TVM Early Virginia

[Okwaho]

Toni,like Rich, I meant no disrespect towards yor rifles.perhaps I sould limit this dicussion to custom and semi custom.There is a fine line between true custom guns and good semi custom guns and a lot of grey area.So for the sake of argument I will classify yours and Larry Williams' guns as semi custom.I will classify guns by some of the others such as Erik Kettenberg and Jud Brennan as true custom guns.Then there is Jim Chambers' kits which I think are absolutely the best on the market.I can't say much about the Whiskers books except that they do show a lot of pictures.George has the best books out since he gives dimensions.Nothing, however, will enable a builder to construct a fine rifle like having handled a number of old guns and I guess this along with a ton of research are two factors that set off the fine custom builders fom those who build good rifles from pictures.Having said this, I think there is a need for builders who can supply good quality rifles at a modest price.As to the rifle that Herschel built for the Smithsonian,like TG I would like to know what makes it a "Virginia" rifle earlier than the Federal period in which Herschel's guns generally fall.I stand by my post as to "Early" Southern and Virginia rifles in particular.
Herschel really started the iron mounted federal period "southern" rifles school and it should be noted that the "peanut double door box iron mounted rifles derive from a brass mounted gun shown in "Accouterments III, PP 62-64 described as "Southern possible Virginia,Ca.1780".

You said you were striving to produce rifles " so that average people can afford to own a reasonable historically correct muzzle loader".I think that this is an admirable goal and one that I personally applaud.Not everyone can afford a fine gun by the likes of Jud Brennan and I think you and Larry Williams fill a void that needed filling.I also think that the average reenactor does far too little research into the rifle he is buying else we would not see so many Federal and later period rifles in a F&I or Rev. War setting.
Tom Patton :m2c:

 

Okwaho, I think you draw the line between "custom" and "semicustom" in the wrong place IMHO. If the Avances build their guns as they say (I believe them)then they are custom made guns. I know of other makers who do use duplicating machines and call their guns custom made--I don't believe that. Certainly Eric Kettenberg and similar makers are in a class by themselves--both in artistry/skill and in price. Kit guns are kit guns, even if they come from Chambers. Some might call these guns semicustom. If a gun is made by hand from wood blanks and cast parts, barrels & locks made by the reputable manufacturers how is that semicustom just because one fellow makes it rather than another? I do not think artistry or research alone makes a gun custom or semicustom. Art and historical accuracy are other questions. :m2c:

 

[Slash]

I did not write this in any anger or animosity. I was only clarifying how we do what we do. There is a lot of misconception in how each builder does their product.
It would be wonderful if more people could see our operations in progress. Anyone is welcome to visit us. We aren't fancy or large, but we are friendly and try to be obliging to our customers.
Thank you for allowing me a voice here. I have found this to be an exciting and educational forum.
Toni (Slash)

 

[rich pierce]

No worries, would love to stop by sometime. Will give you a holler if I do get to that neck of the woods.

 

[tg]

I think the difference between a custom and a semi custom has nothing to do with the method they are made but "how" they are made, as in a custom gun would have a lock, barrel furniture and such that was acceptable as PC to the time and a semi custom would use stock locks and barrel (Siler/GM)
and the end result would be a less authentic gun.

 

[keethb]

Sir,

I believe that your differentiation between custom and semi-custom clearly has merit, but there is still room for deviation. You stated,
"I think the difference between a custom and a semi custom has nothing to do with the method they are made but "how" they are made, as in a custom gun would have a lock, barrel furniture and such that was acceptable as PC to the time and a semi custom would use stock locks and barrel (Siler/GM)and the end result would be a less authentic gun."

Your definitions and differentiation assume that a custom weapon would have a lock and components that WOULD be acceptable to the time. It might be fairer to say that ........"a custom gun COULD have a lock, barrel, furniture and such that was acceptable as PC to the time."

My point is that just because a weapon is a custom, does not guarantee that is automatically period correct. Many custom rifles are owner or builder customized in such a fashion that they are "fantasy guns" and not necessarily acceptable as PC to a specific time or style.

Best Regards,

Sky-Dogg

 

[Stumpkiller]

True enough. As with so much in muzzleloading there exists a gray area here.

Some very custom guns are copies of nothing from history. Homer Dangler made guns from scratch that were Homer Dangler's, not copies of a previous gunsmiths'.

If you could call Pedersoli and have a gun cut to your specifications of LOP and drop, etc. it would be a "Factory custom fitted" gun.

Semi-custom might describe a gun which uses some pre-manufactured parts. A pre-shaped and/or inletted stock blank, butt-plate from a supply house, cast front sight from same. Is a Jim Chambers Ketland lock, say, a production or custom lock? If the gunsmith removes the components from a Chambers lockplate and forges/files it into a more authentic shape, is it then customized or semi-customized? Is a Rice barrel a custom barrel? You order it as you want it for caliber, twist and rifling shape and profile. That's customization. Many originals used locks supplied by specialzed locksmiths that churned them out production style.

There are degrees of customization, just as there are degrees of authenticity.

 

[tg]

I see your point but I guess from my own perspective the authenticity factor is part of customising a ML, I feel the fantasy guns are just that, and the whole experience hinges on capturing the past as closely as possible and I guess I would say that a custom gun SHOULD have the proper parts and style of what it is being represented as... which is a factor not yet mentioned, if you call it a "Custom Lancaster"
it should follow that vein closely..if it is a fancy top dollar fantasy gun with nothing to connect it to that school or a low cost production gun claiming the name Lancaster, it still misses the mark, if you hang the label Custom along with a particular type of gun, authenticity is implied and assumed and should be maintanied at least thru these eyes that is how it appears.

 

[rich pierce]

Obviously we're all going to come at the terms from different angles. Here's how I've been using the term custom for my own work:
1) parts selection: A custom gun will be made from a set of individually selected or crafted parts, not the identical parts set as many other guns

2) pattern: A custom gun will be made to an individual pattern and have it's own measurements- often made for the customer to fit him/her better

3) decorative elements: A custom gun may also have decorative elements such as carving, engraving, and wire inlay that are variations on themes, not identical to many other guns from the same shop or hand.

I have previously considered even very finely crafted kit guns with unique touches, decorative elements, etc., to be semi-custom guns, if they are a "line" or model which share the same furniture and architecture. Maybe that's too rigid for today's practices.

I consider guns which come assembled from a shop, which all share identical features save a couple of options (wood grade, caliber, flint or percussion, etc. to be production guns if they are made in significant quantity.

But like most people, I have my own oddball ideas and break my own rules regularly. So I generally considered somebody like Kit Ravenshear a custom builder even when he was making limited runs of guns of specific models, using a lot of hand techniques, and forging springs for his locks, which were not available commercially.

The terms, for me, have little to do with quality, but more to do with individuality. Some guns I'd call production are highly superior in every way to many guns I'd call custom.

Just realized I wrote a lot of drivel that does nobody any good butr after typing it all i'll post it anyway.

 

[BLAHMAN]

I'm going out on a limb with this one. When I build a rifle I try to build a rifle that I like.

I do enjoy looking at rifles built by others and what I look for is the architecture, the fit, the way the rifle blends from one spot to another (cheekpieces, wrist etc.)

I would have a terrible time trying to copy a certain work, for me that is limiting and very frustrating. I cannot build two rifles that look the same....I just cannot do it.

I cannot produce two paintings that look the same.

I have gotten to the point in my life where I really don't regard a rifle as a rifle (I'm talking about our muzzleloaders), but as an art piece. I view it as art.

As the art form, we are limited, at least I am, to having certain things just so: trigger guards, buttplates, locks, barrels.

What I try to do is take those elements and alter them to fit my taste: file down a tang to a certain shape, change the look of a trigger guard, tweak the shape of the stock, make a patchbox, create an inlay, change the shape of the lock.

I try to do this so that the parts I use are differnt from off the shelf parts that everybody uses. This is just from my strange little mind....I strive to be different and creative.

Now, why bother with posting this? I would think that in years gone by, in the little gun making shops scattered throughout the land, that there were aprentices that wanted to create their own identity through their work.

An octogon to round barrel on a full stock rifle? Sounds neat, think I'll try that.

And that is why I once posted the question: are our muzzleloaders that we build art or just rifles? :hmm:

 

[LRB]

The term "CUSTOM", used to refer to an item or product, made or modified to suit a customers fit, or desires, whether it be a gun, knife, or whatever. A hand made item is not neccessarily a custom item.

 

Everyone seems to have their own definition of "custom" and I see the same problem in handmade/custom knives where people using CNC machines and the like are calling their knives custom, even though the next is identical to the first--and only partly "handmade" (hand assembled using machine made parts). The dictionary says "Custom" used as an adjective means "made to order". 'Custom' says nothing about skill, art, period correctness, style, origin of parts, etc....There are a handfull of guns out there truly made lock-stock-and barrel like the originals; and they are basically museum items out of the reach of most mortals...almost all 'custom' and semicustom (whatever THAT means) guns use parts from the same basic sources-oh sure, several artisans make many of their own parts, but most use the same castings, barrels, locks, triggers, etc that others do. Using a pattern and making numerous guns similar to each other? The old timers did that. Handmade? Most are, but several well-known makers use at least some parts made with duplicating machines, etc, and some use machine-inlet stocks, including 'kits'. When I call TVM (and I have not)and order a particular style rifle, pick the wood, LOP, hardware, barrel, etc. I am getting a gun "made to order"--by definition a custom gun. I own a Keith Casteel that was ordered the same way--who will tell me that it is not "custom". I myself made me a rifle that I built with my own design from a blank and parts ordered individually (not a kit)--it is the only one like it in the world-a custom rifle--but I am not Eric Kettenberg! :m2c:

 

[CoyoteJoe]

When a modern gunsmith builds a "custom" rifle he fits a Douglas, Shillen or whatever barrel to a Mauser, Winchester or whatever action, chambers it for a Weatherby cartrige, perhaps with a semi-inlet stock blank or chunk of wood, fits a Pachmayr recoil pad and it is called a "custom" rifle because it was built to the customer's specifications in every way.
What does it matter if someone else uses some of the same parts, how does that make it less "custom"?
Being period correct has nothing to do with it. Hell, most of the old guns from any time or place would not be exactly PC acording to the experts. Then or now the customer decided and got what he wanted. If he wanted more or less drop in the butt, if he wanted a thicker and more rounded comb, if he wanted a wide or narrow butt plate, if he wanted to use an old musket lock on his new rifle, he got it.
The very reason many old rifles don't fit the standards the "experts" have laid down for certain schools and time frames is because they were custom rifles built by individual smiths.
So, then or now, the customer could order, let's say, a "sothern mountain rifle of 1820" that ends up looking more like a Lancaster of 1850 but with some parts not common to either.
The only way a gun could be really NOT PC is if it employs something which simply could not be had, new or used, in that time period, say a 1790 percussion, and even that could be a retro-fit unless one is actually reinacting the earlier time period.
Someone may like the Jaeger style but hates flint, so it was Grandpaw's old rifle I had converted to percussion before heading out to the Rockies, and if it wasn't even a PC Jaeger to start with, well that's the way Gramps ordered it.
I remember seeing a rifle a feller had built for himself that was the dangdest mixture of parts you can immagine, he just bought whatever struck his fancy but it was sure custom.
Someone said a few weeks back that he didn't consider TVM to be true custom because "I can spot a TVM a block away". Well maybe you could spot a Fredrick Sell or a Melchoir Fordney rifle a block away, does that mean they weren't custom rifles either? How fine do you want to split the hair? If the PC Police had their way they'd ALL use the same parts because only those parts are PC.
I gotta go with Ghost on this "YOU GUYS WORRY TOO MUCH!!" :imo:

 

[Runner]

Where are you located. There is what appears to be a well assembled kit gun that needs final finishing at a Gunshop in Arnold, Mo. It appears to be made of top quality parts and has pretty nice wood also. It is a half stock flinter.

 

[Bob J]

Someone may like the Jaeger style but hates flint, so it was Grandpaw's old rifle I had converted to percussion before heading out to the Rockies, and if it wasn't even a PC Jaeger to start with, well that's the way Gramps ordered it.

When I was 7 or 8 (1972 or '73) saw a friend of my Dad's kill a 300 lb. wild boar with an original .63 Jaeger. It had been converted to percussion in the 1800s. He told me recently that part of the original frizzen? had been modified to use as a safety. The load was 110 grains 1f and, of course, roundball.

 

[tg]

My point as to authenticity is that in the world of ML's when one speaks of buying a custom gun authenticity or a high PC factor has become an expected or perceived to be implied issue, as the mind set seems to expect a custom gun that costs more to be closer to the originals than the cheaper over the counter guns, when the specific type and style of gun is mentioned then the proper parts and finish are also expected and believed to be implied... this is just from my obsevations on people talking about their move up from factory to custom guns, then PC isue is generaly considered part of the deal in this sport, thus the TVM garners a semi custom rating due to cost saving barrel and lock usage where a gun with a swamped barrel and fireblued barrel and correct lock for the period of the gun would be considered a custom gun, at any rate this is what I see from reading many posts and queries from people buying or looking to buy guns, enough of this for now my best to all no matter how you define any of the many words we use in our lives on a day to day basis.

 

[rich pierce]

Coyote Joe, I see your logic and am inclined to revise my definition of "custom" in my head.

 

[BLAHMAN]

Well, tg, I view the 'PC' phenomenon as a constriction. It confines one and limits creativity.

Let me describe it this way. I love to paint and watercolor is my medium. It found me, I didn't find it.

In practicing this paint medium, I enjoy painting along with a very talented person here in town. This guy makes his living by painting and he does well for himself.

Dave's technique is totally different from mine.

I notice, when he teaches, that the bulk of his students do everything he does: use the same brush, same paint, color, paper and mostly the same approach to the subject to be painted. They are making a painting by mimic and repeating the instructor.....they have not got the idea that they should watch, and approach the subject in a way that is best suited for them.

The students become disappointed if their painting does not look just like the instructors. Dave really wants them to break out of this and form their own style and due to this thought he is an excellent instructor.

Often, Dave and I paint the same subject matter and we have two different paintings that are miles apart. One is his creation, the other is mine.

In that respect, I have decided to approach rifle making in the same fashion. I am not the most gifted, I have a long way to go, but I want to do things in a creative manner that expresses my individuality. I want somebody to say "I've never seen a gun like that before." I want that creature to stand out from all the rest.

I would bet, that many a young apprentice, laboring for a master gunsmith, felt exactly the same way: "I want to create something from my own hand, not the master's hand."


So, I'll take the chance to alter things, even if not PC. In making a rifle, I am still trapped by those elements such as lock, stock and barrel. It's what I do with those elements that make the difference.

Now, is this custom? I don't know, but I do know, as long as I've made the item, crafted from my hands, I've put a mark upon the world and somewhere along the line, somebody will know I existed.

This is just :imo: :m2c: :thumbsup:

 

[tg]

"Well, tg, I view the 'PC' phenomenon as a constriction. It confines one and limits creativity."

Not really, it is just one type of product and I think that it has become a part of the expectation of the buyer inspite of Websters or any builders thoughts on the definition of "custom". No one HAS to build guns that closely follow what we know of the originals, nor do they Have to let their imaginations be the guiding factor, and they can always put together a factory kit, each has its own place in the market and in the sport of re-enactment, some of the most popular and highest priced guns are not PC and many who strive for that aspect might well opt for a lesser priced gun for authenticity sake. I do think that as people grow from factory guns towards higher quality pieces that the PC factor is an issue in many cases thus is expected even when not directly implied or advertised, and this is in part due to the casual use of the terms we use to describe many types of guns..."early" "Tulle" and the various schools and individual builder influenced guns. It don't really matter to me...just an observation.

 

[CoyoteJoe]

My point is, who decides what is or isn't PC.
Gunsmiths were individuls as were their customers. Did no smith apprentice in Lebanon PA ever move to Tennessee? If so, did he instantly forget everything he'd learned, discard all his parts and start building rifles just like his neighbor's? Did no one from North Carolina ever move to Ohio and ask a local smith to build a new rifle just like the one he brought with him?
America was a frontier society, constantly on the move.
Look at the map of Pennsylvania. Allentown, Bethlehem, Reading, Lancaster, York, Lebanon all are just a hop skip and jump apart. Yet some would have us believe that each was a totaly isolated school. What happened to all those folks in between? Did someone come around and say "you can't build that here, if you want to build that you'll have to move to another county where they do that stuff"?
I certainly agree that a straight barrel is out of place on any flint or early percussion rifle, even a Leman or Henry "factory built" rifle should have a swamped barrel but I don't believe that all rifles built in Lancaster 1770 had buttplates of exactly the same width and shape or that no rifle built in Reading looked at all like any of those built in York or elsewhere.
The reason the various "schools" are identifiable is because the "experts" put all rifles of a style into that school, even though we don't really know where and when it was made. Therefor: all rifles of that school look alike and we'll just ignore those that don't fit even if we do know the maker and exactly where and when he worked. :bull: