Type C & D French guns

[Thorman]

I have decided to stick with a smoothbore, but the question I have is, TOTW has two of their guns marked Type C & D. Is this a misprint or were the guns called something else? And I have also read that the locks are not completely correct, if not, please show me the difference. Thanks.

 

[LRB]

I will try, but this is TG's and Okwaho's subject of expertise. The C and D designation is modern to denote the different models, and there are other guns given letter designations. The C grade is a bit fancier.
The locks TOW uses are Davis made and completely different than the originals in that they are basically Germanic in design and absolutely inappropiate for the French trade guns. Not even close. The French locks were not near as banana shaped as those in the kits, and there are a number of other differences, such as the cocks and pans.
If you like the looks of the TOW kits, and don't mind the incorrectness, they are decent shooters and will serve you as well as any of that type. If you are looking for historical correctness, you will have to shop elsewhere.
Perhaps TG or Okwaho will advise you on the best place to look.

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

Take a look at the Fusil de Chasse with its 44" barrel. I've not heard complaints of it being non-PC. And, you can get it in 16 gauge, a very nice option. The ones I've seen are handsome guns and very useful. It's on the same page as the others.

 

[tg]

The 44" Tulle kit with some major lock modifications and a few changes from the plan that comes with it is a good choice, The C and D guns would be best if ordered without a lock mortice and substitute the modified Tulle or Trade lock.with a different lock I thing these would be a fair representation of the originals back to about 1715.

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

I really like that gun. I keep thinking I need a 16 bore of some description...someday...

 

[Flint1]

Two quick questions along this line. Although C and D are modern disignations, are the dates TOTW gives for those "types" accurate regarding the decoration on those particular guns, i.e. would those guns have existed during those times wirh a correct lock? Caywood offers these models without a lock, which must be purchased separately from a lock manufacturer they list--is this why their guns do not come with locks, and are the locks they recommend correct for the timeframe?

 

[schizuki]

My supposition is that Caywood sells the lock seperately from the gun (through what is either a dummy company or an affiliate) to avoid paying the 11% Federal excise tax on blackpowder guns and gun kits. Most companies simply (and correctly) pay this tax and include it in the cost of the gun (TVM lists it as a seperate charge, which makes the pre-tax prices of their guns deceptively cheaper than their competition).

Note that legally, once you assemble the lock to the gun, you are liable to pay the tax if you subsequently sell it. Not that the Feds would know.

[Just needed to add that the gun is fully inlet for their lock, so you just "pop it in" when you receive it. And I believe it is quite period correct.]

 

[tg]

Caywoods locks are ok but a bit small, they would probably not be right for an early gun with C furniture but I don't think you can find one for a pre 1720 gun ..the thing I don't care for on the Caywood guns is the short 41" barels they should be around 44". I believe the furniture types are close to the dates given them but there is always an overlap to some degree. The barrel configuration also changed during the early 18th century as far as the way the flats were and whether or not they had flats most offerings around now would be from a late type C period gun.

 

[Cruzatte]

I think some of your questions could be answered by reading T. M. Hamilton's book "Colonial Frontier Guns." And having read the other posts on this thread, I was wondering if the Siler lock could be modified to better resemble an early French lock. On page 22 Hamilton has reproduced a page from Diderot's Encyclopedia. The caption gives the date of the illustration as 1751-77, for what that's worth. On p. 50 there is a close-up of a well preserved lock from a Tulle Fusil de Chasse that gives hope that some clever gunsmith might be able to modify a Siler. However, I am not familiar enough to know whether the lock plates between an original Tulle and a modern Siler are close enough for the modification to work. :m2c:
Cruzatte

 

[Craig]

Thor, I love the look of the Type C TOW shows on the website. Being short, I wanted a shorter barrel and being unskilled, I opted for the Tennessee Valley Muzzleloader Fusil de Chasse.

I don't know how important it is to you to be period correct. If you are a stickler for detail, get the book suggested and ask some questions of the people here who know. If you can accept close-but-I-love-the-look-of-that-Type-C, then go for it.

It appears that those guns were individually hand made and if you went back in time, you would find guns varying in many details, all considered the same gun. Alternatively, you would find many different guns, all fairly similiar but varying in details and noone cared.

Have Fun! Life is short!

Rusty Musket

 

[tg]

The Siler is very small compared to the French locks and has a bridled Frizzen over all not even close when compared to the French locks.

 

[Okwaho]

RW, Basically the answer to your first question is a qualified yes.The so called Types C and D are Fusils fin de chasse {fine guns for hunting}.In looking at the old guns and I recently got some pictures of a "Type D" gun,Ca. 1720-1740 which had a typically French lock although a little longer{6 1/2"} than most fusils fin. It also has a 49 1/2" barrel with no rings.Hamilton is correct in that there is some difference in the mounts of the Fusils fin de chasse beginning about 1730.The sideplate goes from foliate to solid and the butt plates are different.The locks are basically the same except that after about 1700 the French guns become a tad banana shaped and then sometime about 1730 the bottom becomes flat.look at the complete Fusils de chasse in Hamilton.From about 1685 to Ca. 1705 French guns often had a round faced banana lock {Model 1696 infantry musket}A very nice Liege fusil fin {Ca. 1690 to 1705} just turned up which very likely saw long American usage with a round faced banana lock.The lock was about 5 3/8" long and didn't resemble the TOW Jaeger lock in any way.
The problem with the TOW Fusil fin de chasse{so called C and D guns}kits is that they are simply incorrect as far as the lock is concerned.You could ,of course, get one with no mortice and install a more correct lock or you could get a Fusil fin de chasse {not the Type D}kit from R E Davis. I have seen one in its initial stage of assembly and it looks good.I compared it with an old Fusil fin de chasse{ca.1715 to 1730 and it was pretty close. It also comes with a 48" barrel with a horizontal sighting rib from Ed Rayl.
When it's all said and done the bottom line is the question of whether or not you want a historically accurate gun or more importantly whether you even care.
Tom Patton :m2c:

 

[Thorman]

Thanks for everyones replies on this subject, but I have also seen the Early English Gun by North Star West. Any thoughts on this gun would help, and it seems to cover the same time period.

 

[Craig]

It depends what history you are trying to reenact. I live in St.Louis near Fort De Chartres, therefore, a French gun is what I need. What history works for you, French, English, or both?

Someone else can comment on the gun details from North Star although I believe they are pretty accurate.

Of course, you could buy both kinds and be ready for whatever mood strikes you.

 

[schizuki]

If you leave the French markings off the lock (or remove them, or buy it with an identical unmarked lock instead, which is possible with Track), it could just be a generic French-influenced fowler. Plenty of Colonial gunsmiths used salvaged French furniture to make fowlers, and many of them were very close in architecture. Use an Anglo-American type sideplate, even better.

 

[Henry]

The large Siler lock is to small for a
fusil de chasse , but about the right size for a 1733
French regulation pistol . The most complicated
modification is to invert the frizzen screw so it
goes from the outside into the plate .

 

[Okwaho]

I'm sorry but you have me totally confused here. To what gun, lock, and markings{?} are you referring ,the C and D,the Germanic lock or the Northwest gun ? Clue us in,please. :huh:

 

[tg]

I think I see where you are headed by making a parts gun out of the C or D kits...lots of options there, but if one wanted a "real" French fusil from that time period you are still back to square one and need to use a different lock.

 

I have a NorthStar West Early English in .58. I'll bow to tg's historical knowledge(& he's a fine feller, too)as to it's PC accuracy, but it looks mighty close to pictures I've seen. It is definately my favorite. I tried it on some clay birds the other day & I was impressed (if I do say so myself!). Bill in Oregon

 

[tg]

I think the North Starr Early English guns are good interpretations of the pre- NW gun made by the English and I have had a couple of North Starrs other guns and they were well made and good shooters. Hey Bill, did you take the birds out of the box this time or just shoot the box and all at 20 paces????