Curious about North American Jaeger style rifle stock wood. Remember, but can’t currently find, references that NA Walnut was most prevalently used. Based on references, what do the experts say?
Just found this thread. Best answer I’ve seen yet.Where do you come up with all this crap all the time? Do you ever listen to yourself?
Maple was never scarce. Maple syrup requires a lot of big sugar maple trees.
So, wondering what you mean by North American Jaeger style rifle. Just asking so I can answer clearly. If you mean rifles stocked here during the Colonial period with very short barrels there are but a handful with barrels under 36”. 3 come to mind; 2 stocked in black walnut and one in maple. If you include big early rifles like the Marshall rifle in there, then maple predominates and you have a bigger sample size. For example almost all the consensus early Bethlehem and Christians Spring rifles were stocked in maple. Smoothbore were somewhat more likely to be stocked in walnut compared to rifles.Curious about North American Jaeger style rifle stock wood. Remember, but can’t currently find, references that NA Walnut was most prevalently used. Based on references, what do the experts say?
Maple was never scarce. Maple syrup requires a lot of big sugar maple trees.
I am really interested in the shorter traditional Jaegers. Had the chance to handle and a shoot some while in Europe and just love how they handle. Definitely more petite and slimmer than what I see builders making today. The ones I saw were fitted in Walnut, be it European Walnut. Appears I may be incorrect about NA ‘Jaegers’ using Walnut. While not always the perfect reference, TOW makes statements about their Jaeger kits such as ‘curly maple is sometimes found on American guns’ and walnut is the correct choice for a traditional Jaeger rifle’. Not sure there is a NA Jaeger in the traditional sense. Looks like time for some research.So, wondering what you mean by North American Jaeger style rifle. Just asking so I can answer clearly. If you mean rifles stocked here during the Colonial period with very short barrels there are but a handful with barrels under 36”. 3 come to mind; 2 stocked in black walnut and one in maple. If you include big early rifles like the Marshall rifle in there, then maple predominates and you have a bigger sample size. For example almost all the consensus early Bethlehem and Christians Spring rifles were stocked in maple. Smoothbore were somewhat more likely to be stocked in walnut compared to rifles.
Hi Alan,
Yes, it was walnut's tendency to crack during recoil that caused British makers to use it for virtually all their guns and especially for their big bore dangerous game rifles. Of course we know the Hawken brothers chose cherry because it was better. Dang, I probably should have made this rifle out of cherry:
dave
We agree about TOW as far as a historical source. Originals that I handled and shot were in the 24” to 30” barrel lengths. All European.View attachment 9655 Track is not a reliable source regarding original rifles.
There are about 3 short (under 35”) barreled original early colonial rifles I know of. 2 are in Shumway’s Rifles of Colonial America (RCA for short) books. RCA #15 (walnut) and RCA# 112 (maple). A short rifle very much like RCA #19 has also surfaced, stocked in walnut.
So, “American Jaegers” with short barrels were likely quite rare. It’s a little hard for me to guess who, back then, would have carried one, and for how long.
The sister rifle to RCA 19 is a dandy. Above is a close copy by a fine builder.
What we get for the same price is the difference between an accurate custom rifle that could be worth thousands of dollars, verses a shiny Italian clunker that's never going to be worth any more than the money you spent on it. Also, the parts are quite a bit better. A Chambers, or L&R lock will give much better performance, and a Rice, Hoyt, or Getz barrel will out shoot your typical production barrel. Don't get me wrong, I own both types, but only use the import guns for rough work like reenactments and filming. I also do my own labor, so I don't spend money on custom guns, just my time, which I enjoy.You bring up an interesting point. We spend about the same amount on pars as we could get a finished Pedersoli for. The parts we get aren't THAT much better (not counting wood here). Knowing how manufacturing and retail works, Pedersoli probably has 20%-25% (relative to retail MSRP) of the cost basis in parts that we do. The big difference is that we BUY our BP's, TG's, barrels and locks, and Petersoli makes (or outsource contracts in massive quantities) all that stuff.
Enter your email address to join: