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?
Walnut stocks
- Thread starter hamanky
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
Just found this thread. Best answer I’ve seen yet.
Amen. Any one who has a Maple tree in their yard can attest to the prolific nature of the species. I have 3 and the yard right now is covered with "helicopters" to the point you can't hardly see the grass. In a week I'll have at least a dozen sprouting around the yard. In the woods they crowd out the species around here. If I neglect to clean the gutters they look like a minature forest.
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.
Beaver Trapper
36 Cl.
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2019
- Messages
- 83
- Reaction score
- 67
Lots of Maple in Central Canada. Trees that have been tapped tend to have black streaks in the wood from the taps. I'm not sure if this is the case for newer plastic caps.
When I had a flintlock rifle built I went with cherry. My father-in-law was a cabinetmaker and in talking about wood with him he showed me some very old wood spirit levels and block planes he had. He was not really a shooter, but he said cherry is very stable to weather and temperature changes (no warping) and was the wood of choice for levels and other tools that used wood. That rang a bell in my clock tower.
I also like the looks of it. Not that I don't like the looks of walnut or quarter-sawn maple.
I also like the looks of it. Not that I don't like the looks of walnut or quarter-sawn maple.
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.
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.
Attachments
Last edited:
Shot deer
40 Cal
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.
dave
Dave,
Every gun you post on here is beautiful!
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.
Don’t have Shumway’s RCA book (I do have Recreating the American Long Rifle, for what it’s worth), but will be on the lookout for it. Was always intrigued by the shorter Jaegers. Have old (1950s) auction catalogs with European Jaegers, many, if not half, had sub 30” barrels. Guess my personal preference is taking me in that direction.
Appreciate the time you have taken in responding.
Col. Batguano
75 Cal.
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2011
- Messages
- 5,039
- Reaction score
- 1,424
Sugar maples are the best for maple syrup, but you can get sugared sap for syrup out of a host of other trees. red maples, silver maples, box elder, birch, walnut. They all have a slightly different taste. Here's some I made from a silver in my back yard this spring. About 10-11 gallons of sap to make a little more than a quart of syrup, so about a40:1 boil down ratio
I was looking at a video regarding bedding rifles for military competition in CF rifles, the M1A, specifically. In addition to learning I'm not good enough to do it (very complicated) I learned an interesting thing about beech. The guy that made the video said beech stocks (called Big Red) weren't a good choice because while they were strong, beech fibers were more subject to compression than walnut. It would eventually work, but not as well as walnut.
How this applies to ML is I think obvious.
How this applies to ML is I think obvious.
Sometimes stuff on the internet is wrong. Wooden block planes were made of beech because it is hard, tough, dimensionally stable, fine grained, and resists wear. Walnut and beech are about identical in compression resistance. 50 milli pascals for beech and 52 for walnut. Beech is much harder.
Last edited:
He was, of course, posting an opinion based on a lot of experience from a competitive shooter. He acknowledged its strength, just didn't like it for compression. He recommended beech for first efforts because the first timer was likely to have problems and beech military stocks are way cheaper than walnut. It would eventually work but he felt the work needed to make it acceptable wasn't worth the effort. I got the impression that the bedding didn't stay stable as long in beech. And he was talking in thousands of inches. He seemed to know what he was talking about.
The amount of pressure on a gun stock is considerably more sharp and heavier than hand pressure on a thick wooden hand plane. No comparison I see.
The amount of pressure on a gun stock is considerably more sharp and heavier than hand pressure on a thick wooden hand plane. No comparison I see.
I know nothing of his work and will take it at face value. Assuming his experience is valid I wonder if it is applicable to muzzle loaders. 1100-2200 FPS ml vs 1900 to 3000 FPS and more of modern rifles, and the stress caused five or ten aimed shots a minute vs one shot every two or three minutes or far less in a ml. ( times on a range I average about one shot ever six minutes)
And the bearing surfaces on the stock are so much bigger on a ml vs a modern guns.
And the bearing surfaces on the stock are so much bigger on a ml vs a modern guns.
I agree, basically different, but not irrelevant. In gunstocks, like everything else, there's a good, better, and best. For MLs, I think beech is good, walnut is better, and maple is best. But I don't know. I only like maple for its stripes, so I'm kinda shallow on this. I still think plain maple is better than the other two. I like cherry although I don't have a ML rifle...all mine are European walnut and maple.
Last edited:
Old guns were made in lots of different woods, today we have X preference. We want our guns to look right, especially if it’s a custom gun we want our favorite or our choice. And investing $6-900 in parts we don’t want a ‘cheap’looking wood.
Col. Batguano
75 Cal.
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2011
- Messages
- 5,039
- Reaction score
- 1,424
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.
Rockvillerich
Pilgrim
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.
