What is an Underhammer

[Runner]

There is no drop off in participation at the traditional shoots here. In fact, they are so popular that the crowds are making the sites that have been used for a long time too small, especially the parking. The only place that there is a drop off in attendance is where the modern guns and other such things are allowed in. Every one of those has a drop off because it is no longer the same. It is darned sure not better also. I sat with a group of about 40 folks last year that were trying to decide what to do the weekend of Friendship. I was the only person there that had never been. Most went every year for a long time. With how it is today, they don't even want to go. Now, that is a group of folks out living in tents for the weekend and walking around in period dress that will not touch Friendship with a long stick these days.
Humm, no drop off where these things are not allowed. Hummmm, large drop off and a mean feeling at the event where they are. You figure it out!
If the underhammer group wants to have gatherings, please do. Send out lots of flyers.
Maybe you can get a place of your own built in the muzzleloading world.
Me, I am going to be selling all my guns I use at the shoots and rerplaceing them with full stock flintlocks. I am going to be changing everything I use there to items appropriate for a 1790 timeframe. Gonna re-evaluate the juried events maybe.
When the people killing the hobby realize their actions are what is killing it, I hope there is something left to save.

 

[Slamfire]

Let's see now in order to protect the purity of the fur trapper events you are going to outfit yourself in 1790s style. Isn't that a full 20 years too early?

 

[Runner]

Who said anything about a fur trapper event?

 

[John Taylor]

Nice looking side slapper. I would like to see a picture of the inside of the lock, please.

 

[gmww]

Hey Fred, this link was provided by a fella on another forum. It is about an underhammer that belonged to one of Texas revolutionaries. This rifle is believed 1840's though.

Juan Linn's rifle to go on display

 

[faw3]

No problem Bluejacket,as I said to begin with it was twice as long and a lot more in depth,most of it on Smiths involment(or lack of) but I jumped back and everything got gone. I was :cursing: and just wanted to throw the high parts on and get off here,dont know how to type ,spell ,or use this thing Im on.(if my kid didnt need it for school it wouldnt be here-I had been proud to be COMPUT FREE!)Gmww thanks, thats of intrest,may have to see it.Runner whats going on at Friendship has little to do with rifles.and I'll leave it at that. Ive never got to go but would jump at the chance. Have a nice week you all Fred :hatsoff: Bluejacket you might want to read up on the history of Hillard,or go back to Asa in 25, then to Kendall it's a real intresting story, inventing the first "of the ground iron oven "ect. FW :thumbsup:

 

[gmww]

Another interesting tid bit from Herschel C. Logans book page 21 and 22 are diagrams about breech loading underhammers. One is dated Feb. 15, 1838. And in that one it says,

"CLAIM- We do not claim to be the inventors of the moveable chamber to receive and contain the charge. Such chambers having been used by others, but we do claim the manner in which we have applied such a chamber by fitting it into a recess in the breech, and confinin it there by means of the hinged strap, constructed and operated in the manner described, adapting the same either to precussion of flint guns and confining the chamber herein set forth."

Anyway here are the photos of the pages mentioned to read yourselves. Of particular interest to me is the mention of breech loading flints?

David sent a link:
Norways breech loader underhammers

What really caught my eye was this.

Fergurson and Hall came out with their flintlock breech loaders decades before 1842, but Norway was probably the first country in the World to introduce breech loaders full scale in the army and the navy. There seems to have been made a total of some 40 000 kammerladere (chamber loaders) in the years from 1842 to 1870.

I never knew there was a flintlock breech loader. Anyone have information on that?

 

[Metalshaper]

John,

That's kind of an embarrassing point for me! :redface: This lock was actually made as a prototype.. After I had put so much time into it, I just had to go ahead and put it on something. "Miss Muley" was the result.
Its sometimes a LOT easier to draw them, than build them. In my shop, I do most of my work with hand tools and improvised construction methods. In all honesty, if I did it again, I'd rework the design some and use a flat sping instead of the coiled one. Plus, I was ready to see it bust caps,, so I didn't do a lot of cleaning up, or refining the internal appearence..

So if I was to release a photo.. You might just go "Huh, what was HE thinking? :youcrazy: "

This gun is a change barrel design. I have a second barrel that is a 28 gauge smoothy < made from a reamed out .50 > and once I find a suitable large bore rifle barrel.. I'll have a complete set. .36 small bore< as shown >, 28 gauge smoothy and .50-ish large bore..

But right now MRW has me distracted, working on Underhammers! :grin:

Respect Always
Metalshaper

 

[gmww]

You might contact Bruce at Blue Grouse Black powder. He had a mule ear lock on the auction a couple of weeks ago. It's no longer there but he posted a pretty nice picture of the lock. It was impressive as I've never seen one before.

GMWW

 

[Denhill]

Aaah, now I see! Thank you for clearing things up. The hammer moves sideways eh? That opens up some interesting posibilities for the home constructor (not that one can do that in the land down-under without the blessing of the Pope and a letter from HM the Queen). :shake:
This thread is getting better by the minuite! :applause:

 

[faw3]

The copy stuff I sent you should of had the notes at the end , it has who built what when ect, and how much Smith was into it ect. Let me know if I didnt add it Fred :hatsoff: (its got how much the warden got per barrel for those uhs that DIDNT get built and sent to Texas, as well as how much the state made useing convict labor ,around 2000 I think it was. Thats just a WAG. FW

 

[RedFeather]

What a weird string! I'm not into buckskinning and I could see where a pre=1840 UH would be iffy and raise a lot of eyebrows. But is there a rule that says there has to be a documented lower limit to the number of a particular style gun produced before it is allowed? For example, if a fellow should get himself an ORIGINAL underhammer flintlock, would that not qualify, even though the gun, itself, existed prior to and during the mountain man period? How many of those old boys started out with the "wrong" old (by 1830's standards) gun from back East only to trade up? Didn't all have Lemans and Hawkens, did they? So, it's not entirely unreasonable to assume that some non-typical mountain man guns occasionally showed up.

As to restricting technology to an 1800 level, that's truly throwing the baby out with the bath water. How authentic would that make a rendevous?

I would bet that an actual, authentic Mountain Man, transported to today, would be appalled at such restrictions. That's the kind of stuff he headed into the hills to get away from in the first place! :grin:


RedFeather

 

[gmww]

The copy stuff I sent you should of had the notes at the end , it has who built what when ect, and how much Smith was into it ect. Let me know if I didnt add it Fred :hatsoff: (its got how much the warden got per barrel for those uhs that DIDNT get built and sent to Texas, as well as how much the state made useing convict labor ,around 2000 I think it was. Thats just a WAG. FW

There's a couple of pages missing Fred. I'll PM you with the specifics. How you feeling by the way? Do remembber the Museum name that had the Texas Ranger Underhammers on display before they took them away?

 

[gmww]

Fred:

Thank you, thank you, thank you!! I've been searching off and on for the info about Smith and you provided a full measure. Also, knowing that Kendall went solo around 1842 helps me corroborate the build date I put to my my rifle, although I wonder if he serialized his from No. 1 when he opened under his own shingle and mine is #839--it's conceivable that with a crew of convicts making up piece parts and him assembling them in his shop, he could have cranked out a good volume in just a year or so. Most every one I've seen is a variation on a "standard" pattern.

As a technical writer, I cringe when I read your posts (punctuation and run-on sentences, ya know) but then when I read them to myself aloud they make sense--just teasing!!

Thanks again for doing all that leg-work (or is it wheel-work). I may be joining you soon--let's get together and do laps!! (Har-de-har)

Best, Dave

Dave here is the cut and past from the other forum that also addresses the Convict labor with greater detail and dates. The poster also posts here and I've asked him to udate those of us interestd in Underhammers on what he finds. I hope this helps in your interest in the History of the Underhammers from Kendall.

Not had chance to fully digest the articles yet, but there are some fascinating pieces of primary source information....

Report by John H. Cotton, Superintendent Vermont State Prison, to the General Assembly of the State of Vermont, on October 13, 1835. ". . . . a contract has been made with Messrs. N. Kendall and COmpany, for 18 to 20 convicts employed in the manufacture of rifles; the company have been to considerable expense in machinery, in order to prosecute their business profitably. For the convicts, so employed in the rifle shop, the Superintendent received an average of 32 cents per day." As of September 30, 1835 the prison had received $907.29 in income for emplyment of convicts from N. Kendall & Company - over 2,800 man hours. (Underhammer Guns; Ken Aiken. Muzzle Blasts, July 2001)

I note the author refers to other companies producing underhammer pistols and rifles 1836/37, but cites Jedediah Caswell as producing underhammer firearms in the late 1820's.

David

:grin:

 

[faw3]

That last page you put up is the one Im talking about,it should of had a handful of that stuff in it. The place in Waca is Fort Fisher I think Its the Texas Rangers station ,but I dont know how much is gone , last I heard the new guy running it even had the old cannon out front taken away, Now I guess he wants a statue of "The New Ranger"laptop in hand! Enough to make you puke! Not felling to great , have a good day everyone Fred :hatsoff:

 

[gmww]

Thanks Fred. The history of the Underhammer with the 1st Texas rangers sounds very interesting. It's been slim picking on the internet trying to dig that information up. I might have to do some digging the next hunting trip into Texas I do. Hopefully this year. :v (send you a PM by the way)

 

[ResearchPress]

Following is a picture of a Kendall underhammer in the collection of the Royal Armouries , England. The pictures are taken from the Royal Armouries Yearbook 2002.

David

 

[ResearchPress]

Some information to go with the above picture....

The pictures are from a lengthy article by Peter Smithurst (formerly Executive Director, American Precision Museum, Vermont, and currently Curator in the Weapons Department at the Royal Armouries) about 'The gun and gun-making machinery of Robbins and Lawrence' that was published in the Royal Armouries Yearbook 2002.

The Royal Armouries have at least three Kendall underhammer rifles in their collection. Two Kendall underhammers are illustrated in the book, together with a detail of the action. It is from these that I made the composite picture.

Lawrence worked for Nicanor Kendall & Co. Kendall apparently gave up gun making in 1842, but in 1844 joined with Lawrence opening a gun shop in Windsor village. Along with Samuel Robbins they went into partnership and were successful in bidding for a government contract to supply 10,000 of the 1841 'Harpers Ferry' pattern rifles for the Mexican War. These rifles were marked 'Kendall, Robbins and Lawrence.' About 1846 Kendall sold his interest in the company and harpers Ferry rifles manufactured in a later contract were marked Robbins and Lawrence. This company later had a contract to make the P/53 Rifle Musket

David

 

[John Taylor]

That looks like a very simple lock to build. A hacksaw and file would do almost the whole thing.
From all the info that has come up it appears that someone could have had a UH at the rendezvouse.

 

[faw3]

Wish someone would make that action for 60 , all Ive found is MLBS , which is ok for target/bench rifles. It is a very easy action to make and why a lot of blacksmiths and one man shops would build them , not a lot to it, and wood inletting? should take a hour or two at most , cant ask for much more easy than that . Thanks for the pics. Fred :hatsoff: