Traditional Muzzleloading Association
Traditional Firearms => Flintlock Long Guns => Topic started by: Wilawane on January 28, 2009, 06:58:20 AM
-
In this pic the mohawk warrior is holding type g English trade gun.
What stores would you guys recommend to get one. Kit, in white or finished. And I mean other than TOW. thanks in advance any info.
Riku
(http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~walters/web%20230/Death%20of%20Wolfe%20BenjaminWest.jpg)
-
Ywo off the top of my head are Sitting Fox and North Star West. My druthers would be North Star West because they carry the 24 gauge that I want.
-
i think there is also alot of seclusion as to what that gun is or is not . many IMO have some valide points as well . Time fraim the painting was actualy done . Artist that did the painting if we go just by what we see , there are some odd things concerning the gun itself
the other question i would have is how accurate are you looking for .?
the thing about NSW and SF examples is that they look just like their de chase or fusil fin . this is IMO because folks look at the distinctive cows foot shape to the but stock and then go AHHHHHHH . but in fact there are differences in both the forstock , wrist shape and butt stock
-
If you want a proper Type G you want Mike Brooks. Finished, in the white, and I think kits.
That painting is later than the scene depicted, and was done in a studio with props...
(http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff36/bijiw/Smilies/thknowitall.gif)
-
There was one of Mike's and one of Ben Coogle's on TOTW just the other day but i think they are gone by-by.
Mike Sells a Type G kit in Engilsh or Black Walnut but the stock has just the butt profiled and the ramrod channel and barrel channel inle.t
-
I think Brooks and Coogle are the only ones who make a true type G or Carolina gun
-
This is an example of what is considered to be a G or Carolina gun by most of the serious gun students, they go back to the 17th century likely with little change in appearance
http://www.flintriflesmith.com/Antiques ... de_gun.htm (http://www.flintriflesmith.com/Antiques/Bumford_trade_gun.htm)
-
Look over caywoodguns.com Their Wilson trade gun is an English gun with appropriate serpent sideplate and whatever you call those ribbed-looking thimbles. Couple guys I shoot with have them & are most pleased. I recently got a French type D, fine workmanship. Also available in kits. I like the fact that their barrels are made from the same steel as in modern shotguns. Most other barrels, save Green Mountain, are just screw stock.
-
Look over caywoodguns.com Their Wilson trade gun is an English gun with appropriate serpent sideplate and whatever you call those ribbed-looking thimbles. Couple guys I shoot with have them & are most pleased. I recently got a French type D, fine workmanship. Also available in kits. I like the fact that their barrels are made from the same steel as in modern shotguns. Most other barrels, save Green Mountain, are just screw stock.
Yes, but the Wilson is not a Type G/Carolina Gun. It is a copy of the O'Connor gun in Hamilton's book.
Wilawane,
Your only options at this point are Mike Brooks (http://www.fowlingguns.com (http://www.fowlingguns.com)) and Ben Coogle.
Brooks offers a kit as well as a finished gun.
Mario
-
yes caywood makes fine rifles but mario is right , the wilson is not a Type G .
the most distinctive thing about the type G or what many call the Type G IMO is the wrist area .
its not round its ovel and its on its side . IE wider on the sides then through its top and bottom thinkness .
what steels are best or used for barrels is a completely different store and with out a Proofing , it means little
-
I don't se anything about the guns in the pic that tells me they are Engish G's the side plate looks more like it is from a C French fusil, as does the buttplate with the type of finial, I would cast a vote that these ate French guns. Any one else see this?
-
I can't offer an opinion on the underlying topic, but would ask what species of wood Caywood is using on these...
-
there are just to many things out of context
the picture wasnt even painted tell well after the event itself
if you look at the rifle the ranger is holding its comb is greatly over exaggerated. To the point it appears to be rather the shape of a cows foot on French designs .
It also from what we can see of one of the RR thimbles has octagon shaping .
But it appears to carry the same plate but plate as the one the American Indian is holding
But this exsample appears to have a plate type but plate found on much later trade guns and no rounded but as with some French guns
Yet it has different thimbles which match the one on the ground .But that one had a different buttplate then either of the other two .
IMO the lines of all three of these do look French . But I would stretch to lean English for the native rifle based soul in the flatness of the comb
However we then have to ask , why would these men, In a depiction of an English event , all be carrying French weapons
IMO the rifles are out of context and was probably one of the props used for the painting without reference to their actual documentation . I also suspect that only 2 rifles
a) a French fusil possibly a C
B a British Bess which we can hardly see over the shoulder of the soldier on the right
the artist appears to have made changes so as the average person would not immediately suspect
I really don’t think this painting is a good representation of much of anything concerning rifles
-
Very sensible, Cap. Its probably a good virtue to critically assess any artistic rendition, for any "license" that may be represented...
-
Caywood appears to stock kits with maple stocks. They will use pretty much whatever you want on a order, walnut, cherry, &c
With respect to proof testing, it is an ancient way of determining if there is a serious flaw in the barrel. Until recent generations it was the only way. I can guarantee you that by itself a proof test is, and has been, inadequate. One needs to magnetic particle inspect the steel bar or finished barrel, possibly eddy current test. I recall about 8 years ago touring Remington arms in NY, watching rifle barrels being mag particle inspected & some guy eddy current testing each shotgun barrel blank that they bought.
If anyone would like actual mechanical property data, and explanation thereof, for the screw stock most people use just email me. No responsible engineer with any integrity would specify this steel for a gun barrel, black powder or not.
I am well aware that no one reading this, unless there is an experienced mechanical engineer or steel metallurgist present, believes it.
The barrel makers & most shooters find my views amusing at best, except for those who are irritated because they wonder if maybe I might be right.
I trust you all notice that Green Mountain barrel company is known to use Gun Barrel Quality 1137Modified steel. Personally I will use either GM or Caywood barrels. I would prefer chrome-moly (4130, 4140) but settle for the GBQ 1137Mod. Just plain 1137 not a good idea.
Using 1137Mod GBQ means GM spends more hours to machine a barrel than if they had made it of 12L14.
Machining Time = $$$
Guess GM must do this just out of the goodness of their hearts? Don't you wonder why they ignore the potential cost savings of using screw stock?
Follow the Money Trail if you want to know why most barrel makers use 12L14.
-
there is mo standardized testing or requirements for testing of muzzleloading barrels in the US .
the only testing that is done is done by the companies them selves to their standards . These are also most time only batch testing
a proper proof test can only be done by a proofing house of which again there is none in the USA
any such proofing of a barrel will carry said stamp from that proof house .
Such a barrel will not only be fired , it will be x-rayed , measured and fired again to insure not only the steel stays within a tolerance but experience no molecule alignment change and is capable of withstanding a given pressure yet maintaining all of the above again with no do effect to the steal itself throughout the leaght of the barrel itself .
anything less is not proofing only testing .
many barrel makers of old considered hardened barrels to not be suitable . In fact that’s one of the reasons that we find most of the most highly accurate barrels to actually be made of much softer alloys then what we use today .
I in fact and I have said this before . If we read the opinions of Old barrel makers like Hacker Martian , as documented by Hershel house , we find that Hacker specifically states that a barrel should be so soft as to be able to draw the flats with a knife blade . There fore he often found manufactured barrel to be far to hard for use .
I don’t care who you are or what degrees you have , that’s pretty darn soft
now while i wouldnt subscribe to that that line of oppenion , hacker was one of the last truly historic gun makers in this country
myself i prefer a Getz or Rice or Rayl barrel or when available and cost effective an Iron barrel of proper build .
but that’s just me
Historically speaking it pretty hard to claim the priority of modern steal when compared even to softer irons of which there is 300 years of data to provide information concerning the prowess of softer steals over harder ones . But again a person must chose what they feel is correct
There is also more to a safe rifle then just the barrel , proper fit of the breech as well as breech material and breech design is also a must .
do to liability issues this is one of the reasons many companies no longer provide breeched barrels . thus leaving the breeching to the gunsmith or builder .
myself as a gunsmith i prefure that
Personally in all my years as a muzzleloading gunsmith I never seen a barrel , Spanish or other fail do to poor quality of the barrel . Now I have seen them fail do to improper maintenance by the owner or improper loading .
Even modern steels fail even after being proofed .
IMO not only through the centuries have we became more advanced in out technolgies but it also seems we have become more and more brain dead .
as such we sue over anything and everything , chosing to point blaim at someone else .
this is why IMO people tout the prowes of modern steels . basicly so as to cover the vast amount of stupidit amoung their possable customers and thus Cover their A@# so to say
We also know the thought today that BP cannot reach high pressures is a false hood .
This was also documented in I believe the early 1800 where it was shown that given the right circumstances BP could reach pressures over 90 thousand PSI .
So can it happen yes . Is it common No .
So regardless of the material of the barrel you chose to use . One must always properly maintain their weapon . Fail to do that and I don’t care what pictures you take showing how well the molecules align and lay within the steel itself . You run the chance of a barrel failure
There are a lot of sales gimmicks out there ranging from opinions of flash hole liners to bolster designs to barrel steel .. All are opinions and like holes , everyone has one
OHHH LMAO and like everyone else , thats my Oppenion LOL
-
As is often the case paintings are a poor sources to draw from or use as a reference to aquire a piece of gear. As for thw Cauwood guns their Wilson is not to bad of a "replca" but their French nguns have barrels that are way to short and their locks are really small compared to originals , they would be the last place I would go for a Fench gun.