It is starting.....

[huntinguy]

I have started laying out my wood, I am going to start on the barrel in a week, I am waiting for some taps to show up.

I have found a couple interesting things... One, I don't know squat about what I am doing. I have read Recreating The American Longrifle three times now and am more lost than ever.

I have three rifles on hand to use as a guide, One is the CVA Kentucky (the one that had an accident with a teenager... not that I am confessing or anything... and it was many... many... moons past. This is the where the barrel came from) My Renegade and my sons Traditions Hawkins.

I have learned so far that the width of the butt and cheek piece make a difference on the need for cast. I have seen where others have said that also. I learn slow...

The attached is the layout I am looking at, a 13.5 lop and a 4.5 drop. As can be seen the CVA is 3.5 drop and the TC is 2.5. Am I off base with a 4.5 drop?

Where does the arc for the transition for the fore-stock/lock area start the bend to the butt-stock. It looks to me like the trigger or just behind the trigger is the bend point...?

I would like to follow the lines of the LeMann but man... that butt... it has to hurt, I am also enamored with the Southern Mountain rifle. I like the lines of the one ridjrunr posted in reply to one of my questions... but this is going to be a flint... I think...(I have only changed my mind four times to date.) Considering this is going to be a half-stock... I am still waiting for the small Siler to show up, so I can't draw the lock on yet.

Anyone have suggestions???  Keep in mind this is a practice rifle for the real one later. So.

[pathfinder]

Perfect practice makes perfect. No reason this can't be an awsome gun. The drop usually starts near the middle of the tang,and I begin my cast off @ mid-way through the wrist. The drop seem's good and I like @ 3/8's-1/2" off cast off. I'm 6'2" 230lbs ,formerlly athletic build!

[Indiana]

Try to find yourself a copy of "The Gunsmith of Grenville County."  I built my first rifle knowing nothing about the craft and it turned out much better than I could of ever hoped for.  That book was a valuable resource for me, though.  I think it's temporarily out of print now (should be a new edition out in a few years, I've read), but it might be worth a try posting an ad on some of the muzzleloading message boards to see if you can get a copy.  It's much more in-depth than Recreating the American Longrifle.  I used both while I built mine, but used "Grenville" far more than "Recreating."

Good luck!

[Captchee]

Recreating The American Longrifle  IMO is a very good book . Not as fancy  as "The Gunsmith of Grenville County."  But  its what most all of us older smiths and builders started out with . You have to look at it as a book . The book has an order . You build in that order . If you try and take the chapters out of context of that order , then your going to get confused . Not to mention things become complicated . Once you understand the basics  and how the placement of each component  effects the placement of another , then you can start using the book as a reference

Your transitions should start  up at the  center of the  tang screw .
 Drop and cast  is not an case of ; it is what it is .
 These are things that are specific to a given person  or a given style of shooting .
Today production manufactures  build for an average  shooter ..
 But by trying to work this out now , you are jumping ahead  and thus your  becoming confused .

 You need to start with understanding the why  of things .
 

I would like to follow the lines of the LeMann but man... that butt... it has to hurt,

  That would be true if  one were to shoot that style of rifle from  high on the shoulder . But when we understand that  the rifle was designed to shoot from lower on the shoulder to top of the arm , we then see that it wont hurt . We also then  see that the very deep cresant  shapes , must be shoot from the arm , not the shoulder
 See , once we start to understand  the shapes We can even then go to the extreme  and understand  why the evolution of some of the very deep  butt plates  on  some target rifles
.  See by understand that many of these were meant to be shot from under the armpit . IE a laid back , backwards prone position , not off the shoulder .
 
  As such this shooting style effect the drop  and the cast . Today  people are built differently then they were 150 years ago .  We are taller , heavier  and in some cases our necks and arms are longer . that’s where the drop comes in .

 Let me see if I can explain this to you . When you shoot a rifle that’s been designed to be shot off hand , for a specific person , that rifle , when  brought to the shoulder , should yield the  persons eye  to instantly be  inline with the sight . The less movement , the shooter has to do to make that alignment the better ,IE leaning forward or tilting the head to the side . Thus if one has a short neck , their drop will be less then someone with a tall neck . Same holds true for cast  in that a person with wide shoulders  often needs more cast then a person with narrow shoulders . Now add in a gun designed to be shot from the arm  and not the shoulder and  you can see that  such a gun would need even more cast so as to reduce  the shooters need to hunt for the sights .

 Next  consideration come style of shooting . Is the gun designed to be shot with a forward facing stance like  a shot gun  or a more side type of stance with the  shoulder  in the same  direction as the target . IE the gun runs more across the chest the away from it .
 Once you understand these things you then can  decide of you drop and cast .
  You also will then be able to look at a given rifle and understand  the type of person it was made for and how it was to be shot . As well as why the rifle has the lines it does

I like the lines of the one ridjrunr posted in reply to one of my questions... but this is going to be a flint... I think...(I have only changed my mind four times to date.)

 there is this misconception that all half stocks must be percussion guns . this isnt true .
 the Hawken Bros did not invent the half stock rifle . in fact the lines  of their guns  wasn’t even  innovative. Even if we   hold the conclusion that they  did do something special , they basically only re invented the wheel  as  the plains type rifles very much  resemble the early European  half stock sporting rifles .

 Here are some  other ½ stock rifles for you to look at . As you look at these , try and look past  the gun and look at the details of the gun . Notice the differences in the barrels
Some are round , others swamped , others tapered . Notice the differences in the drop .  Look at the butt plate designs and see if you can understand how the rifle was ment to be shot .
I am also including a photo of a gun made by Gustuvus Erichson in Texas  in or around 1838 .
 Notice the gun is a ½ stocked flintlock . It also carries a longer swamped barrel .
 Notice the drop of the  stock . See that the butt plate isn’t  of a design that’s  shot off the shoulder ?.
 This tells me that the person it was built for  most likely  had a tall neck  and did a lot of off hand shooting .
As such , even for it length ,  for such a person , the rifle would have been quick in the draw


Gustavus Erichson was a gun maker, gunsmith, and gun dealer in Houston from 1838 until 1872. Two of his sons, Otto and Alexander, continued the business until the 1890s.
An amazing rifle has just been discovered hidden away in the vault at the Sam Houston Memorial Museum in Huntsville, Texas. An original flintlock rifle that appears to have been stocked in Houston as early as 1840 and stamped G. ERICHSON HOUSTON. TEXAS. on the lock and the barrel. Mounted in iron with a pewter nosecap, stocked in walnut. This large rifle measures 61 inches overall and has a 43 5/8", .51 caliber, swamped barrel. The rifle is in fine shape and, at this time, is the only known Texas marked flintlock sporting rifle.

[pathfinder]

Again, a really fine reply by Charles! Can think of nothing else to add! Everything he said is right on,especially the part about the book being a progression of steps to be taken IN ORDER! One of the wisest things I've heard in a long time. Been building for over 30 years and that statement put's all of the gun building "secrets" into one bucket.  

[huntinguy]

. Once you understand the basics and how the placement of each component effects the placement of another , then you can start using the book as a reference

This is definitely an area where I am having trouble… I can kinda see it as far as the main components but it is the transition areas I am having trouble with, the angle of the butt plate, the beginning of the bend to the butt from the barrel…

. Next consideration come style of shooting . Is the gun designed to be shot with a forward facing stance like a shot gun or a more side type of stance with the shoulder in the same direction as the target . IE the gun runs more across the chest the away from it . Once you understand these things you then can decide of you drop and cast .

I understand this mechanically but not quite yet from a build angle. I have been playing with an old CVA stock and that is where I am coming up with these weird numbers… I have been picking a point on a wall and mounting my rifle, then change the drop and do it again. I know that the more drop the more torque in recoil I will feel. This barrel thought shoots round balls with 55gr of FFF very well, so I don’t think it will be much recoil to worry about.

. Some are round , others swamped , others tapered .

 I didn’t know that until I saw  the pictures ridjrunr posted of his  rifle…..

.  Notice the differences in the drop . Look at the butt plate designs and see if you can understand how the rifle was meant to be shot .

So the AW Spies rifle looks to be an arm gun. And the Erichson looks to be a shoulder postion. More like what is commonly shot now. The Hummel looks like the deep hook would rest over the collar bone, so more direct facing the target and the Linn looks more like todays shooting style, 45 to the target.. Have I got them close?

Again, a really fine reply by Charles! Can think of nothing else to add! Everything he said is right on,especially the part about the book being a progression of steps to be taken IN ORDER! One of the wisest things I've heard in a long time. Been building for over 30 years and that statement put's all of the gun building "secrets" into one bucket.  

I will post some pictures when the chips start to fall.

Greg.

[Captchee]

. Once you understand the basics and how the placement of each component effects the placement of another , then you can start using the book as a reference

This is definitely an area where I am having trouble… I can kinda see it as far as the main components but it is the transition areas I am having trouble with, the angle of the butt plate, the beginning of the bend to the butt from the barrel…

 again  this  this all depends on what your building.  Thus you have to look at the style of rifle your doing . But generally   these things start gradually to drastically  from about the tang bolt

. Next consideration come style of shooting . Is the gun designed to be shot with a forward facing stance like a shot gun or a more side type of stance with the shoulder in the same direction as the target . IE the gun runs more across the chest the away from it . Once you understand these things you then can decide of you drop and cast .

I understand this mechanically but not quite yet from a build angle. I have been playing with an old CVA stock and that is where I am coming up with these weird numbers… I have been picking a point on a wall and mounting my rifle, then change the drop and do it again. I know that the more drop the more torque in recoil I will feel. This barrel thought shoots round balls with 55gr of FFF very well, so I don’t think it will be much recoil to worry about. [/qoute]

  forget about the production guns . myself i have no idea who they are correct for . I have never seen one that fit anyone correctly .  Be it in drop or pull .
They might if you wanted to mount a scope  or were shooting off a bench a lot . But for off hand shooting , they cause you to contort  your body like a monkey humping a football . In reality they have more to do IMO with a   the idea of  shouldering a modern center fire then they do with  anything else .
When your setting this up for your new rifle  what  I find work is to  stand relaxed . Shoulder the rifle  without moving your head . You want a strait line of sight .
 You will not that when you do this with the TC or CVA the barrel will be well below you line of sight . This causes you to have to lean over and bring your eye down .
  If the rifle is properly fit , you shouldn’t have to do this  very much .
 So  if you building a gun to be shot from the shoulder  IE the top of the Butt plate is  just below your collarbone , what you do is  measure up from that point of your body , to the corner of your eye . Now subtract the height of your chosen sight .
 What this now will give you is the amount of drop  to the heal of your  rifle  .
 When it comes to recoil . What I have found is that the more drastic the  drop , the more the muzzle will want to rise  up ignition . This doesn’t always hold true and is more prevalent with very high loads . Now what you do want to take into account is the grain of the wood . The more the drop . The more you need to be concerned about the grain running through the wrist . Especially if your building something with a very  small diameter wrist

[

.  Notice the differences in the drop . Look at the butt plate designs and see if you can understand how the rifle was meant to be shot .
So the AW Spies rifle looks to be an arm gun. And the Erichson looks to be a shoulder postion. More like what is commonly shot now. The Hummel looks like the deep hook would rest over the collar bone, so more direct facing the target and the Linn looks more like todays shooting style, 45 to the target.. Have I got them close?[/qoute]
 you would be correct with the AW Spies  but you have the other 2 backwards .
 think of it this way . you know where you place the butt  to your shoulder with a shotgun  right ?
Now realise  the more the hook , the further off the shoulder  the gun needs to be .
  in some cases like with the Erichson  the gun can set in the same place as a flat buttplate  . but as the shape becomes more cupped and narrow , it must be moved further off the shoulder

 

Again, a really fine reply by Charles! Can think of nothing else to add! Everything he said is right on,especially the part about the book being a progression of steps to be taken IN ORDER! One of the wisest things I've heard in a long time. Been building for over 30 years and that statement put's all of the gun building "secrets" into one bucket.  

Pathfinder, I am really good at doing things in order… just not the order prescribed… I guess I need to calm down and take it slow.

 yes . you need to start with the basics   and go slow . everything . i mean everything has a relationship  to something else . these  guns dont look the way they do  just because  someone thinks they look cool . the look the way they do base on a need
spend as much time drawing your rifle out as you will building it. don’t start cutting tell your happy  . in the end you will be happy you did . its a whole lot easier to  use an eraser  on a sheet of paper then it is to find out  that your lines or parts placement is  all wrong  in the wood . Over time as you gain experience , much of this  becomes second nature . Its still always has to be lined out  but it will come quickly .
 Many years ago when I first started building , I would cut out  my drawing on a piece of  plywood . That way I could actually shoulder the  profile and check the fit  and make minor adjustments

 trust me with this . the slower you go , the more control you take of your tendance to want to rush , the better your end product will be . If you cant do that now , then 1/2 way through , your going to want to just get it done so that you can go out and shoot .
 resist that  want  with every  fiber of your being .  the day will come when your done  and you job will be much better for it

[Captchee]

How about this 1/2 stock  now this is really going to set you back .  but if your confused about what you want , IE flint or cap , why not do this
 this rifle  was made by John Blanck.  . while it originaly shot a belted ball . no real reason that it  you couldnt use a regular barrel though  

[FlintSteel]

How about this 1/2 stock now this is really going to set you back . but if your confused about what you want , IE flint or cap , why not do this

I'm confused Cap. Never saw a "Flintcaplock" before, or even heard of one for that matter. How does it work? Either or both? Kinda like wearing a belt with suspenders?

[Captchee]

How about this 1/2 stock now this is really going to set you back . but if your confused about what you want , IE flint or cap , why not do this

I'm confused Cap. Never saw a "Flintcaplock" before, or even heard of one for that matter. How does it work? Either or both? Kinda like wearing a belt with suspenders?

 well i dont know for sure but , YA eather or both is what it looks like to me

[huntinguy]

I am not much of a shotgunner... If you ask the people that have seen me shoot one they will tell you I am not a shotgunner at all.  I do, however, shoot about as far out on the shoulder as one can. I pretty much set up at then crook caused by the shoulder mussel and the collar bone. I have been playing with butt designs the last few days... This rifle is beginning to slip away from any "school" of design.......

The lock was waiting at the door when we returned home. I do see what you mean by the parts will define the way things go together... WOW, That small Siler sure redesigned the how things will flow into the wrist..... and how the trigger and such will set in... I didn't realize it would make that much difference.

That last rifle Cap posted the picture of... it would take a stouter man that I to shoot that... Seems like you have your choice, a flash hole jet in front of you face or a cap lock jet coming around the hammer.... I will give it that it is an interesting work of art.

Still waiting for my taps.... darn....

[huntinguy]

I finally got my plane sharp. Still haven't gotten to the breach plug yet. (1/2 hour after work doesn't go very far.)

I have squared (squared to the side facing the camera) and leveled the area that the plane is setting on. Do I need to square and level the top of the butt stock area for any reason. The wood seems to have a twist in it and it would cause a problem. Or can I just put a line, square to the area I have planed, where the butt plate will go?

[Captchee]

Do I need to square and level the top of the butt stock area for any reason. The wood seems to have a twist in it and it would cause a problem. Or can I just put a line, square to the area I have planed, where the butt plate will go?

 you mean the comb area ?
 you can if you like . what you need is a  good centerline  to your plank . everything builds from there .
so if you dont plane the comb , be sure to check your buttplate alignment so that its true  for no cast or off sent for  cast .
 it should be noted that there are times when  buttstock needs alittle twist as well .

 do you have one of the building books ? if not , i would recommend getting one .
 they will save you alot of Time money in the long run

[Captchee]

That last rifle Cap posted the picture of... it would take a stouter man that I to shoot that... Seems like you have your choice, a flash hole jet in front of you face or a cap lock jet coming around the hammer....

actually i cant see where either would happen . if you look closely ,  you will see that the pan is angled forward . as such the jet from the flashole would go forwards . looks to be about 100-maybe 112 deg or so away from the shooters face . .
simply about the same as one would do if venting a percussion drum .

[huntinguy]

you mean the comb area ?
 you can if you like . what you need is a  good centerline  to your plank . everything builds from there .
so if you dont plane the comb , be sure to check your buttplate alignment so that its true  for no cast or off sent for  cast .
 it should be noted that there are times when  buttstock needs alittle twist as well do you have one of the building books ? if not , i would recommend getting one .
 they will save you alot of Time money in the long run

I am Using Recreating the American Longrifle.

It says the top flat and lock side need to be square before starting. I think it  is to make sure the lock and barrel are square for fit. I just didn't know if that thought needed to extend to the comb area (too little sleep and too much going on at home... couldn't think of the right name).

It seemed to me if I put lines from my two good surfaces onto the other surfaces it would be sufficient.  We do that at work. I just wanted to check with those who know. Don't want to walk myself into a corner.

I just don't know how much of my machinist thinking transfers to gun building. I am used to working with datums and projections... metal is my thing... not so much wood.