|
They are free in Belgium , but only if vintage
repro modern BP is regulated. that being said, a free old BP gun you can't shoot it unless you get licensed. so ownership is free , but shooting is not |
Here are a few pics of progress so far. As mentioned earlier, the butt plate and toe plate are fitted to the stock, and the tang has been fitted to the breach plug on the barrel.
The crescent shape of the butt plate in no way matched that of the stock, which was left with the afore mentioned ridge in the middle of their mating surface, and the mating surface of the butt plate was far too rough in its "as cast" condition to fit anyway. The toe plate should have been easy but, alas, it was too short to reach the butt plate once the "inletting" for it was cleaned up enough to accept it. I wound up having to build up its aft end by welding. But, they now fit. http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1647309549.jpg http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1647309549.jpg Speaking of "matching" (or not), the octagon of the tang in no way matched that of the barrel. The mating surfaces of both parts were anything but "flat". Both required extensive filing and grinding to make them mate up. Beyond that, the "hook" on the end of the barrel, on the breach plug, was too big to fit through the mortise in the tang. And its vertical sides were not even parallel, nor precisely "vertical". http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1647309888.jpg http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1647309888.jpg http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1647309888.jpg None of this is insurmountable, of course. Maybe inexcusable, though, especially in a kit of this price. And this is the "easy" stuff to start with. It gets much harder from here. |
Something Old
A pair of original spoons.
Top is a Dbl rif..le by Nel..son Lew..is of NY. apx 40 c. Circa 18.50 to 18.80. Proflic maker, well known for Dbl, and Tgts. From WI Bottom is a JH John,son Gre.at Wes, tern Ri,fle Works Pit.tsburg..maker of lower cost spoons, 40 c. this is a deluxe, xlt shiny bore. Have shot. Came from a MO estate of a man whose father was a blk pwd shoo,ter who passed around 1960..Note the hm made sights. http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1647385028.JPG http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1647385028.JPG http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1647384454.JPG |
What we have here are a pair of Hawks..
Top: is Unsigned 1/2 stk Hawk. 36", 54 c Gre,en Riv,er B. very hgh qual. came from a friends estate who never spared any expense.
Bottom: L Pea,rson full stk Hawk 34" 54 c Gre,en Riv,er B little lessor qual, used a propane torch tocase colour:( both as nu, about 7h ea. http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1647385931.JPG http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1647385994.JPG http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1647385994.JPG |
From Higgins Backyard
These came from Ya,kima, neither is signed, came from an MD's estate. I would bet Do,n He,nry Br,own was the maker as he specialized in making xlt qual En,gl,ish style per,cuss,ions in Yaki,ma. Extrm high qual, fit finish engr,aving go,ld band in B. apx 50c
again about 7h ea. http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1647386591.JPG http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1647386591.JPG http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1647386591.JPG |
Quote:
A H B under hammer unsigned with paper patch short starter..and Tasco tgt 20x scope..1k A Chunk spoon, wt Wm Large hvy 48 in B, Sprg Field 1863 lock...weights bout 35 lb. vtg 50's 60's. 4.5h |
Quote:
|
When classics like these were state of the art and the latest, greatest thunderstick on the plains, were the parts interchangeable or was everything hand fitted, the way you're going about it now?
|
Quote:
Their early rifles, the ones stamped "J & S Hawken St. Louis" continued this practice. They were buying some parts, like the locks, from other manufacturers, who had begun to "standardize", to a degree. Once Jacob died (I believe in the '30's, maybe early '40's) and Sam carried on on his own, he very much began to standardize parts. Parts that had perviously been hand formed from sheet stock, or forged, were now cast. By the time Sam had sold the business to J.P. Gemmer, the rifles were pretty much "standardized". Does that mean, for example, if my lock broke in the field I could borrow one from another rifle and it would fit? No. There was a lot of handwork that still went into making things fir. They were close, but manufacturing methods were still not repeatable enough to ensure a level of uniformity that ensures "drop in" interchangeability. That was still a ways down the road. There is a great book that goes into some detail as to how we developed interchangeability not only in gun parts (although that is its primary focus), but in manufacturing in general. American Rifle (A Biography) by Alexander Rose goes into great detail on this. Not surprisingly, it was the military that really drove this need. Believe it or not, even up through the Civil War, gun parts simply did not interchange, not without the loving attention - and very careful hand fitting - of the company armorer. And these were mass produced, "identical" military firearms. One would think this relatively "easy", but it's worth noting that not even by WWI could gun parts be interchanged without some work. Oh, many could be, but things like the bolts in Springfield service rifles still had to be fitted and headspaced. We were not quite there, even by then. Even today, manufacturers struggle with this. A good example in Ruger's resurrection of Marlin. Ruger found those old designs to still, today, require too much hand fitting to be able to manufacture them profitably. They had to make some design changes to the rifles, along with changes in manufacturing methods. Even then, they still require a bit of hand fitting. This is one of the "holy grails" firearms manufacturers are still seeking. They have more or less achieved it in certain classes of firearms, particularly military or the civilian counterparts thereof. But, well - it shows. Compared to expertly hand fitted firearms, they are pretty darn rude and crude, sloppy and loose as can be, with function being the only requirement. Fine sporting firearms, however, just aren't there yet, and may never get there. Granted, that's a finer point on it than "will it fit and function". So, no, in short - when these rifles were new, no one was even thinking about that. They eventually were, but only to reduce, not eliminate, the amount of handwork required. It was, after all, a business. So that was their only real concern. Whether parts could interchange in the field wasn't a question they were even asking back then. |
Well, that is interesting; Makes sense, I guess, there will always be people engaged in building machines where good enough is the starting point. Clockworks, racing engines, cameras; as we learn to polish off the rough edges we just adjust the microscope to keep finding the rough edges we missed.
Thanks for the lesson. Very well explained. |
I've made some satisfying progress in the last couple of days. Best of all, I have found my "zen", or my "happy place" in all of this. My shock and dismay over the lack of "completeness" of the inletting, most of the metal parts, and all of that is now behind me. And I'm having fun "learning as I go". Big thanks to John for his tip on using lipstick as a spotting agent to help fit the parts.
I've gotten the ramrod entry thimble on the front of the forearm, along with the nose cap fitted. I put about ten hours total into getting these parts to fit, but it was an enjoyable learning experience. The "before and after" pics of the forearm where they fit are pretty telling, and indicative of where I have to start in getting anything to fit. Here is how it came from the Hawken Shop: http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1647478889.jpg Here is how it wound up before these parts fit: http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1647478889.jpg Parts installed. All of this work was done by hand, with wood chisels and sandpaper.: http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1647478992.jpg Here is the lock installed into the stock. I do have to say, the Dremel Moto tool is one hell of a boon to frontier gunsmithing ;) I made good use of one on all of the inner radii that had to be cleared to fit: http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1647478992.jpg |
Progress!
|
Starting to Look Like a Rifle
All of the major parts are now inletted and located to one another. The only inletting left will be for the barrel escutcheons, the two keys that hold it to the stock. I can actually assemble it and get an idea what it's going to look like.
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1647987837.jpg Boy was I ever ill prepared for what it has taken to get this far. I now clearly understand what I was getting into, though, and am very much enjoying the challenge. Literally nothing "fits" anything right out of the box. Every single part had to have its inletting finished, nothing was even close. Every single metal part that mates or interacts with any other metal part had to be extensively filed to fit. There has even been some welding involved, to make a part fit its mating part properly. But, come to find out, that is what these kits are all about. "Building" as opposed to "assembling". Beyond that, now that I can actually hold it like a rifle, I'm a little surprised just what a massive beast this thing is. I can see why modern "Hawken" semi-replicas have all been so extensively reduced in size and lightened. I knew this thing was supposed to go around 11 pounds, but the full appreciation of that didn't sink in until I was able to shoulder it and able to carry it like a rifle. The photos don't do it justice, really, but here it is up against my Lyman Great Plains rifle, widely regarded as "the best" representation from a mainstream manufacturer. It goes around 8 pounds and both shoulders and carries very nicely. Its reduction in weight comes from its much lighter barrel, which is 32" long and a straight 7/8" octagon. The new rifle sports a 34" long barrel that is a tapered octagon, going from 1 1/8" at the breach to 1" at the muzzle. Hopefully you can see the difference. http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1647988576.jpg http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1647988576.jpg http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1647988576.jpg http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1647988576.jpg The Lyman rifle, with its lighter barrel, is restricted to 100 grains of FFg behind a patched .530" diameter round ball of 230 grains. That is actually a pretty light charge for a .54, but that's what Lyman says. The new rifle can be loaded with the same patch and ball combination, but but with a much stiffer charge of up to 160 grains. I'm thinking if I do go that heavy (for hunting purposes), I may begin to better appreciate that weight... Anyway, that's it for now. Most of the hard stuff is done, with the only critical locating to be done on the escutcheons. After that it's all down to finishing. Getting there... |
That looks amazing Jeff. Well done!
You must have many hours in that already! |
Nice work. That barrel is hefty!
|
you have waaaaaay more patience and attention to detail then I do :D
|
Indeed!
When I was looking at the side by side comparison photos, part my mind was thinking, " sort of like a 16 guage next to a 20 guage ". Then I saw the pic of the muzzles . There's a lot of mass in that barrel. No wonder they rate it for a 60% greater charge. What a beast! Thanks for keeping us in the loop, Jeff. Best Les |
Looks like a fun and rewarding project Jeff!
|
Wow, 11 pounds? Jeez, How much does a .52 cal Sharps weigh?
Can't even imagine lugging this heavy thing around all day every day like a plainsman of olde. |
The weight of a Model 1874 Sharps is entirely dependent upon how it is configured. About the lightest I have ever seen is around ten pounds, the heaviest around 22 pounds. Their average weight is probably around 12 pounds. Here are two of mine that illustrate the range that most will fall within. The upper is my long range match rifle in .45-2.6" (aka ".45-100"), which has a 34" #1 heavy full octagon barrel. It weighs over 14 pounds. The lower is one of my hunting rifles in .45-2.4" (aka ".45-90"), built as light as possible. It has a 28" half octagon half round barrel in the standard weight, coming in at just about ten pounds.
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1648168656.jpg Also typical for the era (late 19th century) is my original Ballard Pacific in .45-70, sporting a #1 heavy tapered octagon barrel in a 32" length. It goes about 12 pounds. http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1648168826.jpg Then again, I have a first year Winchester Highwall in .40-70 Sharps Straight that only goes about eight pounds with a standard weight 32" half octagon half round barrel. http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1648168826.jpg So, like today, rifles were all over the map back then. They did, generally, put up with a bit more rifle weight than we like to today. In light of that, an 11 pound Hawken was not out of line. They were, however, carried far more often in saddle scabbards and on wagon seats than by hand, on foot. Eastern rifles tended to be lighter, because their owners were more apt to be still hunting their game in thick woods. Not many did that out West, and they wanted greater power and range, so they accepted that their rifles had to be bigger and heavier. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:22 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2025 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Pelican Parts Website