Restoring original muskets

[Craig L Barry]

Re: Restoring original muskets

Curt,
I think along the same lines you do. I see no point in letting an original weapon deteriorate. I want all of my originals to be functional and not look out of place if they were used in a LH. I am currently in the process of restoring an Enfield I picked up to new issue appearance. I got a great deal on a weapon with perfect 'patina' only to take it apart and realize it was a parts gun. As Curt mentioned, even patina doesn't make it right. I figured since it was already a collection of parts I might as well make it look new, or as close as possible.

That is exactly the right way to do it. However, the put together frankenmuskets are not welcome everywhere you might do living history. I had a rather short discussion with the black powder safety officer at the battlefield park about the use of my put US model together, which they did not allow because a piece of history would be lost if it were damaged, but to my thinking this is not the case at all. It is a collection of disassociated parts rescued from the dust bin of history. It is now performing a valuable function lending excellent insight into how an actual Civil War arm looked, felt and functioned. I still use it, just not out there.

The issue should be: "Is it safe" for historic weapons demos? But you know the US Govt...their policy is reproductions only whether that makes any sense or not. I had to use a park service loaner for the day, which was one of those ten lb. Euroarms clunkers.

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Restoring original muskets

Hallo!

"Is there a source for stocks that don't require gun building and wood working skills so I don't have to spend $250+ to learn how to carve?"

Not that I know of

In brief...

Stock wood comes in three general forms: blanks, pre-carved, pre-carved and pre-inlet.

In brief...

A blank is just a slab of wood band-sawed to the rough shape of a gun or in other words a triangle for a buttstock and a long square for a forestock.
A pre-carve is one that is shaped by a router to the rough "configuration" of what type of gun it is supposed to be.
A pre-carved and pre-inlet is in a more finalized version of what the gun is, but also includes the inletting or mortising for the butt plate, trigger assembly, lock, side plate, barrel, bands. etc.

That being said, all things are not made equal. At the far or high end, a stock may be 95-98% ready for all of its parts to be fitted into the inletting or mortising. Typically, they are 80-90% pre-carved and pre-inlet.

Here is a "pre-carve:"





Here are some shots of a "pre-carved' and "pre-inlet' M1822 ABW stock from Dunlap:









Many lads are looking for a finished, ready to have pieces parts added to it or screwed in place once it has been given a final sanding and oiling. And that is NOT what one gets with a "pre-carve" or "pre-carve and pre-inlet" stock.

IMHO without some training or experience, lads cannot inlet "well." It is a learned and practiced skill if not art. And what most newcomers or beginners end up with is NOT metal parts that look they "grew in the wood," but rather parts with gaps and spaces around them. And what they end up with, like an old pard of mine who thought power tools were the way to go in gun building... turned $600-$800 in parts into a $100 or $200 guns.

Curt

[fahnenschmied]

Re: Restoring original muskets

I cant see pictures of your musket in question - but I bough an old Belgian musket a few years ago for the same price as an Indian repro. It was missing a little chunk of wood, the front barrel band spring and the nipple. Nobody else had messed with it. It was evenly brown all over, but I had no idea just how deep it was till I got it in my hands. I ended up making a front band spring, patched the stock with wood from an old Tabatiere, straightened up the original rammer, and now have a 98 percent original musket that looks like a well maintained period musket and not a hundred and fifty year old relic. My rust was light and cleaned up with no pitting at all. Many people overdo things - round off corners and muddle things up. I was able to match the degree of brightness to the still bright bottom of the barrel. It would pay to practice on some junk parts. I only have before pictures, not after.
I am not too sure about this business of building up one out of parts, as regards a Springfield. I have an old sawn off relic I built into a Richmond musketoon years ago. I have a buttplate, guard, lock, half a barrel, and incorrect bands. Periodically I think hey, I should get a Dunlap stock, a Hoyt barrel, either new or a rebuild of this one, new barrel bands and nosecap and rammer - but when I total it all up, I always think for a couple hundered more I could find an original musket that would be less work to fix up.

[WpnsMan]

Re: Restoring original muskets

but when I total it all up, I always think for a couple hundered more I could find an original musket that would be less work to fix up.

This is it in a nutshell. While that cut down specimen may look like a value at the sub-$500 asking price, it will quickly become a money pit if you don’t know what you’re looking at in terms of the price of required original or repro parts to make it right.

The term “patina” is grossly misused in the collector realm as it is liberally applied to firearms approaching relic condition (brown and pitted) as opposed to aged and cared for (gray) specimens. While I appreciate a truly well cared for original showing its age, I fail to see the allure of how patina (neglect) is a desirable trait of any original firearm when it is applied to brown guns. Add me among the other Heretics’ in this regard.

It is a sad state of affairs that the 150th cycle has pushed demand and therefore prices of repros to the point that in some cases it makes more sense to buy an original, even if it is in need of a little work.

[Nighthawk]

Re: Restoring original muskets

I have been working on a Richmond rifle musket for a couple of years now and just got it completed. This was a project gun that was started years ago by another unit member. It was in bad need of some TLC. It had an original '61 Springfield barrel, which had a Hoyt reline done on it. I added a '62 dated high hump lock plate from Rich Cross, cleaned the original stock of years of dirt and grime, and hand rubbed in several coats of oil. I polished the barrel by hand. I put on an original US trigger guard assembly which had been stamped as condemned by the inspector. Lacking the correct tools, I had a unit member who happens to be a very gifted gunsmith, fit an iron butt plate and patch box. The end result was well worth the years and time I put into it. I copied an original that is in a private collection and was very pleased with the end result. Bottom line is that I spent about it would have cost for an incorrect Italian repro. The Richmond probably would have sat in a corner for years, only to be eventually broken up for parts. With a little work and some time, I not only saved a mostly original gun, but had the fun and money savings of doing most of the project myself.