Found MUSKET in thrift store.

stats: 29" octagon barrel(rifled 3/4inch) barrel and other parts marked 566,has what i would call two royal crowns one on part you put the percussion cap on? the other in front of and above a K, an indented square with the letters AR inside and on the barrel OJR(or OIR) H No 58(or 581 or 58I its hard to tell for sure) (and the o in No is underlined) If this sound like something I'll post some pictures latter. It's really cool, but probably not worth too much as some one a long time ago made it into a lamp. crudely so the rifle was not changed but for some additional screw holes.

It is often hard to read old stamps correctly. And crowns were so common, you need to identify which kind of crown. So please post some pictures, of a) the entire gun b) the lockplate c) any markings you can find. That should help enormously in identification.
Number abbreviated as No. with the abbreviation point made as a stroke under the o indicates British/Canadian/US origin.

Patrick

Here are some pictures.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC_0842-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC_0844-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC_0846-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC_0848-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC_0849-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC_0853-1.jpg

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC_0862-1.jpg

The stock looks to be either beech or oak to me and the style looks germanic Jaeger rifle to me. Possibly early percussion or maybe even a converted flintlock.

More pics
http://i681.photobucket.com/albums/v...5/DSC_0859.jpg
http://i681.photobucket.com/albums/v...5/DSC_0856.jpg
http://i681.photobucket.com/albums/v...5/DSC_0855.jpg

Great find there!

I've been searching and the look of the stock and the lack of barrel bands and the K and royal crown has me looking at Ketlands of london(a lock company) that did not make the whole rifle. The shape of the hammer plate (pardon the ignorance) is almost the same shape. the rifle I compared looked older but my brass looked the same just not as fancy. Please let me know if I'm getting close. The stock seems to mimic a brown bess? the picture under and behind the trg gaurd has a stamping?

Now for some speculative fun!
That looks to me like a percussion conversion of an 18th century flintlock "Jäger". The stock is typical for a Jaeger, and the fitting for a hanger (NOT a bayonet) on the right side towards the muzzle makes it a military rifle. The style of manufacture is German (Hessen?) but the barrel marking indicates a British Military usage, as Jaeger rife No. 581 in a regiment or other unit indicated by OIR H. The marking with the crown on the percussion conversion boss is an acceptance/proof mark made when the converted rifle was tested/reproofed.

Good grief, that could be an antique from the War of Independence, and someone turned it into a lamp standard:eek::eek::eek:

If my speculative interpretation is halfway correct, you need to get that thing looked at by someone who is really expert in firearms ca. 1750-1820. And quite possible professionally restored. Or, of course, send it to me - I'll give it a good home:madsmile:

Patrick

In support of my speculation, here is a photo taken at a War of Independence re-enactment right here where I live:

Attachment 17186

And the gentleman at the end of the file is carring a replica Jaeger rifle.

Attachment 17185

Does that look familiar?

I'm not kidding - I think you really have found something special.

Patrick

It is a Germanic very early percussion military jaeger rifle. It should be about 62 caliber. I have a little earlier flint lock version of it. If you decide to sell or trade it. please contact me.

I will be going to the Melbourne,Florida gun show next weekend. I know a guy who might be able to give me some advice. I,m excited to say the least, but I've been broken hearted too many times to count. Patrick, what is the meaning of 566(it appears on barrel,behind barrel, hammer side plate, and stock) Is it like the P 08 Luger,where all parts match?

What an absolute old GEM!

American War of Independence? VERY possible; lots of Hessian troops bought over for it.

Could even be earlier: the dog-catch was obsolete in British-manufactured guns by 1720. This one could have been at Drummossie Moor when Stinkin' Willy turned the mercenaries loose on the Highland wounded, 1746, then in America 30 years later.

If only it could talk to us.....

You're a very fortunate man. You must have done something right.
.

Gentlemen, I am angry with myself!
I was up until 2:41 in the morning, local time, looking up markings in Stoeckel etc, and searching through my archive to find a picture of a Hessen-Kassel Jaeger rifle. This belongs to a member of a local re-enactment group who are every bit as pernickety about historical detail as any N-S skirmisher. As I live in Hessen, in the original "Jäger" country, I am in quite a good position to find out more. But then, waking up bleary-eyed this morning, I read this:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by musketshooter

It is a Germanic very early percussion military jaeger rifle. It should be about 62 caliber. I have a little earlier flint lock version of it. If you decide to sell or trade it. please contact me.

---

The expression "jumping on the bandwagon" comes to mind:(.
More than one contributor had already said it was a Jaeger rifle (which is, by definition, "Germanic").
This is a style from the flintlock era, and the possibility that it is a conversion had already been mentioned.
DaveN had already told us what the approximate bore diameter was.
And I, in my "British understatement" fashion had already light-heartedly expressed my interest in having the rifle, should DaveN not wish to keep it.
To use another quaint British expression, jumping into this correspondence to get hold of the piece is "not cricket":mad:.

I had intended to contact the gentleman in the picture, to obtain detail pics of his replica and, if possible, pics of the original from which it was made. I now feel that I have spent quite enough time on this, and will not pursue the matter further.

Regretfully yours,

Patrick

Thanks to all very much, but still looking for the 566 answer if one is out their?

The 566 would be an assembly number as these would have been made in large batches with hand-fitted but mass produced parts. When sent for finishing, etc. the assembly numbers kept the bits together. On a British firearm of the same period, they use chisel strikes for the same thing. Guns in that era were typically not serial numbered as we think of it today.

I've looked at the bore closer and I'm not sure my first observation is correct. What I thought
was rifling does not twist at all but seem to be even measured (maybe 3mm) going straight down the muzzle? Just adding more info. I may try a picture but it may be too much for my camera, and it may not be necessary anyway.

It probably does twist, only very slowly like 1:70" or something like that. Meant for patched balls.

Well , I'm going to put my 2 pennies in for what it's worth.

I think the gun is definitely a percussion jaeger. It was built as a percussion as I see no indication on the lock plate where a frizzen spring was attached. Also the barrel looks to have been made with a percussion bolster much like a CW era musket. I've never seen a conversion made like that. Usually they add a drum, or put a nipple directly into barrel and add a hammer that is bent so it will strike the nipple.

Went back to the thrift store to see if the ramrod was laying around. The lady said the "lamp" was just left out side their front door, said happens with stuff all the time, imagine that. Opinions on what to do. It's pretty beat up wood wise, should I consider a refinish. I thought I would leave the metal alone. I don't want it to look new but the extra holes gotta go. Your opinions are welcome. PS: Patrick, you mentioned a hanger not a bayonet lug. what did you mean and is it the same, and ,I just don't know blackpowder terminology.

A hanger is the kind of short, relatively heavy (for its length) sword used by hunters to kill wounded animals/cut up meat in the old days. Term also used for the short sword used by 18th C. police, revenue officers and the like (I am not a hunter or a sword expert, so may be slightly off-beam) who would have felt encumbered by a full-length sword. This developed into the "sword" as used by the Rifle Brigade in the Peninsular War - the command in the Rifle brigade was always "fix swords" not "fix bayonets". Likewise the Baker rifle was the successor to the Jaeger. As, indeed, the Rifle Brigade was the successor to the Jaeger companies.

"I see no indication on the lock plate where a frizzen spring was attached"
Good point Doug, you are correct!

OK, revised opinion. If it was manufactured as percussion, then the marking on the bolster must be an acceptance crown plus two inspectors stamps. Yes?No?Maybe?

My friend who has seen his share of firearms and actually refurbished the door (for the lack of the correct term) on the right side of stock, in about 20 mins, to make it the right length, says this is all made at the same time and not converted. Once I have enough info on what is best for this rifle (complete refinish/clean it up or leave it as is) then it's off to the races.
Once again all opinions accepted.

Patrick

The marks do seem to be acceptance stamps. Along with the numbers stamped on the parts, It seems to be a contract Jaeger. Perhaps for a militia group.

The Jaegers I have examined in George Shumway's booth at the NMLRA were much fancier and marked with the maker's name and date of manufacture. This one seems plain by comparison.

:eek:For heaven's sake do NOT over clean or (especially) refinish it!:yikes:

Now that I have said that, I have to say that there has been some interesting and not unfounded speculation about this gun so far. It is not German and most especially, it has no British connection in it’s manufacture, use or design at all. It is rare, both here and in it’s country of origin where it is considered highly collectible and a desired item for arms collectors. So please resist the temptation to make any modifications to it. You might want to use a lightly dampened rag to wipe off years of accumulated dirt from the stock, furniture, barrel and lock and lightly oil the barrel and lock but, unless you have years of experience restoring antique firearms (or just don’t care - and I know you do) please do not try to refinish the gun. Don’t even be tempted to polish the brass. Too bad some foolish person decided to turn it into a lamp - probably in the late '40s or the '50s when people did things like that - but a proper bit of work can at least get it back into proper condition for display purposes at least.

Okay, I have run on long enough now and I apologize for that. What you have is a Norwegian M1821/41/51 Jäger rifle made on Kongsberg Våpenfabrikk, the “K” marks on the lock indicate it’s manufacture there. A link to a Norwegian collector’s website showing this gun is here:

M1821/41/51 Kongsberg jäger rifle Norwegian military small-arms

Below is a link to another Norwegian site that more plainly shows a better view of a Kongsberg modified flintlock musket (M1774/41/51) with very similar markings, again indicating that the work was done there:

http://www.gammlevaapen.net/side42.html

Hope all of this helps DaveN, you are a very lucky guy :cheers: and I wish I had been hanging around outside that store when someone dropped it off. How did it get to this country? These guns were never imported into this country in any quantity so it is likely was brought back by a tourist, maybe visiting family or friends in Norway in the post-WW2 era when all manner of things were brought back from all over Europe at very cheap prices and used for home decoration to show that they had "been there and done that".

This is the most accurate info to date. Thank you. The brass on the 1774 looks more like mine( diff but plate)but I could not tell if the stock had the hatch and the barrel protruded more on the 1774, my barrel is more like the 1821. Are these numbers indicative of the date of around when it was made? To the point, when was it made? Also rest assure I will not refinish though the 7 screw wholes will be repaired by a pro.

Congratulations and thanks gew8805 ! That was a brilliant piece of detective work, and shows that there is an enormous amount of know-how/when/where available, if one can discover it.

DaveN, I am glad it helped. I don't think that there is any doubt that you have the M1821/41/51, the M1774/41/51 started life as a smoothbore, flintlock musket and yours has always been a rifle. As far as the numbers, the “566” numbers are batch or what we call serial numbers which were used to assure that the correct parts stayed together during construction and during later reconditioning/repair - these guns were, of course, far from interchangeable. These numbers could indicate when the gun was made IF Kngsberg kept records like that. Each gun received it’s own number during manufacture and individual parts were numbered to match. The number “581” (or whatever it actually is) is most likely a part of it’s issued regimental identity. The full regimental is “OJR H No.581 “ with “OJR” identifying the actual regiment by title, maybe the Colonel’s name or a locality’s name represented by the “OJ” with “R” signifying “Regiment” (we’ll call it the OJ Regiment) and the “H” is probably the company letter while “581” (or whatever it actually is) is the accountability number that in the records kept on the company level that would have been used to identify which soldier the gun was issued to. That soldier would be responsible for the gun’s care and keeping it in good condition plus it would show who lost it or misplaced it if found somewhere it shouldn’t have been. It would be read "Weapon number 581, H Co., the OJ Regiment".

I have learned a lot from all and many thanks. The burning question and one that will probably be answered at the Melbourne,Fl. gun show Sat is what is the value(I know it's ruff
and I plan on filling the holes made by the lamp fool but other wise leaving it the way it is.
I just want to snicker and maybe laugh out loud when they throw out their numbers.

Very difficult to say since very few if any of the dealers will have the slightest idea what it is. Condition, which is really not too bad, will put some off. And finally, most will want to be conservative with their estimates due to the fact that the estimate may come back on them - "Hey, you said it is worth $X, so it's for swale at that price..." Honest dealers (the majority despite what some say) will likely give a valuation at about 50% - 60% of what they think they can sell it for, they do have to make a living.

Another option is contacting the owner of the website listed above in my first post, he is very knowledgeable and speaks excellent English. Of course if he cares to comment that would be a European price.

Went to the show. The gentleman who I wanted to see wasn't there. many people asked and some followed, and when I encountered the ones behind the tables said, "it's a wall hanger". A pause was followed by how much do you want for it. To those I felt were playing the game I said " I got a nice wall at home to hang it on". I had two who thought it was wonderful and apart from getting 1 matching screw and filling 7 small screw holes made by the lamp guy I plan on keeping it in the family. One guy said I should have it made like new but I trust my friends here on milsurps. Thanks to all and good night.

Gentlemen, if you Google M1803-41-51 Click on the site" Digitalt Museum And follow your nose and the 1803's (about ten or so) and I looked at a couple/ look exactly like the one I have. Even some of the stampings are the same (OIR on one of them in the same spot on the barrel) the K and the crown the shape of the lock,the stamped number and the brass are all the same. I polished the brass on mine and when I saw these pictures I almost fell out of my chair. The Danish rifle 1803 may not be as rare as the 1821 but I think it is what it is. Let me know what you think (Patrick, Claven, gew, and anyone I might have left out) all your opinions are valued.

A little proof with the polished brass. I put these together in haste but you get the picture.


https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC_0870-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC_0871-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC_0872-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC_0874-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC_0879-1.jpg

Dang, now why'd you go and polish the brass? It'll be years before it looks right again. It's like a tarted up 90 year old woman. Made me get harsh, but I'm not sorry!

I'm going to get an after market sight (replica) and a ramrod and enjoy it. I'm not trying to make it look brand new but to me the brass had what ever someone covered the wood with(maybe when it was turned into a lamp?) and to me it looks closer to the ones that everyone is trying to sell. If I was ever to sell it I would have a hard time if it looked to most people like a neglected piece of junk. If I was the soldier and this was my rifle I would polish the brass (when I had the time). I'm sorry if I have disappointed some but I'm going somewhere between don't touch it,and completely restore it.

My apologies to gandog56 for copying this picture from the thread "My Pet Peeve" on the general discussion forum, but it's all staying in the family! It is just so appropriate to illustrate the point I wish to make to help DaveN. But be warned, it also illustrates one of my pet peeves!

Attachment 17511

I would like all of you to imagine you are standing in front of this gentleman.

Now say, slowly and clearly after me:

"Sorry sarge, but I am not going to clean this rifle, it would damage the original patina"

The scenario lies somewhere between unbelievable and unimaginable. I am not quite sure what his reaction would be, but your life insurance might classify you as a suicide risk!

Let us assume he is, at heart, a humane person, and realises that he is confronted with a very difficult case. I imagine him explaining quite slowly and patiently that corrosion and dirt are not part of the original rifle, not "part of it's history", but the result of neglect and failure to maintain a soldier's most important item of equipment, and he would surely beseech you to bear that in mind as you spend the next days cleaning every rifle in the armory, lest you forget this lesson, which is that

CORROSION AND DIRT IS JUST THAT - CORROSION AND DIRT.

IT DESTROYS YOUR EQUIPMENT.

IT IS NOT SOMETHING TO BE PRESERVED.

Now there is a type of dealer who, rather than honestly admitting he is buying and selling old tools of a military nature, perceives himself as a "Purveyor of Fine Antiques to the Discerning Gentry".

These people have accordingly invented some delicate expressions to cover the dismal state of some of their old equipment and sell it "as is" without going to the trouble of doing a proper (but time-consuming!) job of cleaning it up. So a finish turning into what to you and me is plain rust is described as "plum brown". There never was any such finish, it is just rust developing.
Likewise, filthy wood and brass covered in verdigris does not "show a fine patina", it needs cleaning.

But, but, but... there is nevertheless such a thing as patina. The surface of wood darkens with exposure to light - and handling, of course. Surfaces are rubbed in a various ways, depending, on their position. Dings appear from everyday usage. Linseed oil and varnishes harden slowly over years. The combination of these long-term effects is a genuine patina. Complete removal of this layer will give any old piece of wood a falsely fresh look.

I am accordingly shocked when I read about ghastly recipes, such as smothering your gunstock in oven cleaner (which tends to be caustic soda with value-enhancing additives) and even putting it in the dishwasher for a really good clean. That wood is part of a complex tool. Skilled armorers spend years adjusting fits and bedding barrels so that rifles gives their best performance. The wood was selected, matured and carefully dried before use. It has settled down over a century or so to its present form. And now someone comes and soaks it right through to destroy that settled state and encourage it to warp, adds caustic chemicals to remove any real patina and really destroy the surface, attacks it with sandpaper, just in case there was still some original finish left, and presents the result as restoration.

Furniture restorers, museum staff, musical instrument makers - all would be horrified, and if they knew the term, would scream...

...that is NOT restoration, that is BUBBARING

It is therefore quite understandable, and correct advice to a beginner, to say "leave it alone", as some have already done. I said right at the start that it looked as if it needed professional restoration, and have not intervened further in the matter of restoration until now, as I am very busy on another "building site". But you have started the ball rolling by polishing the brass. And the surface of the wood looks as if it has been covered in floor varnish. That (if I am guessing right) is something to be removed. So before you do anything further, I implore you to read the series on refurbishing an Argentine Rolling Block on the restoration forum (The Restorer's Corner). Right from the start, please, as when I have managed this once, it would be pleasant not to have to repeat it!

Coming Soon to a Forum Near You! - Part 5 on refurbishing the stock.

Please note, these are tips on refurbishing old rifles, not on museum-level restoration - to make something fit for use without having to wrap it up in cotton wool or keep it in a glass showcase forever.

And if you don't do it properly - the ghosts of sergeants long past may come to haunt you!

Finally:

DON'T TAKE IT TOO SERIOUSLY - IT'S YOUR RIFLE

- as you have quite correctly pointed out!

Enough for now, must get on with Part 5 a.s.a.p.

Patrick

Double posting eliminated

DaveN, I just had another look at the original pics. You are quite right, that was no kind of original finish, that was Bubba at work with the floor varnish - the clue is the look of fossilized treacle over everything. Fortunately Bubba usually does not bother to clean the wood before splashing on the brown muck, which does not adhere well to the so-called "patina" a.k.a. dirt. It often comes off quite easily IF YOU DO IT PROPERLY.

So please leave that rifle alone for now, read up on the Argentine RB refurbishent, and not only do you have Part 5 to look forward to, but I will see if I can post a pic of a "treacle" rifle AFTER the kind of treatment that I not only recommend, but actually practise!

P.S: I think you need to learn the Norwegian for "Do you happen to have a spare backsight and cleaning rod?"

For DaveN:

Treacle Rifle before

Attachment 17527

Treacle Rifle after

Attachment 17526

Convinced?

If so, please wait a couple of days so that I can tell you how to do it

:wave:

I will wait. Patrick you have come through again,thanks.

Too harsh, I was? Possibly. But upon a further review of the photos presented so far, I'm still not convinced that a GENTLE cleaning of the wood and esp. the brass would have been more prudent to start. I don't mind old brass that's worn shiny because tou are handling it or using it, but the rest ought to keep that nice old browness. Green is bad, that's gotta go, but the photos did not reveal much active corrosion.

AS it was furniture, I'm wondering if it doesn't have just an old waxy build up. Try a light rubbing w/ a soft cloth wettened w/ isopropyl alcohol. It will remove scads of gunk but leave the old finish pretty much untouched. Not aggressive at all! Besides might as well even out the finishes now that you've started. In 30-50 years it'll be all better, and that's not much in gun years.

I've a brass barreled blunderbuss (Irish mail carrier's thing IIRC) that someone polished up over twenty years ago, and it still doesn't look quite right.

But never mind me, I think Patrick Chadwick will do a much better job helping you do right to this VERY interesting weapon! I just couldn't help expressing my dismay, have seen way too many "improved" pieces over the years. Be patient, and gentle, please. Thanks for letting me rant. All done now.

Jmoore, you were and are right. This is one of those fields where if you don't know what you are doing, you should not crash in and do something irreversible. I started out on junkers, made some mistakes:o, and the whole point of human society is that we don't all have to pile in and make the same mistakes over and over, but can learn from others.

I only intervened because I was worried that since DaveN had started on this tricky path anyway, he was likely to do something that he might regret later - as I have done in the past - if he did not get some help, and so he should rather be gently led in a direction that is not going to result in serious damage.

I am always careful to refer to my methods as refurbishment, not restoration. Refurbishment, for me, means getting the thing working as intended, catching up on maybe a century of missed maintenance (nearly 2 centuries in this case!) to bring the rifle back to something like the condition it might have had if it had been properly cared for all that time.

BTW, I am looking forward (Hint! Hint! :D) - to reading your final write up of the Arisaka puzzle as a "sticky" on the Japanese forum:thup:

(Sorry! That is what is described in German as "a nudge with the fence post":lol:)

FWIW, this is how I like my old brasses to look AFTER being cleaned. Patinated, but not dirty or corroded - a nice mellow reddish hue to show age.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSCN1612-1.jpg

That looks fine to me too. I wrote somewhere else that if you refinish everything as new, (which I did once, and regret) you get that "mutton dressed as lamb" look. Jmoore expressed the same sentiment.

P.S: can we please see the rest of whatever it is?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patrick Chadwick

P.S: can we please see the rest of whatever it is?

---

I'll bet it's part of his Brunswick rifle resurrection. Just a WAG. BIG thread. Scary amount of work.

ETA: Link here:

https://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=23840

Yah, I've been reading it, too. Almost bought one, should have. Saw a couple that weren't too bad, but it was in the middle of a roadtrip and there were other things to squander money upon. Now I really need to get in the woods. Deer time!

Patrick,jmoore, The photos may look like new but I did try to leave some of the tarnish in the scares and a little around the harder tho clean areas that seems to say clean but not new giving it the antique look or what you call pantina. I call pantina light. Rest assured no sand paper will go any where near this stock. In person the brass looks like brass with character I just to see where the wood ended and the brass began. My photos were taken in haste and the flash really makes the brass look bright yellow than brassy/bronze color. Is there truth in that in USA we tend to like then left alone and in Europe they like them shined up.

.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaveN

Is there truth in that in USA we tend to like then left alone and in Europe they like them shined up.

---

Not that I am aware of.

The difference is that over here, licensing restrictions and the requirement to keep just about anything that goes bang in an approved (i.e. expensive) gun cabinet mean that anything which is non-working is literally occupying valuable space. Space that people like myself would rather use to house a shooter. We just cannot afford/are not allowed to collect everything that takes our fancy, and are forced to be selective.

The requirements for de-acts that you are allowed to hang on the wall are now so severe that for types which are not in demand as shooters, you can purchase perfectly serviceable milsurps for LESS than the same item as a de-act! :madsmile:
Which is why I got the "treacle rifle" for free.:cheers:
Just don't ask about the time it takes - you are about to find out.

:wave:

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00044-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00042-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00041-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00039-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00038-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00037-1.jpg

OK, but don't do any more to the brass. Like, for instance, starting to file out the dings! That is a no-no. If you want to do something creative while I am slaving away over a hot keyboard hammering out Part 5, then I suggest you go to the Argentine RB thread, read through parts 1 and 2, and start dismantling your rifle ever so carefully. Yes, if you want to get rid of the treacle look that is what you will have to do. Even if you do nothing at all to the metal bits.

The RB thread will do near enough as a "first approximation" for your rifle, because as it is the principles and methods that are important, and the problems are usually pretty similar for most guns from the black powder era. So please follow that thread for guidance, as I am just not up to doing it all again for another rifle in a kind of multiplex operation. Call it creative laziness, if you like!

And I will not hide it from you: dismantling such an old rifle without causing any damage can be a tough job! Take your time. It has been waiting for about 180 years for some careful maintenance. A few days longer won't hurt. If something is horribly stuck, do not force it, but post the problem here.

One question: about 1/2" from the left end of the top barrel ring in your pictures (i.e. the ring that is clear at both ends) - is that a deliberate marking, or just accidental scratching?

Patrick

No, creative laziness is not good enough. I'm cutting corners because I'm tired. Very bad habit. Modify last message!

The RB articles are fine for the techniques, but if you are a beginner at this sort of thing, I do have to be a bit more specific. Please post pics of as much of your rifle as you can. All attachment points, please. Then I can advise you better. The great danger is that screws will be so tight and corroded that screw heads will be twisted right off or a screw shank breaks. The rifle needs to be dismantled so that the wood and other parts can be cleaned without a nasty mess remaining in the cracks and gaps to cause more trouble later. BUT better to make compromises here than ruin something.

So pics first please, and I will try to talk you through it. If you feel at any stage that I am leading you into a situation that you can't handle, please stop and say so!

G'night, I'm whacked (00:41 here)

Patrick

I hope you have a barf bag.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00051-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00048-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00047-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00057-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00056-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00055-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00049-1.jpg
I'm not sure I have the ability to do this. My biggest worry is the pins are very rusty. Is penetrating oil called for (a few drops left to do its thing ) and once they are out I fear they won't go back in. I do know I could get the replacement pins, but once I have to replace to much stuff it may take the charm(as ruff as this is) out of this really cool rifle.

If you're worried about it, disassembly is likely not needed on that gun. The holes can be fixed with patching or dowel repairs glued in with epoxy mixed with sanding dust (use clear wood-compatible two-part epoxy and mix with very fine sanding dust). Try to use a similar wood for your dowel - looks like an oak stock to me.

IF the wood is varnished, remove it using a gel-type varnish remover - leave just long enough to remove the varnish - not the coloration of the wood underneath. The new finish you should apply is probably raw linseed oil as that is what was used in the 19th century.

Cheers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaveN

You wanted more.
I hope you have a barf bag.

---

Well that should quieten the "don't spoil the historic original finish" enthusiasts.
There is none to be preserved.
And the "part of its history" faction can look at those holes and weep.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

"Now I know what you're thinking... is his store of wisdom exhausted?
Or has he still got some tricks up his sleeve to turn this dire wreck back into at least something you can hang on the well without being ashamed?
Well, to tell the truth, I don't rightly know myself.
Go on DaveN - make my day!"

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Well you saw my pics of the treacle rifle. That sort of thing is manageable.
But have you seen this?

Attachment 17545Attachment 17546Attachment 17547

That was the same type as the treacle rifle (Gew. 88 in carbine form - Kar.88)
In this case, Bubba beat me by sandblasting the entire rifle, beore smothering it with black paint. I keep it "because it might come in handy one day" - that's the pack rat syndrome for you - and as an example of Bubba's Inhumanity to Wood.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaveN

I'm not sure I have the ability to do this. My biggest worry is the pins are very rusty.

---

You are right to be worried. What this thing really needs is hands-on treatment by Claven2.
So Claven2, if you wish to take over here, that is fine by me.

Otherwise, DaveN, I shall now retire and have a good think how we can tackle this in a low-risk manner where you can stop at any time you feel it is getting to be too much.
IMOH you have nothing much to lose with that wreck.

Patrick

Yes Patrick you now see the truth. The evil that was wrought upon this rifle was nothing short of a lampabottomy. I'm not one to give up, but in the condition it's in it does no one no good at all. Maybe a wall hanger in the dimmest of light. I still believe I have nothing to loose and I know it might even be fun and rewarding a project.

Dave, I'm with Claven. Disassembly is not needed - leave it alone. Just fill the holes with pins made from matching beachwood (same as used in the stock when manufactured) then dress them over carefully and stain and finish to match. And you will need to use an oil based varnish to match the original finish on the gun. Yes, that wood finish IS the original military finish put on the gun when manufactured, not some mess the lamp-maker put on it. If you want, a good quality boiled linseed oil applied VERY thinly over time will match the original varnish- just be sure to allow each THIN coat to dry completely before applying another. Please don't take offense but wthout much more experience that you have exibited so far, I would not attempt to completely disassemble the gun.

Have you made any decision about the rear sight replacement?

Guys, just a note, this gun, while rough, is really not too bad as far as condition goes.

I don't think it's hopeless at all, but IF you are not very experienced in woodworking, you should consider seeking the help of someone close by who is. I'm a huge believer in learning, so if it were me, I would NOT drop it at the gunsmith and have him do everything for you as next time you will still not know how to do the requisite repairs. That option is certainly available, but I would opt for finding a local gun enthusiast with a solid reputation for wood repairs.

I'll have to defer to gew8805 on what the original finish for this rifle was, as I honestly don't have any concrete info on Norwegian martial arms of that period. If it's varnish that's appropriate, then by all means, do not strip it off.

Repairing those holes is not as daunting as it sounds. The original wood is either oak or beech. It looks oakish to me, but that might just be due to the varnish. Based on other guns of that period and area though, beech is every bit as likely and looks very similar to quarter-sawn oak. Your first step is to decide how invisible you want the repairs.

Three ways to go on this one, in order of difficulty from least to most:

1) Use round dowel stock straight through the existing holes, drilled out to give crisp edges. Secure in place with epoxy or glue mixed with sanding dust made with a belt sander. End grain won't match seamlessly so the repairs will remain somewhat visible.
2) Use round dowels made on a lathe so that the exposed grain runs parallel to the stock grain. This will be more invisible and the hardest part is lathing out the dowels without snapping them. Secure as per above making sure hte grain direction matches when the dowel is pressed in.
3) Use small rectangular patches with the grain lines as closely matched as possible. This requires the most skill to do right. You need to be good at both chiselling a nice sharp rectangular inlet, and also VERY patient at filing and fitting the patch before you glue it in. You fit it proud and then file or plane it flush after the glue/sawdust sets. This will also be the closest thing to a period stock repair as most 19th century stock repairs were hand-fitted with chisels - presumably because chisels and wooden blocks were more adaptable for field repairs than carrying a large selection of dowel stock about in a wagon train.

Do not attempt No.3 by yourself without either having someone to walk you through it, or practising on scrap wood first to learn by trial and error.

Whatever you do, please keep us updated and we love pictures.

I just got back to the key board. What now???
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00059-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00060-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00062-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00064-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00066-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00067-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00069-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00070-1.jpg

Also ,the rifle shop is making a rear sight (6-8 weeks) a ramrod and the worm and breach block reamer thingee to go in the patch box. They seemed to be very knowledgable on this rifle. They emailed pictures and info.

OK DaveN, I think you have reached decision time.

As you will have noticed, there are varying opinions as to what to do with this rifle.

1) The "don't spoil the original finish/patina etc" school of thought.
- Which is reasonable if there is an original finish or patina to be preserved. You stated yourself, I do believe, that the brown gunge was all over the rifle, including brassswork, lock etc. And so it certainly looks in the first pictures that you posted.

So, with the greatest respect for the fact that geww8805 undoubtedly knows more about this type of rifle than I do, I must nevertherless repeat my opinion that that all-over muck was never an original finish. That is, I say again, a "treacle rifle". And I have demonstrated that you may find a reasonable surface preserved under the treacle.

2) If you have the skills and experience of Claven 2, you can give it the full treatment. Claven2 has posted a blow-by-blow account of his recovery of the Brunswick rifle. But it was not a beginner's project.

3) My position varies along the line between those two extremes, depending on what I actually find. I want to refurbish (not restore in the antiquarian sense) my rifles to proper working order. I think my previous posting referring to the Ghosts of Sergeants Past makes my position quite clear.

I am very relieved to see that (unlike the Argentine RB) there was no horror story of rust in the barrel channel. You have already cleaned the brass and largely dismantled the rifle. Very brave, after my caution re. screws. And your courage has paid off. You seem to have a good solid barrel - who knows how it looks inside?

As Claven2 has pointed out, you could clean off the woodwork without dismantling the rifle. That is true, but the process is messy enough anyway, and it is easier if you do not have to worry about chemical gunge lurking between, for instance, buttplate and wood, to cause possible trouble over a longer period.

However, as the rifle is just about completely disassembled, you can use the method I am now describing in Part 5 of the RB series. As you might guess ( if you read the shopping list I posted for Joel in advance of Part 5), it involves the gel paint stripper mentioned by Claven2 - and 3.5" diskettes! So take a look at Part 5 in a couple of hours time. In the meantime, please do NOT start to strip the stock! And please do not do the plugging (as described by Claven2) just yet. It will be easier to select the wood and match in the plugs when the stock has been cleaned. We don't even know what kind of wood it is. (My bet is on beech)

And the decision - no, not whether to refurbish it or not- you have in effect already made that decision and committed yourself. No, I mean - are you going to investigate whether it can be turned into a shooter again.
Crazy? Only on my good days:madsmile:

Of course it might be hopeless, but that is what Joel thought at first about the RB. It's starting to look different now.

To answer that question, a first step would be a good picture of the inside of the lock in cleaned condition.

Patrick

I have a friend who originally bought the rifle and fixed the trigger and then gave me the rifle. He has been refinishing any thing and every thing for as long as 60 years. From old cars to rifles, knives, binoculars you name it. Through this great site and as much hands on I can get out of him I hope to have a nice rifle when all is done.
I will have the sight in 6-8 wks from the Rifle Shoppe and he was going to show me how to sweat it on. I think the bore is worn beyond shooting as the rifling is very faint(smooth) and the pic I saw on one for sale looked sharp. The sight for my purpose will be for looks.

OK, but have you looked at Part 5 of the Argentine RB series?

I wouldn't assume the rifling is bad. 19th century rifling, especially pre-1870, was not that unifiorm. It may have been made the way you see it - generally these were not shot enough to wear rifling out. Also, the original rifle round in a Jager would have been patched ball, so the rifling just grabs cloth, not the bullet itself. I wouldn;t sentence it as a non-shooter unless I had tested it for safety and then accuracy.

Cheers.

Claven2, thank you for your support!

DaveN please note:
A barrel that only shoots lead balls cannot be shot out in a normal lifetime. It can, of course, be ruined by poor maintenance (rust, bell-mouthing from incoorect cleaning) and patches themselves can be abrasive. But if you can see rifling from one end to the other, then it is a potential shooter from the point of view of internal ballistics. Provided, of course, it is not suffering from some fault (deep pitting, delamination of a damascus barrel...) which could make it hazardous. That is something that neither Claven2 nor I can judge from a distance. But you say you can see rifling, and the outside was not covered in rust. That is one compensation with "treacle" rifles - plastering varnish over everything does at least help to save the thing from rusting. Since Bubba will not have varnished inside the barrel ("out of sight - out of mind") then that is the weakest point. See if you can get a light inside that barrel! (A white-light LED on a thing twin cable will do)

But back to the woodwork!
I hope to hear from you soon, with some photos of wood looking a lot better than before!

Patrick

PC,C2, I do want to do a good job and I now know where to find the info ARG pts 1-5 and 6
thank you PC. I browsed parts 1-4 and read part 5 and realize this stuff is going to take time if I stand a chance of doing it right. It is now time to take a deep breath and contemplate what I'm about to get myself into. Am I up for what may be quite a journey. I will make a list and begin aquiring what I need if it's a go.
PS: it may be sacralege but I've seen "Elmers" wood filler (with real wood in it). Is this good, bad dare I say cheating or just not the way to go? DN out for now.

FWIW The smallest size mag lite will fit down a barrel of this caliber. Let it slide down the barrel gently. You can see all but the bottom 3 inches of the barrel.

What's a treacle rifle?

Thanks, I took the lets call it a percussion tube and used a pipe cleaner and blew out through muzzle and then shown a flash light (torch) and no go. What I could see from shining the torch and looking on an angle, it looked nicely rifled. When i get a sm mag lite I'll post a picture.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaveN

PS: it may be sacralege but I've seen "Elmers" wood filler (with real wood in it). Is this good, bad dare I say cheating or just not the way to go? DN out for now.

---

Yes it is sacrilege! Common-or-garden wood filler will not bond well to ancient wood and will simply shake loose in a rifle. The proper way to do it has been so well demonstrated by Claven2 that I can do no better than to say: read what he wrote, and study the pictures. But get that stock clean first, so you can identify the wood, to get a good match.

And don't worry about all the stuff for the Argentine. It is enough that it is all available. Your target for tonight (OK, the weekend) is to clean the gunge off that wood, as per Part 5, and hopefully be so encouraged by your success that you feel the urge to do the whole job and turn it back into a shooter. Yes, I am an optimist, because even if this is probably not going to turn into a muzzle-loading match winner, the experience will enable you to look at other opportunities with a much sharper judgement.

My first refurbishment was a wallhanger, a "treacle" rifle. Underneath the oil-rotted varnish was a very fine Brazil Mauser in 7x57. I still have it. Will post a pic some day, but not now. With you and Joel I am feeling like a midwife giving instructions to two first-time mothers at a distance of several thousand miles - I wish I could be there, and desperately hope it's all going to turn out well!

Sorry about the purple prose, but I really am rooting for you guys. Don't give up!:thup::thup:

Doug Rammel: you will find the "treacle" rifle further up in this thread. I posted it as a morale booster for DaveN, to show that even horrible-looking stocks can turn out very nicely.

Patrick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaveN

I took the lets call it a percussion tube and used a pipe cleaner and blew out through muzzle

---

If that means that the nipple is free (you have to learn a bit of the lingo) it is very good news. Because of the narrowness of the ignition hole, they are frequently rusted up solid. That tells me that the rifle was at least not put away dirty, full of blackpowder residue, the last time it was fired.:thup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaveN

You wanted more. I hope you have a barf bag.

---

In actual fact, this rifle is in rather better shape than I expected! The lamp thing can get MUCH worse!

I will, on the reliance of very few examples on hand of military wood of that species and vintage, cocur that the wood finish is original under whatever crud has built up over the years. Quite frankly, the metal doesn't look that bad either. Be really conservative in your efforts! What you take off can't be put back.

Fear not! I have not suggested that DaveN should refinish the metal, just that the wood could be cleaned up with the gel stripper independently recommended by Claven2 and myself (so that's at least 2 out of 1,000,000 who think it's a good idea!).

DaveN, I had not recommended that you dismantle the rifle just yet, because of the fear of ruining screws and pins. I have had seen steel pins in wood that were rusted right through on rifles a century younger than your Jaeger. But you got the pins out in one piece. You were lucky. This suggests to me (just a guessing game, you will soon be able to tell me the truth) that whatever the wood is, it is not oak. Oak contains tannin. Tannin is acidic, and if that shaft was oak those pins would have rusted to crumbs by now. I still guess beech, from the lighter swirls that show through the gunge.

I understand jmoore's concern, just stick to the wood for now, please!!

Patrick

Will do, and only one pin fell to bits as per I think the last picture I took showed a pin about half its size. By the way looked all over my place for those disk I had and thought for sure I was pack rat rated, but no luck. Is there anything else I can use? Just a note, I have a brother in law who has a very high if not off the charts pack rat rating I may see Sunday so still hope remains.

On this super high res "monitor of goodness" (it's not mine) The wood shows very well through the grunge. Gotta be beech! Little "white" highlights all over. Again, I think it's best to try a good cleaning before having a go with the stripper. If it doesn't clean up acceptably, THEN strip it. However, that means the grain will probably be raised, leading to further actions that can degrade the rifle further.

That's it from me on the wood, y'all drive on.

Agreed - before using gel stripper, get some methyl hydrate (methylated spirits, rubbing alcohol, etc. - all the same thing) and a piece of clean cotton t-shirt rag and give the stock a good scrubbing with that first. It might clean up - who knows. This is the least intrusive thing to try first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jmoore

However, that means the grain will probably be raised, leading to further actions that can degrade the rifle further.

---

With the gel stripper I use, that is quite simply not true. There is no degradation of any kind.

However, it is wise to be cautious, as we live in different countries, so the gel strippers may have a different composition. All I can say from plentiful experience is that the gel stripper one gets here most definitely does not raise the grain. As far as I can see, it doesn't even penetrate hardwoods to any significant degree. But I never leave it on for more than a few minutes anyway. The action on varnish is so fast that it is almost a brush on/wipe off process. But please note that I do not use anything with water to remove the stuff - that would raise the grain on a freshly stripped surface.

DaveN. As you may well be worried by this exchange of opinions, I suggest you first try out the gel stripper + non-aqueous removal agent on an old piece of painted timber.

Patrick

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patrick Chadwick

Fear not! I have not suggested that DaveN should refinish the metal, just that the wood could be cleaned up with the gel stripper independently recommended by Claven2 and myself (so that's at least 2 out of 1,000,000 who think it's a good idea!).

---

Oh my. Patrick, I have all of the respect in the world for you and your "take it slow" ideas, the same with Claven. But under no circumstances am I fan of any type of stripping of the finish. I guess that puts me in a one in 1,000,000 situation. I have seen too many antique guns and pieces of furniture as well ruined by the use of strippers - and have even done it myself so my statements are based on experience. Dave, it is yours so it is up to you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patrick Chadwick

DaveN, I had not recommended that you dismantle the rifle just yet, because of the fear of ruining screws and pins. I have had seen steel pins in wood that were rusted right through on rifles a century younger than your Jaeger. But you got the pins out in one piece. You were lucky. This suggests to me (just a guessing game, you will soon be able to tell me the truth) that whatever the wood is, it is not oak. Oak contains tannin. Tannin is acidic, and if that shaft was oak those pins would have rusted to crumbs by now. I still guess beech, from the lighter swirls that show through the gunge.

I understand jmoore's concern, just stick to the wood for now, please!!

Patrick

---

We agree on the wood, it is beechwood, a common gunstock wood in Northern Europe (Prussia through Scandanavia) and also heavily used in England and other parts of Europe when the need was great and standard woods (usually walnut) were not available. Oak, while used from time to time is a very poor choice for gunstocks.

---------- Post added at 07:12 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:09 PM ----------

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Claven2

Agreed - before using gel stripper, get some methyl hydrate (methylated spirits, rubbing alcohol, etc. - all the same thing) and a piece of clean cotton t-shirt rag and give the stock a good scrubbing with that first. It might clean up - who knows. This is the least intrusive thing to try first.

---

Good suggestion Claven. :thup: Hopefully the use of strippers can be avoided.

When I stripped it (yes I said stripped it) it showed a nice grain but also it showed how beat up and dinged and scratched and gouged it was. Amazing what some grunge can hide. I would say that 60 or 70 years as a lamp was not so good for this 1803 danish. I showed my friend after three steps and we concluded that this rifle was stained and after sanding (yes I said it) and a new coat of stain (holes are plugged) all the blemishes are either gone or very minimized. It was so bad that when you wiped it with a rag or paper towel it would have lint caught in all the ruff spots. On the bright side a flash light was dropped down the muzzle and it looks real promising. I don't know what else to say, I appreciate all everyone put in, to helping me. Thank you very much.

Photos?

Claven2, please take a look at the thread on the Argentine rolling block (restorer's forum). We need your advice!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaveN

........... this 1803 danish.

---

Dave, sorry you felt that you had to resort to stripping and sanding the gun but it is, after all and for the time being, yours so it's treatment is up to you.

You do need to correct your use of the term "1803 Danish". Until 1814, Norway was united with Denmark and the pattern arm you have was originally called the Danish M1803, however, after defeat of Denmark-Norway by Sweden in the Napoleonic Wars Norway gained independence from Denmark and formed the separate nation of Norway. Late in 1814, Norway went to war with Sweden and upon loosing the war became loosely associated with Sweden until 1905. With the building of a Norwegian nation, Kongsberg Arsenal started manufacturing arms, obviously based on the Danish pattern. Since your gun is plainly marked with the "K under Crown" representing manufacture there, the arm is a Norwegian M1821/41/51, not a Danish M1803 even though it was based on the Danish pattern. Sorry, just trying to clean up terminology so that others will be able to understand what you have.

Thank you that was good to Know. I'll read that several more times as it was more than I new of that part of the world, and my best and favorite subject in school was history. As far as the stock goes It was stripped and lightly sanded just to smooth its rough surface but not removing what I call battle damage. It just looks cleaner ,smoother and easier on the eyes, but still some what the same. When I'm satisfied the stain has dried and the holes are covered I'll post some stripped pics and stained pics.

I just wanted to thank you for sharing with us Dave. and thank the experts here for all they've contributed. This rifle is one of the most interesting 'finds' I've seen in years, and it makes me feel good to read where so many members have unselfishly helped with research and hard earned years of knowledge.

It's been interesting to follow this thread, and even thrilling at times -
Especially when experts identified it as a very rare rifle!
(The only way it would have been more exciting would be if I'd found it at a secondhand store myself!) ;)

I'm looking forward to seeing the stock after you've repaired the holes, etc, and hope you'll post photos of all of your results as you go along.

Thanks again Dave, and also to everyone involved,
~ Harlan

I have to agree with Harlan - thanks Dave for posting about the rifle and we are looking forward to more pictures.

Hope to have some after pics to go with the before pics soon. I've been following the Argentine on restorers corner and hope to apply some photo advice to the after pics. You know the before picture, no make-up, old cloths, no smile and bad lighting. the after picture, a visit to Glamour Shots. Well I hope thats the result I get.

It looks like a percussion conversion from flint. The dog lock(!!) went out of style in the early 1700s. I found one (still cocked) at an early plantation dig near Charleston, SC. I have never seen a percussion ignition dog lock before. It would be interesting to see the inside to find out of the half cock was broken and the dog safety added, or if it was originaly a dog lock. The conversion is very typical of 1840s German states military work (Saxon, Dresden, Wurtemburg, etc.). So, it was not in the US for the revolution (although some Hessian troops probably carried very similar flint Jaeger rifles, and many Germanic Pa. gunsmiths made them before Kentucky long rifles came into style). The next question, who imported it? During the Civil War, all manner of obsolete arms were brought in. Strangely enough, mostly by the North. The South bought Enfields and Lorenz rifles almost exclusivly. Odds are it is a Herman Boker import from 1861 or '62. it is a neat old piece for sure!

tbeck you might want to read the complete thread, it has been identified as a M1821/41/51 Kongsberg jäger rifle from Norway, a very rare rifle in it's country of origin and almost unheard of here. The dog catch remained in use in Norway and Denmark and even in Russia well into the 19th Century, even on percussion weapons. There were no imports of military weapons from Norway during the American Civil War, Norway was re-equiping her forces with purpose made percussion weapons - like this one - and also early breachloading firearms were coming into use at that time, the first being adapted in 1845. Earlier weapons were kept in store for second line troops and for war emergency. They really didn't have an excess of weapons to export. See:

Norwegian military small-arms

and particularly:

M1821/41/51 Kongsberg jäger rifle Norwegian military small-arms

Thanks Gew. I screwed up and didn't see the many pages beyond #1.

Not at all, sometimes you can be in a hurry and just not see everything. Sorry if I sounded abrupt. I'm hoping that Dave will post "finished" pictures of his restoration.

This is my first "Restoration"It's really a clean-up to put on the wall for now. I am not doing anything that can't be undone. At this time it is all apart and organized so I can put it back together when the rear sight and the stuff for the patch box gets here from the Rifle Shoppe . I have already received the ramrod and it is a perfect fit. At first it looked too long but I did not know just how far the rod went into the stock, and was pleased at the perfect fit. I could post some close ups of the various parts if you would care to post your opinions. I thought about leaving the metal as is but to refinish I think would require it to be re-blued? For now it just sits in my safe, safe from any more harm. Thanks again for all the interest, it continues to intrigue me the knowledge that's out there.
MERRY CHRISTMAS and HAPPY HOLIDAYS to ALL and YOURS


Parts should be here in 4 or 5 weeks, so sometime in late Jan. I should be ready to start putting it back together.

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...ilon1050-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...ilon1049-1.jpghttp://i[IMG]http://i681.photobucket.../nilon1020.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...ilon1019-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...ilon1018-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...ikon1011-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...ikon1010-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...ikon1008-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...ikon1004-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...ikon1012-1.jpg681.photobucket.com/albums/vv172/usauk15/nilon1047.jpg[/IMG]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaveN

........... I thought about leaving the metal as is but to refinish I think would require it to be re-blued? For now it just sits in my safe, safe from any more harm. Thanks again for all the interest, it continues to intrigue me the knowledge that's out there.

---

No, the original finish was bright, not blued. My advice is to leave it with the aged patina, removing the age induced brown would completely destroy the value of the gun - it will deface remaining markings and, in some cases, remove those marks completely. When you get the new parts from TRS you will need to do a fair amount of filing in order to get the sight together, then you will need to brown it and the new ramrod to match the rest of the metal.

Merry Christmas to you as well Dave, may the New Year bring you and your family happiness and prosperity. :)

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00104-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00103-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00102-1.jpghttps://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC00101-1.jpg

I wanted to add the 4 action pics and seem to have added them all again. I guess I have added redundance to my post. The ramrod is made of steel so gew8805how do I brown this to match. The barrel is definitely a good brown color and what I thought was rust (and some was) under the wood cleaned up nicely with gun oil. I saw this very type rifle on an auction site (a link from TRS) with a sight and ramrod that was as ordered, and yes it did look odd. The sight not so but defintely the ramrod.

:wave: Hiya Dave!! I just read the whole 10 pages on your rifle. Cool. The folks on this forum seem to be friendly and knowledgeable. Looks like you are coming right along with cleaning it up and getting it ready for display. Too bad it was damaged, anyway the price was right.
looking forward to more updates on it. I still haven't gotten with my buddy about the M1 yet. it will probably happen in the next couple of weeks. Can't wait to shoot it. Thanks again.
Love ya man
Craig

Dave, just found the bayonet that I think fits your rifle, look under "Norwegian 1851 Sabre Bayonet" (under "Norway") here:

For Sale

This is Ron Reide's site, he has more rare bayonets for sale than anyone out there. Three good photos so you will know what you are getting. And yes, I know, it is a lttle bit more than you paid for your rifle..... :yikes:

T.P. thanks it looks great and is correct as far as I know but I think I would rather have a couple of garand rifles (cmp) at that price. did you see the prices on the garand bayonets. I have one of the 1905 SA's wood handles dated 1906(16 inch) i like the original style scabard looks like canvas and leather and to good to be original but I wouldn't care if the price was right.

Wonderful find! Is the "hook" behind the hammer a form of safety? Does the hammer have a half-cock? I've not seen any flintlock or caplock with such a hook.

kirk I know it does hold the hammer like a safety and many gun makers of that time did away with it but it seems the Norwegians at konsperg armory stayed with it longer. but please there are members on this sight who can correct me if i got it wrong as i'm just recalling what I've learned from them on this sight.

If you look hard (sorry the pictures bad) but someone scratched, something i can't make out then 117 m 63 on the cheek pad. I did not try to sand it out as it seemed to be part of the rifles history and may even be a clue to where its been. next time I get my camera out i'll try to get a clearer pic.

Up date. still waiting parts from The Rifle Shoppe. Soon I hope.


Talked to Rifle Shoppe......... parts did not turn out well so they have to re do them.2/18/11 Will wait some more.

Still don't have rear site yet but put it all back together this Sunday. I think it looks like a nice old rifle and better with the ramrod though I haven't tried to brown it so it looks new. The one on the auction site 3years ago had a new looking ramrod and it went for $3K so I should be able to double what I paid for this one $20.00(ha ha ) I'm going to look for a nice wall mount so I can display it and have the ability to change to a different rifle when I feel like a change.

Still no parts from THE RIFLE SHOPPE? I've called twice and left messages and no call back. have they gone out of business or what?
Did a degrease, bleach and leave in my hot humid garage and the ramrod came out great. looks like it belongs.


Just an update seems I'm just using this thread to keep a record of my progress now, what little it is. Hope to post some pictures soon, most likely with out the rear sight.