Blunderbuss

[fernando]

Originally Posted by celtan

... What do you make of it all? Fake, copy, field repair? Besides the barrel, most of the gun feels legit ...

What do i know ? Indeed the barrel is the more suspicious section; note that its back is integral, whereas allways the tang and plug are separated from the barrel ... am i not right ?
But talking about screws, although the lock plate screws don't seem right, having a much too perfect end, for the period, i guess.
The lock itself looks too new, i would say. The trigger guard filing detail is rather raw, don't you agree ?
Remember what the other guy said about this piece being a kit ?
But i will not issue a final diagnosis; don't know enough to do so .
Saludos
Fernando

.

[celtan]

We concur. But I don't think it's a kit, otherwise we'd have seen plenty of others, and that's not the case. In fact, I have only seen one like it in a weapon's book. All others are merely reasonably similar.

Filipino armorers can copy most guns in a couple days. The odd thing is that it came with a real 18-19th C. spanish flintlock pistol, both bought concurrently from the very same source.

I'm at a loss here.



M

Originally Posted by fernando

What do i know ? Indeed the barrel is the more suspicious section; note that its back is integral, whereas allways the tang and plug are separated from the barrel ... am i not right ?
But talking about screws, although the lock plate screws don't seem right, having a much too perfect end, for the period, i guess.
The lock itself looks too new, i would say. The trigger guard filing detail is rather raw, don't you agree ?
Remember what the other guy said about this piece being a kit ?
But i will not issue a final diagnosis; don't know enough to do so .
Saludos
Fernando

.

[kahnjar1]

I have just come back to this thread, and see that pics of the inside of the lock and the lock cavity have been posted since I was here last time.
In my humble opinion, those screws look modern to me, and show next to no wear from having been removed. Also there appears to be clear evidence of circular marks towards the edge of them. This is not what I would expect to see on old internal screws. Most old locks also show deforming of the screw slots from "attention" by non armourer trained people.
The pics I have of similar locks, have screws with heads which are far more "barrel shaped" as opposed to dome shaped which appear here. Also the lock cavity seems very clean for an item of some age. I would have thought that there would be noticable residue of powder and oil.
I don't think that this is a kit, but equally I am not 100% sure that it was made to ever be used in anger.

[celtan]

Which means that...I get to shoot the d. thing on our next re-enactment!

I wonder how much 2F BP I can pack into that sucker's barrel...


: )

Originally Posted by kahnjar1

I have just come back to this thread, and see that pics of the inside of the lock and the lock cavity have been posted since I was here last time.
In my humble opinion, those screws look modern to me, and show next to no wear from having been removed. Also there appears to be clear evidence of circular marks towards the edge of them. This is not what I would expect to see on old internal screws. Most old locks also show deforming of the screw slots from "attention" by non armourer trained people.
The pics I have of similar locks, have screws with heads which are far more "barrel shaped" as opposed to dome shaped which appear here. Also the lock cavity seems very clean for an item of some age. I would have thought that there would be noticable residue of powder and oil.
I don't think that this is a kit, but equally I am not 100% sure that it was made to ever be used in anger.

[Bill M]

Originally Posted by celtan

Which means that...I get to shoot the d. thing on our next re-enactment!

I wonder how much 2F BP I can pack into that sucker's barrel...


: )

Well, you won't need a funnel!!!

[kahnjar1]

Originally Posted by celtan

Which means that...I get to shoot the d. thing on our next re-enactment!

I wonder how much 2F BP I can pack into that sucker's barrel...


: )

2F seems a bit coarse to me, but its your decision. Rule of thumb with BP shotguns was depth of powder (4F) equal to diam of bore (at breech), if you did not otherwise know what the correct charge was. I would, for safety sake start with an obviously low charge and work up---that is if you really are sure about firing it.
Hospital charges are rather high these days!!

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Bill Marsh

Well, you won't need a funnel!!!

[fernando]

Originally Posted by celtan

Which means that...I get to shoot the d. thing on our next re-enactment!

I wonder how much 2F BP I can pack into that sucker's barrel...


: )

I wonder if you should shoot the thing ... safety wise.
Take care.

Fernando

[celtan]

Hi Guys,

I certainly won't need a funnel. That's the true advantage those beasties held: easy to load.

I won't use projectiles (no compression!), just two or three hundred grains of FF should do the trick.

Best

M

Originally Posted by fernando

I wonder if you should shoot the thing ... safety wise.
Take care.

Fernando

[Matchlock]

The first ca. 1690, the second ca. 1710, the pair ca. 1690.

The first two from Peter Finer's site, the unique pair up for sale at Bonhams London on 26 November 2008. Before bidding please note that the estimate is in GBP.

Michael

[fernando]

I will buy them all ... providing the estimate is in ITL (Italian lira)
Fernando

[Matchlock]

Sold at Bonhams a few years ago.

Michael