Rifle ID and Intro

[jricker3]

Greetings. I am new to this forum and new to black powder arms. I own a few smokeless weapons, but have wanted to get into black powder for a while.

To that end, I picked up a rifle that is a complete mystery to me, and may well become a wall hanger if it proves to be too much to refurb. I am hoping you can assist in identifying what I stumbled on.

First off, here is a link to a Google Drive folder with a bunch of high res images of the rifle both assembled and disassembled:

https://drive.google.com/folderview...NuN3g1NU5YNWNZdUFLcm1vc2UxQ1FrNVk&usp=sharing

Now for the details:

It was found in an attic and the homeowner had no details at all as to the history of the gun.

Markings: There are no markings other than a number stamped on the bottom of the barrel partially obscured by the fore stock (2684), and almost totally worn off scrollwork on the top of the buttplate and the brass cover in the side of the stock.

Barrel: 36 caliber rifled octagon. Total length is 29.5" to the end of the bore and 30.25" to the very end of the barrel. Width is .975" at the muzzle and 1.12 at the near end.

It has a double trigger (not sure if this is standard for black powder or not). The action is heavily worn from much use and will not stay cocked. There is no provision for a half cock... it's all or nothing.

The inside of the lock plate appears to be hand hammered, and the springs also seem to be hand worked. The lock is held on with a single screw passing through the stock.

The metal piece at the fore end of the stock (not sure what it is called) is cast lead. Could this be a cut down stock?

The supplied ramrod is wooden, warped, and too long. Probably not original.

I opted not to remove the butt plate because I did not have a screwdriver with a fine enough blade, and didn't want to bugger the screws.

The rear sight is drift adjustable and does not look like those I saw on modern reproductions.

Given this info as well as the pics, can anyone shed light on what this may be? Given that the trigger mechanism will need fettling by a gunsmith at the least, and total replacement at the worst, is it worth putting money into, or should I give it a home blueing and bung it on the wall.

Thanks in advance for your input. This is all very new to me, but I love adding to my collection of guns and knowledge. Even if it turns out to be wall art, that and the knowledge gained will be well worth the $75 I paid.

 

[Shanghai McCoy]

It has the look of what is often called a "Plains rifle". Circa 1840's maybe..?

 

[elhombreconnonombre]

Even a $75 1840s complete wallhanger is a priceless conversation piece.I would retain whatever patina it posesses and not reblue it.

 

[Gary B]

You have a short stock .45 cal. Hawkin kit rifle. My grandfather had one just like it, mine now. What does the inside of the barrel look like? You can get new works at Dixie Gun Works. Clean it up and shoot the darn thing.

 

[jricker3]

The bore is in pretty good shape. Definitely needs a scrubbing, but from what I can see does not appear to be heavily pitted.

It is .36 caliber though, not .45. Did they make the kit rifles in .36 too?

I'll check out Dixie Gun works. Thanks.

 

[Gemmer]

Yes they made .36cal kit guns. BTW the metal piece at the fore end is most likely pewter not lead. I seem to remember this kit in the Dixie catalog in the 60s or 70s.

 

[xxmaa]

Don't believe that is tc kit or any other. How much do you want for it ?

 

[jricker3]

Sorry xxmaa, I just bought it today.

 

[xxmaa]

Kinda

Kidden ; there jricker; Don't sell that to anyone! First find out if it is a real dimick ( Horace dimick) he was competing with others in St. Louis; 1849 though the civil uprise. I don't know it is, maybe some one , just copied one , The wood , does'nt look old. And the metal seems kind of fresh for 160 yrs. but it's a good copy . The Thompson center hawken was a replica of the dimick; but after ( Hollywood ) we only knew HAWKENs" look it up . At least 75$ you didn't get faked out!

 

[xxmaa]

Just now noticed

Your in southern Oregon ! Call joe Williams ,at gun works emporium ; near Eugene . He can fiix your lock , or sell you a l&r reasonable. He might have made the barrel anyway.m

 

[StrawHat]

The triggerguard is not unlike what would be found on a rifle made in New England. The small bore would fit with that area also. What is the stock wood? Walnut and cherry were common on NE rifles.

The long ramrod could be original, I use a rod at least 4" longer on my rifles, it makes it easier to grab and withdraw from the ferrules or bore.

Kevin

 

[DoubleDeuce 1]

It sure does look interesting. The patchbox is backwards from what you might normally see. The finial of the inlay is pointed toward the butt plate instead of the wrist of the rifle. Interesting piece.

 

[Malachi Leviticus Blue]

Looks like the stock was likely inlet with modern power machinery to me.
See pic

A 36 caliber rifle will generally get some attention in the marketplace. Even not functioning, I bet you could turn a nice profit if you decide it's not for you.

Repair or replace the lock and see how she shoots!

 

[jricker3]

Thanks for all of the input. It sounds like regardless of whether it is an original or a repro, it was worth the $75 I paid. As for shooting versus hanging on the wall, I am a shoot it kind of guy. Hanging a perfectly good gun on the wall is like restoring a car then not driving it. What's the point.

If it turns out to be an old original, all the better. I currently have an 1873 Springfield Trapdoor from about 1875, so this would make an excellent precurser to it.

I will get it to a competent gunsmith first to get the lock refurbished and to check for safe functioning prior to loading it up.

 

[Curator]

jricker3,

Usually the problem with these kind of locks is a sticky "fly" on the tumbler. A good cleaning with a solvent may free the fly and let the lock catch on half and full cock. The fly is there to prevent the sear from catching on the half-cock notch when the gun is fired. It is a small bit of metal inletted into the face of the tumbler, behind the bridle.

Make sure you can unscrew the percussion nipple and that the flash channel is clear (and the gun is unloaded) before attempting to shoot it. I have shot many original percussion rifles from this period of history and found them to shoot very well.

 

[Jim K]

Not hard and fast, but old guns generally have the name of the maker and sometimes the owner on the barrel, with the name the lock maker on the lock. And they do not have serial numbers.

Looks like a kit gun to me.

Jim

 

[AJumbo]

This doesn't have the "feel" of an old rifle; it may have been made from modern reproduction parts, or could (my pet theory) have been a factory rifle that was refurbed. It's unlikely that a period 'smith would have serialized he barrel.

The rear sight looks wax cast; that's period-correct, but this one was never cleaned up. Very similar sights are sold by Dixie Gun Works and others.

Is the nosecap lead, or tin?

The barrel may never have been finished. I think you have a shooter/project rifle here. If the bore's good, you got your money back on the barrel alone.

You might be able to send Dixie a tracing of the lock plate and have them figure out what lock it is, and whether they have parts for it.

 

[jricker3]

>>The fly is there to prevent the sear from catching on the half-cock notch when the gun is fired. It is a small bit of metal inletted into the face of the tumbler, behind the bridle.

I'll take another look, but when I had the lock off I only saw one notch. Also, it looks like the sear is rounded instead of squared off. This, along with the wear to the brass parts, leads me to believe that this rifle saw a lot of use in its life.

The springs are fine in the lock and nothing appears broken, so I suspect that just the heavily worn parts will need to be replaced.

>> Is the nosecap lead, or tin?

The nosecap is lead.

 

[xxmaa]

Pic of H.Dimick Rifle

Trying to send picture of an original Dimick

 

[DoubleDeuce 1]

XXMAA,
That is a cool photo. Maybe the backwards patchbox was his signature.

 

[Jim Watson]

Look at the screws.
Are they mass produced with standard threads or are they hand or shop made?

 

[jricker3]

Look at the screws.
Are they mass produced with standard threads or are they hand or shop made?

The slots are off center in some of the screws. Other than that I cannot tell if they are handmade or mass produced.

 

[jricker3]

Another thing I noticed is that the screwholes on the tang are not centered. Mass produced parts should be properly centered.

 

[xxmaa]

Doubleduece1

I don't know if the patch box was, but the triggerguard ,stubby forearm tip , long wrist and broad depth of stock, at toe and heel ; are typical. He probably made what ever you wanted. He also made a 1851 navy look a like. Basically looks better than a colt,

 

[Loyalist Dave]

Well only if this was a mass produced kit, and not a modern made copy of a Dimick, then the builder might have been off on his drilling. A serial number on the barrel leans toward a modern repro in a big way, and the rear sight is obviously cast = modern. It may have been an original rifle that somebody replaced the barrel so that it might be shot...that would explain the stamped number, and the off center holes in the tang which would've needed to match the holes already there, and it would explain the rear sight.

LD