Victorian Air Cane Restomod

[draitzer]

That is really slick, a deer-hunting cane! There is also the possibility to adjust the opening / lift of the valve, maybe by a screw on the metal head to change the clearance from striker to valve.

Don R.

[Jerry Cornelius]

Slightly off topic but what were these things for, back in the day? A novelty, or something else?

If I was a Victorian gent planning to use my walking stick in self defence I think I’d probably feel safer just with a stick for bashing, (or even a swordstick, I suppose, back then) so I’m wondering if they were just cool gadgets, or were they supposed to have a serious use?

Great thread btw.

[fullmetaljacket]

That is really slick, a deer-hunting cane!

You hear about these being used for poaching, however I doubt the gentleman who could afford one would indulge in such caddishness

There is also the possibility to adjust the opening / lift of the valve, maybe by a screw on the metal head to change the clearance from striker to valve.

Due to the translation of rotational motion with this type of lock, I'm a little hesitant to play with that as a variable as it does not seem to alter performance as predictably as one would expect with more traditional linear hammers.

Slightly off topic but what were these things for, back in the day? A novelty, or something else?

While supposedly for self defense, the fact that it's a single shot muzzle loader means that it was hardly practical for this purpose.

They were more likely purchased as a novelty, as described in this article by Tom Gaylord:

The popular myth is that air canes were 19th century defensive weapons. Most advanced collectors believe this is untrue, because it takes a lot of work to make a muzzleloading air cane ready to fire. Perhaps, if you knew you were about to go in harm’s way, you might have time to make the weapon ready, but a derringer or even a good knife would be better. Using an air cane for self-defense would be the equivalent of holding up a liquor store with a flintlock — not the thing a thoughtful person would do. I think sword canes are much more capable defensive weapons, and people have probably extrapolated the defense role to air canes because of their similar appearance.

Many collectors believe the principal attraction to air canes was simply their existence. They were portable science experiments one could use to amaze both family and friends.

They were not used as walking sticks. The end of the ramrod did have a brass tip that could be put on the ground, but it was too fragile to serve as a walking support. It was more for show than for go.

[WebleyWombler]

The Victorians were great ones for collecting and I believe that Gentlemen would often carry them on country walks loaded with shot , just in case a specimen they desired appeared in range. I also believe that solid shot used was often clay balls so as not to damage small birds/mammals too much. Unobtrusive and fairly silent, they were ideal for the job.

Never read anything about them being intended or used for self defence. remember this was in the days when small pocket pistols were cheap, common and had no restrictions on them.

Pity that modern ones are prohibited weapons in Europe now

[fullmetaljacket]

The Victorians were great ones for collecting and I believe that Gentlemen would often carry them on country walks loaded with shot , just in case a specimen they desired appeared in range. I also believe that solid shot used was often clay balls so as not to damage small birds/mammals too much. Unobtrusive and fairly silent, they were ideal for the job.

Could you be thinking of the stone bow?

My example is anything but silent and at over 35 ft lbs of muzzle energy in its standard configuration even a clay ball is going to make a mess of a small bird/mammal, you won't have much of specimen left.

[WebleyWombler]

Could you be thinking of the stone bow?

My example is anything but silent and at over 35 ft lbs of muzzle energy in its standard configuration even a clay ball is going to make a mess of a small bird/mammal, you won't have much of specimen left.

Nope. Air canes. Shot was the most common load and whilst you may feel they are noisy, compare that to a powder burner. remember that small .32 calibre revolvers could be bought for as little as 10/- in those days and had 5 or 6 shots. Air canes were more like a fiver and only single shot. Which would you carry for self defence?

Stone bows were very common in this part of the world but clumsy for a gentleman to carry on an amble with his family or a group of like minded naturalists.

[greenwayjames]

Could you be thinking of the stone bow?

My example is anything but silent and at over 35 ft lbs of muzzle energy in its standard configuration even a clay ball is going to make a mess of a small bird/mammal, you won't have much of specimen left.

The two halves could be unscrewed slightly and a spacer used between them to reduce the valve opening and lower the power of the original. I was told of a farmer who used such a set up to despatch geese when he had to in his yard. His wife was a sculptor and he used clay bay balls which were very effective for head shots without putting holes in his barn doors.

[fullmetaljacket]

Fair points. I finally got a look at Baker & Currie's "The Construction and Operation of the Air Gun. Vol. 2" and the same explanation is offered:

Various explanations for their development and use have been touted, some of the most common being use by poachers, self defence or by naturalists for securing specimens. None of these explanations are really convincing as no working class poacher could possibly have afforded one, neither would it have been a sensible choice to carry for defence a loaded cocked aircane with all the hazard of an unprotected stud trigger. The case for use by naturalists is possibly the most viable; used as a shotgun with a charge of dust shot, they would have been very effective in acquiring undamaged specimens of small mammals and birds at short range.

However, this minority demand could not possibly account for the large numbers that were clearly being manufactured during this period. Most major gunmakers carried and advertised them as normal stock completely replacing the older style of butt and ball reservoir weapons. In fact they were still being listed in catalogues of the 1920's albeit as discontinued items.

Perhaps one explanation for their popularity was that for some purposes the aircane provided a viable alternative to the blackpowder firearms of the day. Its lack of flame, smoke and noise meant it could be used safely for amusement indoors by Country House shooting parties, for example when bad weather precluded normal shooting.

More importantly perhaps, the available evidence indicates the aircane filled a niche, prior to the introduction of the rook rifle as a rival to the bullet crossbow for rook shooting, as well as providing excellent sport with other small game.

The performance of the Reilly 32 cal muzzleloader quoted in the book is also in the same ballpark as my unmodified example:



Does anyone know if the addresses colin.currie1@virgin.net and geoffrey.baker@virgin.net quoted in the book are still valid?

I would very much like to compare notes with these gentlemen once I'm done playing with this thing.

[Unframed Dave]

One of my favourite airguns, the cane. I'd like to say they came in various shapes, but they certainly came in a variety of sizes.

IMG_20210304_190807.jpg

Dave