Chambers York .50 vs. Isaac Haines .54

[TreeRat91]

Hi all,

I am about to order my first flintlock kit, and I’m torn between getting a .50 vs .54. I have it narrowed down to either the Chambers York in .50 or the Chambers Isaac Haines in .54. Ive been told both models balance pretty similar, and the York has a 4” longer barrel at 42”. It’s going to be used for punching holes through paper, and Missouri whitetails. I reckon most of my hunting shots will be under 75 yards, but shooting at targets I’ll probably stretch it out a bit further. From what I’ve gathered so far, the biggest downside to the .54 is that you use a little more powder, and it has a bit more recoil. I will be using PRBs in whichever I get, so bullet selection isn’t as big of a deal, as long as I can get my hands on PRBs. Is the .54 unenjoyable to target shoot with or is it overkill for whitetail? Is the .50 sufficient for whitetail and make for a more enjoyable day at the range? Which caliber do y’all think would be better for my needs? Thanks in advance for all the help and advice!

 

[Art Caputo]

I would personally go with the rifle that appealed to me the most. If that’s a push, I’d lean towards a 50 for the first flintlock. It’s effective on whitetail, less recoil, and for any kind of volumeshooting/paper, particularly given it’s your first flintlock, cheaper, and may be easier to gain proficiency. Half my dozen or so flintlocks are 50’s, the balance assorted calibers, larger and smaller. I really like the caliber.

 

[Okie Hog]

Is the .54 unenjoyable to target shoot with or is it overkill for whitetail?

Neither.

 

[Larry (Omaha)]

Hi all,

I am about to order my first flintlock kit,

I have 54 and 50 flintlocks and do not see much difference punching paper. Naturally a 54 will give a touch more knock down power, but placement is really the key as any hunter knows. Two main items I look for in a rifle: Do I like the style? Does it/will it, fit me?
Keep us posted.
Larry

 

[Dutch7]

My first custom was/is a .50 cal 7/8"x42 and it balances well, has won several matches and taken two dozen deer. My choice .50 cal

 

[Rod Man]

Knowing what I know now, I would have to agree with those that mentioned the .50. I also agree with Larry. The .54 is not that much more. As far as recoil you can work with the charge and figure out a load for the rifle that doesn't slap you around. The 50 is just an all around pleasant caliber that can still carry the mail.

RM

 

[erhunter]

I haven't held the Isaac Haines but I did handle a 50 York from Chambers. They are beautiful, sleek rifles that have a small wrist that I like. The weight is nice also. The one I handled pointed nicely and would have been a joy to hunt with also. In my opinion a 50 or 54 will do it's job if you put the ball in the right spot!

 

[Tom A Hawk]

I don't think you can go wrong with either and in my experience you will probably come to want both. I just finished a .54 Isaac Haines in November and have parts on the way to start a .58.

Is the York model currently offered? I am not finding it or the generic Lancaster on their website.

 

[TreeRat91]

Thank you for all the replies! M

I don't think you can go wrong with either and in my experience you will probably come to want both. I just finished a .54 Isaac Haines in November and have parts on the way to start a .58.

Is the York model currently offered? I am not finding it or the generic Lancaster on their website.

Yeah, they said both are offered, but they’re having a hard time getting wood so it’s about a 6-8 month wait on them. What made you choose the Haines in .54 over the York in .50 if you don’t mind me asking?

 

[Tom A Hawk]

Thank you for all the replies! M


Yeah, they said both are offered, but they’re having a hard time getting wood so it’s about a 6-8 month wait on them. What made you choose the Haines in .54 over the York in .50 if you don’t mind me asking?

I have a .50 Lancaster and 3 other .54 rifles but not in Lancaster styling. The swamped barrel .54 Isaac Haines balances very nicely for off hand shots. Another reason for choosing the .54 is its "whack factor". It hits really hard.

Please point me in the right direction. I'm still not finding the Chambers Lancaster offering. Jim Chambers Flintlocks

The stock coming from Pecatonica was a 30 day wait.

The .50 Lancaster was my 2nd build.

 

[TreeRat91]

Beautiful rifle! Here, let me know if this link doesn’t work. He has about 5 pages of models you can scroll through.

https://www.flintlocks.com/rifles01.htm

 

[Tom A Hawk]

Beautiful rifle! Here, let me know if this link doesn’t work. He has about 5 pages of models you can scroll through.

https://www.flintlocks.com/rifles01.htm

Thanks. Got it. I was skipping over page 1.

 

[TreeRat91]

Thanks. Got it. I was skipping over page 1.

I made the same mistake a few times. Do you hunt with any of your rifles? If so, what do you hunt and what do you typically take with you?

 

[hanshi]

The .50, and this also goes for the .54, is quite capable of dropping deer a bit beyond 100 yards - I've done just that more than once. Either rifle will do everything you want a rifle to do. I say go with what fits your build. But, the York tends to be nicely trim and you'll never be under-gunned with a .50.

 

[BillKilgore]

In for the info.

 

[Tom A Hawk]

I made the same mistake a few times. Do you hunt with any of your rifles? If so, what do you hunt and what do you typically take with you?

Yes, I hunt with all of my rifles and like a good father I try to give them equal woods time. We have a few bears but I can never seem to catch up with them. Whitetails are therefore the most common game in this area. For many years I hunted with a .54 caplock Hawken and took several deer with it. Then I became enamored with unmentionable handgun hunting and took a handful that way. Now its back to black powder but with flintlocks that I have made. Last years kill was with a fullstock .54 flint Hawken. I've made clean kills with a .45 and on up but to answer your question, I tend to favor a .54.

However, as Hanshi points out, a .50 is perfectly adequate.