...would you fellas say a Pedersoli Kentucky/Pennsylvania or CVA Kentucky rifle, with the curved buttstock, originate from? What time period was this style popular and where? Thanks! James
-
This community needs YOUR help today. We rely 100% on Supporting Memberships to fund our efforts. With the ever increasing fees of everything, we need help. We need more Supporting Members, today. Please invest back into this community. I will ship a few decals too in addition to all the account perks you get.
Sign up here: https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/account/upgrades -
Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.
We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.
Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103
From What School...
- Thread starter swathdiver
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
Pete G
76 Cal.
I think that they are somewhat like the Reading school. The "Roman Nose" type stock was a later development, about 1820-1830. A lot of the Reading guns did not carry engraving either, although they just about always carried some type of carving.
Depending on the model...they tend to be a mish-mash of styles, not really belonging to one "school", I've been taught.
LD
LD
galamb
58 Cal.
Would agree.
In those models I can see a little bit of many schools - some of which were from neither Kentucky or Pennsylvania.
On some models of Pedersoli's they do appear to at least make a genuine attempt at making them at least "slightly resemble" their namesakes, most others do not.
To put it another way, take a look at a Dickert, a Beck, a Leman, and something attributed to Haga.
Aside from all having locks, stocks and barrels, at least to me they look "nothing alike" - yet they are all Pennsylvania's. So calling a rifle a Pennsylvania gives some pretty wide latitude in terms of what it looks like...
In those models I can see a little bit of many schools - some of which were from neither Kentucky or Pennsylvania.
On some models of Pedersoli's they do appear to at least make a genuine attempt at making them at least "slightly resemble" their namesakes, most others do not.
To put it another way, take a look at a Dickert, a Beck, a Leman, and something attributed to Haga.
Aside from all having locks, stocks and barrels, at least to me they look "nothing alike" - yet they are all Pennsylvania's. So calling a rifle a Pennsylvania gives some pretty wide latitude in terms of what it looks like...
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2005
- Messages
- 5,024
- Reaction score
- 10,000
Hi,
The school of cheap mass produced muzzleloaders. They don't fit in any school or historically correct style.
dave
The school of cheap mass produced muzzleloaders. They don't fit in any school or historically correct style.
dave
Dave Person said:
I started to write something I probably would regret, but decided not to do it. I thought the OP's question was a fair one. Some people have what they have. Maybe what he has is not as PC as some others have....but then neither is mine, a T/C Hawken, another cheap, mass produced muzzleloader, which also fits no school or historically correct style. I'm happy with it, and the people I meet who have something similar.
When anyone asks me what school any of my longrifles are from, I just say the school of hard knocks. :grin:
The reason I ask is that I like the looks and feel (comes right up on the sights) of a CVA Kentucky Hunter half stock rifle.
The barrel is about worthless and the stock is beech so the idea might be to have the stock reproduced in Cherry or Maple and fit it with a GM barrel and change the wedge plates to something fancier and maybe even change it from .50 to .45 or smaller as we already have CVA Frontier and Mountain rifles in .50 and .54 caliber.
By that point it wouldn't really be a CVA anymore, save for some brass and the triggers but you get the idea, I'd like it to sort of resemble something historical but not rivet counting status.
The barrel is about worthless and the stock is beech so the idea might be to have the stock reproduced in Cherry or Maple and fit it with a GM barrel and change the wedge plates to something fancier and maybe even change it from .50 to .45 or smaller as we already have CVA Frontier and Mountain rifles in .50 and .54 caliber.
By that point it wouldn't really be a CVA anymore, save for some brass and the triggers but you get the idea, I'd like it to sort of resemble something historical but not rivet counting status.
Your inference is unwarranted.
The question was indeed a fair one. It was merely about schools, and the replies were honest.
In no way, shape, nor form did anyone criticise the topic rifles as "bad" nor as "unacceptable", and in no way, shape, nor form did anyone suggest that the thread poster was inferior for owning such, nor was it suggested that any of the responders had anything "better".
For example, I own three Thompson Centers, Two CVA products, and a Pedersoli tradegun. None match any of the actual "schools" discussed by gun historians.
LD
MSK
Smollett
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2014
- Messages
- 353
- Reaction score
- 3
The last person to insult anyone on this forum would be Dave Person, the target of the vitriolic post. I would venture to say that most shooters on this forum own, or have owned in the past, a mass produced muzzle loader. I am confident Dave Person's answer comes simply from objective experience.
Smollett
Smollett
Gentlemen, words mean things. The post that caused mine to be written was a critical, condensing reference to the fact that the OP's gun was not up to the agost standards of even being considered to be of a particular school. It appeared to me that he wanted to have direction to work towards making his gun all it could be. I equate Dave's post with criticizing a man's bird dog, or child in a football game. If that offends some sensibilities, I apologize. At least one, bpd303, evidently understood that.
Loyalist Dave said:
Oh good, 'cause for a minute there I thought someone was being negative. Still, let me help you and Smollet out with what the other Dave really meant if not quite said...
"Hi,
The school of some of the best, state-of-the-art, mass produced and best-value-for-the-money muzzleloaders available. They blend elements of a few made up 'schools' and are historically correct representations."
:shake:
Unlike here, the only comment someone from back in the day would make about those guns is to ask "where can I get one too?".
Let me state it another way. Which would you prefer to receive?
1)OP, the gun you have falls into one of those categories many made in the 50's, 60's and 70's , not quite period correct, but a good entry level ML'er. We now know that those guns served a valuable purpose in that many people got into ML'ing who never would have without those mass produced guns. But that does not mean that you can not alter your gun to make it more like an original. The following are just a few of the many changes you can made: X,Y.and Z. Each will cause your gun to gravitate towards a certain school, dependent upon your taste. Keeping looking at this board; there are many knowledgible folks here that will do everything they can to help you in your quest.
or:
2)The school of cheap mass produced muzzleloaders. They don't fit in any school or historically correct style.
It is a mighty thin pancake that does not have two sides. If there is an apology due, I have offered mine.
1)OP, the gun you have falls into one of those categories many made in the 50's, 60's and 70's , not quite period correct, but a good entry level ML'er. We now know that those guns served a valuable purpose in that many people got into ML'ing who never would have without those mass produced guns. But that does not mean that you can not alter your gun to make it more like an original. The following are just a few of the many changes you can made: X,Y.and Z. Each will cause your gun to gravitate towards a certain school, dependent upon your taste. Keeping looking at this board; there are many knowledgible folks here that will do everything they can to help you in your quest.
or:
2)The school of cheap mass produced muzzleloaders. They don't fit in any school or historically correct style.
It is a mighty thin pancake that does not have two sides. If there is an apology due, I have offered mine.
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2005
- Messages
- 5,024
- Reaction score
- 10,000
Hi,
This thread is straying, however, let me add this. You are right. Words have meaning. Longrifle schools and makers names, like other words, have meaning. For example, calling the TC product a "Hawken" contributes to making the historical gunmaker's name, "Hawken", meaningless. My statement was objective and correct. The styling of those guns reflect cutting costs and production efficiency rather than some historical affinity. That is particularly the case for the CVA product with its 2-piece stock and amorphous shape.
Swathdiver, it is unclear to me what you are trying to do. Do you own a CVA or Pedersoli gun and want to convert it to a more historically recognizable gun or are you considering buying one and modifying it accordingly? In either case, the locks and brass hardware on both guns reflect some late flint (1810-1840) styling. Even the percussion versions look more like converted flintlocks. You could dump the stocks entirely and build any late flint rifle you want. I would urge you not use the old stocks as guides but do some research as to what a late flint longrifle might look like. There are many internet resources available, including gun auction sites, for images of originals. Good luck,
dave
This thread is straying, however, let me add this. You are right. Words have meaning. Longrifle schools and makers names, like other words, have meaning. For example, calling the TC product a "Hawken" contributes to making the historical gunmaker's name, "Hawken", meaningless. My statement was objective and correct. The styling of those guns reflect cutting costs and production efficiency rather than some historical affinity. That is particularly the case for the CVA product with its 2-piece stock and amorphous shape.
Swathdiver, it is unclear to me what you are trying to do. Do you own a CVA or Pedersoli gun and want to convert it to a more historically recognizable gun or are you considering buying one and modifying it accordingly? In either case, the locks and brass hardware on both guns reflect some late flint (1810-1840) styling. Even the percussion versions look more like converted flintlocks. You could dump the stocks entirely and build any late flint rifle you want. I would urge you not use the old stocks as guides but do some research as to what a late flint longrifle might look like. There are many internet resources available, including gun auction sites, for images of originals. Good luck,
dave
Billnpatti
Cannon
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2008
- Messages
- 7,340
- Reaction score
- 40
I have been reading with interest the several answers to the OPs question. The manufacturers of factory made rifles make them to sell. They know that there is a relatively small market to which they are selling and it is not economically possible to make exact copies of any particular school of rifle building or they will exclude those folks who like a different style of rifle. So, they manufacture a pretty darn well made rifle that is more generic in style that will appeal to a larger segment of an already small market. These rifles are perfect for the person who simply wants to shoot a good muzzleloading rifle that is relatively representative of the rifles of old. Many of us simply cannot afford a custom made exactly HC replica of an original rifle nor do they necessarily need one. I, for one, am not all that interested in being stitch and button countingly correct so I buy and shoot several Italian made rifles and I wear my jeans while doing so. I have a hunting frock, a hunting shirt and a slouch hat that, for me, are reasonably close to being similar to what was worn in olden days. Exactly HC? I don't know :idunno: ....and I don't care. I am happy with them and occasionally wear them (with modern shoes and jeans) as I take one of my Pedersolis to the woods to hunt squirrels. Different strokes for different folks.
So, my point being that while Pedersoli makes several different and very good rifles, none are spot on HC. If you are happy with that, great, buy it and enjoy it. It will be a great shooter and will give you years of smoky pleasure. But, if being HC is your thing, then you had better go the custom made route to be sure that everything is exactly what great grandpappy shot Indians with. And, thus endeth the refrain. :hatsoff:
So, my point being that while Pedersoli makes several different and very good rifles, none are spot on HC. If you are happy with that, great, buy it and enjoy it. It will be a great shooter and will give you years of smoky pleasure. But, if being HC is your thing, then you had better go the custom made route to be sure that everything is exactly what great grandpappy shot Indians with. And, thus endeth the refrain. :hatsoff:
Myself, I didnt see anything wrong with any posts? Saw no malice towards anyone or their gun?? Face it ALOT of us on here just shoot for fun, and hunting of course. If I could afford one of Kindigs guns I would buy it AND shoot it (with light load of course). I cant so I am very happy with my replicas from the school of "I could care less"!
I do want a NW trade gun though! Its coming. If its not HC correct please dont tell me cuz I dont really care. I like the girl on the website :redface: and the gun and its reviews appeal to me, having no smoothies other than shot guns or shotguns or whatever they are.
For those that are HC followers more power to ya! Some day when you read about me winning megamillions lottery I will likely follow suit but I wont forget where I started and "police" others!
Have a great day! I gotta go get a load a wood, its cold here!
I do want a NW trade gun though! Its coming. If its not HC correct please dont tell me cuz I dont really care. I like the girl on the website :redface: and the gun and its reviews appeal to me, having no smoothies other than shot guns or shotguns or whatever they are.
For those that are HC followers more power to ya! Some day when you read about me winning megamillions lottery I will likely follow suit but I wont forget where I started and "police" others!
Have a great day! I gotta go get a load a wood, its cold here!
Except that if you review the original thread, to which the reply was posted:
"...would you fellas say a Pedersoli Kentucky/Pennsylvania or CVA Kentucky rifle, with the curved buttstock, originate from? What time period was this style popular and where? Thanks! James "
I find nothing that indicates that he is referring to a rifle that he owns, NOR does he say he's trying to improve it. He is simply asking for information on rifles. Perhaps he owns one; perhaps he knows somebody that owns one; perhaps he saw one or more for sale; perhaps he is curious. It was your assumption that he was referring to his own firearm... and so the reply that caused yours to be written could not have meant what you assume it meant.
And I equate your post to "putting words in another's mouth".
LD
Pete G
76 Cal.
Sounds like some of these fellas have been locked inside the cabin for too long. Ya'll need to get out and burn some powder.
54ball
62 Cal.
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2004
- Messages
- 3,117
- Reaction score
- 1,018
swathdiver said:
OK let's take the classic CVA/Traditions Kentucky. Like it or not that design is historical in it's self and like the TC Hawken helped to usher in muzzleloading in the modern era. Both it the TC Hawwken and it's clones are mid/late 20th Century iconic muzzleloaders.
It's a modern firearm made for the modern era. With that said, it does kind of sort of resemble some historical arms. As far as dating one to the period, East of the Mississippi Circa 1830/40 by a talented but unknown maker with limited knowledge of architecture. A blacksmith one off...some of which are quite good, others well... :td: If the one was 150 years old I would rate it as OK. It's not a work of art like a Beck or Dickert but it's not a Hillbilly baling wire and corncob build either.
If you are willing to sacrifice the factory architecture there are some things you can do to the "Kentucky" to knock that modern edge off.
Will it be "correct"? Correct can be a subjective term. Lets just say you can do some stock work to one to make closer to a period firearm. If you are willing, this can be a fun project and a good introduction to gun building. One warning though, it's not going to be easy. If it was everyone would be Herschel House.
First, you need to study the architecture of period firearms to see where the factory went wrong. Second is actually being able to transfer this to the wood and lastly is accepting there is only so much you can do. It is what its.
The following are the main architectural flaws of the CVA Kentucky.
The wrist and buttstock is too thin and small.
From the lock panel forward the stock is too thick and robust.
The ramrod is channel is not close enough to the barrel channel making the rifle somewhat slab sided. The more you thin one the more slab sided it will be.
You can reshape one but it requires a lot of thought. The brass spacer between the stock can be reshaped allowing the stocks to be shaped down to it. Keep in mind though, the trigger mechanism is made for that thick stock. If you go too far , you'll have trouble there. Also the trigger guard is very brittle and does not like to be bent much at all. Annealing it before bending may help a little but these are prone to breakage if bent too much.
The hardest part will be deciding what can be done and whats best left alone. These rifles can benefit from just a careful finish as is. Properly browned, a dark finish done well with some inlays these can look pretty good as most were not finished well even factory rifles. They respond well to decoration, like fore stock molding and that can hide the slabsidedness some what. And again....they are what they are.
Perersolis are a little better with the Frontier/Blue ridge being the best. These Hatfield designs favor the historic Sheetz type rifle somewhat.
Rick Boylan
45 Cal.
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2014
- Messages
- 832
- Reaction score
- 8
I must say the use of the word "cheap" when referring to a production gun is a bit insulting.
Sure the production guns don't cost thousands like the custom built guns do. But they are just as accurate and fun to shoot as any thousand dollar gun can be.
Maybe I would say some of us just want to make smoke and not pay for overpriced guns that won't shoot any better than our cheap ones do. But that could be taken as insulting those who pay out large sums of money for their custom guns.
It's how things are said that cause others to interpret a persons comments as friendly or offensive.
Sure the production guns don't cost thousands like the custom built guns do. But they are just as accurate and fun to shoot as any thousand dollar gun can be.
Maybe I would say some of us just want to make smoke and not pay for overpriced guns that won't shoot any better than our cheap ones do. But that could be taken as insulting those who pay out large sums of money for their custom guns.
It's how things are said that cause others to interpret a persons comments as friendly or offensive.
