The Hawken rifle is maybe a concept made in the 70's by a movie and marketing professionals in the firearms industry. BTW my CVA Mountain has steel buttplate and trigger guard and pewter nosecap and patchbox and browned finish, made in USA.
Just the barrel length, rate of twist and over all length of the rifle.. she's a looker for sure!!Shine said:what do you want to know.
Alden said:Rod L said:By the way, here's a great example by a true artist:
http://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/fusionbb/showtopic.php?tid/282855/post/1315481/hl//fromsearch/1/
Herb has done work that most of us mere mortals can only dream of creating.
I think the subject's been beat to death, though, & I'm unlikey to convince anyone otherwise. Suffice to say that I & some others think that the T/C, Zoli, & the rest of the "Hawken" types are more of an 1850s-60s generic half-stock plains rifle, rather than anything that came from the St. Louis shop of the Hawken bros.
Rod
Oh no Rod, quite the opposite my Hawken rifle expert friend... I'm SO on board. OK, then THIS is the gun YOU want to say is THE Hawken Rifle? And only it! Then no other gun with any variation will be a Hawken. Is that what you'd like us all to agree to!? Examples:
brass mounted some were brass mounted
one barrel keysome, especially the Missouri squirrel rifles had one key, I'm sure some were pinned
no entry thimble for the ramrod some, even a few the venerable mountain types, had a one piece pewter cap
butt plate has a different profile most 19th Century rifles had a deeper crescent and corresponding drop, that's typical to nearly all rifles of the period
different trigger guard the Hawkens on a great many of their rifles used a design common on English sporting rifles, that being a scroll type guard where the guard is screwed into the set trigger plate, Some of the local trade rifles may have used a simpler arrangement
breech not the same On a lot of their rifles, the Hawkens would commonly use a snail type patent breech, another feature of the English sporting rifles, sometimes they would use a bar lock and breech, sometimes a drum and of course flint on their early fullstocks
barrel may be thinner, thicker, longer, shorter, and heavier or lighter As typical with most rifles of the period most barrels were longer than 32"
stocks material must be fancy maple maple is a very good stock wood but like most makers other woods most likely were used too, such as walnut or cherry
front and rear sights must be exactly the same As with most rifles of the period simple notched iron sights were used as were buckhorns and adjustable leaf sights on the later rifles, as typical of the period low dovetailed silver leaf sights were used on the front
forestock same length and shape forestock length would vary on the type of rifle
same exact wrist shape a Hawken feature especially on the mountain rifles was a long breech tang that was secured to the trigger plate. This sandwich of steel made that type of Hawken very strong in the usually weak wrist
no other more minor differences OH but there is
Trust me when I say everyone, expert and novice alike, is waiting for this "knowing" answer...
Rod L said:...the next time I'm down at the BBHC or the Museum of the Fur Trade, I'll tell them that those Hawkens they have displayed don't exist ---at least according to you. I'm sure they'll be pleased to hear that...
Rod
AldenIf I had to take out a micrometer to defend most of my attacks said:Not knocking anyone----if you had actually read my posts, you would know I own one. A CVA rifle, of very early 1980s vintage, my very first ML rifle. .45 caliber, half-stock, I even converted it from percussion to flint (and that includes dealing with the drum-that-screws-into-the-breechplug affair, and the metric threads--yes, it can be done!) I shot that for years, numerous rabbits, squirrels, and even deer fell to it. Say what you want about those old CVAs, but don't call them inaccuarate. 60 grains 3f under a patched roundball, and the thing was a tack driver.
However, I ALWAYS knew it for what it was---a 1980s representation of a very generic plains-type rifle, and a not very good representation, at that. I never deluded myself into thinking it was anything else, and I knew perfectly well it was no Hawken. Didn't stop me from having fun and sending a mine full of lead downrange.
When I wanted something more historically correct, I was able to purchase a used representation of a J.J. Henry rifle, that would have been correct for the Upper Missouri fur trade of the latter 1830s (and yes, my Henry is instantly recognizable as such, don't go claiming there's no such thing, now). Within the last couple of years, I wanted something that was correct for an earlier period, that's when my 1810 era Deringer rifle took place.
You see, it's always been a progression with me, and my goal is historical accuracy. I know others don't care a whit about history, and just like to get out and shoot, or go hunting, and are just as happy with what they've got as I was with my old CVA.
I guess you can call your T/C a for-real, honest-to-God gen-u-wine Hawken, or whatever. You could also claim that it's a dead-nuts copy of an English half-stock percussion sporting rifle---it bears just as much resemblence to the latter as the former. But, in the end, you're only kidding yourself.
Rod
Rod L said:Not knocking anyone...
A CVA rifle...
I ALWAYS knew it for... a very generic plains-type rifle, and a not very good representation, at that... never deluded myself... it was no Hawken...
something more historically correct... my 1810 era Deringer rifle [built by a "gunsmith" in between making camp furniture, trunks, boxes and sewing shirts -- OK!].
...my goal is historical accuracy... others don't care a whit about history... as I was with my old CVA.
Rod
Enter your email address to join: