Is this a real traditional in line?

[nwtradegun]

called an over hammer.

 

[M. De Land]

Interesting but Butt ugly and probably blows cap fragments into ones face and cheeks.

 

[F.G. Ford]

Interesting but Butt ugly and probably blows cap fragments into ones face and cheeks.

It comes with a face shield :shocked2:
Fred

 

[zimmerstutzen]

I have seen other types of "in-lines" from the early 1800's. There were even in line flit locks from the 1600's. However the rifle shown is not what some define as an inline. some require a bolt type striker that slides forward to hit a percussion cap. Other folks view any gun that has a percussion nipple in line with the bore as an inline. But that definition would include C&B revolvers as well as some of the gas-light parlor guns.

Most of the old zimmerstutzen guns are in-lines even if made inn the 1830"s. I had a 28 caliber Wurfflein zimmerstutzen, made in Philadelphia inn the 1850's. It had double set triggers, a box lock action and thee hammer struck a bolt that slid forward into the nipple installed into the rear of the barrel stubb,

 

[Loyalist Dave]

loads from the muzzle
uses a #11 cap
wood stock
fixed breech
exposed hammer
fixed metallic sights
Brass inlay
brass patchbox
brass buttplate
Kentucky style buttstock.
H&A style mainspring assembly
19th century style metal work.

Interesting set of criteria, so the TC Scout would only fail because the breech plug is designed to be removed for cleaning. hmmm

You might add, designed to shoot only black powder or a substitute for black powder. :wink:

LD

 

[Griz44Mag]

So your list says "fixed" metallic sights.
Are you excluding an adjustable rear?
I consider my TC as traditional, does that meet the criteria?

 

[Zonie]

"Interesting set of criteria, so the TC Scout would only fail because the breech plug is designed to be removed for cleaning. hmmm"
-----------------
Wrong.

The styling of the TC Scout is similar to a lever action gun.

Although there were lever action guns made prior to the CW fitting into the forums time frame, they were cartridge guns. That is why they don't fit within the forum rules as I see them.

Basically, I look at the guns posted on the forum and ask myself, does this look like a single shot muzzleloader that might have existed before the days or during the CW?
If it does I let the topic go on.

If it looks like a lever action, bolt action, break action (like a Topper shotgun) or any other modern firearm, it fails my test and the topic gets flushed.

The owner of the forum and the moderators are the only people who can decide what stays and what goes.
The members can comment on a gun but we make the final decision.

In the case of the rifle in this topic, the gun does look like it could be something made back in the 1840-50's so I have allowed it to stay.

Hopefully this clears up the question?

 

[coloradoclyde]

loads from the muzzle
uses a #11 cap
wood stock
fixed breech
exposed hammer
fixed metallic sights
Brass inlay
brass patchbox
brass buttplate
Kentucky style buttstock.
H&A style mainspring assembly
19th century style metal work.

Interesting set of criteria, so the TC Scout would only fail because the breech plug is designed to be removed for cleaning. hmmm

You might add, designed to shoot only black powder or a substitute for black powder. :wink:

LD

No matter how sharply one tries to draw a line between black and white, there is always a grey area..... :wink:

 

[coloradoclyde]

So your list says "fixed" metallic sights.
Are you excluding an adjustable rear?
I consider my TC as traditional, does that meet the criteria?

Fixed sights tend to be more traditional than adjustable sights... Especially plastic or fiber optic ones....

If someone can show me a period copy of the T/C adjustable rear sight I would love to see it.

 

[meanmike8665]

The poor TC Hawken, the muzzleloader everyone love to hate.
Does not look like a Hawken, the sights are not correct, the twist is not correct.....they just shoot.
Michael

 

[coloradoclyde]

The poor TC Hawken, the muzzleloader everyone love to hate.
Does not look like a Hawken, the sights are not correct, the twist is not correct.....they just shoot.
Michael

No no.....That honor goes to CVA I think... :haha:

 

[Kansas Jake]

Yeah, but how many of us would be here dedicated to muzzle loaders if it hadn't been for TC or CVA. I owned both as my first couple of smoke poles and still have several of each.

 

[meanmike8665]

I think I have 5 TC's. Most have two barrels the original barrels plus some sort of 'drop in'. I like TC's and they shoot very well for me. I wish I had back a couple I sold to help someone get started that didn't stay with muzzleloading, oh well.

Michael

 

[coloradoclyde]

Yeah, but how many of us would be here dedicated to muzzle loaders if it hadn't been for TC or CVA.

Not many.... :wink:

 

[Grenadier1758]

The poor T/C Hawken.

Actually the T/C looks like some of the Hawken "squirrel" rifles of smaller calibers and brass mountings in using the Dimmick style trigger guard. The Hawken brothers had only one rifling machine of 1 in 48 twist. The T/C fault is in the shallow depth of the grooves.

 

[meanmike8665]

Yes, I know. There also some 1850's California rifles that are similar. However, as a general rule I have read more posts about how TC's are not real Hawkens and blah, blah ....
The real reason for my post ' show me an original TC type rear sight ', just plain ol' hate from the purists.

BTW, the original picture to this post looks like the rear sight is a lollipop peep. I had an original rifle vintage 1850's made in California rifle that had a similar sight.

I traded that rifle for a Sharon Hawken and TC Hawken and glad I did.


Michael

 

[coloradoclyde]

BTW, the original picture to this post looks like the rear sight is a lollipop peep. I had an original rifle vintage 1850's made in California rifle that had a similar sight.

It also has a V notch on the barrel too....




Michael

 

[meanmike8665]

Did not see it, thanks. I will go look at it again.
Michael

 

[meanmike8665]

I wished I could see the front better. BTW, I like the rifle very much.

Michael

 

[RADeO]

I believe that is called a "Babcock" rifle and it is not a cobbled-up home-made gun. I have a friend who has one and have seen it myself several years ago. Wish I could remember more about it though. :cursing: