opinions on the blue ridge rifle

[David Snellen]

Gentlemen,
I was in a discussion with a fellow on the blue ridge rifle by cabelas/pedersaoli.
I am interested in y'all's opinion, but these are the problems I see:

1. the triangular forestock
2. the triggerguard is not inletted.
3. the thin butt stock

Do y'all agree or see other things that would take this rifle out of a correct period piece (OR do you know of anything they look like in history that I have not seen)

I do not/have never owned one, but they remind me of the Hatfield rifles made in the '80's

I am NOT meaning to insult anyone or their choice of firearms, I just wondered if I was correct on my assessment.
Respectfully,
David

 

[JackAubrey]

I have one in .36 calibre /flint. I don't exactly know what you mean by a "triangular" fore stock, but the trigger guard is not inletted on mine. One thing I've wondered about is the barrel. Mine is obviously a "squirrel rifle" by calibre, but it is decidedly muzzle heavy for such a long thing supposed to be pointed up into the trees. As I understand it, the originals had "swamped" barrels to counter this very problem. I don't see why I could not do a little swamping myself, but I don't want to compromise the safety of the barrel. It is a production gun after all. JA

 

[David Snellen]

Dear Sir,
So do you think other than the inlet and heavy barrel is pc?
Thank you,
David

 

[54ball]

The Blue Ridge/Frontier is an Italian continuation of the Hatfield Brand rifles. As far as a factory made longrifle, It's the best IMHO for the period correct look.

With that said it is a mixture of styles and eras.
The overall stock shape resembles rifles made around 1812. It really favors a Sheetz Rifle of that period.
The triangle forearm is a feature found on some Pennsylvania and Southern longrifles although the Blue Ridges may be slightly exaggerated.
The large flat faced English style lock IMHO is more in line with 1770 or before.
The straight barrel puts it back into the 19th century.
The trigger guard IMHO looks early like the lock and not being inlet simply aids in manufacture.

If I had to date one as a historical rifle...I would place it at points south and west of Marlyand circa 1810.

There are some things about how the stock is secured that are modern features, like screws instead of pins. As far as looking the part it does it pretty well. Again probably the best with out going to a custom build.

As far as swamped barrels, by the early 19th Century Southern mountain rifles show a very slight swamp. So slight it may not be detectable by the naked eye. Many had breeches of 1 inch or greater and barrel lengths of 46 inches or greater. About the largest caliber in this period was .45 with larger calibers being rare and smaller being quite common.

So. An original Southern Mountain was actually very heavy especially in the nose.

 

[thecapgunkid]

Thanks, 54ball, for an interesting set of comments. I hefted one once when looking for a flintlock and am glad I put it back on the rack at Cabelas. I held out for a hand made rifle, swamped, at .54 caliber and have not looked back. For the money, I did not really want something that heavy. A couple of trips to Dixons in Eastern PA and I found my dream gun.

Were I inclined to get a rifle without swamped barrel, I'd go for something shorter. Maybe you should think of Pedersoli's Jager if you are bent on a factory gun.

Else, hang loose until you see something you can't live without....it'll happen...trust me...

 

[David Snellen]

Wow. I am surprised that they seem to be more PC than I thought.
Other than trade muskets, I haven't seen any trigger guards that were not inletted. Am I wrong in that?
Thank you,
David

 

[54ball]

In the study of longrifles... never say never but most were inlet.

Wow. I am surprised that they seem to be more PC than I thought.

Keep this in mind, for a "factory" produced longrifle they are, lets a say good representation of a period rifle. If you want more historical accuracy in factory gun, you'll need to go military. For a rifle you would really have to go semi custom to full custom for a more historical piece. Or you could do the research buy the parts and build your own, which is easier said than done. :wink:

 

[Pete G]

If you're only going to own one rifle just to get a flavor of the old guns it is fine.

If you are interested in history or correct guns you will soon outgrow the production made stuff.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

Please note... he said a "good" representation... not a "great" representation. :grin:

Part of the equation is that there is nothing on the market in factory made rifles that is slightly better...so the Blue Ridge Hunter falls into the "good" category by default.

I owned one and liked it very much. I sold it to a beginner to raise funds for a better rifle. Here's what I found objectionable:

The rear sight is wrong for the AWI

the ramrod thimbles serve as washers to retain the barrel in the stock.

I don't like the case hardening on the lock, and the lock is retained by one lock screw plus a wood screw.

As you mentioned, the trigger guard is not inlet

Forward portion of the stock has a / \ shape

The barrel has a patent breech which sometimes causes ignition problems.


All of that being said, I found it to be a very serviceable, and accurate rifle (when I swapped out the thick front blade for a thin blade). I'd recommend it in .54 if you decide to own one.

While it is at the bottom of the "acceptable" list for rifles used by folks portraying riflemen of the AWI..., it is acceptable...., and the cost out-of-the-box is less than the cost for just the parts of most of the more correct rifle kits.

LD

 

[Crewdawg445]

+1, I've got an old Hatfield and the blue ridge rifles are very similar. I personally replace production vent liners and usually the lock (if it's wearing a rock lock). I'd go for it, I love my Hatfield, very accurate and a all around good example that production guns can be of good quality with minimal work. With that said Loyalist Dave is spot on, that's why I'm done fiddling with production guns, time to build!

 

[JackAubrey]

I'm not big into the PC thing. I do LIKE to do things the way the old timers did, but I don't have to have a screw for screw dyed in the wool EXACT replica. I like the modern steels we use rather than the soft iron barrels, for example. The swamping thing seems like a very logical solution our forefathers came up with that would be an advantage on a production gun. JA

 

[Billnpatti]

You are correct in your observations both about the physical features of the rifle and its resemblence to the Hatfield rifles. That resemblence, as I understand it, is because Pedersoli obtained the design from Hartfield and continued the production of the rifle. In essence, it is the same rifle only better. The early Hatfield rifles were excellent rifles but the last ones that came from Hatfield were of very poor quality. I was fortunate to own an early Hatfield rifle that had a three digit serial number. It was a .50 caliber and it was a real dandy. I am so sorry that I ever traded it. Is the Blue Ridge rifle an accurate copy of an historical design? :idunno: I surely can't say for sure, but what I can tell you is that being made by Pedersoli, it is an excellent rifle. Make no mistake about it, HC or not, Pedersoli rifles are excellent rifles.

 

[Alden]

I do not/have never owned one, but they remind me of the Hatfield rifles made in the '80's

They should. That's exactly what they are. Pedersoli took over the Hatfields as The Frontier and Cabela's has their branded version Blue Ridge.

As long and (front)heavy as I can handle in full octagon. But I lov'em and have a coupla hatfield flints, an old Pedersoli Frontier, and even a Hatfield caplock.

You may not have any!

 

[bpd303]

I have a Cabela's Blue Ridge in .54 caliber and an early Hatfield with a Pedersoli barrel in .45 caliber. The .54 Blue Ridge is a little lighter due to the bigger bore, but other than that it's hard to tell them apart. Fine production rifles both of them.

 

[David Snellen]

Gentlemen,
Very good posts. I don't plan to ever own one, it was just a question. I have a Southern mountain rife 1815 era custom made that isn't perfect, has chatter marks etc. Not a 'perfect' gun, but I love it. I do mostly 1840-65 so that is my focus, but I sure appreciate the answers!
David

 

[Alden]

Knowing what I know today I'd have bought a Maple Frontier MADE by Pedersoli before being taken advantage of by TVM on a "custom assembly" of parts.

 

[Idaho Elk Hunter]

There is a Blue Ridge Pedersoli in classified ads on here right now in percussion though. Nice looking rifle.

 

[BrownBear]

Without regard for the cosmetic details, the Blue Ridge/Frontier will make you proud when it's time to quit parading and start shooting. All I've been around and the two I currently own give stellar accuracy. Even my carbine version doesn't seem handicapped by its shorter sighting radius.

 

[jamesthomas]

I do not/have never owned one, but they remind me of the Hatfield rifles made in the '80's

They should. That's exactly what they are. Pedersoli took over the Hatfields as The Frontier and Cabela's has their branded version Blue Ridge.

As long and (front)heavy as I can handle in full octagon. But I lov'em and have a coupla hatfield flints, an old Pedersoli Frontier, and even a Hatfield caplock.

You may not have any!

It looks like to me that somebody has too many! :grin: Maybe your the reason he don't have one!. :grin:

 

[Rick Boylan]

Too bad that ones not a flint or I'd be on it like Oprah on a canned ham. :haha: