I am wondering what y'all think about the Pedersoli kit? I checked out a number of their kits and this one seems to be PC. Most of the other flintlock kits had dovetail sights that seemed to be middle to late 19th century (I am interested in the 1790 - 1830 period).
-
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
Pedersoli Harper Ferry flintlock kit?
- Thread starter Bo T
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
Col. Batguano
75 Cal.
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2011
- Messages
- 5,034
- Reaction score
- 1,407
Have you looked at Track's 1803 HF kit yet?
Bo T
There is a big difference between the kits made by the big factories like Pedersoli and the small muzzleloading parts suppliers like Track of the Wolf's "kits".
The big factory kits are basically made from production parts which have been removed from the manufacturing cycle before they were totally finished.
This means the threaded holes are finished, the dovetails if any are cut and the mortises for the lock and trigger are almost finished.
You would need to do a little final fitting of the parts, do some rough and finish sanding of the wood, stain and finish the wood and assemble it all.
This would take anywhere from 20 to 40 hours depending on your skill and how well you want the parts to look when it's done.
The "kits" offered by the small companies consist of a a stock which is roughly the shape of the finished gun with a barrel channel and ramrod hole drilled.
All of the parts like the trigger guard and buttplate are just rough sand castings which will need to be filed, sanded and polished.
The lock is usable but the screw holes to hold it into the stock don't exist.
The stock will have a LOT of wood left all over it to allow a builder to modify it to the shape he wants to end up with. This means a LOT of wood will need to be removed.
None of the holes for screws exist so they will have to be located, drilled and threaded.
All of the mortises (if they exist) are just rough approximations of what is needed so the lock, trigger, side plate etc will need to be finished to fit the existing lock.
In other words, these are basically a box of rough parts which all need to be finished, located and assembled.
To build one of these guns you will need to spend at least 100 hours of time.
You will need tools for measuring, drilling and threading steel and wood parts.
On the positive side, these kits are the best way to build a unique, accurate reproduction of the guns that were made back in the 1700-1850 time period.
PS: I wrote the above for rifles/smoothbores but basically it also applies to single shot pistols.
There is a big difference between the kits made by the big factories like Pedersoli and the small muzzleloading parts suppliers like Track of the Wolf's "kits".
The big factory kits are basically made from production parts which have been removed from the manufacturing cycle before they were totally finished.
This means the threaded holes are finished, the dovetails if any are cut and the mortises for the lock and trigger are almost finished.
You would need to do a little final fitting of the parts, do some rough and finish sanding of the wood, stain and finish the wood and assemble it all.
This would take anywhere from 20 to 40 hours depending on your skill and how well you want the parts to look when it's done.
The "kits" offered by the small companies consist of a a stock which is roughly the shape of the finished gun with a barrel channel and ramrod hole drilled.
All of the parts like the trigger guard and buttplate are just rough sand castings which will need to be filed, sanded and polished.
The lock is usable but the screw holes to hold it into the stock don't exist.
The stock will have a LOT of wood left all over it to allow a builder to modify it to the shape he wants to end up with. This means a LOT of wood will need to be removed.
None of the holes for screws exist so they will have to be located, drilled and threaded.
All of the mortises (if they exist) are just rough approximations of what is needed so the lock, trigger, side plate etc will need to be finished to fit the existing lock.
In other words, these are basically a box of rough parts which all need to be finished, located and assembled.
To build one of these guns you will need to spend at least 100 hours of time.
You will need tools for measuring, drilling and threading steel and wood parts.
On the positive side, these kits are the best way to build a unique, accurate reproduction of the guns that were made back in the 1700-1850 time period.
PS: I wrote the above for rifles/smoothbores but basically it also applies to single shot pistols.
Mickc01
45 Cal.
I assembled a Pedersoli Harper's Ferry Pistol a couple of years back. Was and continue to be very happy with it. It is indeed a beginner level kit (thank goodness). It was pretty much already assembled when I received it but it needed a good bit of wood removed and the brass still needed some shaping and polishing. It can be easily completed in less than a week except maybe for stock finishing. Here's a pic of mine....
After looking at a number of pictures of originals, I decided to go with a dark stock finish and take the color casehardening off of the lock. Not perfect but as I said, I'm pretty happy with the results...Mick
After looking at a number of pictures of originals, I decided to go with a dark stock finish and take the color casehardening off of the lock. Not perfect but as I said, I'm pretty happy with the results...Mick
I was looking at the NSW trade pistol, but they told me they were 6 months out. I checked out some of the other offerings and although they were interesting, the Harper's Ferry kit caught my eye. And since a part of having the kit is simply to learn the parts and placement...it is suitable. Although I might solder a rear v notch on.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 1,879
- Reaction score
- 2,951
I have one, I got it as partial payment on a piece I built. IMO the lock is garbage.
The lock suffers at least as many problems as the Pederosoli 1803 Harpers Ferry rifle, possibly more. I have been thinking of trying to fitt a shorter goose neck cock to mine as a starting point to make it shootable.
Agree that the lock is not right, with the following caveat: I have the production Harper's Ferry gun, not the kit. I am assuming that the kit has the same lock.
The geometry of the lock is all wrong. Not only is it wrong for proper lock function, it's wrong from the perspective of copying the original.
In addition to that, the production model is rifled. Really? Why????
Mine has consistent ignition problems due to the lock geometry.
The geometry of the lock is all wrong. Not only is it wrong for proper lock function, it's wrong from the perspective of copying the original.
In addition to that, the production model is rifled. Really? Why????
Mine has consistent ignition problems due to the lock geometry.
"In addition to that, the production model is rifled. Really? Why????"
Not only is it rifled but it is .58 instead of .54 and it's rifled for a mini ball and has a very slow twist. They used the tooling for one of their civil war guns. I've said it many times but I still can't understand how they could have done such a poor job of copying the locks for both the Harpers Ferry rifle and pistol. I have a pistol that I got as part of a trade over 20 years ago and have never even tried to fire it because of the lock.
Not only is it rifled but it is .58 instead of .54 and it's rifled for a mini ball and has a very slow twist. They used the tooling for one of their civil war guns. I've said it many times but I still can't understand how they could have done such a poor job of copying the locks for both the Harpers Ferry rifle and pistol. I have a pistol that I got as part of a trade over 20 years ago and have never even tried to fire it because of the lock.
Well, I ordered the kit from Dixie Thursday night and it showed up today. The stock seemed to have a good inlet. There was one grind mark on it that will require a slight change in how I finish it. One of the hired hands at Pedersoli got a bit rambunctious with the belt sander or had to remove a chip. But I am going towards an 'arsenal' finish so it is workable. After all of the comments, I had to try the lock. The scrape pattern is uniform across the width of the flint from the top of the frizzen to about 1/2 inch from the bottom. I'm guessing that only @ 10% of the sparks are going into the pan. I forgot to order a spring vise so the lock will have to wait. The good news is that I sparked the lock @ 10 times and the flint is still fine.
frogwalking
45 Cal.
- Joined
- May 6, 2013
- Messages
- 691
- Reaction score
- 5
I built one many years ago. It put me on the track where I have now built 8 or 10 rifles and pistols, a few from Chambers kits, the rest from parts and wood. The kit is not hc. It is the wrong caliber in the first place, and the lock geometry is odd. The flint hits the frizzen as if the intent is to chop the frizzen in two It is, however a very pretty gun. How do I like shooting it? it is a hoot. While it is tough on flints, it fires reliably and the lack of rear sight relieves you from having to actually hit something. Lots of smoke and fire, and a huge ball going somewhere. If you dry ball, no problem as the flash hole is large enough to pour powder into the barrel behind the ball. I highly recommend it.
There were a few pictures posted re: the lock on this pistol. The one that I have appears to be an upgraded model. I'll do a buff on the mechanism when I get a spring vise. The trigger pull is a little heavy so I'll thin out the mainspring some.
Pete G
76 Cal.
Thinning the mainspring will not help the trigger very much. Concentrate on the sear spring first.
Mickc01
45 Cal.
Bo T said:
Thanks, Bo. I've shot it a few times but not as many as I would like. It's lots of fun...Mick
Similar threads
- Locked
