Period TC Hawken Style Trigger-guard

[grizzly adam]

Hey, Y'all ...

I have in following many traditional forums noted with interest various charges made, stating that little or nothing of the TC Hawken closely matches the form of any period rifle.

I was pleased to discover this 1850-70 era target rifle on TOTW that features a triggerguard that has a form very close indeed to that of a TC Hawken. Of course, certain small details vary, but when viewed in profile, this triggerguard is definitely of the same type:
http://www.trackofthewolf.com/(S(4...catId=12&subId=78&styleId=266&partNum=AAF-474

I have often thought TC made a mistake in calling their admirable contribution to muzzleloading history the "HAWKEN". Had they called it something else, they might have avoided all the unwarranted criticism that has obscured the real value of that arm's place in the renaissance of blackpowder shooting.

 

[J.D.]

IMHO you can engage in wishful thinking and grasp at all the straws you want, but it ain't gonna fly.

I have handled at least a half dozen original Hawkens, a coupla Dimicks, as well as other plains rifles and seen a number of others that I couldn't get my hands on, and there isn't any resemblance between any TC and the any originals.

As to TC naming their rifle a "Hawken", it was done for marketing and that's it. TC is not concerned about the controversy surrounding the authenticity of any of their guns. They only care about selling them.

That said, TC guns are good quality, but they are not historically correct and can't be made to be without replacing the stock, barrel, and all of the hardware.

 

[rafterob]

I think this argument hinges on one's interpretaion of the word "resemblance" which according to the dictionary means to have a similarity to or a likeness thereof. All of these words contain a vagary about them, so I believe one is correct to say that a TC, Traditions or GPR may "resemble" a traditional Hawkins or Plains rifle. Please don't confuse this with being an historically accurate reproduction of said rifles and allow us "not so HC" folks to have our little fantasies. :v -I notice the word resemblence was not used in the original post and assigned this word to the concept being expressed. Can I possibly b.s. anymore? :bull:

 

[roundball]

Good find...and beyond the trigger guard, a TC Hawken is practically a duplicate of that whole rifle...excellent find...thanks !
:hatsoff:

 

[J.D.]

I don't have a problem with fantasizing about certain things. The problem arises when fantasies spill over into delusions that result in misinformation.

These types of threads are the result of simple ignorance. Ignorance is lack of education, or a simple lack of knowledge in a given area. It has nothing to do with intelligence, BTW. I wanted to make that clear so's no one would be offended.

I try to encourage readers to find information on these old guns, so they can become knowledgeable about them.

If someone can read the messages posted on the forum, they can read a book, for cryin' out loud.

I wrote that slowly for those slow readers out there. :hmm:

Sorry 'bout that, I have a weird sense of humor.

Books don't cost all that much. Some are pretty inexpensive, and most gun books have lots of pictures so folks won't really have to read all that much.

If one can't afford to buy books, they can get 'em from the library. If the library doesn't have 'em, they can get 'em through interlibrary loan.

If you don't live in an incorporated area that does have a library, you can buy a library card for about 15 bucks that will make the entire knowledge base of the entire world, through all ages, at your almost immediate disposal. All ya gotta do is get a coupla books.

If you can't read...as if that should be a problem for someone who posts on the forum, go to whatever museums you happen across in your travels.

Yeah, I know, it takes time to read. It takes more time to travel. So get off your duff and take a little time to enjoy life instead of sitting in front of the tube watching sports or home shows.

Even taking side trips to museums while on a family vacation, or even a day trip can be enlightening. And museums are everywhere. Even in places like Pinedale and Cody Wy. Fort Benton Montana has a decent little museum, as does Great Falls. Don't Forget The museum of the Fur Trade in Chadron NE, The Davis Gun museum in Oklahoma,or The School of the Ozarks south of Branson MO, or the Gateway Museum under the Arch in St. Louis, to name only very a few.

I mention those because folks living in less than major metropolitan areas don't seem to think that there are any museums close by.

Or How about gunbuilders fairs, similar to Dixon's? The Montana Gunmakers Guild hosts a gunmakers fair, as does those in Oregon and Washington State, or the CLA show in Lexington KY, or any number of gun shows that feature originals. And I'm sure there are other such events that I am not aware of.

I guess that the point of this rant is that there are LOTS of venues to learn about these old guns. And most of them are relatively inexpensive.

And learning about these things can be interesting.

I want everyone to understand, I don't care what anyone shoots. Shoot them all in good health and enjoy the experience.

However, you won't do yourself or anyone else any good by disseminating misinformation based on ignorance or wishful thinking.

 

[roundball]

"...and there isn't any resemblance between any TC and the any originals..."

:hmm: :hmm:...and IMHO, that's a very, very strong statement there, with which I respectfully disagree.

As to TC naming their rifle a "Hawken", it was done for marketing and that's it. TC is not concerned about the controversy surrounding the authenticity of any of their guns. They only care about selling them.

Agree

"...That said, TC guns are good quality, but they are not historically correct..."

Agree...and in the 6-8 years I've spent on several ML forums I've never seen a single post that ever stated, suggested, or even hinted that they were historically accurate.

Just adding my .02 cents to the thread...

 

[DOUBLEDEUCE 1]

The photo of the rifle for sale at TOTW is very interesting. I have seen a rifle similar to that at a local museum. The thing has been badly cared for and is wrapped in wire at a few spots.
I own a Thompson Center Hawken rifle. I believe it is a good rifle and has served me well for over thirty years. As for the name Thompson chose for their rifle, I know it is a marketing ploy, and a great choice. Would there be such a flap if the rifle had been called a "Plains Rifle"? I don't think so.
Think of all of those "Derringers" floating around out there. Henry Deringer made the original and others copied either for marketing or maybe just out of admiration for his work. Those that copied Deringer's work even took his name but added the double 'r' for Derringer. Some of those "Derringers" are close copies and some not so close. Some are even not in the same hemisphere. CVA comes to mind for one.
And let us not forget that all facial tissues are not "Kleenex", but that for the most part is what we call them.
Thompson may have employed a marketing gimmick, but also, just maybe they might have been offering their version of a great rifle as sort of a tribute. :thumbsup:

 

[Le Grand]

Hey Grizz, What you want is available from The Hawken Shop, www.thehawkenshop.com. Take a look. The pieces you want come in the Four Piece Conversion Kit; iron trigger guard, special iron nose cap, "primitive" screw-on rear sight, and iron buttplate. And individual pieces can be purchased too.

 

[wwpete52]

Dixie Gun Works also offers that kit.
You know, I could never understand why T/C never offered at least one rifle that was a true replica. I think that they could have sold a truck load of them. I also never understood why Lyman didn't make their Great Plains Rifle with a browned barrel and hardware.

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

So since I have a torso, arms, legs, a head and eyes and a nose and a mouth I can now claim to resemble Brad Pitt or George Clooney? Damn I am a handsome ol' devil!!! :blah:

 

[rafterob]

That line seemed to work when I was courtin my wife....of course 25 years ago I may have had at least a smidgen of resemblence to some movie hunk.

 

[grizzly adam]

Wow!

What an amazing array of responses, considering that:

I didn't claim that the TC Hawken is like unto period Hawkens.

I didn't mention Plains Rifles of any sort, or contend that the TC Hawken may be reasonably compared to them.

I didn't say I wanted to rebuild a TC Hawken.

Indeed, I didn't say most of the things so belabored in most of the responses! I did say this, though:

The trigger-guard on that target rifle (which is no Plains Rifle) listed at TOTW closely matches that of a TC Hawken in profile, while varying in some small details.

And that it plainly does, Gents.

I'm glad someone noticed that, at least. :wink:

I just thought some might find it interesting.

 

[roundball]

:grin:

Nah, you're way off base...there's no "resemblence" at all...course your photo had that new fangled lock on it

 

[wstillwagon]

That's funny! Sarcasm noted. ml68
Roundball, those stocks are very nice. Anything special or all TC factory?

 

[nw_hunter]

LOL! Come up for air man! :grin:

 

[nw_hunter]

Count me as one that did :thumbsup:

 

[DOUBLEDEUCE 1]

No doubt about the similarity of the trigger guard on that rifle you found on TOTW. It sure looks a lot like the guard on my Thompson version of the Hawken. :thumbsup:

 

[Liver eatin’ Johnson]

...and there isn't any resemblance between any TC and the any originals.

Oh really J.D.?

Hey Griz...

These might help you sleep better - actual photos of actual rifles from an actual BOOK ( California Gunsmiths 1846 - 1900 by Lawrence P. Shelton ) Perhaps T/C read this book too :wink:

 

[DOUBLEDEUCE 1]

Some of those thingies look like they came right off the pages of the Thompson catalog. :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

 

[Liver eatin’ Johnson]

TC guns are good quality, but they are not historically correct and can't be made to be without replacing the stock, barrel, and all of the hardware.

Here's one that makes a T/C look even more historicly correct: