Austin Halleck Flintlock Mountain Rifles

[BigSkyRambler]

These rifles are pretty. A friend has a well used one I could get for a good deal. But I have read spotty reviews. What are the thoughts of the hive mind here?

 

[Grimord]

I have one in .50 caliber. Sparks great, and shoots better than I can hold off hand. I did replace the touch hole liner, cause to one in the rifle (original?) was corroded.

 

[azmntman]

Never seen or shot one but cant recall hearing bad about them?

 

[Black Jack]

From what I have read (and I have no firsthand knowledge), a lot depends on when it was made. In it's later stages, the company apparently had pretty severe financial difficulties and quality during that time suffered badly. Unfortunately, I have no specific information regarding dates/timeframes, etc. Perhaps someone more informed will chime in.

 

[dave_person]

Hi,
I just fixed one for a client. I suspect they first came out with a percussion gun and then created a flintlock by fitting a separate pan (like a Siler), frizzen, frizzen spring, and flintcock. The external parts appear to be L&R early classic flintlock parts fitted to their percussion lock plate. The frizzen screw was drilled much too high through the bolster and lock plate such that there was only a paper thin thickness of metal above the screw. In addition, the screw was too short so that the head (it inserts from the inside of the lock) was only supported by the thin lock plate and not the thicker bolster. As a result, the hole in the lock plate broke under pressure from the frizzen on the screw. I fixed it by simply making a longer screw that also goes into the bolster for support. It was incredibly stupid for the manufacturer to use the short screw when such an easy remedy (longer screw) was available. The tang on the hook breech is straight with no bend. Moreover, they did not blend the stock into the barrel and breech, just left it high and straight so the top of the standing breech is set down below the surface of the wood. This gives the stock a clunky, hump-like appearance behind the barrel. The rest of the gun seems pretty good. The set triggers must be set to allow the lock to be brought to full cock. If you step back about 10-15 feet and squint your eyes, the gun almost looks like a plains rifle. It shoots pretty well, at least after I fixed the botched frizzen screw.

dave

 

[Bill Bryan]

I bought several when the company was in business. The stock cracked on both of them but after my repair they shot fine.

 

[nwtradegun]

if it say made in mo. it is a fine gun. if it says made in Utah run like hell is junk.

 

[kingsax26]

I had a .50 flint . I dont recall where it was made. it was pretty enough and i got it for a good deal . But i dont think it was a great gun unless i put somne money into it. I had many cracking issues with the stock, partly due to poor wood and also to poor fitting of the breech. the lock had a tendency to shatter flints and was very "rough" when firing. The accuracy of it was decent , i could never get more than 2 inches at 50 yards . although i never finished working a load, but also because that lock bounced the gun all over the place when shooting. I might consider buying another if one presented itself, but i would only do so if i could shoot it first. I would pull the barrel and inspect the wood very closely..... mine had three major cracks all in the area of the breech, side panel and in front of the lock panel....i sold the gun for cheap to someone on here . dont remember who it was but id like to see what they did with it

 

[nwtradegun]

i had one and did not have to set the trigger to cock it. sounds like you got one made in Utah. J U N K

 

[dave_person]

Hi RJ,
The good news is that the gun is not mine.

dave

 

[Dryball]

Love mine. never a problem