Blue Ridge .54 flinter..?

[the Black Spot]

am thinking of purchasing one. just wondered of those that own or did own what you thought.
this is on the .54 caliber ones.
thanks in advance

 

[boar]

I have the 32. Real acturate, Eats flints. Dilly

 

[cowpoke1955]

I have a .45 Blue Ridge flinter. It is very accrurate and reliable. Mine is pretty easy on flints. I use 7/8th Black English flints by Tom Fuller from Track of the Wolf. I was going to buy one in .54 when they were on sale for $409. Then Cabela's raised the price so high, that I'm looking at semi-custom/custom rifles for my next one. Not that much difference in price now. The Blue Ridge is a good rifle. Personally, I think they are too pricey for a production gun. Maybe, if they go on sale again :hmm: .

 

[JWP]

If your referring to the Blue Ridge that Pedersoli makes - I know a couple guys that have them and are very satisfied. They are a good shooting gun for the money. Can't say I've heard anything about them eating flints.
hope this helps :hatsoff:

 

[john12865]

Pedersoli does make a nice quality production gun. I've shot several that friends own and have heard no complaints But the price of $550.00 is steep for me, for a production gun.
I like the Lyman GPR kits that can be had for $300.00. Of course it's a Hawkins style gun but you can make them as nice as you want and they are very good quality for a production gun.

 

[the Black Spot]

if the lyman gpr came in kit form with a full stock i would be on that like flies going to potatoe salad

 

[agill]

I have a .45 cal. Blue Ridge. It's one of my favorite rifles. I would recommend it for a production gun. :thumbsup:

 

[john12865]

if the lyman gpr came in kit form with a full stock i would be on that like flies going to potatoe salad

It would be nice if they made some full stocks.

 

[sixoclockhold]

I owned two .32 and 36 flint and returned them.
the Patent breech design is unnecessary and complicates cleaning of gun to really clean it out you should remove went liner. the design makes it very sensitive to fowling and causes misfires. You need to really work to figure this gun out to keep the gun from misfiring. Accuracy at 25 yds. great at 50 yds erratic defied correction. Fowling in both got under lock into mortise during firing session. The wood screw holding lock in front is silly. Sight needed to be filed down almost to barrel to be on at 50 yds. Lock sparked very well though. Some of this applies more to smaller caliber version.
JB

 

[sixoclockhold]

it is vent and fouling.

 

[lightsky]

nice going jeff :rotf:
glad to see someone else can spell :hatsoff:

 

I have one and was lucky enough to get in on the Cabelas sale. Best flinter I have. But - if I was still in the market for flinter, I would defiantely consider a custom job due to the not so great price differential.

 

[SCATTERSHOT]

I have had two of them, both in .54 flint. The weight distribution is better in the larger caliber, IMO. My favorite of the two was the carbine. Both sparked well and were accurate, although neither would be considered period correct, if that matters to you. I liked mine, and would own another in a heartbeat if I shot much anymore.

Good luck!

 

[the Black Spot]

not so concerned with period correct, but what makes it not pc? is there a period this rifle fits? :hmm:

 

[SCATTERSHOT]

Well, there's quite a bit. Stock architecture, barrel attachment, ramrod thimbles, breech layout, sights, and on and on. Nothing wrong with that, and I certainly don't care about it on my personal guns, but that's a few of the features. I'm sure I've overlooked something, but basically it's like camparing a T/C Hawken to one of Sam and Jake's best.

Just buy it and enjoy it. It's a great gun.

 

[NYS]

Also could depend on the period you are looking to be correct for. I would think it would be fine for Western US fur trade (1820 - 1840).

I have the .54 in percussion. Really enjoy shooting it, quite accurate once you spend some time at the range and get everything adjusted to you. I had to file the front sight down a bit and drift the rear buckhorn slightly to one side (left, I think). This particular rifle seems to really like a very tight ball/patch combination (.530 and .015 respectively), so I now use a synthetic ramrod, which isn't correct for any period save "modern".

 

[J.D.]

Scattershots opinion is right on.

I have one in 32 and have had to work on it more than necessary to get it to work right.

The powder cavity measures less than 1/4 inch in diameter and the liner extended nearly half way into that diameter. That means powder did not find its way into the liner, which equates to eratic ignition.

I seriously doubt that the powder chamber in the 54 is much larger.

The locks spark ok, not great, but ok and the architecture of the stock doesn't always fit all that well, and the waaaayyy too thick forearm feels heavy in the hand.

Pedersoli's do shoot good, until the barrel heats us and the mickey mouse barrel attachment prevents expansion along the length of the barrel.

IMHO, they are a decent gun for $350 or so, but not for what one cost now.

For just a little more you can get a good gun without those design flaws and with a MUCH better lock.

I don't mean this as a slam to anyone, but those who rave about the atributes of the Pedersoli guns
apparently have never handled or shot a decent gun.
J.D.

 

[the Black Spot]

well, since i have a large family i decided to keep cost down as much as possible. so i went $130 cheaper and ordered the kentucky rifle instead(pedersoli). it is .50 cal flintlock 35" barrel. lot of reviews said it was a good deal. once i get it and shoot it i will post a small review. thanks to all for your advice and replies.

 

[J.D.]

Scattershots opinion is right on.

That should have read Jeffrey Breitman is right on.

Sorry, 'bout that.
J.D.

 

[Teach]

Scattershots opinion is right on.

I have one in 32 and have had to work on it more than necessary to get it to work right.

The powder cavity measures less than 1/4 inch in diameter and the liner extended nearly half way into that diameter. That means powder did not find its way into the liner, which equates to eratic ignition.

I seriously doubt that the powder chamber in the 54 is much larger.

The locks spark ok, not great, but ok and the architecture of the stock doesn't always fit all that well, and the waaaayyy too thick forearm feels heavy in the hand.

Pedersoli's do shoot good, until the barrel heats us and the mickey mouse barrel attachment prevents expansion along the length of the barrel.

IMHO, they are a decent gun for $350 or so, but not for what one cost now.

For just a little more you can get a good gun without those design flaws and with a MUCH better lock.

I don't mean this as a slam to anyone, but those who rave about the atributes of the Pedersoli guns
apparently have never handled or shot a decent gun.
J.D.

Not all Pedersolis are are made by them Traditions are contracted out to make some of their rifles, the "cub" is one IIRC
Cheers Teach.