Dixie Jager

None of your guns are replicas. Nor are the PC. They, to start with are made of steel. Not Iorn like the real Mc Coy. You may spend a lot of money but you are no more PC than the the guy with the Dixie Jaeger!
Old Charlie

If what you say is true, then DGW should be able to double ther price and "maintain current sales"!!..... is this correct???? :haha: :haha:

YMHS
rollingb

 

[Stumpkiller]

They, to start with are made of steel. Not Iorn like the real Mc Coy.

Damascus steel is iron with the carbon mechanically forged in by repeated folding, hammering and heating. A forged iron barrel would have some of the same inclusions, and therefore be even closer to steel than the raw iron.

The difference between iron and steel is 0.02 to 0.1% carbon (by weight). That is a hex of a lot harder to spot with the naked eye than an improperly shaped stock, a totally wrong triggerguard, etc., etc.

(Jaegermeister - That jaeger is a Frank Bartlett with a slightly reworked Davis Jaeger lock. :redthumb

 

Old Charlie, that's the irony of it all. There isn't much cost difference between the Italian Dixie Jaeger and the American made Jaeger kits offered. in my case I found out it's cheaper to do it right the first time. A guy could spend "a lot" of money on production guns as well, and as far as contemporary gunbuilders' (Zonie,Birddog6 and others) endeavors being as non-PC as mass produced Italian near misses simply because of modern metallurgy as opposed to basic design elements and fantasy rifle furniture sounds like sour grapes to me. I think some folks can be intimidated by those who strive for authenticity at different levels of the hobby. The trick is not letting it show.

 

I think some folks can be intimidated by those who strive for authenticity at different levels of the hobby.

By golly,.... I think this should be nominated for the MLF's "truism of the day" award!! :thumbsup: :redthumb: :applause: :applause: :haha: ::

YMHS
rollingb

 

[tg]

"None of your guns are replicas"
The term replica generaly implies an imitation in form and function not an exact duplcate in materials and methods of manufacture, many fall back on the "originals had iron not steel" defense to try and validate a mediocre unresearched attempt at replicating a gun from the past but it does not hold up under any kind of close scrutiny or logical dissection of the whole picture.

 

I agree,.... and I would consider "documented architecture" to be of foremost importance rather then a frivolous "molecular" difference in steel, when constuct'n a replica firearm.

YMHS
rollingb

 

[Old Charlie]

The term replica generaly implies an imitation in form and function not an exact duplcate in materials and methods of manufacture,

In that case a polyester Hunting frock should be just fine.
Old Charlie

 

[Tahquamenon]

:thumbsup:

Thanks.

 

[tg]

As always there are none so blind as he who will not see....

 

[Tahquamenon]

Certainly no expert here but frankly, I don't feel that there is only one particular PC version of the Jaeger rifle as they were made for so many years and eras.

I would say that the best we could hope for is honest faithful attempts at a specific version for a given period.

Not that there is a particular Jeager that is more correct than others of different periods.

Just posting a photo and saying "all Jaeger's should resemble this" is not really just.

It's unfortunate that Pedersoli did not pick one version of the Jaeger and imitate/replicate that. They certainly have the capabilities to do so. I'd say their present version is loosely "reminicent" of a Jaeger-ish style.

Unfortunately, for some of us (myself included) building a Jaeger (or something else) from a kit is not an option. It should not have to be either.

Folks from centuries past did not all build their own rifles or rifles from kits. They bought, bartered or traded, inherited, stole, found after conflicts and so on.

I would be nice if there were more faithful renditions of the Jaeger and other rifles in a no frills production flaver rifle. I'd certainly be interested.

:m2c:

 

[Stumpkiller]

I would be nice if there were more faithful renditions of the Jaeger and other rifles in a no frills production flavor rifle. I'd certainly be interested.

If enough consumers contacted distributors and producers and said "I would have bought your product if it more closely resembled an authentic firearm" we might have some reasonably priced choices that would pass muster. Metalurgy, coil springs and the "Don't be stupid" stamping on the barrel can be forgiven, but how much harder would it be to get a proper pattern set initially on the stock-duplicating and CNC machines? It's just as easy to do it right.

These companies can turn out near-enough Colt revolvers for $100 to $300. Why not a Jaeger or a honest Kentucky/Pennsylvania clone? What the market now is calling for are 300 yard muzzleloaders that require no special technique or maintenence to operate. We're third (or forth) in consideration after centerfires, in-lines and now Cowboy Action.

I just saw a new factory-custom Marlin lever-action in .38 Special for $850. 25 years ago you couldn't give away the Marlin .357 carbine, now they're backed up for a year.

Think what a better place the world would be if T/C styled their Hawken like an example from the original Hawken Bro's shop? Remember the Ithaca/Browning Hawken?

Oh well, the good news is that because there is no "easy" authentic rifle a whole domestic industry has been formed to meet the need, and artists are feeding their families by producing quality firelocks. I guess it makes you appreciate them more if you have to scrimp and sacrifice for two years so you can purchase one.

 

[Tahquamenon]

:agree: to the point of cost and functionality.

I find it difficult to justify the cost of over a thousand to several thousand dollars for a muzzleloader. For me scrimping and saving is not the issue.

I'f I wanted to spend that much I would. I just find it hard to believe that spending thousands of dollars actaully makes for that much more value and performance in a shooting/hunting weapon?

More period correct and authentic? Absolutely.
More accurate and reliable? Debatable.
More rugged and roadworthy? Equal, except when you scratch or gouge the crap out of your rifle you feel worse on the spendy model. I would anyway.

I'm not suggesting that any production rifle compares to a fine semi-custom or custom rifle. But the reality is that many folks simply cannot afford these and still have money left over to buy powder and projectiles. Regardless of scrimping and saving.

It sure would be nice for folks to be able to obtian accepted traditionally styled ML's at reasonable prices.

I think you are right on with writing manufactureres regarding production of more authentic replicas.

 

I would be nice if there were more faithful renditions of the Jaeger and other rifles in a no frills production flaver rifle. I'd certainly be interested.

:m2c: [/quote]

So would about 50% of the reenactment community. If DP would replace his current *******ized offerings with a real replica of the Dickert Contract Rifle (there are several existing examples), he could scoop up a large market.

They could use one PC stock patern, One style octogon to round barrel, one style lock. They could start wih a barn gun or poorboy version and vary grades by offering more and nicer trim, just like the origionals.

They have the capabilities and parts in stock at this very moment. And they could offer this product at a reduced price due to the volune of the market.

That is the irritation that most of us feel. They are not trying!

Use the jeeaagggeerrr stock and lock we are contemplating at this moment, combine it with the barrel from the 1803 rifle, streched to 38":

step one: iron strap trigger guard and RR thimbles only
Step two: brass TG and wood patchbox
step three: Brass trim and two piece patchbox from the 1803
step four: Daisy patchbox, matching sideplate etc.
Step five: brass inlays.....

DP has the parts and capabilities for making a good reproduction rifle at hand. It is amazing to me that they continuiously assemble these parts in combinations that are not truly acceptable to anyone looking for a good 1760-1780 era rifle.

DP has responded to the market offered by the Rev War and Civil War reencators with deciently accurate reproductions because the market is there and it demands a specific level of accuracy. From there he leeps directly to the mail order catalog sportsmen.

The civilian reenactor/shooters are being shafted for repclicas because there are enough of them that will accept a sort of/nearly/almost looks like a real long rifle. DP does not even view us as a market he needs to respont too!

It is a free world out there. One can spend his hard earned money in any way he chooses. But DP does not offer any products I wish to own at the present time.

:results:

 

[Tahquamenon]

I also agree. DP could readily re-create more authentic weaponry. Take the Jaeger for example. They could have done it to resemble a given example and labeled it as the 1750 Jaeger or whatever.

I think Thompson/Center could as well although, I expect them to drop their current Hawken rifle at some point.

 

[Tahquamenon]

Hey Stump,

Do you have a picture of this Hatfield rifle?

 

[Stumpkiller]

Do you have a picture of this Hatfield rifle?

You mean Ted Hatfield's alleged family heirloom that no one else has ever seen to my knowledge? No, and that's why I am skeptical that Pedersoli is now using that exact stock as their Frontier rifle. To my knowledge Ted Hatfield (now at Austin and Halleck) never produced said "original" that he based his design on. A friend owned one in .36 and I must say it shot very, very well.


Here's the current rendition:

Slap a D.Pedersoli Frontier and a Hatfield Squirrel Rifle says "Ow!"

Our replica, stocked with select American tiger striped maple, faithfully reproduces the original rifle produced during the golden age (1760-1840) of the American long rifle.

Oh yeah. That one. :haha: Eighty years and thirty some schools of design all rolled into one. Astounding! That's playing pretty fast and loose with the term "faithfully". My response would be: "Liar, liar!" Bill was more faithful to Hillary. They should have a disclaimer that this particular version doesn't look like anything actually from that period, but merely shares the features of a wood stock with bits of metal attached. Or maybe by "faithfully" they meant: "Full of a firm belief in something of which there exists no proof." Can't argue that: "We've never seen one, but we firmly believe this is what one would have looked like, or at least an average of all of them put together, so it is a reproduction based on faith."

At least in their J

 

:thumbsup: :applause: :applause: :redthumb: ::

YMHS
rollingb

 

[Boonetract]

The Dixie/Pedersoli would be like painting a red cross on a Dodge Caravan and showing up at a WWI reenactment to play Ernest Hemingway in his role as an ambulance driver.

:crackup: Too funny!

 

[Tahquamenon]

Stumpkiller, you were making the comparison of the DP Frontier to this mysterious Hatfield not I.

I guess if a Hatfield was never actually made and you have never actaully seen one, then how could you accurately describe something else as being like something that does not exist and you have never seen?

I along with anyone that reads english can read the DP website.

I'm also not suggesting that the DP Frontier is like anything else PC. I don't know, that's why I ask.

 

I guess if a Hatfield was never actually made and you have never actaully seen one, then how could you accurately describe something else as being like something that does not exist and you have never seen?

Because the Pedersoli Frontier (Blue Ridge) is a commercial replica of a "semi" custom replica made by Ted Hatfield of his great grandpappy's rifle thet nobuddy has seen (except for Ted,.... :haha

YMHS
rollingb