Does HC really matter?

[Dphar]

I think Dan has articulated why HC "matters" to some of us. It irks those who have studied a great deal in any field to hear things mis-named. The example here is the person who calls their rifle a Hawken or a Southern Mountain Rifle or a whatever when it does not closely resemble originals, while at the same time saying they don't care about HC.

It is akin to someone calling a Marlin lever action rifle a Winchester, or a fanny pack a shooting pouch. It's just not, and those who know the difference might be tempted to point that out.

It's a rare person who has the self confidence to say, "I was sure enough misinformed about that. I learned something today." Instead, when facing evidence that they have been operating under false assumptions, we usually hear, "Don't care", "you're wrong", "who asked you", etc.

Hi Rich
You said it far better than I could.

A mentor of mine, a long time master builder had shown a rifle to a man and after the man had left my friend's wife turned to him and said "He had no idea what he was looking at." He also likes to relate how a client would order a rifle. He would deliver, either in person or by mail and as soon as the new owner touched it he would suddenly know more about it than the man who made it.
This now retired maker is BTW, pretty talented and like many of us has put a lot of years into study. He unlike me has a near photographic memory...

Here is a sample. There were many, many others of similar workmanship.

I killed a number of deer with this rifle before I stupidly sold it to pay a doctor bill.

Dan

 

[Snakebite]

I think Dan has articulated why HC "matters" to some of us. It irks those who have studied a great deal in any field to hear things mis-named. The example here is the person who calls their rifle a Hawken or a Southern Mountain Rifle or a whatever when it does not closely resemble originals, while at the same time saying they don't care about HC.

It is akin to someone calling a Marlin lever action rifle a Winchester, or a fanny pack a shooting pouch. It's just not, and those who know the difference might be tempted to point that out.

It's a rare person who has the self confidence to say, "I was sure enough misinformed about that. I learned something today." Instead, when facing evidence that they have been operating under false assumptions, we usually hear, "Don't care", "you're wrong", "who asked you", etc.

I think very well said, both Dan and Rich. For me, muzzleloaders are a step back in time. Trying to get an understanding and appreciation of a small part of what our forefathers did.

My own thoughts are that if you don't care anything about the historical aspects of muzzleloading, which is fine if that's the way you feel, what's the difference between shooting a nice flintlock and an inline? An example, I used to work with a guy who came in talking about the great deal he got on a muzzleloader at Walmart, a CVA for $149. He was all about Pyrodex pellots and sabots, synthetic stock, etc., and he didn't understand why I wasn't all into it as I was always talking about muzzleloaders. I was nice but I told him that for me, that's not what muzzleloading is about. I told him I've never shot anything but blackpowder and roundballs and for me, that's what it's about. If you don't care, that's fine, but what I don't care for is the attitude that a muzzleloader is a muzzleloader is a muzzleloader. Probably not real good at explaining myself, but I hope some understand where I'm coming from. I guess bottom line is that HC does matter to me.

 

[azmntman]

For me, muzzleloaders are a step back in time. Trying to get an understanding and appreciation of a small part of what our forefathers did.

Me too.

However I like to drive a stick shift truck (standard transmission)... but I am not at all into HAVING to have a round ball on the gear shift. Could be a ball, a skull handle or a beer can.

For me, at this point in my "walk", muzzleloaders are kinda the same. I love to shoot em but if its a oval lock and not a square or pointed one it wont bother me. Long as it uses a cap or flint and is not an inline (something grampa would a feed the family with).

Now some want there truck exactly stock as it came from the factory and that's fine. That's what they are into. I don't fault em for it and they likely don't care what I drive either. Betting a bunch of us here are into BP and not that much into H/C etc. Still like to shoot though and get it done.

Now the beer can wont do at a route 66 car show just like a traditions may not make it at a H/C shoot. But both drive and both shoot :idunno:

 

[galamb]

In 500 years if the world survives I wonder if some "historic car nuts" will be debating whether it would be correct or not to build a 4 door Corvette.

The argument may go that while the one or two that have survived to that time may only have two doors they "must" have been built with 4 (or whatever). Certainly "other cars" and even trucks had 4 doors in some cases, so why "wouldn't" they have existed.

Therefore, in 500 years, some would argue that a 4 door Corvette could be HC even with the lack of evidence.

They may make the same "wrong" assumptions that we do based on our "current reality".

Like was a Germanic lock even on a southern rifle - must have been one right?

Or did the Hawken's ever build one of their mountain rifles in flint?

While either could have been done, and "maybe" was, we "know" that the Corvette was only built with two doors - and maybe SMR's only had English locks and the Hawken's never built a flint mountain rifle - because like the Vette, it "could have been done" but simply never was.

If you choose not to emulate an original of whatever "tag" you have hung on your rifle, it is nothing more than a fantasy gun, no more correct than a 4 door Corvette.

But if you want a 4 door, go ahead and build one...

 

[ratfacedmcdougal]

"Thank you all for the replies. I think I get the idea of the importance of HC and admire those who adhere to it. This sport sure is fun."

I think this comment of mine got lost in the discussion. Ive met and shot with a few people that are on this forum, been to woods walks, novelty shoots, a primitive biathlon that had 180 shooters. I heard many comments on my rifle, all of them about how gorgeous it is. They might have been snickering behind my back. I doubt it because it is.

Not to dig at those that are HC but, how HC is it to use an electric welder to alter a lock, a Bridgeport milling machine to work that metal, a router to inlet and a drill motor to do anything on a build. I could go on but I made my point. We are all in this sport for mostly the same reason. Shooting. The great joy of it. I have found that joy with my flintlock long rifle.

Anytime any of you are in Maine let us go shooting, you can even snicker at my rifle, I won't mind. I'll even let you fondle it
Cheers
RFMcD

 

[54ball]

I have three old vehicles.

My 1950 F-1 has a 1951 grille and front fenders. It has some vintage speed parts, like an adapter to adapt the 1968 302 to the 1950 transmission.

I want this truck to be Period for 1964-65. I'm going to make the 68 engine look like a 63-64 289. So since it's been modified some, I want it look like a F-1 built into a hot rod in the mid 60s. That's fun for me. Can it pass for 1950, No.

I have a 47 CJ2A that's nearly untouched except For an engine change in 1951. That one is going to be period for the engine change, a well kept Jeep with a factory replacement "red engine block" from 1951. Could it pass for 1947, you betcha as long as I keep the hood shut. Open the hood and it's a 47 with a new 1951 factory replacement engine.

Lastly I have a 64 Ford Fairlane Sports Coupe with a 2bbl 289. That is going to look like it came out of the showroom in 1964.

I'm not really a purist for factory original unless I have a candidate for that, but I am a era specific purist.

I'm not going to pass off that 1950 F-1 as factory new , it's not. It is as one looked modified in the mid 60s.
So when someone takes body parts parts off an old truck and puts it a new frame with all the latest fuel injected computer stuff, new modern suspension, that's fine we can be buddies.

The only problem I have with that is if they say, It's just like original, or just like they built in the 50's and 60's or the often heard, If they had they would have built it like this.

They did not have so they did not build them like that.

Same goes for BP arms...

 

[Claude Mathis]

Not to dig at those that are HC but, how HC is it to use an electric welder to alter a lock, a Bridgeport milling machine to work that metal, a router to inlet and a drill motor to do anything on a build. I could go on but I made my point.

A point you may be missing is, that most people are concerned with the finished product, not the manufacturing method. You don't have to use trees that were cut in 1750 to produce an "historically accurate" flintlock or ride a horse to the Rendezvous. :wink:

 

[Dave K]

I am not really concerned with what an owner likes, as he is the owner. For me it IS the journey back in time, as it really was. I like my guns to be as accurately built as the time period they are to replicate. One reason I have such a love for some of my guns, that are original. It is important to me,doesn't have to be to you, HC or PC. My '62 Corvette is as it was built. Everything original, except battery style and radial tires. Something's just can't be feasibly replicated.

 

[tenngun]

I'll stick with the Siler on this rifle and the Fowler being built right now. I like it and wouldn't change it out if I could. Maybe I'll stick one on an Ohio just for fun.
Cheers
RFMcD

No one has ever commented on my wrong lock, I doubt any one will ever comment on yours. The lock bothers me because I know it to be wrong. I have a chrome tanned deer skin wool lined hand swen coat. I wear it to town because its not brain tanned. I won't take it to an event. When I made it no one would have said a word about it being chrome tanned, now it would bother me and take away from my enjoyment of the event. We will never be perfect but its fun to keep getting closer as we can.
I hope you enjoy your new gun as enjoyment is why we do this. The next time I make a SMR I plan to be more correct. I plan that for my enjoyment, I know after the fact I will say "gee I wish I had ..."
I hope you don't end up saying on your new gun 'I wish I had..."

 

[tlallijr]

Not to dig at those that are HC but, how HC is it to use an electric welder to alter a lock, a Bridgeport milling machine to work that metal, a router to inlet and a drill motor to do anything on a build. I could go on but I made my point.

A point you may be missing is, that most people are concerned with the finished product, not the manufacturing method. You don't have to use trees that were cut in 1750 to produce an "historically accurate" flintlock or ride a horse to the Rendezvous. :wink:

You could also say..."It's not the destination but the journey that got you there"

 

[nkbj]

With reference to using modern manufacturing technology...
Don't expect anyone to shoot a barrel forged with a hammer and a strong right arm. I won't.
Well, not until I have to!

 

[tenngun]

I think that was rat faced mcdougal :haha:

 

[Claude Mathis]

Not to dig at those that are HC but, how HC is it to use an electric welder to alter a lock, a Bridgeport milling machine to work that metal, a router to inlet and a drill motor to do anything on a build. I could go on but I made my point.

A point you may be missing is, that most people are concerned with the finished product, not the manufacturing method. You don't have to use trees that were cut in 1750 to produce an "historically accurate" flintlock or ride a horse to the Rendezvous. :wink:

You could also say..."It's not the destination but the journey that got you there"

Yes, you could, but I don't see how that relates to my comment? With all due respect, I'm discussing historically accuracy, not philosophy.

 

[Bear64]

I read on this forum and others how a Siler lock on a Southern Mt rifle is So Un-HC. Does it really matter to most folks? My So.Mt. is a gorgeous Iron mounted, birdseye, 13/16th x 42"straight oct..45 barrel(is the barrel un-hc also?) and very daintily built, LH Chambers' Large Siler flint lock. Maybe if Chambers built another in LH we would have gone different, I doubt it though. The Whole HC thing doesn't matter to me. I wanted and got the look of a So. Mt.and am quite proud of it and of the builder.

At the moment I have a N.E. Fowling gun being built and again with the same lock. And again HC doesn't matter. I know it will be a thing of great beauty and the lock style won't distract from that beauty.

What I want in a lock is reliability, and ease of replacement parts and a great guarantee. So Chambers' Siler it is.
Cheers
RFMcD

If that's your attitude, who cares? Have fun!

 

[Dphar]

So tell me if you cut the top of the cab off the F1 at the cowl and graft on a 93 Chevy cab top and windshield, weld on a 58 Edsel grill and headlights, then put in a 1972 VW bus drive line and a Mustang II front suspension is it still a 1950 F1? How *******ized does it have to be "not a 1950 F1" anyone? Is it still a F1 because you kept the steering wheel? A friend hit a deer with his R model IH pickup years ago and put on a L model front. But this did not make it a L model. It made it the only repair he could do at the time.

I deleted a paragraph and recommend this instead.
I really hits the nail on the head.
See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4pAwosnIQE

Dan