Early T/C Hawken Accuracy

[w_dexter]

Anyone know if the early TC Hawkens are as accurate or more accurate then the newer ones? A friend of mine has a very early(11xx)serial number 45 cal Hawken thats never been fired,the bore is of course like new but the rifling doesnt look like the rifling in my newer TC Hawken,the rifling on his early TC looks like it might be deeper,he read somewhere that very early TCs had cut rifling....any help and info here appreciated ...thanks

 

[Flintlock58]

In the 70s and 80s I had two TC side lock Renegades in 50 and 54 cal. And both shot VERY well right out of the box. I dont have them any more simply because I decided to get into Flinters and bought customs because I am a lefty.

 

[Billnpatti]

I have two early (late 60s or early 70s) Hawkens that I bought as a kits. They botht seemed to have deeper rifling than my other barrels such as Getz, Long Hammock, Rice, etc. When I had first finished assembling my T/C kits, they both seemed to cut my patches at first. After some advice from a more experienced muzzleloader shooter, I polished my bore with lapping compound on a series of tight fitting patches (two or three hundred strokes, if I remember correctly). This took the sharp edges off the rifling and seemed to actually improve the accuracy. No more cut patch problems and they actually seem to get less fouling. Both are easier to load, too. All of these changes are subtle but noticible.

 

[Pete Gaimari]

Didn't some of the TC Hawks have RB twist? That would probably be deeper.

 

[tiger955]

I have 2 older TC Hawkens, both came with shallow groove, 1-48 twist rifling, to shoot conicals as well as round balls. From what I have read, some came with round ball barrels, deeper grooves, 1-60 or 66 twist. The round ball barrels were marked "round ball" as I understand. You might want to see what twist the rifling is, perhaps it is a round ball barrel.
Someone with more knowledge than I will most likely chime in soon.

 

[ohio ramrod]

I believe that I have heard that some of the early T.C. s had douglas barrels. But I don't know it for a fact. :idunno:

 

[Jblk]

I have a cap gun with the deep rifeling and it is very accurate.

 

[Dphar]

Anyone know if the early TC Hawkens are as accurate or more accurate then the newer ones? A friend of mine has a very early(11xx)serial number 45 cal Hawken thats never been fired,the bore is of course like new but the rifling doesnt look like the rifling in my newer TC Hawken,the rifling on his early TC looks like it might be deeper,he read somewhere that very early TCs had cut rifling....any help and info here appreciated ...thanks

I would rebarrel it with a GM drop in.
The early TCs had a "problem" your friend would rather not recreate.

Dan

 

[123.DieselBenz]

Can you explain more about this "Problem" please.

 

Anyone know if the early TC Hawkens are as accurate or more accurate then the newer ones? A friend of mine has a very early(11xx)serial number 45 cal Hawken thats never been fired,the bore is of course like new but the rifling doesnt look like the rifling in my newer TC Hawken,the rifling on his early TC looks like it might be deeper,he read somewhere that very early TCs had cut rifling....any help and info here appreciated ...thanks

I would rebarrel it with a GM drop in.
The early TCs had a "problem" your friend would rather not recreate.

Dan

What problems?

 

[zimmerstutzen]

I bought a TC Hawken 50 cal kit in 1976. Shallow groove 1 in 48 twist. Supposed to be good for patched round ball or bullet. Ya know the expression "Jack of all trades Master of none." That rifling was about capable of a 5 inch group at 100 yds off the bench. Very embarrassing. A few years later I got a Lyman GPR. Incredible difference, not all in accuracy, but just in having more reliable ignition. Those early TC frizzens were trash.

Some folks swear by TC. It is sort of a Ford, Chevy, Dodge thing. I prefer fords, but I would not have any Ford made in the late 1970's or early 1980's. All US trucks were junk then. A TC caplock is ok. A drop in barrel can cure alot. The frizzens on the early flinters weren't so good. The lock geometry of the early flinters wasn't so good either. There's no doubt that the guns were otherwise quality goods. Heck even a Rolls Royce with a bad engine bearing has good fit and finish. When is the last time fit and finish in a gun killed a deer?

 

[Rat Trapper]

I have three early TC Hawken rifles (54, 50, & 45) and all are great shooters.

 

[sidelock]

My early 70's .50 TC will place every PRB on top of the other at 35 yd using 35g 2F if I can hold it. It will place every maxi within 1.5" at 100 yd with 90g 2F if I hold it. And thats with the same sight setting. My faverite hunting gun for about 40 yrs. Lots of game. turkeys,deer,squirrels,groundhogs,rabbits,fox,maby others ???? I love em

 

[Pete Gaimari]

Just like fishing stories. The fish get bigger over time.

Muzzleloader stories get tighter groups over time.



I'm just saying.

 

[tiger955]

I once shot a 3 shot cloverleaf with my old TC flinter at 100 yds, I seriously doubt the gun shoots that well, I KNOW I can't shoot that well with open sights, pure luck. I still kick myself for not buying a lottery ticket that day.

 

[LRB]

I bought a .45 in 1973. Shallow groove 1-48. It would shoot 1/2" groups at 50yrds all day long. I loaded a .451 ball, .011 cotton flannel patch, and 60 gr of FFFg Dupont powder. Once the ball was started, it would slide right on down. Very smooth bore. I sold another .45 to a young preacher and sighted it in for him with my load. It shot 3/8" groups at 50 yrds. He may have had a little special help though. One minor problem always amazed me though. If I didn't install a new T-C nipple in it about every hundred or so shots, the groups would open up to as much as 1". Install a new nipple, and right back to 1/2".

 

[Pete Gaimari]

I bought a .45 in 1973. Shallow groove 1-48. It would shoot 1/2" groups at 50yrds all day long. I loaded a .451 ball, .011 cotton flannel patch, and 60 gr of FFFg Dupont powder. Once the ball was started, it would slide right on down. Very smooth bore. I sold another .45 to a young preacher and sighted it in for him with my load. It shot 3/8" groups at 50 yrds. He may have had a little special help though. One minor problem always amazed me though. If I didn't install a new T-C nipple in it about every hundred or so shots, the groups would open up to as much as 1". Install a new nipple, and right back to 1/2".

Now wait a minute! I know a little exaggeration is acceptable, but how do you get a .45 ball in a 3/8" hole? Let alone a group.

 

[odean]

Could be like some groups are measured from center of bullet hole to center of bullet instead of from outside to outside.

Oscar/NC

 

[LRB]

I bought a .45 in 1973. Shallow groove 1-48. It would shoot 1/2" groups at 50yrds all day long. I loaded a .451 ball, .011 cotton flannel patch, and 60 gr of FFFg Dupont powder. Once the ball was started, it would slide right on down. Very smooth bore. I sold another .45 to a young preacher and sighted it in for him with my load. It shot 3/8" groups at 50 yrds. He may have had a little special help though. One minor problem always amazed me though. If I didn't install a new T-C nipple in it about every hundred or so shots, the groups would open up to as much as 1". Install a new nipple, and right back to 1/2".

Now wait a minute! I know a little exaggeration is acceptable, but how do you get a .45 ball in a 3/8" hole? Let alone a group.

Secret lube, Pete. Center to center is the standard measurement for groups

 

[Pete Gaimari]

If that was me i'd think I missed the paper with the other shots.

I think too much like a hunter. I've never seen accuracy like that.