Flintlock on a budget

[Russ T Frizzen]

I agree with what you are saying. Most folks haven't actually hunted in (or even seen)heavy cover. I prefer light short barreled guns myself. Each to his own!

I don't have to compensate :wink:

Some folks prefer to hunt in a traditional way using traditional firearms. There are many light guns with long barrels and they handle just fine in thick cover--and you might be surprised at how many of us have hunted in this sort of cover. You may well prefer mass produced short barreled guns and there is nothing wrong with that at all. But tossing out snide little digs at others is not in any way called for. Perhaps you do feel a need to compensate after all?

 

[Swampman]

I prefer custom made short barreled guns.

Long barrels are ok for living history buffs, but they offer no advantage for the hunter.

I thought I'd seen thick until I hunted NW Florida. D. Boone got lost here for 3 days once.

 

[Zoar]

Mark, if I recall from my reading on this explorer, he was never lost, he said something like, "I may have been confused for a while, but I was never lost".....

I have tried that line before and it works for me too!!!!

 

[redwing]

Yes, I would like to know where the facts come from on all western rifles being short. I don't know about hunting or guns in the Deep Wild country of New York? But out here on the Bear River in Wyoming I do see a western rifle or two.

I can tell you this. I have looked at owned studied and shot many rifles of the fur trade era. For the most part they were the long rifles of the Ky. and Ill. hunters. The rest were mostly smooth bores.

Now for the later market hunters during the buffalo hunting and rail road building times
they used the short barreled production rifles of their time. It is very rare to find these short barreled guns today. They were just not used to the extent that Hollywood would have you think. They filled in a short time from the long rifle to the Ctg. guns. Most of them were broke down during 1849 and later and the short barrels were used as crow bars in the gold mines.

As opposed to your ideas the short guns were used in open country. The men who came early to the west used their long rifles in the tangled marshes up in the high country.

I am like TG, where do your facts come from?

 

[Jblk]

I am getting ready to pull the plug also so last Fall I got a GPR in flint.I find it very accurate and no problem toating through the timber.Flint takes some getting familar with but is alot more fun than the cap guns I own.For the money that you spend for the GPR its a good bargin and a well constructed rifle.I sight all of my iron sighted Mls in at 100 yards, and they shoot right to the point of aim.Thompson also makes a fine rifle for the money, and you can't beat their service.My eyes seem to work better on the longer barrel, but I never did like a blade front sight, but replacment sights are easy to obtain.What ever rifle you pick, it only needs to make you happy, so go for it. :v

 

[Swampman]

I agree the GPR (out of the box)is probably the best looking (and shooting)of the currently produced inexpensive rifles.

Midway has them for less than $400.00

 

[Swampman]

Sorry (I double checked) that price was for the percussion gun, the flintlock is $415.00.

 

[kevthebassman]

I'm looking at midway right now and the Lyman GPR is $483, and that's the cheapest I've seen for it, unless you were talking about a kit or something.

 

[FPDoc]

Here is where I got my .54 GPR Flinter for just over $300 a while back.
lymanproducts..dot..com/lymanproducts/index.htm
(look under "specials" tab then scroll down to "factory reconditioned muzzleloaders"

Keep an eye on this "page" cause there isn't anything there right now. Depends on what they screw up. Mine had a bit less than perfect wood (a fuzzy area on the forend) that will clean up when I rework the stock anyway.

 

[B. Miller]

My 54 cal GPR will take out the eye of a squirel, along with the head. I have shot better with it than my expensive custom.

 

[Swampman]

It was an assembled gun. It's in their latest flyer.

 

[Zoar]

I shot my Lyman's Trade rifle again yesterday. I have a 50 yard "range" on my land. I shot it standing and squating (there was mud on the ground so who wants to kneel in that, not me.) Squating is simply that: From the standing position you go straight down to a squat and I get a bit better accuracy from there. And you can get there fast.

Having been an expert marksman in the marine corp I'd developed practices that I gleaned there, for example: while using the squating stance---as a modified sitting stance---bracing my left forearm against the inside of my knee, it really locks the shooter right in. I practice this stance because I use it in the field when ever possible.

Well from that position with my Trade Rifle and round ball I shot great groups, as good as I can shoot any non-scoped modern rifle from any field stance at 50 yards. From standing it also shoots as well as any modern rifle with iron sites I ever shot from standing. (The sights that come with this Lyman Trade Rifle are really terrific. Although I did buy and I am waiting for them to arrive the aftermarket peep and front globe JUST to see if I LIKE them for hunting... especially in low light...) However, again after shooting it, I feel very comfortable in recommending this Lyman Trade Rifle in flintlock to anyone looking for a "Flintlock On A Budget" especially a guy who wants it for making big holes in paper AND shooting deer. It sparks great, it's simple, and everytime I shoot it, I have an absolute ball and I want to shoot it more: now that to me is a great endorsement. And at only $275 bucks.... for an accurate rifle. Holy cow, that can fit in most any budget. I have spent that on ammo for my other modern guns in one shopping trip!

Plus, I really like the big 54 caliber. I can shoot it using 70 grains FFFg for target blasting making this gun is so economical to shoot! Sure I will go up to 90-100 for hunting. However, this is alot cheaper than bow shooting. Every season it seems I have to dump money into fletching, restringing, and whatever, and fixing what broke, and before I know it the bill is $250 or more.

I can't think of a more economical setup for deer hunting or just farting around making holes in things and honing your marksmenship skills.

 

[tg]

"e. If they wrote it it must be true--ads never exaggerate...right"

That was my point I did not intend to offend the gentleman who posted Lymans twisted history write up, I just like to point out the anything of a historical nature need be researched not taken for an advertisment, the lyman guns are very good guns I had one and though it was very good, the sad truth is many folks want a gun that is of the type (replica) that was used in the past and write ups by manufactures even some semi custom builders can be very biased at selling guns not acurate hitory info, often when the wool is pulled from the buyers eyse there is from a little to a lot of dissapointment.

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

Yup. And oftentimes when the wool is pulled from over their eyes, they refuse to see what lies before them. None are so blind etc.....

 

[Zoar]

Yup, the Lyman self promotional literature that states the Trade Rifle was "patterned after" Trade Rifles used by indians, trappers, etc can be a bit misleading and I stand corrected in saying it was used by indians, trappers etc. It appears the Lyman Trade Rifle is NOT a faithful and full, completely authentic copy of exactly any of the Trade Rifle(s) used in 1700 and early 1800's. Additionally, my research has opened my eyes to the fact there were different styles and types and not just one Trade Rifle. But it seems some were shorter than others. So maybe the best we can say is Lyman could be a portion right... However, when Lyman wrote "patterned after the famous Trade Rifles" it clearly is self promotion and glorifying their gun in ways it may not live up to. And I'm certainly no historical gun expert to say either way or what percentage of that self promotion is absolutely not true, or true. I guess I thought the statement was basically or at least a high percentage enough true when I read it and then offered it as heresay. But if it isn't true at all, and it is not like any Trade gun at all that ever existed, then well I guess I read into it what the marketing guys at Lyman wanted people to read into it.

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

But in the end all that matters is that you have a reliable and accurate rifle that you like and can count on. The hype is irrelevant.

 

[tg]

" But if it isn't true at all, and it is not like any Trade gun at all that ever existed, then well I guess I read into it what the marketing guys at Lyman wanted people to read into it. "

This is pretty common practce in order to grab a larger market share, even with many semi custom outfits and many of the guns on consignment on TOW as well, the only problem is for those who have a high historic value expectation, I think the internet forums are going to help some for those lacking the resources to research the validity of many claims and even put pressure on vendors to get things a bit closer in their advertisments, as stated above it really only matters depending on what level you are interested in, the production guns are where nearly everyone starts and many are good reliable ML's with at least a bit of the look of the originals most of us have owned more of them than the PC/HC type.Either way it is always best to have the chance to make an educated choice.