For anyone considering an Indian manufactured Flintlock

[toot]

No, your's is an opinion. You know what they say about opinions. You just keep going on.

every body has one?

 

[Reviresco]

I did a lot of research when I was planning on getting my first smoothbore. There were at least five documented cases of barrel failures that I had record of. At least two of them were not user error, I haven't heard of any in several years though. One was a repro 1853 Enfield that failed on the first shot out of it, another was a pistol that an experienced muzzleloader had for about a year, shot it and cared for it. It developed a crack from the rear of the barrel where the breechplug screwed in. Maybe there were issues early on and the failures made them step up their game a bit? Who knows. I wouldn't mind getting one of the Indian matchlocks, no lock to worry about!

I picked up a matchlock from military heritage not long ago and the trigger bar just snapped right off. It was held together with a really weak weld and little surface contact between the pieces. Fortunately it's such a simple lock that it can be replaced, but know that you very much get what you pay for. They're project guns ar best.

Cheers

 

[FlinterNick]

I picked up a matchlock from military heritage not long ago and the trigger bar just snapped right off. It was held together with a really weak weld and little surface contact between the pieces. Fortunately it's such a simple lock that it can be replaced, but know that you very much get what you pay for. They're project guns ar best.

Cheers

I’ve seen all sorts of odd things on Indian guns, one English lock musket came with wood screws holding in the lock. Sounds like an easy fix but the wood screw holds were counter sunk and needed to be TIG welded, not really worth the welding costs and redrilling and tapping of $100.00. Then new screw holds needed be drilled and then bolted, Its a good thing there was no side plates

 

[Mr. Flintlock]

That's an opinion -- which you keep repeating over and over. No matter how many times you say horse feces taste good, most of us will say they don't and won't try them. You're welcome to your feces though.

It's probably done to get around the need to get a gun manufacturers license. Even Kibler sells his locks separate from the kit.

 

[FlinterNick]

It's probably done to get around the need to get a gun manufacturers license. Even Kibler sells his locks separate from the kit.

There’s not legal purpose or reason why Kibler sells his locks’ separate. Most BP parts dealers do the lock separate from the kit.

 

[tenngun]

The same reason why people harbor freight tools….. and cheap tools are more expensive to own. Cheap muskets are more expensive to own… look at the poor fella on the Brown Bess FB site whose veteran arms bess stock broke at the wrist and lock mortise. Cheap gun bad, bad wood. I’ve seen over a dozen broken indian made stocks, 1 or 2 broken Pedersoli’s over my lifetime.

I had a Precarced stock blank from Track of the wolf.
It has no lock mortise and plenty of wood to place the lock.
I had to inlet the tang and trigger bar, done with chisel and x-acto otherwise the wrist was only worked with a rasp, scrapers and sand paper
Third time out wrist cracked. It ran in a line from just forward of the trigger to the comb on an angle
Had a talk with a doc at work one night.
About cigarette smoking and a host of problems it caused besides. He was rabid in his anti smoking in a way I thought detrimental to his patients.
And I stumped him with a question.
We see so many of the same conditions in non smokers.
Smokers are largely not the most health conscious
When we see everything from bladder cancer and diabetes in non health seeking population how do we lay one bad behavior as the cause?
How can we say pt X bladder cancer was caused by his smoking and not the case of Coke he drank per day, or the fact his only exercise was the walk to the kitchen from the couch to grab his twinkies?
In the 1950s TV came to people homes.
And you could buy a Playboy at your local liquor store.
On TV was a lot of Christian church shows
1960s started seeing a rise in reported rapes. Porn( pretty soft back then) was blamed.
But there is a statistical link between TV preachers and the increase in reported rape. The lines almost perfectly match
Or, obesity in America matches the rise of health food store, and the appearance of mega gyms.
Not to be outdone crime spike in America happened at the same time as fluoridated water
Every failure would have to be seen on its own.
Every thing your saying about Indian guns right now John Baird was saying in the 1970s about Spanish and Italian guns.

 

[French Colonial]

There’s not legal purpose or reason why Kibler sells his locks’ separate. Most BP parts dealers do the lock separate from the kit.

So..... I will pretend I do not know and ask.

Why do you think that Kibler, Chambers and other manufacturers (not distributors) sell the locks separately?

 

[NorthFork]

a few more pennies, what planet are you on?

It's just an expression. But they really are not that much more expensive. The Peds run $1200 to $1300 brand new and lightly used are not much more than an Indian.

 

[Rock Home Isle]

So basically some of us love India made guns, others hate them, while others don’t seem to mind them, and still others hold mildly negative views of them…sounds normal

 

[sturmkatze]

And it just keeps going in a circle. Some don't like them. Some are rabidly against them (mostly never having one) and some like them. Won't change. Just like balistol -- good stuff that some don't like because it smells icky. It they don't like flintlocks. Or Spanish guns ("it's be a Jukar, not a CVA).

Just let it go.

 

[manbat]

When it leaves the manufacturer, it will not function as a firearm.

Yes. If anyone manufactures an object, at any price, and it is not sent out the door as a functional firearm, then it was not manufactured to be a firearm, and as such you can't hold the manufacturer liable for any problems that might happen as the result of someone trying to use it as a firearm.

It doesn't matter what the reasoning was behind the manufacturer making this choice.

I get such a kick out of reading these and all the legal, manufacturing, and import regulation expert opinions that are offered. But like so many opinions offered in this world, none have an actual legal foundation or are supported by actual data. Yet all experts are absolute in the knowledge that they are correct and anyone else that disagrees is an idiot.

For those making an argument base on the legality of whether an Indian gun is a firearm, you may want to look at the actual law. Not one muzzleloading arm mentioned, whether Indian or Italian, with proofed or un-proofed barrels, kit or fully assembled, the form of metallurgy used, newly manufactured or historical, is legally a firearm. Go read 18 U.S. Code § 921(3). Every muzzleloader you shoot is categorized as an Antique Firearm and arguing that one is a firearm that carries liability and the other isn't, has no actual basis in law. Antique Firearms are unregulated in federal law and they are specifically not "Firearms".

For those so astute and knowledgeable as to make a determination of liability based on how the arm is manufactured, proofed, drilled, or assembled, good luck getting a judgment that the manufacturer, wholesaler, distributor, or dealer, is liable for defects when you are the person measuring and dumping gunpowder and jamming a projectile you either selected or made, down the barrel of a weapon not considered to be a firearm. In the world of actual firearms liability, once you modify the weapon or ammunition, as we reloaders regularly do, you become the primary owner of the liability.

The rest of the discussion is nothing but pure opinion that takes away the important question of what amount of money is worth risking your life. To pretend you know who is manufacturing Indian barrels, or their manufacturing and quality processes for something that is "meant to be a firearm", regardless of who drills a hole, is just a way to rationalize spending less money. We all take chances and have different thresholds for risk.

 

[wganz]

There’s not legal purpose or reason why Kibler sells his locks’ separate. Most BP parts dealers do the lock separate from the kit.

you might want to check again, there are some stiff ATF fees for being a manufacturer; IIRC, this was on Kibler's site
I'll check myself when I get through charting

ETA: And here you go.

Go under the [Sold Out] button and click 'Included parts' to get to the tab with this statement.

 

[tenngun]

I get such a kick out of reading these and all the legal, manufacturing, and import regulation expert opinions that are offered. But like so many opinions offered in this world, none have an actual legal foundation or are supported by actual data. Yet all experts are absolute in the knowledge that they are correct and anyone else that disagrees is an idiot.

For those making an argument base on the legality of whether an Indian gun is a firearm, you may want to look at the actual law. Not one muzzleloading arm mentioned, whether Indian or Italian, with proofed or un-proofed barrels, kit or fully assembled, the form of metallurgy used, newly manufactured or historical, is legally a firearm. Go read 18 U.S. Code § 921(3). Every muzzleloader you shoot is categorized as an Antique Firearm and arguing that one is a firearm that carries liability and the other isn't, has no actual basis in law. Antique Firearms are unregulated in federal law and they are specifically not "Firearms".

For those so astute and knowledgeable as to make a determination of liability based on how the arm is manufactured, proofed, drilled, or assembled, good luck getting a judgment that the manufacturer, wholesaler, distributor, or dealer, is liable for defects when you are the person measuring and dumping gunpowder and jamming a projectile you either selected or made, down the barrel of a weapon not considered to be a firearm. In the world of actual firearms liability, once you modify the weapon or ammunition, as we reloaders regularly do, you become the primary owner of the liability.

The rest of the discussion is nothing but pure opinion that takes away the important question of what amount of money is worth risking your life. To pretend you know who is manufacturing Indian barrels, or their manufacturing and quality processes for something that is "meant to be a firearm", regardless of who drills a hole, is just a way to rationalize spending less money. We all take chances and have different thresholds for risk.

We could only call it a risk if we could show a link.
Go on you tube and you will see plenty of unsafe loading practices. I saw one where a fellow was tap shooting a bess carbine.
Poured powder from his horn. Put a ball in the muzzle, and tapped the but a few times on the ground and shot.
Indian,Perdisoli, custom from the rifle shop all could have the same result, a cracked wrist or a blown barrel. The failure would be his loading. Another talks about how smokeless is safe in a ml.
When gun cotton was invented it was put in ml. Do you reckon that was safe?
You may have read about guns picked up on battlefields with multiple loads in them.
You think anyone ever fired a gun on the battlefield that fired after the third shot was loaded and blew?
I bet it happened
I had a one inch green river .54 barrel. Thinking at the time ( late 70s) more powder equated to more power I tried charges up to 150 grains of three f.
Would that have held it I accidentally ran two ball down, or tried a maxie?
What if by stupid mistake I charged it twice?
So many variables
Even a statement after the fact of ‘I loaded correctly’ or ‘ kept it clean’ prove nothing.

Proofing barrels was done pretty early in guns history, and yet old guns are known to have blown.
You think any barrel was ever stressed by proofing?
Falada of Navy arms did some test where God awful changes were run down the bore. The only way he got a rupture was by blocking the barrel.
But
What did those non destruct test do to that steel? Was his ‘safe barrel’ really safe there after?

 

[manbat]

W

Proofing barrels was done pretty early in guns history, and yet old guns are known to have blown.
You think any barrel was ever stressed by proofing?
Falada of Navy arms did some test where God awful changes were run down the bore. The only way he got a rupture was by blocking the barrel.
But
What did those non destruct test do to that steel? Was his ‘safe barrel’ really safe there after?i do

My point is in relation to the legal and liability-related elements of the previous posts not the validity of proofing or old guns. If you want to question the validity of proofing barrels in today's day and age that's your choice. No amount of proofing replaces or protects from stupidity or stupid mistakes, as noted

Personally, I choose to place more trust in a proofed barrel, a standard process employed for real arms today and for hundreds of years prior, and rely on myself to avoid stupid mistakes as opposed to pretending that barrel proofing is worthless because it doesn't cover stupidity.

If I am injured due to my stupidity or carelessness, so be it. But pretending that products of unknown origin are of a particular quality level or eliminating even a particle of risk to my life to save $900, are not worth it to me.

 

[FlinterNick]

you might want to check again, there are some stiff ATF fees for being a manufacturer; IIRC, this was on Kibler's site
I'll check myself when I get through charting

ETA: And here you go.

Go under the [Sold Out] button and click 'Included parts' to get to the tab with this statement.
View attachment 161479

That has nothing to do with Gun Laws in terms of shipping firearms.

The excise tax an OHIO LAW that is a whooping 11%, which would increase his prices. So he can ship the lock with the stock, but he doesn’t so you don’t have to pay for it. If were to ship the gun with the lock, OHIO would likely audit him and make him pay the excise taxes plus’s fines, but that doesn’t mean its illegal to ship the gun.

Loyalist arms sends the lock separate because Canadian Laws say you can’t ship a working (vented in all) firearm through USA customs,

 

[French Colonial]

That has nothing to do with Gun Laws in terms of shipping firearms.

The excise tax an OHIO LAW that is a whooping 11%, which would increase his prices. So he can ship the lock with the stock, but he doesn’t so you don’t have to pay for it. If were to ship the gun with the lock, OHIO would likely audit him and make him pay the excise taxes plus’s fines, but that doesn’t mean its illegal to ship the gun.

Loyalist arms sends the lock separate because Canadian Laws say you can’t ship a firearm through USA customs.

So then, why does Jim Chambers sell the lock separately?

 

[maillemaker]

Look up the definition of “Contradiction”…and yes you did and have…

I am fully aware of the definition of "contradiction", and no, I did not. I fully acknowledge what they intend to manufacture, while simultaneously recognizing what they are actually manufacturing. There is no contradiction here.

 

[maillemaker]

No, your's is an opinion. You know what they say about opinions. You just keep going on.

Again, it's not an opinion, it's a fact. It is a fact that the firearms are manufactured as non-firing replicas. This is a fact, not an opinion.

 

[maillemaker]

In the world of actual firearms liability, once you modify the weapon or ammunition, as we reloaders regularly do, you become the primary owner of the liability.

This is the fact I have been stating continuously. In addition, if you take something that wasn't even manufactured to be a firearm in the first place, and modify it to become one, the same situation applies.

The reason I "keep going on" about this is it is very clear from the responses that a lot of people don't understand the liability they are assuming. As long as you understand what you are taking on, I have no problem with people buying whatever they like.

 

[FlinterNick]

So then, why does Jim Chambers sell the lock separately?

Not sure what you’re talking about, i had a chambers kit a year ago, and it all came in a single box. There was a single transaction for the kit. What ever point your trying to prove, I’d give it a rest and stop making your Friday feel like a Monday.