-
Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.
We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.
Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103
hawken help
- Thread starter jae mobley
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
- Status
Jim Buchholz
36 Cal.
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
- Messages
- 81
- Reaction score
- 0
The T/C "Hawken" has been around nearly 40 years now so is it to late to start calling it anything else? T/C calling these thing "Hawken" was the only mistake they made though.I have 3 so I must like them a lot but perhaps I should start calling them "killer" or something like that.
With any luck with will help the originator of this thread in understanding his "Hawken" barrel marking.
I think the problem that some people here are struggling with is that we are talking about 3 completely different classes of firearms.
Rifle 1. The original Hawken rifle (the "mountain man" grade version) was a very expensive, high quality rifle meant for the western trade. It was 2 to 4 times as expensive as its cheap contemporaries made in factories in the east.
Rifle 2. High quality reproductions of Hawken rifles using proper parts and stock shaping to make a "Hawken" rifle that is invariably marked with the actual makers name. These are "copies" of Hawken rifles. Very close in all respects but obviously not an actual antique Hawken.
Rifle 3. Cheap mass produced ML firearms that are stamped "Hawken" or similar to cash in on the name recognition and reputation of the #1 gun.
These are not a copy of anything (except foreign copies of non-Hawken "Hawkens" made by other current arms makers) and are designed to sell cheap. They generally have a poor rep for reliability, often accuracy and sometimes safety.
The maker of #3 could care less what the original rifle looked like.
The maker of rifle #2 has spent time and effort to make a passable copy of the #1 rifles Jake and Sam made for the western trade.
Those who seem to have problems seeing or acknowledging the differences between the three generally own #3 and often cannot or will not tell one from the other.
To those you try to compare guns made by Gemmer to the #3 rifles since they were not made by Jake or Sam are simply trying to justify their position or ignorance or simple apathy by word games.
I have a friend who made a VERY close copy of a J&S Hawken for Western Arms back in the 70s. Used an original J&S as a pattern. It was to be reproduced in Italy so that there would be a true Hawken copy that was affordable since there was a market at the time. The Italians could not or would not reproduce the prototype at least not in quantity.
So far as I know this was the only attempt at marketing a mass produced "copy" of a J&S Hawken.
In summary the 2nd and 3rd classes are reproductions used by different people. #3 is used by someone who is either breaking into the sport or has no real affinity for what really was used in the 19th century and/or uses the rifle mostly as part of a costume. #2 is used by people who like fine firearms and wish to be HC and they also use the rifle as part of a costume to a greater or lesser extent. People on both sides of the discussion need to accept this.
I KNOW it really irritated me when TC came out with a "Hawken", largely because of John Bairds writings. They made a product that at first had some serious "teething problems" and hung "Hawken" on it to make people think it was something it was not. It was like Jerry Lewis passing himself off as Albert Einstein. To those of us who studied the guns it just was not "right". So those of you who own and enjoy the #3 guns, try to understand where WE are coming from.
The #2 rifle is one of the best using guns. It is strong, accurate and seldom if ever gets "out of order". For a 50-58 caliber rifle it is probably the best choice for the hunter.
I really wish SOMEONE, preferably a maker of traditional ML arms with some skill and experience, would do detailed studies on as many original Hawken rifles as possible such as was done on the "Kentucky" rifles in "Rifles of Colonial America 1 & 2" by Shumway from a MAKERS perspective. Only better photography. Then write a book.
Dan
Below are reasonable facsimiles of FS Hawken rifles made by two different makers. While not "Hawken" rifles as per #1 by definition they are far closer than the #3 rifles and fall neatly into the #2 class. But they are not low priced either.
I think the problem that some people here are struggling with is that we are talking about 3 completely different classes of firearms.
Rifle 1. The original Hawken rifle (the "mountain man" grade version) was a very expensive, high quality rifle meant for the western trade. It was 2 to 4 times as expensive as its cheap contemporaries made in factories in the east.
Rifle 2. High quality reproductions of Hawken rifles using proper parts and stock shaping to make a "Hawken" rifle that is invariably marked with the actual makers name. These are "copies" of Hawken rifles. Very close in all respects but obviously not an actual antique Hawken.
Rifle 3. Cheap mass produced ML firearms that are stamped "Hawken" or similar to cash in on the name recognition and reputation of the #1 gun.
These are not a copy of anything (except foreign copies of non-Hawken "Hawkens" made by other current arms makers) and are designed to sell cheap. They generally have a poor rep for reliability, often accuracy and sometimes safety.
The maker of #3 could care less what the original rifle looked like.
The maker of rifle #2 has spent time and effort to make a passable copy of the #1 rifles Jake and Sam made for the western trade.
Those who seem to have problems seeing or acknowledging the differences between the three generally own #3 and often cannot or will not tell one from the other.
To those you try to compare guns made by Gemmer to the #3 rifles since they were not made by Jake or Sam are simply trying to justify their position or ignorance or simple apathy by word games.
I have a friend who made a VERY close copy of a J&S Hawken for Western Arms back in the 70s. Used an original J&S as a pattern. It was to be reproduced in Italy so that there would be a true Hawken copy that was affordable since there was a market at the time. The Italians could not or would not reproduce the prototype at least not in quantity.
So far as I know this was the only attempt at marketing a mass produced "copy" of a J&S Hawken.
In summary the 2nd and 3rd classes are reproductions used by different people. #3 is used by someone who is either breaking into the sport or has no real affinity for what really was used in the 19th century and/or uses the rifle mostly as part of a costume. #2 is used by people who like fine firearms and wish to be HC and they also use the rifle as part of a costume to a greater or lesser extent. People on both sides of the discussion need to accept this.
I KNOW it really irritated me when TC came out with a "Hawken", largely because of John Bairds writings. They made a product that at first had some serious "teething problems" and hung "Hawken" on it to make people think it was something it was not. It was like Jerry Lewis passing himself off as Albert Einstein. To those of us who studied the guns it just was not "right". So those of you who own and enjoy the #3 guns, try to understand where WE are coming from.
The #2 rifle is one of the best using guns. It is strong, accurate and seldom if ever gets "out of order". For a 50-58 caliber rifle it is probably the best choice for the hunter.
I really wish SOMEONE, preferably a maker of traditional ML arms with some skill and experience, would do detailed studies on as many original Hawken rifles as possible such as was done on the "Kentucky" rifles in "Rifles of Colonial America 1 & 2" by Shumway from a MAKERS perspective. Only better photography. Then write a book.
Dan
Below are reasonable facsimiles of FS Hawken rifles made by two different makers. While not "Hawken" rifles as per #1 by definition they are far closer than the #3 rifles and fall neatly into the #2 class. But they are not low priced either.
Russ T Frizzen
70 Cal.
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2004
- Messages
- 5,007
- Reaction score
- 423
The Hawken rifles were called plains rifles a long time ago. It's a generic term for a certain type of rifle as most of us know. I've also heard the Hawken called a "Rocky Mountain" rifle many times before. The history of the Hawken name and the sequence of the shop's owners is also well known. Nothing new here.
You come on here and immediately insult some of us by calling us nitpickers and you expect a warm welcome? Well, a couple of sycophants gave you one. I took exception to your tone. A great deal of your post was sophomoric and irrelevant--the classic "if you can't beat 'em with facts dazzle 'em with B.S." tactic. Doesn't work well here--with the apparent exception of the afore-mentioned yes-men.
If you knew your history, you would have known that the Hawkens and the various names for their rifles were around long before Lyman went into business and way before Lyman began importing their rifle. That is some of the silliness that I was referring to.
As to being a troll, you seem to know a great deal about their appearance. I had no idea what they looked like. Thanks for the heads up. By troll I was referring to an attitude and state of mind. It seems that that is just one more point that you missed. I applaud your consistency!
You come on here and immediately insult some of us by calling us nitpickers and you expect a warm welcome? Well, a couple of sycophants gave you one. I took exception to your tone. A great deal of your post was sophomoric and irrelevant--the classic "if you can't beat 'em with facts dazzle 'em with B.S." tactic. Doesn't work well here--with the apparent exception of the afore-mentioned yes-men.
If you knew your history, you would have known that the Hawkens and the various names for their rifles were around long before Lyman went into business and way before Lyman began importing their rifle. That is some of the silliness that I was referring to.
As to being a troll, you seem to know a great deal about their appearance. I had no idea what they looked like. Thanks for the heads up. By troll I was referring to an attitude and state of mind. It seems that that is just one more point that you missed. I applaud your consistency!
Sorry, I'm not up on derogatory forum terms like you are, don't spend enough time insulting people I guess. I just have a little time off from work this week and get a kick out of forum groupies telling the majority, and by the way, way off the topic of the thread origin, how wrong they are. You were so concerned in getting your arrogant point accross, that you could care less about answering the thread origins poster.(your very first post) Do you stand in front of a mirror while typing? Do you carry a soap box? I agree there are many types of "Hawken" like rifles, originals to copies. Like the 1,2,3 examples stated. I just don't take offense to companies using a non-trade marked name to describe a model of something they are making. By the way, the cheap replica "Hawkens" that all us degenerates own(even though I don't) in no way lessen the value of a real "Hawken". I don't think anyone here is "fooled" by a Spanish, Italian, or Japanese gun carrying the "Hawken" label to think they are buying a J&S Hawken. If the guns were a piece of junk would it matter. All the Ford lovers never called a "Edsel" a Ford. It was done so not to associate the Ford brand with a POJ Edsel. Also, I have not insulted you in anyway but you feel that is the only way you can get people to listen to you. Let me know where you live in MA and I will come see you. It sounds like your just another liberal M+##hole. Proably voted for MA big three I listed earlier. You most likely are a major recipient of MA welfare and that is why you have the time to post so much. There, now I've stuped as low as you. I am done here. Mr. Moderator, please follow the thread and interpret as you see fit. I am also sorry for getting caught up with the low lifes here. I won't do it again. I should have known better, I'm just a small time player to these professional degraders.
Russ T Frizzen
70 Cal.
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2004
- Messages
- 5,007
- Reaction score
- 423
Actually, I am retired, I am a conservative, I am an Endowment Member of the NRA, I am not especially arrogant but I do take history and facts seriously and I know that "stooped" is spelled as I have just spelled it and not "stuped" as you seem to think.
As for the M@$$hole slur, I live a lot farther away from Boston than you do and I have never voted for those twits you keep mentioning. We're done. Bye.
As for the M@$$hole slur, I live a lot farther away from Boston than you do and I have never voted for those twits you keep mentioning. We're done. Bye.
- Status
