Hawkin rifles

[Rick Son]

What are the differences between an original Hawkin and our modern replicas?When i first got around this stuff i thought it was just becuase it was shorter wood.Was Hawkin the name of the inventor?Are reps better now or originals better.

 

[Kentuckywindage]

most of the new stuff branded as a hawken are nothing like the original in any way. It was just a marketing hype in the day for some greenhorn to see the Hawken name on a muzzleloader and think to himself that hes a real mountain man now.

Most cant afford a real hawken and by real i mean a REAL one made in the time the brothers were alive.

There are some very close to real replicas made, and a lot more affordable.

 

[krolick]

As has been well stated, the store-bought repros are nowhere near the originals. These new made pieces, for the most part, are good for our present shooting activities. The Hawkins brothers were just like any of the many gun makers working in St Louis. With one exception. Their meticulous attention to the rifling methods. Stock shapes and furniture styles and caliber varied over the years. They used ready made production locks and most barrels are stamped on the top flat with "J.&S.Hawken St.Louis" and after 1849 with just "S.Hawken St.Louis". Some slight variation have been noted. The barrels of Hawkins were so highly re-guarded for their accuracy, many were refit on to later cartage guns like Spencers and Sharpes. G.S.
Note:The last original I saw for sale was $45,000

 

[George T.]

There was a post here a while back that had a link to a piece about originals. If you can find it will be worth your time.

From what I have seen over the years they varied a lot back in the day. The sights are tiny on all of them. barrel length varies as does the trim material. Bore size and wood does as well.

The modern renditions have adjustable sights standard bore sizes and barrels shorter than many originals. The triggers are so-so but you know what for a reasonable price some get pretty darned close. For just over a Grand you can get closer. Then there are custom rifles. Still unless you have a particular rifle to copy it will be a close but not exact piece. George T.

 

[Idaho Ron]

Is this the one? Zonie did a great job with this one.
http://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/fusionbb/showtopic.php?tid/248316/

 

[galamb]

An "original" Hawken (the ones referred to/associated with the name) were built by either or both of the Hawken brothers (Jake and Sam) in St. Louis somewhere between 1825'ish and maybe 1858.

These rifles were "big and heavy". Their plains rifles were generally in the 50 to 56 caliber range (with odd cals like 52 not unheard of).

The barrels were rarely "shorter" than 34" with 36 to 38" being somewhat common.

Likewise the barrels were "heavy", an inch or more at the breech. Many were tapered, at least one example was swamped - a few were straight.

The stock was almost always "plain maple" and finished a very dark black. They tended to "rust blue" the barrels.

A typical rifle was "iron mounted" (butt plate, trigger guard, ramrod pipes etc) rarely brass.

The rifles usually weighed somewhat OVER 10 lbs with ones in excess of 12 lbs also very typical.

On the half stock versions (their plains rifles) barrels were held to the stock by TWO keys - it was only their "local squirrel rifles" that had one key (and those are not the rifle commonly referred to)

Does that even remotely sound like anything produced by T/C, Traditions et al.

Many original Hawken's were "full stocks" as well.

There only similarity is the name "hawken" in the name of the model. Most are far more typical of rifles by makers such as Henry or Leman, but only if you squint your eyes real tight and look at them from in excess of 100 yards on a foggy day...

 

[Zonie]

Is this the one? Zonie did a great job with this one.
http://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/fusionbb/showtopic.php?tid/248316/[/quote]
No. Zonie posted that because a number of people were saying that there was no real halfstock rifle made that looks anything like the modern factories version of many of their sidelock rifles.

Some of the guns that were made in California during and following the Gold Rush have some of the characteristics of the modern sidelock halfstocks as that link points out.

As was mentioned above, the factories jumped on the "Hawken" bandwagon and started calling their sidelock halfstocks Hawkens just to sell them.
Either they didn't know what a real Hawken rifle looks like or they didn't care.

I find it ironic that the one factory made halfstock that looks anything like a Hawken is the Lyman Great Plains Rifle and they avoided calling their gun a Hawken. I for one am glad they did that.

As for owning a good reproduction of a real Hawken in the calibers they were made in, I wouldn't want one.

Those rifles typically weighed between 10 and 15 pounds which is a lot heavier than anything I want to carry very far.

 

[RedFeather]

Some people don't even refer to the modern guns as replicas, which they are not since they don't copy an original. Better to call them representative, etc, made more to give the flavor of an old style arm and in consideration that most of us don't have a horse nor saddle horn over which to tote an eleven pound gun.

BTW, judging by the replies here, I guess I should use my T/C's for tomato stakes come spring.

 

[galamb]

A few years back I was one that just had to have a "true replica" - had to build it myself (couldn't afford one from one of the recognized builders) and it still wouldn't pass the "sniff test" - it's near impossible to get off the shelf components that are "correct".

It was built from a plan, reflecting Kit Carson's Hawken with a fair degree of accuracy.

I got Oregon barrel to custom make the 31" tapered 1 1/8" to 1", 54 cal barrel.

I tried to find the "most correct" castings for all the furniture etc and had visions of doing some "serious bambi hunting" in the eastern hardwoods where I live and hunt.

The problem was the rifle ended up weighing 10 1/2 pounds - try humping that over dense, rough ground for any period of time.

Realized it's a "mountain/plains rifle" meant to be carried by the horse, not the rider

Sold it and used it to fund a couple of "more suitable" rifles and have never looked back - got my Hawken "fix" (plus going to start work shortly on a Christian Hawken, Maryland rifle - a much more suitable "hawken" for my purposes).

And agree, the Great Plains by Lyman is fairly "indicative" of a plains rifle flavored in the style of Hawken, Dimick etc.

The couple of Hawken's by Pedersoli are actually fairly representative and probably the closest you would find in an "off the shelf" version today - not cheap - they do start at around 1000 bucks and would not stand up to the scrutiny of a true Hawken "student", but their "Rocky Mountain or Missouri River" versions in fancy maple are beautiful rifles...

 

[Alden]

Reminds me of another thread here recently. What I've read so far is not much of an answer to the OP's question but mostly:

• Modern "Hawkens" are unacceptable especially as reproductions of a real Hawken (as though there was ONE)
• Hawkens were heavier.

Polly want a cracker? Grits!?

 

[galamb]

If these replica's didn't have "Hawken" somewhere in their name there would be nothing to debate.

Is a car like a truck - they both have wheels, a steering wheel, fenders - keep going. But is a car a truck - no it isn't.

Here's a couple of pics - first is an original Henry trade rifle and a Lyman Trade rifle. They look close, but if Lyman called their model a Henry you could find dozens of differences.

The second is, in order, a "St. Louis Hawken", a real Hawken and a Pedersoli Missouri river Hawken.

The Pedersoli looks pretty close, the Traditions looks like some sort of plains rifle, but certainly not a Hawken.

If they had of simply called it a "St. Louis rifle" there would be little to debate.

 

[Dphar]

What are the differences between an original Hawkin and our modern replicas?When i first got around this stuff i thought it was just becuase it was shorter wood.Was Hawkin the name of the inventor?Are reps better now or originals better.

HAWKEN was the name.
The Hawken Rifle most people think of was a rifle developed over time by Jake and Sam Hawken of St Louis. They were arguably the best "plains rifle" of their time. They were members of a family of PA Gunmakers. These two moved west to the then Frontier Jake first then Sam and supplied guns to the Mountain Men, locals and at least one man traveled from Virginian to buy a special order J&S Hawken (its documented). So they had a good reputation by about 1840.
To be a true Hawken requires certain criteria be followed. Modern factory mades simply cannot do the proper stock shaping (its too complex) nor will they use the proper parts to make even a close copy of the J&S or S. Hawken rifle. Trust me its was attempted 35 years ago or so and it was a failure. A friend of mine made a close copy of a J&S Hawken as a prototype for the then Western Arms Company...
SO....
To many differences to count if we are discussing the mass produced rifles. Easier to list the things that are the same.
The similarities are they are usually 1/2 stocked, octagonal barrels and usually have percussion locks.
Other than that the mass produced rifles are simply generic at best, in many cases not even traditional MLs but modern constructs that someone uses the name "Hawken" as a selling point. When they hit the market decades back they were not considered traditional since they were stocked like a modern bolt action rifle and many still are. But as the numbers grew and then the plastic stocked abominations (from the historical stand point) with various ignition types arrived on the market and then suddenly these "modern MLs" have become "traditional"(something they were not really thought of as when they were introduced) since they have a wood stock and a side lock.

Some of the custom made Rifles are pretty close. But buying one of these for under 2000 means the seller was ignorant. And many of these lack the shaping details that would make it a true Hawken from the historical standpoint. IE they are not copies in most cases but rifles "based on" the Hawken of what ever era they think its from. Close enough for most people.

Here are three original Hawken Rifles from Cody. The center one likley dates to the mid 1830s, the right one is probably 1840s-50s as is the PG target rifle.

"The Plains Rifle" by Hanson, J. Baird's " Hawken Rifles, the Mountain Man's Choice", "The Hawken Rifle its Place in History" by Hanson (reads like sour grapes to me, but has some good info). "Firearms of the American West 1803-1865" by Garvaglia and Worman (out of print but inter-library loan should get one for reading) has a lot of info and quite a number of photos of various original Hawken and other western rifles or the time. Covers a wide range of firearms, virtually everything.
Baird's book is good but his timeline in the front of the book is off I think.
Dan

 

[cynthialee]

I don't understand the aversion that you guys have to a heavy gun. My hiking about gun weighs in at about 11.5 lbs. I have lighter ones, but I am trying to get a work out when I hike so weighted down is a good plan.

 

[fleener]

my jim bridger replica is close to 12 lbs. I have humped it around for quite a few miles hunting. As I get older, it is not nearly as much fun. I would not take it to the mountains for hunting.

Fleener

 

[galamb]

As I have gotten older I have definitely got "softer".

20 years back I would have carried a heavy rifle through sheer stubbornness. Today I find something in the 6-8 pound class far more comfortable.

Likewise, my "caliber of choice" has shrank as well. I now prefer my .40 and .45 to the 50's and larger. Yes, it requires better shot placement - passing shots that I may take with a larger bore etc.

But it's for all those reasons that a heavy, 54 cal just no longer suited my tastes...

 

[ZUG]

Wow - good for you Cynthialee, now I know where to find a good woman to do the chores and take care of poor weak me - you must have arms like Popeye :bow: :grin: :grin: . Just fun'in you - no harm meant would'nt want you to give me a pounding :shocked2: :v !

 

[nwtradegun]

if you wish to see correct hawkens go to http://www.thehawkenshop.com/. they produce correct era hakens

 

[Alden]

Cynthia Lee -- I am plenty weighted down without a heavy gun to lug around too!
:wink:

Yeah, I can hardly see any resemblence in any of those guns, LOL, least so when you compare "a" particualar Hawken to something that really is a different design from that one altogether (when there are other original Hawken rifles it does more resemble).
:shake:

When you are making Sesame Street comparisons of disimilar items one of them doesn't belong. But when you have to take out a micrometer to evidence a difference or even say a somewhat different caliber was more prevalent, there really is no point there. We know modern guns are not originals. That they are lighter. We know a company's production gun named a Hawken can't be like each and every one of all the handmade guns some folk made for decades.

Again we are seeing this repitition of parroting "failure" and "unworthiness" based on everything from microscopic detail to intentionally false arguments. So, let's positively demonstrate some differences that are factual (if only to answer the OP) and embrace the quality, mass-market, affordable Hawken style rifles for what, and as, they are rather than look for or, frankly, make up reasons to dismiss them and denegrate those members here who shoot them. Almost no-one here owns an orignal and almost certainly no-one is shooting them. And I have news for those who bought a custom reproduction...

...it doesn't match any particular gun, or all of them, perfectly either.

 

[galamb]

Nobody is denigrating those who shoot them, at least in this thread that I can see.

The question was asked "What are the differences between an original Hawkin and our modern replicas?"

You seem to indicate with your response that things such as -

they were iron mounted
they used two barrel keys
they have an entry thimble for the ramrod
the butt plate has a different profile
they use a different trigger guard
the breeches are not the same
the barrel was thicker, longer and heavier
the stocks were usually plain maple or walnut, not beech
the sights were different
most of the parts were hand forged
the forestock is longer and shaped different
the wrist is shaped differently
and the list goes on - are "minor" differences.

Does that mean the T/C or Traditions is not a fine, functional, reliable rifle - not at all.

But that list is "some" of how the mass produced replica "differs" from an original.

How different do they have to be before it suits your definition of "different"?

 

[crockett]

Hasn't been mentioned so....Barrel length. A lot of replicas has 32" or shorter barrels. Many of the original Hawken rifles has 36" or 39" barrels. The tang and trigger plate- two long pieces of steel to re-enforce the wrist.