Hawkin rifles

[Rod Lassey]

Oh, I've read it---and understand it perfectly.
The problem stems, much of the time, from newcomers who purchase one of the said "Hawkens", and truly believe that they have a rifle that is an accurate representation of an original---when, in fact, nothing could be farther from the truth. Then, they are either disappointed that it isn't a historically correct version, or they argue to the death that it is...without knowing what an original should look like.

Don't get me wrong, they are great shooting rifles, and an excellent first step for many into the wonderful world of muzzleloading. Some will be perfectly satisfied with them, others may go on to more historically correct arms.

The rub, as I see it, is comments like this:

"As you are so informed, have studied text and originals, you'll recognize that no two Hawkens are exactly alike. Ipso Facto...

There is no, single, "The Hawken rifle" to not be an exact copy of. Understand!?"

While there are differences in rifles produced by the Hawken Bros., they all tend to follow the same lines, have certain traits, if you will, that readily identify them as a Hawken. Most of the modern reproduction "Hawkens" don't. If you don't believe me, lay a Pedersoli Hawken, a Lyman Great Plains rifle, and one of the others beside each other. Can you pick out the one that doesn't belong?
http://www.davide-pedersoli.com/tipologia-prodotti.asp/l_en/idt_34/rifles-hawken.html
http://www.lymanproducts.com/lyman/muzzle-loaders/great-plains-rifle.php
http://www.dixiegunworks.com/product_info.php?products_id=1019

To say that, because there are slight variations in original Hawken rifles, therefore any percussion half-stock rifle can be called a Hawken is absurd at best.

While the horse has long ago left the barn as far the name of Mr. Center's rifle, at least we can recognize that they bear little resemblence to the original Hawkens, or, for that matter, to original rifles intended for the Rocky Mountain trade. SOME may bear a slight passing resemblence to certain California guns of the 1850s, but that's another story. As long as we recognize them for what they are, and don't try to fantasize them into something they are not, and try to fool ourselves in the process, then we will have gained some understanding of their place in history.

Rod

 

[cynthialee]

obviously your eyes must be looking at the world different than mine
I see them more alike than not, and too not see the glaring similarities is an active attempt at being blind.

 

[don hepler]

Right on, girl.

 

[Rod Lassey]

obviously your eyes must be looking at the world different than mine
I see them more alike than not, and too not see the glaring similarities is an active attempt at being blind.

Each to his/her own. By the same logic, I suspect I can remove the frizzen from my 1810 Deringer rifle, stick a slow match in the jaws of the cock, and call it a late 1500s matchlock, right? After all, there are glaring similarities--long barrel, full stock, match ignition, fires from the shoulder.

Rod

 

[Rod Lassey]

By the way, here's a great example by a true artist:
http://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/fusionbb/showtopic.php?tid/282855/post/1315481/hl//fromsearch/1/

Herb has done work that most of us mere mortals can only dream of creating.

I think the subject's been beat to death, though, & I'm unlikey to convince anyone otherwise. Suffice to say that I & some others think that the T/C, Zoli, & the rest of the "Hawken" types are more of an 1850s-60s generic half-stock plains rifle, rather than anything that came from the St. Louis shop of the Hawken bros.

Rod

 

[Snakebite]

Cynthialee,

You might want to research Hawken rifles a little more to see the differences. They are being compared to actual Hawkens. The Pedersoli is probably the closest of the three, the GPR somewhat (the GPR has never been described as a Hawken, it's a PLAINS rifle though they do try to add some Hawken characteristics) and the TC, not even close. If you want to say they are alike because they are halfstock and percussion, yes they are, but that's about as much as they resemble each other.

Or as compared to an actual Hawken.

IMO, the TC was a good entry level gun, alot depends upon how far you want to go with muzzleloading. If you want a hunting rifle fine, if you want to get more into the historical aspect of muzzle loading, it tends to slide down the ladder.

The gun Herb built is probably one of the best Hawken rifles (closest to the real thing)I've ever seen and I've seen a few originals.

 

[don hepler]

I've been around guns for years, and do a lot of gunsmith work. I see the difference, two wedges, ram rod entry thimble, tapered barrel 1 1/8 tapered to 1", Iron hardware,vs. brass, slender wrist, more drop in stock, slender wood on forearm, longer barrel. I have a TC/ Hawken.... not a J&S Hawken.... not a Samual Hawken..... but a TC Hawken. We get it.

 

[FishDFly]

A name is a name is it not, and the name is not always what folks started calling it.

Kleenex is universal now for facial tissue and Kleenz is widely accepted name for facial tissue.

Thermos bottle is a universal name for a vacuum bottle.

Coke is widely used name for carbonated drinks.

Folks should go get some eggnog and add something to it maybe and put another log on the fire.

 

[Shine]

Here is mine

 

[galamb]

Now that is one fine looking Winchester...

(can you see the difference - not everyone can - that's why this program is broadcast with "described video")

 

[S.Kenton]

By the way, here's a great example by a true artist:
http://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/fusionbb/showtopic.php?tid/282855/post/1315481/hl//fromsearch/1/

Herb has done work that most of us mere mortals can only dream of creating.

I think ya hit that one outa the park Rod!
Herb builds some FINE Hawken copies and he shoots them VERY well too! BTW my honest opinion is this..the T/C Hawken no more resembles an original J&S Hawken than a Chevette resembles a Corvette...like night and day...apples to oranges.. need I go on??

 

[Shine]

It was made back in 88 by a guy named wheeler out of mass. It is a close copy of the bridger hawken. L&R lock was originally flint but was converted to percussion to get the right look. .50 cal and very very accurate. This rifle will shoot 1 inch groups off the bench at 100 yds.. 105 grs. of 2ffg.

 

[galamb]

It does look sweet.

What's the dimensions on the barrel? Did he build it with a taper or is it straight? and how much does she weigh?

I built a Carson replica a number of years back that weighed in at 10 1/2 pounds. Then my tastes switched to slender full stocks so sold her to finance a couple of other rifles.

May build another one again, but it's not on my "immediate to do" list.

 

[S.Kenton]

That is a NICE Hawken!! Whats the specs of it?

 

[Shine]

what do you want to know.

 

[Shine]

50. cal 1 inch straight Hoppy Hopkins barrel,8 lands and grooves.
premium curly maple really dark with age gun was built in 1988. The former owner of this rifle won a lot at the nationals with this gun.
L&R late flint lock converted to percussion.
13.5 length of pull.
This is the only percussion gun I own and it is deadly accurate.

 

[Alden]

Hawken is no different, to the unknowing all lever action cowboy rifles were Winchesters and all six shooters of that era were Colts. Got a half stock caplock rifle gotta be a Hawken :idunno:

Dave, given your sarcastic examples, but point well taken, the only thing that makes a Hawken a Hawken is the maker. Little else. Except that their half stock caplocks have a similar appearance...

...to modern "Hawkens." And by the way...

...you couldn't tell the difference between what was and wasn't an actual Hawken but I'll bet you could tell Winchesters from Kennedy's and Colt's' from a Merwin Hulbert. Or am I giving you too much credit? Furthermore...

...today's commercial replicas of those guns would be reproductions of a specific model (fantasy guns notwithstanding). You can't do that with The Hawkens Rocky Mountain Rifle because, yet again, THERE IS NO SUCH THING.

Still the "knowing" will broadly argue as though there is, usually criticizing not new shooters but particularly new posters who have not personally witnessed this internet parroting about their commercial Hawkenee gun yet.

 

[Alden]

By the way, here's a great example by a true artist:
http://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/fusionbb/showtopic.php?tid/282855/post/1315481/hl//fromsearch/1/

Herb has done work that most of us mere mortals can only dream of creating.

I think the subject's been beat to death, though, & I'm unlikey to convince anyone otherwise. Suffice to say that I & some others think that the T/C, Zoli, & the rest of the "Hawken" types are more of an 1850s-60s generic half-stock plains rifle, rather than anything that came from the St. Louis shop of the Hawken bros.

Rod

Oh no Rod, quite the opposite my Hawken rifle expert friend... I'm SO on board. OK, then THIS is the gun YOU want to say is THE Hawken Rifle? And only it! Then no other gun with any variation will be a Hawken. Is that what you'd like us all to agree to!? Examples:


brass mounted
one barrel key
no entry thimble for the ramrod
butt plate has a different profile
different trigger guard
breech not the same
barrel may be thinner, thicker, longer, shorter, and heavier or lighter
stocks material must be fancy maple
front and rear sights must be exactly the same
forestock same length and shape
same exact wrist shape
no other more minor differences


Trust me when I say everyone, expert and novice alike, is waiting for this "knowing" answer...

 

[dave524]

Dave, given your sarcastic examples, but point well taken, the only thing that makes a Hawken a Hawken is the maker. Little else. Except that their half stock caplocks have a similar appearance...

I wasn't tryin to be sarcastic, my point was that sometimes a style is identified by the original maker even when the item being identified by that name bears little resemblance to the original. As a 20 something year old kid I was pretty happy with 1976 vintage CVA Mountain Rifle and in 78 with my TC Hawken, as a retired old geezer now in my 60's I am far more knowledgeable and much more discerning in what actually constitutes a good replica of a rifle manufactured by one of the Hawken clan. Most are less knowledgeable that members of this forum, bet there is a few out there that would think a genuine Hawken isn't cause it don't look like a TC.

 

[Alden]

Sorry Dave, that's so much nonsense, your arguing about "a" rifle that never existed vs...