Kibler - field observations?

[SOLANCO]

Hunting birds makes me think a lot about gun weight. Seven pounds is almost more than I will abide. Bear in mind it is a day long activity and you are carrying a lot of other stuff. Food. Maybe water. Cel. First aid. And whatever game you make. And any truck you need for the dog(s).
Not much interested in deer, etc any more. But I have been thinking about another rifle for messing about with ground hogs and squirrels. That is not energetic work so 8 pounds or so would not be bad. More interested in how it comes up and points. Thinking a .36 .

 

[stikshooter]

Hunting birds makes me think a lot about gun weight. Seven pounds is almost more than I will abide. Bear in mind it is a day long activity and you are carrying a lot of other stuff. Food. Maybe water. Cel. First aid. And whatever game you make. And any truck you need for the dog(s).
Not much interested in deer, etc any more. But I have been thinking about another rifle for messing about with ground hogs and squirrels. That is not energetic work so 8 pounds or so would not be bad. More interested in how it comes up and points. Thinking a .36 .

Bigger hole less weight , a 54 makes for a great squirrel killer and if missed a firewood gatherer , or if on the ground a garden planter (think corn planter) /Ed

 

[Art Caputo]

Perhaps is just me but I find that when pushing +250grs. of lead at hunting velocities(+1400FPS) that a pound or two of extra weight improves accuracy/stability over my lighter rifles/large calibers, particularly with the longer shots(70-120 yards). IMO, as long as the rifle is well balanced and not too heavy to shoot off-hand, the trade off in carry weight is well worth the improved shooting stability….ALA…Hawkens/Sharps. It’s no big deal when shooting at the closer ranges, but combining the inherent lag time of a flintlock with barrel dwell time of the ball, for the longer shots on game, shooting stability trumps a pound or two of added weight for me…Just my viewpoint.

 

[Brokennock]

I find that when pushing +250grs. of lead at hunting velocities(+1400FPS) that a pound or two of extra weight improves accuracy/stability over my lighter rifles/large calibers, particularly with the longer shots(70-120 yards). IMO, as long as the rifle is well balanced and not too heavy to shoot off-hand

It’s no big deal when shooting at the closer ranges, but combining the inherent lag time of a flintlock with barrel dwell time of the ball, for the longer shots on game, shooting stability trumps a pound or two of added weight

I am in no way trying to bust on you with my question, just a question based on curiosity and my nature of thinking everything through (probably to a fault)
I completely agree with the last part of what I quoted, "shooting stability trumps a pound or two of added weight."
When shooting at game making a clean hit should trump many things.
What I am wondering about is your references to offhand shooting and, "longer shots on game."
Wondering, not just on your part but overall regarding muzzloader hunters, how much shooting at a living creature is being done "offhand," at "longer" ranges?
Not questioning taking the shot at your stated, "70 to 120 yards," just wondering how much offhand shooting at game is being done at those ranged, especially in the 100 to 120 yard arena? And, is it maybe time to gain a more stable position at those distances?

In general I see a lot of emphasis placed on offhand shooting, but it rarely seems to be the best option in the field.

Again, not trying to argue or bust anyone's stones. Just wondering.

 

[French Colonial]

I am in no way trying to bust on you with my question, just a question based on curiosity and my nature of thinking everything through (probably to a fault)
I completely agree with the last part of what I quoted, "shooting stability trumps a pound or two of added weight."
When shooting at game making a clean hit should trump many things.
What I am wondering about is your references to offhand shooting and, "longer shots on game."
Wondering, not just on your part but overall regarding muzzloader hunters, how much shooting at a living creature is being done "offhand," at "longer" ranges?
Not questioning taking the shot at your stated, "70 to 120 yards," just wondering how much offhand shooting at game is being done at those ranged, especially in the 100 to 120 yard arena? And, is it maybe time to gain a more stable position at those distances?

In general I see a lot of emphasis placed on offhand shooting, but it rarely seems to be the best option in the field.

Again, not trying to argue or bust anyone's stones. Just wondering.

Any one who has shot BPCRS knows what the average chicken scores look like, IMHO most people should be looking for a rest when shooting at 100-120 yards, it is the ethical thing to do.

 

[Zutt-man]

I am in no way trying to bust on you with my question, just a question based on curiosity and my nature of thinking everything through (probably to a fault)
I completely agree with the last part of what I quoted, "shooting stability trumps a pound or two of added weight."
When shooting at game making a clean hit should trump many things.
What I am wondering about is your references to offhand shooting and, "longer shots on game."
Wondering, not just on your part but overall regarding muzzloader hunters, how much shooting at a living creature is being done "offhand," at "longer" ranges?
Not questioning taking the shot at your stated, "70 to 120 yards," just wondering how much offhand shooting at game is being done at those ranged, especially in the 100 to 120 yard arena? And, is it maybe time to gain a more stable position at those distances?

In general I see a lot of emphasis placed on offhand shooting, but it rarely seems to be the best option in the field.

Again, not trying to argue or bust anyone's stones. Just wondering.

Speaking from my own experience (and I hunt a lot), I RARELY shoot without a rest over 75 yards. This includes unmentionables

 

[Art Caputo]

I am in no way trying to bust on you with my question, just a question based on curiosity and my nature of thinking everything through (probably to a fault)
I completely agree with the last part of what I quoted, "shooting stability trumps a pound or two of added weight."
When shooting at game making a clean hit should trump many things.
What I am wondering about is your references to offhand shooting and, "longer shots on game."
Wondering, not just on your part but overall regarding muzzloader hunters, how much shooting at a living creature is being done "offhand," at "longer" ranges?
Not questioning taking the shot at your stated, "70 to 120 yards," just wondering how much offhand shooting at game is being done at those ranged, especially in the 100 to 120 yard arena? And, is it maybe time to gain a more stable position at those distances?

In general I see a lot of emphasis placed on offhand shooting, but it rarely seems to be the best option in the field.

Again, not trying to argue or bust anyone's stones. Just wondering.

No problem, busting on my views is always welcome….
In 40+ years of hunting I only shot one whitetail over 100 yards offhand….and hit it too far back. I got him after some tracking, but the rest of my longer shots since have been from a stabile rest. I will say that even at the closer ranges, my off-hand shooting is improved with my heavier(+8 pound), large cal rifles. Being predominantly a still hunter, I routinely practice off-hand shooting out to 50 yards or so with all my rifles, and will shoot at game at this range if there is no time or provision for a rest,…And I feel confident with the shot.

 

[Bushfire]

With a scoped centrefire I've done a few good offhand shots from extended ranges, with a muzzleloader the farthest i can think if was about 70 yards. As a rule I use a rest. In open country I'll use a pack, a bit of long grass or sit on my butt and lock the gun into my knees.

Offhand shot are as a rule used in I jump an animal and there's no time to find a rest but the shot is doable.

 

[ColonialRifleSmith]

I didn't want to hijack the previous kibler thread so decided to start my own. It's probably a moot conversation, to date I know Jim hasn't been willing to ship to Australia. We can get Chambers easily so I know it's possible to get kits here without too much hassle. I'd like to do a chambers but maybe better off trying a kibler first (if possible to get one).

Anyway, I'm after first hand experience of guys using the various models for hunting. The SMR is probably not worth consideration as my state has a minimum ball weight of 230 grain for deer.

So of the Colonial and Woodsrunner how have folks found it for practicality when hunting? I'm not referring to walking a couple hundred yards to a treestand and back. But anyone that has experience with ground hunting through hills and thick country how are they? I typically shoot 3-5 big game animals from 20 yards to 130 yards a year, so my guns need to be good hunters.

I've got my doubts on a colonial weighing in at around 10lb being a great option for lugging through the hills day on day. I can handle heavy-ish type guns but I prefer something more manageable. I'm open to any honest feedback good or bad in this regard.

Conversely how is the woodsrunner? I know it's shorter and must be lighter. Is it good for hiking through the hills? On that does anyone have an actual length for the gun? I can find barrel length but not OAL?

Alternatively, I have heard rumours he's one day going to do a hawken flintlock, maybe I'm best waiting to see if that eventuates. Or maybe I could just keep building them and try for one in the shorter term.

Hi to Australia from Pa. My 1st Kibler was a Colonial .50 cal. I personally didn't care for it. The comb was too high for me to get a good sight picture. I sold it and bought a Southern Mountain .45 cal. This rifle is a tack driver. I currently have a Woodsrunner .50 cal. on order. Suggestion, buy a rifle from Kibler and have it mailed to someone here in the US. Then have them re-mail it to you Down Under. I would do it for you, however you would need to get things sorted out with your customs. They can be a 'B' sometimes. Semper Fi.

 

[hanshi]

"Balance" is definitely a subjective term and what makes a rifle "balanced" can differ among individuals. I prefer swamped barrels for all around use, but a dedicated offhand rifle, IMHO, needs a straight barrel. In my hunting career I've carried 6 and 7 pound rifles through the woods and up and down tree stands. But I've also done that with a 10.5 lb rifle. I know what "balance" means in my case but likely not in anyone elses.

 

[akroguy]

Hi to Australia from Pa. My 1st Kibler was a Colonial .50 cal. I personally didn't care for it. The comb was too high for me to get a good sight picture. I sold it and bought a Southern Mountain .45 cal. This rifle is a tack driver. I currently have a Woodsrunner .50 cal. on order. Suggestion, buy a rifle from Kibler and have it mailed to someone here in the US. Then have them re-mail it to you Down Under. I would do it for you, however you would need to get things sorted out with your customs. They can be a 'B' sometimes. Semper Fi.

View attachment 208740

I hear ya on the Colonial comb height. I put a set of taller sights on mine and it made a world of difference. I'll probably do the same on the Woodsrunner but just got it yesterday. It does have a shorter length of pull which changes the angles a bit.

 

[Pratt]

I think the talk about barrel length short or long is of a personal preference. I have seen Boones rifle and crockets rifle and many over the mountain boys. All had an estimated 40 inch barrels. I have no problems moving thru the woods with a 44 inch barrel.

 

[RMH]

More than a month ago, I asked for some numbers:

My Woodsman in .54 Cal. weighs just under 7.5lbs using my bathroom scale. It is 55" overall length. The rear sight is 11" from the breech of the barrel. (measured from where tang begins at back of barrel) It balances 9.5" in front of the trigger. (with scraper and ball puller in patchbox) The balance point will vary depending on type of wood and density. My rifle is cherry.

The term "perfect balance" is highly subjective. My rifle carries naturally and well with one hand at the balance point. It comes readily to my shoulder and hangs steady.....I know it isn't a definitive term, but it feels good and more importantly it feels right to me. I have not hunted with it yet but intend to take it to Michigan Upper Peninsula's Huron Mountains this fall. ( I use the term mountains loosely. They are forested rocky hills with an elevation change of 1200' or so.)

 

[Kmcmichael]

I prefer the rifle to balance in my hand between the lock and the entry pipe. I do not like the sight stabbing me in the hand, this makes it easy to carry vertically when in heavy brush. My Colonial .50 does not. I built a Colonial .54 for a friend which does.
‘The .54 Woodsrunner seems to carry well.
‘I will likely move the sight forward on my .50 or install a tang sight.

 

[Mike in FL]

I'm 75. My rifle is more than 10lbs like what a rifle built in the era I emulate was. I'm not very strong and don't have much stamina, but I cannot figure why shooters today are so concerned about rifle weight. Seems like maybe folks get spoiled with the modern, lightweight smokeless guns. Surely 95% of the BP hunters here are younger and stronger than I. That said, I can surely appreciate the light, delicate, and gorgeous lines and grace of a slim, long-barreled squirrel rifle. I reckon it's a good thing we all don't like the same thing.

 

[Zutt-man]

I'm 75. My rifle is more than 10lbs like what a rifle built in the era I emulate was. I'm not very strong and don't have much stamina, but I cannot figure why shooters today are so concerned about rifle weight. Seems like maybe folks get spoiled with the modern, lightweight smokeless guns. Surely 95% of the BP hunters here are younger and stronger than I. That said, I can surely appreciate the light, delicate, and gorgeous lines and grace of a slim, long-barreled squirrel rifle. I reckon it's a good thing we all don't like the same thing.

Hunting spots are getting harder to come by for access. A lot of times it requires hikes upwards of 10 miles to find game. Every pound counts when you’re hunting imo

That said, my guns are 8 lb 6 oz and I don’t feel them much in my arms unless I’ve put in a few miles. I need to find a sling that doesn’t wrap over the barrel (may invest in some swivels)

 

[French Colonial]

Rifle weight really does not concern me as much as how it balances shooting offhand. I had a really nice copy of the John Schriet rifle that I sold because it had a target grade straight barrel that was just to muzzle heavy so I sold it to a person who wanted it for nostalgic reasons and it will get shot a couple of times and put away.

The Woodsrunner I am working with balances very well and is getting closer and closer to becoming my go to gun.

 

[Mike in FL]

I'm 76 and a little bit crippled, but I can walk the mountains all day if I go really slow. Sometimes I use My hickory walking stick that has a leather thong so I can put it over a shoulder if I choose not to use it. My point is my favorite style long rifle is the long-barrel early Lancaster, which is very similar to the Colonial. I carry that with great ease, and if it doesn't bother an old guy like me, it won't bother you.

 

[Pratt]

I built a Kibler SMR in maple and .45. It has great balance and it is a please to take for a hike.

 

[reddogge]

About the Hawken rifle Kibler is researching. I was to understand he is looking at the later half stock percussion version. If so, they are not lightweights if done historically accurately.