Kibler Hawken?

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I watched it earlier this morning. I had a slightly different take in that I interpreted her to say that the design would be finished, not necessarily that the production would begin. I could be wrong, have been before...
 
I didn't necessarily mean to imply they'd be in peoples hands. With the Fowler there were some promotional events that a pre production sample was shown at. Then leading up to actual availability Mr. K dropped some time frame hints here and there on the forums he is active on.
 
Has there been any discussion on what calibers the Hawken might be offered in? A 58 would be great in my opinion.

Are there images available yet for this gun? Will it be flintlock or percussion?
Have to keep an eye on his website and YT channel. It was roughly mid-year when he started dropping hints and eventually making mentions in videos about the fowler. He may handle this one differently though whereas the forum is concerned. The guy gets a lot of unnecessary flak on here for some reason.
 
Lots of black powder enthusiasts love a Hawken and percussion. I think Jim would do very well with a half stock percussion rifle with a tapered barrel. Whatever he comes up with will be historically correct. I am keeping my eyes on this one. I mostly shoot flint now, but I'd snatch up the right Hawken kit from Jim.
 
I am interested to learn mire about this!

Why a .62 caliber? I thought that the originals came in a range of calibers but most were in the .50-54 range. Is there a specific example in this size that makes it more desirable than a .54? Or is it just because this would be the lightest version? Thanks in advance for your responses!
 
I am interested to learn mire about this!

Why a .62 caliber? I thought that the originals came in a range of calibers but most were in the .50-54 range. Is there a specific example in this size that makes it more desirable than a .54? Or is it just because this would be the lightest version? Thanks in advance for your responses!
Don't fret about it being a 58, much less a 62. Jim's rifle will be of a caliber
I am interested to learn mire about this!

Why a .62 caliber? I thought that the originals came in a range of calibers but most were in the .50-54 range. Is there a specific example in this size that makes it more desirable than a .54? Or is it just because this would be the lightest version? Thanks in advance for your responses!
Don't fret about it being a .62 or even a .58. It will be of the caliber(s) most prevalent during the originals.
 
I am interested to learn mire about this!

Why a .62 caliber? I thought that the originals came in a range of calibers but most were in the .50-54 range. Is there a specific example in this size that makes it more desirable than a .54? Or is it just because this would be the lightest version? Thanks in advance for your responses!
There are specific examples of calibers larger than 54 including 62. They seem to show up later in RM fur trade period (which "officially" ended in about 1840 but seems to have thrived throughout the '40's). But for me that would not be a determining factor. I'd be interested in the additional punch for elk and moose size game.

And, yes, the lighter weight would be a big factor for me at age 78 and doing much of my hunting at 10,000 to 11,500 feet. My 54 GPR feels heavier every year.
 
Back
Top