Kibler Hawken?

[Indy Durtdigger]

Y'all lost me on this latest line of discussion.

I mean, the original Woodsrunner is well documented - Jim Parker handled it and posted pics from one of Wallce Guslers classes: LINK1 Kibler's is about as close a copy of that rifle possible, sans carving/decoration.

Same with the SMR: LINK2 How can you look at a SMR and deny it's Whitson heritage?

Sure the Colonial is more generic. But, y'all, these guns are period correct.

The descriptions given on his website with each rifle saying they are representative of a decade long period rather than any specific styling. The SMR is the only one that a specific builders influence is sited. Woodsrunner kit is based on a copy of an original yes but if memory serves the original is from an earlier period than the kit gun unless that's a typo on the site.

No one is doubting they are period correct. Just observing how they are being represented to prospective customers.

More Hawken talk please.

 

[brazosland]

Y'all lost me on this latest line of discussion.

I mean, the original Woodsrunner is well documented - Jim Parker handled it and posted pics from one of Wallace Guslers classes: LINK1

Kibler's is about as close a copy of that rifle possible, sans carving/decoration.

Same with the SMR: LINK2 How can you look at a SMR and deny the Whitson school heritage?

Sure the Colonial is more generic.

Is the complaint that they are not photostatic copies of exact items?

It’s not a complaint just a discussion. I’m sorry reading comprehension is challenging.

 

[Indy Durtdigger]

It’s not a complaint just a discussion. I’m sorry reading comprehension is challenging.

Cool it. No one attacked you for having an opinion.

 

[Ditt44]

I guess I over simplify things sometimes, most times. The entire "Hawken" debate becomes mind numbing with arguments. I look at it from the perspective of "Hawken style". I am sure not every single original-made-by-Mr. Hawken(s) gun was identical in every aspect. Does that discredit any particular example?... rhetorical statement, don't reply and answer that. Thompson Center has probably sold more "Hawken" STYLE guns than any manufacturer to date. Were they historically or period correct? Again, don't answer that. Does it matter? No. The 'style' is Hawken-esque, they simply grabbed the market by calling them a "Hawken" model. Ok... and? They sold 100s of thousands of them. And they are reliable and when well cared for will last several life times.

If Kibler gun "style" arguments are made, I again would drift toward a simple perspective. Jim Kibler is a master gun builder. No argument. He likes a specific "flavor" of gun within a "style/school". Inspiration, simple as that. Let him dream, innovate and move the craft forward with a new standard. Why must he make copies of some randomly found old gun?

If I were talented enough to create and manufacture a gun for the mass market, I would be starting with smaller, lighter, half-stock designs because that is what appeals to me. If I made high quality, reliable guns, I'm sure I would sell some in "my style" and some users would be happy with them. Others would criticize me for not adhering to a specific historical example and they'd not buy them. That's their choice.

Some builders like to make replicas and copy historical guns as closely as possible. That's awesome and commendable, that keeps history alive. At the same time, let people create, chase their vision and in the end if the market doesn't like it, they'll dictate success or failure for the builder. Pretty simple. Live and let live. If you don't like it, don't buy it/change the channel. Not everyone has to think, believe and like the same thing as you do. Why does that make so many people so insecure?

With any craft, there is room for innovation and god forbid, "change".

If someone wants to denigrate any builder, you might as well start with any modern tool or improved method they use. Right? You can't love or hate the final product and not take into account the tools, materials and process because the vast majority of builders are not using PC/HC methods and tools so, now what? Wherever YOU draw the line it is only YOUR line.

/rant

 

[Art Caputo]

I guess I over simplify things sometimes, most times. The entire "Hawken" debate becomes mind numbing with arguments. I look at it from the perspective of "Hawken style". I am sure not every single original-made-by-Mr. Hawken(s) gun was identical in every aspect. Does that discredit any particular example?... rhetorical statement, don't reply and answer that. Thompson Center has probably sold more "Hawken" STYLE guns than any manufacturer to date. Were they historically or period correct? Again, don't answer that. Does it matter? No. The 'style' is Hawken-esque, they simply grabbed the market by calling them a "Hawken" model. Ok... and? They sold 100s of thousands of them. And they are reliable and when well cared for will last several life times.

If Kibler gun "style" arguments are made, I again would drift toward a simple perspective. Jim Kibler is a master gun builder. No argument. He likes a specific "flavor" of gun within a "style/school". Inspiration, simple as that. Let him dream, innovate and move the craft forward with a new standard. Why must he make copies of some randomly found old gun?

If I were talented enough to create and manufacture a gun for the mass market, I would be starting with smaller, lighter, half-stock designs because that is what appeals to me. If I made high quality, reliable guns, I'm sure I would sell some in "my style" and some users would be happy with them. Others would criticize me for not adhering to a specific historical example and they'd not buy them. That's their choice.

Some builders like to make replicas and copy historical guns as closely as possible. That's awesome and commendable, that keeps history alive. At the same time, let people create, chase their vision and in the end if the market doesn't like it, they'll dictate success or failure for the builder. Pretty simple. Live and let live. If you don't like it, don't buy it/change the channel. Not everyone has to think, believe and like the same thing as you do. Why does that make so many people so insecure?

With any craft, there is room for innovation and god forbid, "change".

If someone wants to denigrate any builder, you might as well start with any modern tool or improved method they use. Right? You can't love or hate the final product and not take into account the tools, materials and process because the vast majority of builders are not using PC/HC methods and tools so, now what? Wherever YOU draw the line it is only YOUR line.

/rant

I tend to agree that a relatively close offering of the famed Hawken styling by Kibler while appealing, due to the weight/bulk would not get the broad based appeal as a carry/hunting rifle(I have a close Hawken copy. Perhaps a Leman style, that might strike a similar contrast in handiness that exists between Kiblers Colonial and the Woodsrunner could have a broader practical appeal while maintaining elements of authenticity… I’m not sure a representation of the Thompson Center Hawken style by Kibler would be that attractive due to the multitude of rifles that have been sold in that configuration. My first ML was a Thomson Center Hawken, and it is still a very usable/functional rifle. IMO.

 

[Patched]

None of which addresses my post.

I also agree with you. But I stop at making him a Deity. He is a business man and wants to make money.

So do I. And…I’m glad he does.

Everyone is chatting along happily here…and then along comes you…with some vague petty correction concerning Jim Kibler’s judgement in creating the products he offers.

So far everyone has been kind to you…May I suggest to you that you reach in your possibles pouch and grab a clue…

That definitely addresses your post.

 

[Ditt44]

I tend to agree that a relatively close offering of the famed Hawken styling by Kibler while appealing, due to the weight/bulk would not get the broad based appeal as a carry/hunting rifle(I have a close Hawken copy. Perhaps a Leman style, that might strike a similar contrast in handiness that exists between Kiblers Colonial and the Woodsrunner could have a broader practical appeal while maintaining elements of authenticity… I’m not sure a representation of the Thompson Center Hawken style by Kibler would be that attractive due to the multitude of rifles that have been sold in that configuration. My first ML was a Thomson Center Hawken, and it is still a very usable/functional rifle. IMO.

Yes on the Leman style. My eye gravitates toward that look more so than most others that I have seen posted/offered/historical images etc. As someone else noted, had Jim Kibler lived in the late 1700s he would have become a world renowned gun builder having produced by a fraction of a fraction of what he can today. His 'style' would be his own. We would all be discussing where the "Kibler style" fit into the overall historical context of long guns.

 

[VA Hawken]

While I'm looking forward to whatever Jim Kibler decides to release in a "Hawken" kit, I'm personally not worried about the subjective authenticity.

I'll likely buy one of the kits whenever they are available, regardless. I've got two Hawken rifles which are broadly in line with what is considered "authentic" and four T/C Hawken rifles that are nowhere near close. But, I still like the T/C versions for what they are. Bottom line, if you like it, then don't worry about it.

 

[brazosland]

Everyone is chatting along happily here…and then along comes you…with some vague petty correction concerning Jim Kibler’s judgement in creating the products he offers.

So far everyone has been kind to you…May I suggest to you that you reach in your possibles pouch and grab a clue…

That definitely addresses your post.

Your Feels are not my concern. Noted that you don’t seem to understand the fact based discussion.

That poster insisted I was wrong because I put his Oxe in a ditch. Other posters have confirmed my statements that Kibler guns are general style ofvthe period guns. It’s a fact, and not a terrible one. But, it is a fact.

 

[Patched]

Your Feels are not my concern. Noted that you don’t seem to understand the fact based discussion.

That poster insisted I was wrong because I put his Oxe in a ditch. Other posters have confirmed my statements that Kibler guns are general style ofvthe period guns. It’s a fact, and not a terrible one. But, it is a fact.

Clueless eh?… thank you for righting this ship. We couldn’t have done it without you..

 

[brazosland]

Clueless eh?… thank you for righting this ship. We couldn’t have done it without you..

I feel sorry for you, sir. You seem determined to be offended. I wish you well.

Ignore button in 5, 4, 3…

 

[reddogge]

I don't care what he come up with as long as it looks like this. Top original, bottom bench copy.