Gus, that is one good looking Bess.
-
Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.
We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.
Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103
Looking for some advice on purchasing a Brown Bess
- Thread starter magnusmd
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
Having just purchased a Pedersoli SLP, I can tell you that it would be forgiving to a newcomer to flintlocks. My only reliability issue will be fixed once I fashion a lead flint wrap. (The flint is difficult to hold in place with leather).
Can't speak for Indian made guns like these guys can, but the Pedersoli is certainly a quality product. I'm really impressed with it.
There is a long post regarding this acquisition, some questions, and pretty much all things Pedersoli Bess. Look for "Pedersoli Second Model Brown Bess"
Welcome to the hobby good sir!
Can't speak for Indian made guns like these guys can, but the Pedersoli is certainly a quality product. I'm really impressed with it.
There is a long post regarding this acquisition, some questions, and pretty much all things Pedersoli Bess. Look for "Pedersoli Second Model Brown Bess"
Welcome to the hobby good sir!
AZbpBurner
54 Cal.
I have 2 India-made guns, and have fired others. Keep in mind that the assembly and finishing is minimal, and for proper appearance and function, you'll be essentially finishing a kit gun.
I highly recommend Loyalist. They have actual accessible and helpful customer service; Middlesex doesn't anymore. While my Middlesex Fusil has a great frizzen that sparks like the 4th of July, the tumbler and sear needed to be hardened - they were rec'd as dead, putty soft, and were still that way after return for the supposed lifetime warranty service. Middlesex doesn't respond to e-mail anymore. It's as if they aren't in business anymore, except to cash your check and mail your gun.
I highly recommend Loyalist. They have actual accessible and helpful customer service; Middlesex doesn't anymore. While my Middlesex Fusil has a great frizzen that sparks like the 4th of July, the tumbler and sear needed to be hardened - they were rec'd as dead, putty soft, and were still that way after return for the supposed lifetime warranty service. Middlesex doesn't respond to e-mail anymore. It's as if they aren't in business anymore, except to cash your check and mail your gun.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2012
- Messages
- 2,263
- Reaction score
- 3,625
As most have described there are 3 options. India gun that may need work (my vote goes for veteran having personally worked with them). A new or used Italian piece (pendersoli which may not be as correct for your use). And a no longer produced piece that can be found used.
There is another option . . .
A real brown bess
http://www.ima-usa.com/original-br...ck-parts-set-nepalese-gurkha-marked-lock.html
There is another option . . .
A real brown bess
http://www.ima-usa.com/original-br...ck-parts-set-nepalese-gurkha-marked-lock.html
Last edited by a moderator:
These Nepalese parts are of the East India Company pattern often referred to as the Third Model. It certainly appears that these muskets will need work.
We keep coming back to asking your unit what model presently being sold is correct for the unit's interpretation and what issues have they had with the muskets.
We keep coming back to asking your unit what model presently being sold is correct for the unit's interpretation and what issues have they had with the muskets.
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2005
- Messages
- 5,225
- Reaction score
- 10,888
Hi,
Totally wrong pattern Bess for F&I or Rev War.
dave
Totally wrong pattern Bess for F&I or Rev War.
dave
NC Highlander
40 Cal.
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2015
- Messages
- 109
- Reaction score
- 0
I'd also recommend Loyalist. I bought a SLP from them at the beginning of the year as a late graduation present to myself. They had great service and delivery. The only hitch we had was with the ATF that didn't quite understand their own laws.
Not perfect, but I don't think it's complete junk. The only thing I've really needed to do with it was lighting the mainspring. You needed forearms of Popeye to pull it before I filed it down.
Not perfect, but I don't think it's complete junk. The only thing I've really needed to do with it was lighting the mainspring. You needed forearms of Popeye to pull it before I filed it down.
AZbpBurner
54 Cal.
Several years ago, 2 guys at my range were firing a beautiful Bess. My initial thoughts were Pedersoli or Miroku - it looked factory new. Up close you could tell there was some surface rust removal and that it wasn't a reproduction. The shooter got it from IMA and needed only to disassemble, clean and oil finish the stock, shine up the brass and remove some light surface rust. It was magnificent. The other guy had his on order and was waiting for delivery. Several months later they were both back at the range. Shooter #2 got his IMA Nepalese. All metal parts were in exceptional condition. The stock, however was essentially a pile of dry rot with some big stock-shaped chunks of wood. He had pictures of it, and it was a heartbreaker. He was busy taking measurements from the good Bess and planned on making his own stock.
Fast forward a year or 2 - I had forgotten all about them, when there there were one weekend, both firing what looked like brand new Bess'. The new stock was an identical rendering of the original, and looked every bit as nice as the original. He said that it took about 2 years of weekend work to get the stock shaped to his satisfaction.
Based on what I've seen, and also read about others, the IMA Bess purchase is a ¢rapshoot and you've got no assurance of getting something in even shootable condition. I looked at their website a year or 2 ago & at that time they did have some originals purportedly excellent & unissued condition, but they were pretty pricey.
As far as I'm concerned, IMA isn't a viable option, unless they have located a cache of excellent muskets hidden behind a sealed wall and are selling them at a price I could afford for a shooter.
Fast forward a year or 2 - I had forgotten all about them, when there there were one weekend, both firing what looked like brand new Bess'. The new stock was an identical rendering of the original, and looked every bit as nice as the original. He said that it took about 2 years of weekend work to get the stock shaped to his satisfaction.
Based on what I've seen, and also read about others, the IMA Bess purchase is a ¢rapshoot and you've got no assurance of getting something in even shootable condition. I looked at their website a year or 2 ago & at that time they did have some originals purportedly excellent & unissued condition, but they were pretty pricey.
As far as I'm concerned, IMA isn't a viable option, unless they have located a cache of excellent muskets hidden behind a sealed wall and are selling them at a price I could afford for a shooter.
Gus,
The OP was talking about American Militia....,
Now mea culpa because the information I read was from 1988 Dr. Bailey's dissertation, and Dr. Bailey has done more research since, but I don't think he has refuted his dissertation. I did point out that the British carried 1740's versions converted over to metal ramrods and metal nose caps, and some had the more modern locks (what folks refer to as the 1756 btw). There were more than 100,000 of them in British stores prior to the AWI, and so many extra parts that they continued to be produced into the 1790's, albeit with shorter barrels.
The muskets in America probably did not undergo those upgrades to metal rammers and nosecaps. That's the point. Since the British won the vast majority of the battles, until say Saratoga, you're not getting the more modern British muskets from capture, or discarded on a battlefield.
As for the shorter muskets, they were 38" and 36" barreled pieces, most started out with wooden rammers and were converted later to metal. They were all of a caliber smaller than even the French musket, being in the vast majority .65. This included the Dragoon carbine which is thought to have prompted the move to the SLP. (TWO regiments had carbines of 28" barrels.) Later carbine versions produced during the middle of the AWI had the SLP characteristics, but would have been in even smaller numbers than the older versions
So the Pedersoli Bess Carbine with it's .75 barrel of 30" is simply not a good idea....Hence my suggestion to "forget" the shorter musket for an American militiaman.
As for what the colonials had when the war started, they were armed with lesser quality muskets, some bought in Liege, some produced in England of the early characteristics. Some were contracted, but the private makers would and did produce muskets in large numbers conforming to the older patterns.
Yes, there were dragoon units which had a very SLP looking gun, and Marine units that had SLP's (or Sea Service muskets that were similar to the SLP), And the Highlander units were in some cases shortening older muskets to 42", or getting some SLP's when coming over, but again, your colonial militia man with a state-of-the-art SLP would be a very very rare bird, and the Pedersoli version of the short musket really falls "short". :wink:
LD
The OP was talking about American Militia....,
Now mea culpa because the information I read was from 1988 Dr. Bailey's dissertation, and Dr. Bailey has done more research since, but I don't think he has refuted his dissertation. I did point out that the British carried 1740's versions converted over to metal ramrods and metal nose caps, and some had the more modern locks (what folks refer to as the 1756 btw). There were more than 100,000 of them in British stores prior to the AWI, and so many extra parts that they continued to be produced into the 1790's, albeit with shorter barrels.
The muskets in America probably did not undergo those upgrades to metal rammers and nosecaps. That's the point. Since the British won the vast majority of the battles, until say Saratoga, you're not getting the more modern British muskets from capture, or discarded on a battlefield.
As for the shorter muskets, they were 38" and 36" barreled pieces, most started out with wooden rammers and were converted later to metal. They were all of a caliber smaller than even the French musket, being in the vast majority .65. This included the Dragoon carbine which is thought to have prompted the move to the SLP. (TWO regiments had carbines of 28" barrels.) Later carbine versions produced during the middle of the AWI had the SLP characteristics, but would have been in even smaller numbers than the older versions
So the Pedersoli Bess Carbine with it's .75 barrel of 30" is simply not a good idea....Hence my suggestion to "forget" the shorter musket for an American militiaman.
As for what the colonials had when the war started, they were armed with lesser quality muskets, some bought in Liege, some produced in England of the early characteristics. Some were contracted, but the private makers would and did produce muskets in large numbers conforming to the older patterns.
Yes, there were dragoon units which had a very SLP looking gun, and Marine units that had SLP's (or Sea Service muskets that were similar to the SLP), And the Highlander units were in some cases shortening older muskets to 42", or getting some SLP's when coming over, but again, your colonial militia man with a state-of-the-art SLP would be a very very rare bird, and the Pedersoli version of the short musket really falls "short". :wink:
LD
- Joined
- May 6, 2014
- Messages
- 17,433
- Reaction score
- 16,436
Dave,
Some time ago on this forum, I went through the British Infantry Units that came here in or before 1775 and checked Bailey's index on what they were issued/reissued before they came here. Will have to try to find that information again.
British Artificers were converting LLP British Infantry Muskets with Nose Bands (not Nose Caps) and converting wood rammer pipes to use steel rammers here in America during the FIW. Now, that would pretty much only been for Regular British Army Units, though, and maybe some British American Regiments (Regulars) raised here, but probably not British American Provincials or Militia. Some British Regular Army units even cut down their barrels to 42" here as well, though not in large numbers. Bailey is unclear on what units did it and my best guess it was done for some Light Infantry.
Also, somewhere on this forum I posted documentation that the 42 RHR had a mixture of P 1742 Muskets and P 1744 Dragoon Carbines when they first came over during the FIW. The Dragoon Carbines were .76 caliber, though and not "Carbine Bore" and the only thing that made them "carbines" was the 42 inch barrel length. Since they were for Dragoons, they had sling swivels and bayonets fitted. (I think these are the ones you mentioned that were the beginning of the SLP usage.) However, they were rearmed with P1756 Carbines w/steel rammers during the War and other Highland Units were issued the same before they came over in the FIW.
I agree that most Patriot American Militia units in the AWI were armed with (at best) Wood Rammer muskets and most would have been LLP's, prior to Saratoga as you pointed out. Most would have been a hodgepodge of whatever models were in colonial stores. Though there were some armed with 42" Civilian Contract Muskets, as mentioned before.
Like you, I would LOVE to see Pedersoli make both the P1742 and P1756 repro LLP muskets. Though the P1742 might be a little sketchy for American Militia in the FIW, it would be great for the AWI.
Gus
P.S. Since I am dreaming, I would love to see Pedersoli make the P1740 LLP with the double bridle lock, the early "wrap around aprons" and the trigger guard that became standard on the P1742. That would be a wonderful Musket to use for both FIW and AWI.
Some time ago on this forum, I went through the British Infantry Units that came here in or before 1775 and checked Bailey's index on what they were issued/reissued before they came here. Will have to try to find that information again.
British Artificers were converting LLP British Infantry Muskets with Nose Bands (not Nose Caps) and converting wood rammer pipes to use steel rammers here in America during the FIW. Now, that would pretty much only been for Regular British Army Units, though, and maybe some British American Regiments (Regulars) raised here, but probably not British American Provincials or Militia. Some British Regular Army units even cut down their barrels to 42" here as well, though not in large numbers. Bailey is unclear on what units did it and my best guess it was done for some Light Infantry.
Also, somewhere on this forum I posted documentation that the 42 RHR had a mixture of P 1742 Muskets and P 1744 Dragoon Carbines when they first came over during the FIW. The Dragoon Carbines were .76 caliber, though and not "Carbine Bore" and the only thing that made them "carbines" was the 42 inch barrel length. Since they were for Dragoons, they had sling swivels and bayonets fitted. (I think these are the ones you mentioned that were the beginning of the SLP usage.) However, they were rearmed with P1756 Carbines w/steel rammers during the War and other Highland Units were issued the same before they came over in the FIW.
I agree that most Patriot American Militia units in the AWI were armed with (at best) Wood Rammer muskets and most would have been LLP's, prior to Saratoga as you pointed out. Most would have been a hodgepodge of whatever models were in colonial stores. Though there were some armed with 42" Civilian Contract Muskets, as mentioned before.
Like you, I would LOVE to see Pedersoli make both the P1742 and P1756 repro LLP muskets. Though the P1742 might be a little sketchy for American Militia in the FIW, it would be great for the AWI.
Gus
P.S. Since I am dreaming, I would love to see Pedersoli make the P1740 LLP with the double bridle lock, the early "wrap around aprons" and the trigger guard that became standard on the P1742. That would be a wonderful Musket to use for both FIW and AWI.
Those first two parts pics you showed reminded me of dig ups from a two century old battlefield. I was turned off of any India made products when a friend said his business was greatly injured when he started buying India products. He was in the farm and tractor business. He started buying India made tractors. But, he quickly found they were real El-Junko quality. Cast parts (which are most of a tractor) had holes so deep they seeped and leaked oil. Some parts were impossible to fix. And, those tractors were nearly impossible to sell. With those kinds of standards, I am shied away from an India made products.
As I've said before, India can and does produce some quality machines. They also produce some real junk.
My Royal Enfield motorcycle was made in India.
After 5 years of riding it and 20,000 miles covered the only unusual things that needed replacing was the rear chain, some light bulbs and one engine mount bolt. :grin:
My Royal Enfield motorcycle was made in India.
After 5 years of riding it and 20,000 miles covered the only unusual things that needed replacing was the rear chain, some light bulbs and one engine mount bolt. :grin:
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2006
- Messages
- 3,936
- Reaction score
- 1,043
You can build up to a standard or down to a price.
Good, fast, cheap. Pick two.
You may not always get what you pay for but even rarer is to get more than you paid for.
Good, fast, cheap. Pick two.
You may not always get what you pay for but even rarer is to get more than you paid for.
NO DOUBT! :thumbsup:
I'd have to shell out the cash for one....in fact I'd probably go ahead and pay $1500 for one if they did. I'd drop another $1500 (probably have to sell blood and semen) if they'd produce a proper Spanish musket with the grooved frizzen, duckbill ****, and brass barrel bands....
LD
Last edited by a moderator:
- Joined
- May 6, 2014
- Messages
- 17,433
- Reaction score
- 16,436
The funny/interesting thing is that if an American Militiaman (and especially on the frontier from the Mid Atlantic colonies, northward) had an Iron/Steel Rammer Musket prior to or at the very beginning of the AWI, that musket more than likely would have been the Model 1746 FRENCH Musket captured from Fort Louisbourg in the FIW.
Gus
Gus
Another aspect of the whole argument is the Massachusetts militia laws for 1775 required them to carry...Artificer said:
"a good firearm with a steel or iron ramrod...a bayonet fitted to his gun, a scabbard of belt therefor, and a cutting word , or a tomahawk or hatchet, a pouch containing a cartridge box that would hold fifteen rounds of cartridges at least, a hundred of buckshot, a jack knife and tow for wadding six flints one pound of powder forty leaded balls fitten to his gun...."
We'll stop there but it's amazing the colonies required metal ramrods while many regulars still carried LLP muskets with, we certainly hope, the steel ramrod but who knows! :wink:
To the original poster I'd also recommend, as others have, talk to your unit commanders and make sure what they require. Not all re-enactment units even carry guns that should pass muster while others are very precise about what's allowable. Be sure you know what they allow before spending money. I will also add my vote to Loyalist and Veterans for picking the best quality India made guns and checking them thoroughly. historically, any number of regular units carried the longer LLP pattern muskets deep into the AWI. Others didn't and most had SLP pattern muskets issued to their 'light' companies as soon as they could...if not issued the special version we now thing was available. A lot had to do with how much money the regimental commander was skimming too! Ah, the questions! :haha:
- Joined
- May 6, 2014
- Messages
- 17,433
- Reaction score
- 16,436
Yes, it was sometimes amazing what the politicians in Boston sometimes came up with.
A few years back, I ran across an ordinance they passed in 1760 stating from that time forward, no one was allowed to store cannon in their basement. The cannon from there on out had to be stored in a "store house," or at their place of business. The way the ordinance was written, one could not be sure if some folks were storing just one cannon or many cannon in their basements. Boggles the mind to think enough Boston Townsfolk were storing cannon in their basements that they figured they needed an ordinance to stop the practice.
:haha:
Good to see you posting again Wes, hope you are doing well health wise.
Gus
A few years back, I ran across an ordinance they passed in 1760 stating from that time forward, no one was allowed to store cannon in their basement. The cannon from there on out had to be stored in a "store house," or at their place of business. The way the ordinance was written, one could not be sure if some folks were storing just one cannon or many cannon in their basements. Boggles the mind to think enough Boston Townsfolk were storing cannon in their basements that they figured they needed an ordinance to stop the practice.
:haha: Good to see you posting again Wes, hope you are doing well health wise.
Gus
Artificer said:
Holds still today IMHO
Yeah, better. Thank you. Down to being just sore from doing my Flying Wallenda's impression in the garage when I stepped on a cat putting out food! :haha: Good thing the old Sgt. was an ex paratrooper and taught us how to take a tumble! :rotf:
Similar threads
