#1 The Sea Service Bess. Course, for not much more than that you could get a Jackie Brown, TVM, Early Rustic Arms, or Jack Garner smoothbore and have a really nice smoothbore that didn't come from India. JMO
-
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
OK, let's put it to a vote.
- Thread starter TN.Frank
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
- Joined
- May 24, 2005
- Messages
- 5,462
- Reaction score
- 5,250
#1 :thumbsup:
Rebel said:
It's the "not much more" that's killin' me. $558 for the Sea Service is "doable" but $750-900 is not. I know, to some $200 bucks isn't all that much more to pay but to me it's a lot. For no more then I shoot I think I'll get good service out of it.
I know what ya mean about $200 but it wouldn't be that much. Jackie Brown and Jack Garner have smoothbores listed for about $695 last i checked. And they had some ready to sell.
I think they are in the Muzzleloader Links forum here. Here is Jack Garners sight, i guess Jackie Browns is down.
[url] http://www.tennesseevalleymanufacturing.com/index.php[/url]
[url] http://www.tennesseevalleymanufacturing.com/index.php[/url]
Last edited by a moderator:
Big John
45 Cal.
#3's my pick!
""These early muskets were issued to the British Navy, as well as some marine units in 1715-40's,
but were carried on board His Majestys' ships for many years afterward."
So you need something earlier then 1715??"
But in reality they probably started production in 1738 it seems....this looks like another case of a supplier offering unreliable info on their product, a very common situation.
but were carried on board His Majestys' ships for many years afterward."
So you need something earlier then 1715??"
But in reality they probably started production in 1738 it seems....this looks like another case of a supplier offering unreliable info on their product, a very common situation.
Yup, I'd go with #3 and replace the ramrod for all but wall hanging. Then again, I like the looks of the Bess' brass. And the 36" barrel,,, I like!
However,,, the .76 cal would make me skowl a bit. Would need to check common mold and wad size availability first (probably not a problem,, I don't know).
However,,, the .76 cal would make me skowl a bit. Would need to check common mold and wad size availability first (probably not a problem,, I don't know).
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2005
- Messages
- 1,673
- Reaction score
- 39
Wood rules...
Silly brass ramrod person... :winking:
Silly brass ramrod person... :winking:
arcticap
54 Cal.
#1 is a beauty, but I like the 1806 Baker Smooth rifle too because of it's smaller caliber, sights and cheek piece. Good luck TN.Frank! :v
[url] http://www.loyalistarms.freeservers.com/bakerifle.html[/url]
[url] http://www.loyalistarms.freeservers.com/bakerifle.html[/url]
Last edited by a moderator:
A lot of rifles that are "unknown" seems to have poped up since Atlanta Cutlery bought up those tons of old guns of all types from Nepel, a Baker , the slant breech Sharps with out a name or # on it, but the one I wanted the sappers carbine with a 26" sword bayonet wsa sold out in 6 days! Im sure all 3 have good and bad points , I havent seen any but #2 it looks much better than the pic, but the service from these people has been outstanding, no Q or problem to small to call them about . Hope that helps some others cantell you about the others #3 dose look good. FRED :hatsoff:
Mike Brooks
Cannon
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2005
- Messages
- 6,686
- Reaction score
- 33
Well, other than the fact the mounts should be brass, the triggerguard is of the wrong style, there should be a sideplate, the frizzen is of the wrong style and the buttstock architecture looks nothing like a sea service musket, it's looks like an exact copy of a sea service musket if you squint your eyes just right. :winking: If historical accuracy isn't an issue, this may be the gun for you.
I can't stand brass on a gun, historical correct or otherwise, I think it looks cheap. I like iron because it more durable and can be browned or blued to cut down on the shine which is a big plus when hunting. In 6+ weeks when I've got the money saved up I may find something else that I like even better but at this point in time the "Sea Service" musket is the one I like.
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2005
- Messages
- 1,379
- Reaction score
- 246
Save your money even if you have to save for another year and buy a decent musket. The steel on these guns look like chrome, they leave to much wood and what kind of wood it is, well that's anyones guess. If it looks like junk, feels like junk... well you get the picture. I know people say they are a decent gun for the money but after handling them, I couldn't come away with any other opinion than what I've just said. You need to handle one of these before you spend the money.
