Parker Hale vs. London Armory Musketoon

[kilbuck]

I'm considering a reproduction Enfield Musketoon for whitetail hunting in close cover. So far I have flushed out two options: (1) a used Parker Hale, reportedly in excellent condition for $550, and; (2) a new London Armory from Dixie at $625.

My knowledge of these guns is near nil. I did read in an old Track of the Wolf catalog that the PH had a spliced forend. That might have been for the longer 3-band musket model, didn't say.

Also heard that some of the reproduction musketoons tend to zero at 200 yards. Don't know if PH was one of those.

I've read Dixie's description of the London Armory, also a report posted on Dixie's website by a happy customer who gave the gun five-stars. Two of these LA guns reportedly zeroed at 50-100 yds, if I recall correctly.

Would enjoy hearing your comments on these two options. The price of the used PH sounds high to me, but may be negotiable. Does it have features/performance that justify the price, or is the new LA clearly a better buy?

I'll probably want to try both patched round ball and hollow base conicals if I end up owning one of these nifty-looking pieces.

 

[CoyoteJoe]

The difference in cost reflects the difference in quality, Parker-Hale is a large cut above the Spanish or Italian repos.
I can't speak as to where the Musketoon sights zero, mine was the mid-length two band. For hunting with the musketoon I think you would be better off shooting roundball, less expense, less recoil, shoots flatter and swaged balls are readily available. Whether or not you can get them to shoot to the issue sights I can't say but I find the issue sights pretty poor and I'd probably change them for hunting anyway.
I'd not hesitate to choose the Parker-Hale except that one never knows about a used muzzleloader, the bores very often show damage from neglect or misuse even if they look fine from the outside.

 

[kilbuck]

Coyote-
Thanks for the information. If I like the looks of the PH, I will certainly ask to run a patch and light the bore up, maybe even test fire.

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

My P-H 1853 is easily one of the best rifles I own. If the bore is good, these rifles are definitely worth the extra money. I use the .575 Minie intended for the Springfield rifled muskets and 80 grains GOEX ffg. Don't know what the velocity is, but the accuracy is great.

 

[SCATTERSHOT]

If the used P/H is the first generation Parker Hale, they were made in London from the original dies, and are superb rifles. The later P/H replicas were made in Italy, but the barrels were English, I believe. I had a musketoon tnat was a first gen P/H, and it was as fine a rifle as you can find.

Caveat Emptor, though, on used rifles. Insist on an inspection period with a full refund if not satisfied. I bought two rifles recently from an online auction outfit, and although I asked the right questions, both were in miserable shape, the barrel of one being rusted so badly that you couldn't see the lands and grooves.

 

[Zonie]

"..My knowledge of these guns is near nil. I did read in an old Track of the Wolf catalog that the PH had a spliced forend. That might have been for the longer 3-band musket model, didn't say..."
__________________________________________

I don't know what they were talking about unless, as you say someone had been frinkleing with it.
I own all three models of the original PH rifles and they each have one piece walnut stocks.

As for point of aim, my Musketoon shoots about 2 inches high at 50 yards with a 566 grain Lyman #575213PH Minie' over 60 grains of FFg.
IMO, this would not be noticed in close cover hunting.
The recoil with these 566 grain slugs is rather stout and will be noticed.
I have only shot a few roundballs in the Musketoon and at the time, I had shot about 30 Minie's.
As I recall, I wasn't getting a very good group but I think that was due to my sore shoulder.

With its 3' 4" length it would be a great little gun for hunting brushy areas and the 18 1/2 inchs between the sights still is enough to give good accuracy.

I paid about $375 for my used gun about 1 1/2 years ago and consider it to be one of my better deals.

 

[TFoley]

I have owned my PH Musketoon since 1977, and PH Whitworth since 1986. Neither the latter, nor my three-band Volunteer, nor my P53, have a spliced forend. In fact, I have never heard that allegation made before.

The Musketoon was designed with gain twist and a choked bore, to shoot the Minie bullet, not a ball, but your results may differ. I have never tried a vball in mine, but then we don't often see .58cal ball here in UK.

The Parker-Hale weapons were made in the factory in Golden Hillock Road Birmingham, not in London, BTW.

If you get the chance to buy the PH, and the bore is good, go for it, you won't regret it.

tac in Tokyo

 

[kilbuck]

I'm learning a lot here. Thanks all for taking the time to respond.

Found another guy with a Parker Hale Musketoon from Navy Arms., Model PHM103. Does this correspond to any of the weapons you all have been referring to. What's with the Navy Arms? Does that say where the gun was made (Italy?), or if it was an early or late model?

If I digest the posts correctly, we don't yet have a testimonial that these musketoons will shoot accurately with patched round ball, though I understand it can be done. Coyote, did you ever shoot round ball in yours? If so, how did it group?

 

[kb466]

As to the spliced forend, I understand that was only on the long Parker Hale P1853 three band rifle musket, not the shorter ones. I have owned two of the British-made P1853's and still have one of them. They are great rifles, much better than the Italian-made in my opinion. As for the splices, they are finger joints hidden under the rear band and are not visible. Mine look as though an effort was made to match the wood so that it looks to be one-piece. If you are looking at a first generation, British-made Parker Hale, I would definitely buy it over an Italian-made musketoon.

 

[faw3]

I'll take a shot at this and can be wrong, I do have both and have no idea what the spliced thing is. The P-H is way ahead of even Navy Arms, at one time ( I dont know if its done now) they all got barrel blanks from PH and rifled it how they wanted to. I'v cut down the front sight on my Euro Arms to shoot RB its good up to 50 yds. Hope that helps, the PH is a "you get what you pay for- they are First class made. Fred :hatsoff:

 

[Zonie]

"... As for the splices, they are finger joints hidden under the rear band and are not visible..."
_____________________________________________

Well Golllllllieeee! My 3 band does have a finger joint splice under the rear band!

That brings up a question:
These Parker Hale Enfields are supposed to be almost exact copies of the original guns.
Were the original P1853s stocks spliced and joined?

As for Navy Arms, appearently they have been importing the Parker Hale Enfields for a number of years.
They also appearently have imported non Parker Hale Enfields this conclusion being reached because the 18th Ed of the Blue Book of Gun Values 1997 says in each of the three different guns listings "Add $xxx for Parker Hale version.". The $xxx is 100 for the 3 band, 90 for the two band and 50 for the Musketoon.

Navy Arms is still the importer of the Italian made "Parker Hale" which is listed in the Dixie Catalog as made by Gibbs Rifle Co.-Parker-Hale/Italy.

As I don't own one of the new Gibbs Parker-Hale/Italy guns, I can't say if there are any markings which would indicate that they were made in Italy.
I will guess that if the rifles are made in Italy, they will have the star in a circle over the letters PN indicating the Italian Proofing. I would expect this even if the barrels were made and proofed in England.
The only marking on each of my Parker Hale Enfields is the marking "PARKER-HALE LTD. BIRMINGHAM ENGLAND" on the top of the barrel. Also, a crown over "BP" is stamped on the top of the breech plug indicating British Proofing. Also two concentric circles with "PARKER HALE LTD" marked between them is stamped into the right side of the stocks butt.

Speaking of the Gibbs Rifle Co. the 18th ed. of BBGV says in the Parker Hale Limited listings in the Cartridge section:

revious manufacturer located in Birmingham, England. Rifles were manufactured in England until 1991 when Navy Arms purchased the manufacturing rights and built a plant in West Virginia for fabrication. The new company is called Gibbs Rifle Company and they manufactured models very similar to older Parker-Hale rifles during 1992-1994. Shotguns were manufactured in Spain...until 1993."

Now, that ought to be confusing enough.

 

[kb466]

Were the originals spliced? No, I do not believe they were. I have understood that the Parker Hale three bands had the splices because the stock-cutting machine used by Parker Hale in Britain could not handle the longer stock blanks, but could handle the stock blanks for the two band and the musketoon. The splices do not bother me because they are not obvious, the wood matches and it looks to be a strong, well-hidden joint. Like you, I did not know it was spliced till it was pointed out to me years ago. Splice or not, the Parker Hale is much closer to an original thatn any of the other Enfield repros.

 

[ResearchPress]

I have been collecting information on Parker-Hale rifles for some time now and have a record of getting on for 300 serial numbers. Have a look at Parker-Hale Muzzle Loading Rifles on my web site. If anyone cares to submit details to the survey it would be much appreciated; if requested I may be able to give an approx. date for a rifle, based on info received to date.

Hopefully the pages will be of interest even if you do not wish to complete the survey.

David

 

[TFoley]

Were the originals spliced? No, I do not believe they were. I have understood that the Parker Hale three bands had the splices because the stock-cutting machine used by Parker Hale in Britain could not handle the longer stock blanks, but could handle the stock blanks for the two band and the musketoon. The splices do not bother me because they are not obvious, the wood matches and it looks to be a strong, well-hidden joint. Like you, I did not know it was spliced till it was pointed out to me years ago. Splice or not, the Parker Hale is much closer to an original thatn any of the other Enfield repros.

Sorreeeee. I have three of the long stock Parker-Hale originals, and none of them, as I noted before, have a discernible splice. I called up a pal to look at his three, just like mine, and wojja know? None of his appear to be spliced either.

Let's just sum up.

The Parker-Hale originals were made using the actual original P53 gauges and patterns, borrowed from the MoD Pattern Room in the 1970's by Roger Hale, and not returned until a LOOOOOONG time later, in the late 90's as I recall, to a VERY annoyed Herbie Woodend, curator and life-long friend of yours truly. I was actually standing there when they arrived, and Herbie was fit to explode when he read me out part of the accompanying letter - 'herewith as requested our long-term loan gauges and patterns'...not a word of thanks there.

Unless the weapon is stamped Parker-Hale Birmingham and has British proof marks, it is most certainly NOT a genuine original Parker-Hale product, no matter how you look at it.
As I noted on another forum many moons ago, the subsequent makers are now beginning to suffer from production creep - the phenomenum of parts getting bigger or smaller as tolerances in the manufacture are lost due to the manufacturing process and lack of access to the orginal pattern parts, as enjoyed for many years by Parker-Hale, for free, I might add.

Sure, the copies look nice, and mnany of them have far superior wood to that seen on the P-H originals. I was very lucky with mine, and Roger Hale actually chose my very dark wood after making me wait three eyars for my Whitworth.

Like the man said, if it says Parker-Hale Birmingham, it means that it made by Parker-Hale Brimingham, and not the Okeefenokee Black powder, Firework and Banjo Company of Pattaquumpus, Naples, Italy.

YOU Choose.

tac

 

[faw3]

That last line makes my day :rotf: Fred :hatsoff:

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

Zonie said:
"Previous manufacturer located in Birmingham, England. Rifles were manufactured in England until 1991 when Navy Arms purchased the manufacturing rights and built a plant in West Virginia for fabrication. The new company is called Gibbs Rifle Company and they manufactured models very similar to older Parker-Hale rifles during 1992-1994. Shotguns were manufactured in Spain...until 1993."



Interesting that they would say that. Gibbs is a subsidiary of Navy Arms and is owned/founded by Val Forgett, Jr. I have been to the Gibbs facility in Martinsburg, W.Va. a number of times and can tell you that they do not manufacture anything there, it is a storage and sales venue and that is all. The guns are made in Italy and, like the the earliest Parker - Hale made guns are not interchangeable with original. I have never seen a P-H Enfield, even an "English made" one, that was "made to the original guages" as their publicity stated when they first came out in the '70s. (I know I'll catch hell for that one.)

 

[kb466]

Tac,
That is interesting that your three-band Parker Hales do not have the splice. Mine clearly does and is most assuredly British-made (serial No. 45XX). I have looked at four P1853's and all four were spliced. Incidentally, it is stocked in a beautiful piece of European walnut with lots of burl and figure. The spliced forend may have come from the same hunk of wood as the grain and figure matches so well. You would not know that it was spliced unless you take off the rear band and look carefully for it. Based on your experience, I wonder if the spliced stocks went to the American market. Maybe David Minshall could weigh in on this--I had already sent him the data on my P1853 for his registry.

Regardless, my P1853 is a beautifully made rifle and I am delighted to have it.

 

[CoyoteJoe]

Yes, I shot many balls from my two band Parker-Hale. It shot a patched ball with "moderate" loads as well as anything. The minie I used was from a modified mold with thick skirts. That grouped into 3" at 100 yards with 90 grains of Pyro-RS and ONLY with 90 grains, anything more or less opened the groups. I don't recall specific loads for the balls but it was much less finicky than the minies and a .570 ball is plenty of lead for 100 yard deer or elk. The musketoon would be a pound or so lighter than the two band and recoil of the minie load was quite sharp in my heavier rifle, I think it would be very unpleasant in the musketoon. :grin:

 

[CoyoteJoe]

I got my "two-band" in the early 1980's, beautiful fiddle back walnut, and if it was spliced it must have been done very, very well, because I never saw it. I always removed the barrel for cleaning and I think I would have noticed, but--.

 

[sledgemeister]

I have a first gen 1861 p/h musketoon and it shoots minies like a dream. They are a good solid, well made rifle. Italian engineerng peaked at pizza. If you have the choice between a British made p/h or a Italian made the choice is very simple.
BTW great quote by tac

Like the man said, if it says Parker-Hale Birmingham, it means that it made by Parker-Hale Brimingham, and not the Okeefenokee Black powder, Firework and Banjo Company of Pattaquumpus, Naples, Italy.