Pedersoli Brown Bess ?’s

[TF Black]

I’ve been saying for a couple years now that a Kibler kit for the AWI era would be a huge hit. As others have noted, it’s kind of amazing that AWI reenactors today have such extremely limited (period correct) musket options. And I’d imagine that with the uptick in AWI events given the anniversary, now would be the perfect time.

Beyond the reenacting community, I think there’s a significant secondary market consisting of military collectors, history buffs, and hobbyists that are just generally more interested in owning a flintlock military longarm than a civilian longrifle or fowler.

I think a Bess probably makes the most sense. Maybe choose a pattern that could do “double duty” for the F&I and AWI period, like the 1742, or choose the 1756 Long Land pattern, which seems to me to provide the most AWI flexibility, especially if versions could be had with a wooden or steel (iron) ramrod.

ETA; my only other advice ( worth what you paid for it, of course), is if you do it, reproduce it as accurately as you can. Again as others have noted there are a couple commercial options available, but they suffer from a lack of authenticity.

Sign me up for 2 them…p

 

[FlinterNick]

Nope. The 1816 was the first US infantry musket to be made with a retention spring. This is one point I’m gonna cheat on my 1795 when I build it. I’m gonna use the French lug on barrel style you showed me.

It’s works great, I’ve done it a few times for navy arms charlevilles, rammer just slides right out on those. The lug can be pretty small and a later period rammer spoon works well.

 

[Clark Badgett]

I’ve been saying for a couple years now that a Kibler kit for the AWI era would be a huge hit. As others have noted, it’s kind of amazing that AWI reenactors today have such extremely limited (period correct) musket options. And I’d imagine that with the uptick in AWI events given the anniversary, now would be the perfect time.

Beyond the reenacting community, I think there’s a significant secondary market consisting of military collectors, history buffs, and hobbyists that are just generally more interested in owning a flintlock military longarm than a civilian longrifle or fowler.

I think a Bess probably makes the most sense. Maybe choose a pattern that could do “double duty” for the F&I and AWI period, like the 1742, or choose the 1756 Long Land pattern, which seems to me to provide the most flexibility, especially if versions could be had with a wooden or steel (iron) ramrod.

Sign me up for 2 them…

I think a 1756 and a 1769 version could be pulled off easily since they had parts commonality with exception to barrels, rammers, side plates and butt plates. Same lock, same pipes, same thumb plate, same trigger guard.

 

[FlinterNick]

I’ve been saying for a couple years now that a Kibler kit for the AWI era would be a huge hit. As others have noted, it’s kind of amazing that AWI reenactors today have such extremely limited (period correct) musket options. And I’d imagine that with the uptick in AWI events given the anniversary, now would be the perfect time.

Beyond the reenacting community, I think there’s a significant secondary market consisting of military collectors, history buffs, and hobbyists that are just generally more interested in owning a flintlock military longarm than a civilian longrifle or fowler.

I think a Bess probably makes the most sense. Maybe choose a pattern that could do “double duty” for the F&I and AWI period, like the 1742, or choose the 1756 Long Land pattern, which seems to me to provide the most flexibility, especially if versions could be had with a wooden or steel (iron) ramrod.

Sign me up for 2 them…

Some coach and harness brown Bess pictures. And a bicentennial Pedersoli kit !


Only cost $595 in 1975 !

 

[FlinterNick]

I think a 1756 and a 1769 version could be pulled off easily since they had parts commonality with exception to barrels, rammers, side plates and butt plates. Same lock, same pipes, same thumb plate, same trigger guard.

It would be an efficient way to offer a Bess since the hardware is almost the same along with the same lock.

Where it is tricky is the very early patterns, 1728-1742.

I think even better is Jim’s available of different wood grades, walnut, maple or cherry. Almost all were in original English walnut, but the option to do other woods is great.

 

[FlinterNick]

I’ve been saying for a couple years now that a Kibler kit for the AWI era would be a huge hit. As others have noted, it’s kind of amazing that AWI reenactors today have such extremely limited (period correct) musket options. And I’d imagine that with the uptick in AWI events given the anniversary, now would be the perfect time.

Beyond the reenacting community, I think there’s a significant secondary market consisting of military collectors, history buffs, and hobbyists that are just generally more interested in owning a flintlock military longarm than a civilian longrifle or fowler.

I think a Bess probably makes the most sense. Maybe choose a pattern that could do “double duty” for the F&I and AWI period, like the 1742, or choose the 1756 Long Land pattern, which seems to me to provide the most AWI flexibility, especially if versions could be had with a wooden or steel (iron) ramrod.

ETA; my only other advice ( worth what you paid for it, of course), is if you do it, reproduce it as accurately as you can. Again as others have noted there are a couple commercial options available, but they suffer from a lack of authenticity.

Sign me up for 2 them…p

There was a company in the 1980’s that offered a long land pattern Bess that would either be issued with a wooden rod or a steel rod. The major issue they had with those was they decided to use the later lock with a straight profile and not the banana curved lock. The company’s name escapes me but very now and then you seem them auction.

 

[TNGhost]

The model 1795 was the first Colonial American Made Rifle and it was an exact copy of the 1777 Charleville that’s how much they thought of that weapon, Bravo I think it was one of the best out there at the time.

Didn't the 1763 Charleville make up the bulk of the Charleville's provided to the U.S. during the AR?

 

[TNGhost]

No super keen movies recently. Also, there is just some bit of gatekeeperism. Last, you need French reenactors… that’s the hard part.

Put a call in to Maine and Louisiana......

 

[Coinneach]

A big complaint by the British was stands of arms not being returned after the F&I War. Many soldiers treated them as personal property.

Smart thinking on their part IMO

 

[TrailWalker]

They don’t spend thousands on uniforms and clothing. Not like you’re thinking. And thousands for a gun that will be dropped. Have the butt slammed in the ground, carried when wet and other such things… most will not spend that much. Young people and those with families won’t. But if Jim a Kibler can make one with prices in line with his other offerings, yes.

I’m simply going off what I’ve been told by reenactors at various events. I was astonished to learn how much some of these guys spend on their get-ups.

Townsends wants $515 for a period coat alone. Trousers are $200, shoes are $200… I’ll let you do the math.

 

[Tumbledown]

I think even better is Jim’s available of different wood grades, walnut, maple or cherry. Almost all were in original English walnut, but the option to do other woods is great.

And then we're right back to the issue of authenticity we argue about with the Indian and Italian guns.

 

[FlinterNick]

And then we're right back to the issue of authenticity we argue about with the Indian and Italian guns.

The wood choices are authentic, there were many American restocked brown Bess’s in cherry and maple. That’s why i mentioned that.

 

[FlinterNick]

Didn't the 1763 Charleville make up the bulk of the Charleville's provided to the U.S. during the AR?

No it was the 1766 - 1768 model.

Sometimes the 1766 is referred to as the 1763/66 because many of the 1763’s were sent back and modified. The modifications were the stock mostly which was reduced in the butt stock.

The 1763 model was sent over in large numbers and is distinctly heavier than the 1766, but more 1766’s were sent over than 1763’s.

1763 musket


https://emuseum.history.org/objects/89501/model-1763-infantry-musket-and-bayonet

 

[Smokey Plainsman]

I think a 3rd Model Brown Bess would be a neat gun to have. I like how it looks and it's proper for the War of 1812.

 

[Tumbledown]

The wood choices are authentic, there were many American restocked brown Bess’s in cherry and maple. That’s why i mentioned that.

But then they're not Brown Bess muskets, they're colonial guns.

Either it's a King's Musket, or it's not.

 

[FlinterNick]

But then they're not Brown Bess muskets, they're colonial guns.

Either it's a King's Musket, or it's not.

I agree, if Jim Kibler offer’s a brown Bess in Cherry, well then you can call it a colonial restocked brown Bess, or call it a colonial gun if you must. My point was the choice different wood is a neat option.

 

[FlinterNick]

I think a 3rd Model Brown Bess would be a neat gun to have. I like how it looks and it's proper for the War of 1812.

Ironically the only 3rd models’ I’ve seen people shoot are the originals. I’ve never seen a rifle shoppe 3rd model brown Bess.

 

[FlinterNick]

Deleted

 

[Smokey Plainsman]

A Bess in curly flame maple would be an amazing gun!!

 

[Indy Durtdigger]

I've nothing of value to add to this conversation but I would like to know what kind of hypothetical time frame we're talking about on pre orders?