Pedersoli vs. Loyalist Arms Indian

[rembrandt78737]

I'm admittedly a fan of the Indian flintlocks. Well, the Loyalist Arms finished ones. I have a Brown Bess and two pistols from them. The finishing done on the one Indian pistol I have from Veteran Arms I was not impressed with, so I'm not recommending their products. I'm always surprised by the amount of bad-mouthing of the Indian guns that occurs on these forums. A lot of it is out of ignorance and most of the people making the worst comments don't own one and are passing mostly hearsay. Nevertheless, I figured I'd see what was so great about a Pedersoli.

First off, it was over twice the amount I paid for the same model I purchased from Loyalist Arms. Now, some of that is offset by the fact that I didn't have to wait 8 to 12 weeks to get it like for the Indian guns. But I'm still paying twice the amount and I was expecting twice the value. To be honest, I was totally UNDERWHELMED by the Pedersoli.

Wood fit and finish were better, yes. The cutouts in the stock for the lock are cleaner and more precise. But things went downhill from there for me. It still had some finish flaws and I absolutely despise the finish Pedersoli uses. It has almost a plastic look to it and it is considerably lighter in color than on any of my other guns. So that was the first strike against it (well, technically the price was the first, but I'm going to ignore that for now). The finish would need to be stripped and redone. It would bug me eternally otherwise. The second strike was that none of my spring clamps will work on the frizzen spring. They just slide off the spring due to the design of the spring. I don't have that issue on any other flintlock I have but this one. So getting a different spring clamp just for this pistol is another negative. The third strike was the pan was brass and not steel. The pan surface looked like a freshly plowed farmers' field and would require far more effort to polish it smooth than I've ever had to do on my Indian flintlocks. The fourth and final strike was the fit between the pan and the barrel was terrible. There was a gap sufficient to allow significant amounts of powder to fall between the lock and barrel. Tightening the lock did nothing, so I would need to remove wood to seat the lock deeper. Something I might expect (but haven't yet encountered four firearms later) on the cheaper Indian guns, but certainly wasn't expecting on an $850 pistol. It looks like while they take exceptional care on the wood fitting they seem to lack quality control where it really matters (like the lock and pan to barrel fit).

Personally, I'll stick with my Loyalist Arms Indian guns. This Pedersoli is going back to Dixie Gunworks. Pedersoli just doesn't seem to be worth the money considering you still have to "fix" them.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

Which has been the objections for a long time now.

You don't get the value for which you are paying, too often with the Pedersoli guns.
I have a Pedersoli "Indian Trade Musket", and it's at least 20 years old. The ramrod thimbles were not properly installed, and one broke loose from the stock it was pinned so shallow in the wood. There is a visible line on the frizzen where they quenched it... it ain't straight. BUT this gun would be $1000 in today's money.

LD

 

[Commodore Swab]

Out of curisoity what did you dislike about the VA finish compared to the loyalist?

 

[rembrandt78737]

Out of curisoity what did you dislike about the VA finish compared to the loyalist?

A lot of little attention to detail things. Some functional, most cosmetic.
Functionally, the Veteran Arms was a slower lock. The inside of the touch hole was ragged and steeply angled which caused a fairly noticeable ignition delay from pan to barrel. It had been drilled but not cleaned up in any way and the interior of the touch hole was rough. I ended up having to redrill it slightly larger to smooth the sides and bevel the outside of the touch hole. So it appeared less attention was shown to the mechanics of the pistol.
The wood finishing was inferior and seemed to have a semi-gloss varnish that came off easily as I applied museum wax to the stock. The “varnish”, if that’s what it was, lasted one waxing. The Teak doesn’t hold stain very well, so I usually spend a fair amount of time rubbing down the stocks to remove the excess stain. The Loyalist finishes come out of this process looking good. The Veteran arms finish I’m considering redoing completely. The end of the barrel of the Veteran Arms pistol looked like it had just been cut. No effort to polish out the end of the barrel was made. The ramrod was only roughly finished and the tip fell off within a few days requiring re-gluing. Granted, the ramrod would never be used, but it was just another example of a lack of attention to detail that I don’t encounter with the Loyalist Arms finishing. In conclusion, it looked like Veteran Arms did the minimum necessary and then shipped the pistol. These Indian guns will always be a bit rough, but it appears Loyalist puts a higher level of effort in their finishing process for the same money. Their customer service is also excellent. Considering I’ve only purchased one firearm from Veteran Arms, this pistol may have been the exception rather than the rule. So maybe this critique is unfair. But when the wait time for delivery runs in the 8 to 12 week range for these firearms, you go with the vender you have confidence in.

 

[Commodore Swab]

Must have been an order from a while back.

 

[rembrandt78737]

Last summer.

 

[HatchetJack95]

I hear ya. When it came down to it, I sprang for the Pedersoli Bess over the Loyalist Arms Bess for one reason: availability of interchangeable parts. When I inevitably need to make a repair, I want it to be easy. But that's not a knock against India muskets at all! The many people I know who have India guns never have any issues, and a lot of the complaints that they're unsafe or unfit to shoot really do seem to be exaggerated or overblown. Would I double charge a live round out of an India musket? Hell no! But I wouldn't do that with my Pedersoli either!

With the vast price difference between an Italian and an Indian musket, I cannot blame anybody for choosing the latter!

 

[Commodore Swab]

I hear that frequently about "interchangeability and availability" of pendersoli parts. I have a HF pistol and found a new lock for it, definitely not "interchangeable nor were the parts while they both were pendersoli. On the availability who sells/stocks parts? Perhaps just perhaps the "interchangeability and availability" is not all it's been made out to be?

 

[rembrandt78737]

Like I said, this was a one time purchase during the worst of the COVID shutdowns. But Loyalist was dealing with all the same issues as Veteran Arms, from staffing to issues getting parts from India. The little things were still getting done though. Your experience may be different. This post was more about my disappointment paying big bucks for a Pedersoli and then still being faced with “fixing it” rather than knocking Veteran Arms. I didn’t send their pistol back to them, after all. I’ve remedied some of the issues and planning on fixing the rest. When I’m done I’ll be happy with it. At $400 I don’t expect perfection and am more than willing to invest time making adjustments myself. At $830, I’m not. With Pedersoli prices I’m not expecting a project gun.

 

[user 49399]

My Loyalist Arms Fusil de Chasse is my main squirrel gun. It works just fine and I’ve never had any problems with it. I think it looks historically correct also. I keep it clean and use good flints and it shoots every time.

 

[rembrandt78737]

I think that is the key for any firearm, maintenance. The firearm is poorly maintained and misfires or fails outright and the blame gets affixed to the weapon, not the shooter. I’ve never had any shooting issues with my Indian made pistols or my musket other than a dull flint or wet powder, and those are common flintlock issues, not manufacturing issues. Unfortunately, bad press, whether true or not, gets spread far more quickly and passionately than good press. That is the nature of man, I guess. Personally, I love the Indian stuff and their very roughness appeals to me. Not to mention the barrels aren’t stamped with all sorts of modern stamps like “black powder only”, etc. They are shooters, not show pieces, and that is what I like.

 

[user 49399]

I agree 100%, especially the part about no barrel markings.

 

[longtoothpard]

I have owned Loyalist and never had a problem with them other than fhe metal being too shiny for me. I have owned India made guns from others with metal lock parts too soft or a painted on finish on the stock. Also had a Pedersoli 1795 that I had to beat the barrel bands with a wooden mallet to get them off the musket. I sanded down the stock and refinished. Plus Pedersoli furniture is very thick and clunky. Not what you expect for $1400. I just bought a Miroku Charleville in excellent shape. That that is the Cadillac of muskets. And it was $700. The older Pedersoli Besses are far better than the current ones.

Given how expensive Peds are you're better off to put some extra with it and get an original or a good repop kit from Rifle Shoppe.

 

[skwerleater]

I have tried several of the Indian pieces over the years. The fit and finish was lacking on them and out of 6 of them, 5 had major lock flaws to the point where they just would not function. The Italian pieces are more expensive, and I have owned several. There is no comparison in the quality, Italian ones are way better.

 

[NorthFork]

The pan on a Pedersoli Indian Trade musket (I assume that is what you are referencing) is NOT brass. It steel. The lock plate and pan is cast as one unit.

 

[springfield art]

I'm admittedly a fan of the Indian flintlocks. Well, the Loyalist Arms finished ones. I have a Brown Bess and two pistols from them. The finishing done on the one Indian pistol I have from Veteran Arms I was not impressed with, so I'm not recommending their products. I'm always surprised by the amount of bad-mouthing of the Indian guns that occurs on these forums. A lot of it is out of ignorance and most of the people making the worst comments don't own one and are passing mostly hearsay. Nevertheless, I figured I'd see what was so great about a Pedersoli.

First off, it was over twice the amount I paid for the same model I purchased from Loyalist Arms. Now, some of that is offset by the fact that I didn't have to wait 8 to 12 weeks to get it like for the Indian guns. But I'm still paying twice the amount and I was expecting twice the value. To be honest, I was totally UNDERWHELMED by the Pedersoli.

Wood fit and finish were better, yes. The cutouts in the stock for the lock are cleaner and more precise. But things went downhill from there for me. It still had some finish flaws and I absolutely despise the finish Pedersoli uses. It has almost a plastic look to it and it is considerably lighter in color than on any of my other guns. So that was the first strike against it (well, technically the price was the first, but I'm going to ignore that for now). The finish would need to be stripped and redone. It would bug me eternally otherwise. The second strike was that none of my spring clamps will work on the frizzen spring. They just slide off the spring due to the design of the spring. I don't have that issue on any other flintlock I have but this one. So getting a different spring clamp just for this pistol is another negative. The third strike was the pan was brass and not steel. The pan surface looked like a freshly plowed farmers' field and would require far more effort to polish it smooth than I've ever had to do on my Indian flintlocks. The fourth and final strike was the fit between the pan and the barrel was terrible. There was a gap sufficient to allow significant amounts of powder to fall between the lock and barrel. Tightening the lock did nothing, so I would need to remove wood to seat the lock deeper. Something I might expect (but haven't yet encountered four firearms later) on the cheaper Indian guns, but certainly wasn't expecting on an $850 pistol. It looks like while they take exceptional care on the wood fitting they seem to lack quality control where it really matters (like the lock and pan to barrel fit).

Personally, I'll stick with my Loyalist Arms Indian guns. This Pedersoli is going back to Dixie Gunworks. Pedersoli just doesn't seem to be worth the money considering you still have to "fix" them.

Thanks very much for your experience's comments. I'll check out Loyalist! I agree with you concerning the 'bad-mouthing'. The Pedersoli would not be my choice. I'm mulling over getting a Trade Musket.

 

[longtoothpard]

Like others on here I have owned both Pedersoli and Indian muskets. With the latter, Loyalist has always been my favorite. The issue of spare parts is a concern with the Indian arms. I have been very disappointed with Pedersoli lately. The biggest complaint I have always had with Ped is how chucky and heavy their stuff it. I have one of the 1816 muskets that I bought at the NSSA nationals way back in 1992 that functions well. Have had to replace the frizzen and the mainspring, but I will hold on to it for years to come. HOWEVER, it is very heavy. My favorite of the Loyalist was their 1840. While not a true and exact copy, it always performed well; just did not like the mirror finish on the metal - over polished for my liking. Now, my absolute favorite musket is my Miroku Navy Arms Charleville. Well made, and light weight. Never fails to spark. I have owned and sold four over the years (yes, I'm an old timer), but the one I have now is held with a death grip. lol Finally, I bought a Ped 61 last year. Hunk of junk. The trigger guard was bent and the wood to metal fit was atrocious. Dixie gave me my money back, no questions. So, I'm done with Ped.

 

[Surfinator58]

I have owned pedersoli as well as India guns I prefer the India guns because of the price and original look Italian guns look like they were produced on CNC computer-driven machines which they were there too perfect to clean

 

[trettie]

I’ve bought two pieces from Loyalist: an English Lock and a Matchlock musket. The English lock developed a crack in the forearm, but it was repairable. The trigger pull was quite stiff, but I was able to adjust it down to a more comfortable level. The matchlock needed some tweaking to the pan cover. Purchase and shipping was painless, and I was given finish options on the stock. I’d do business with them again.

 

[pheenix99]

I have owned pedersoli as well as India guns I prefer the India guns because of the price and original look Italian guns look like they were produced on CNC computer-driven machines which they were there too perfect to clean

If the Indian stocks were made of something other than Teak....I'd consider it.