Pendersoli, Lyman?

[bobznew]

Okay, I have been looking once again at getting a plains-style percussion rifle, probably in .54 caliber. The 2 guns that I've seen a lot of and find most appealing are the Davide Pendersoli "Rocky Mountain Hawken" rifle, and the Lyman "Great Plains Rifle".

I am considering BOTH of these guns, so naturally before I take this sort of plunge, I want to glean as much information as possible on both guns. I would love to hear from you all on which gun is preferred, pros and cons of each, etc.

Thanks in advance.

 

[cowpoke1955]

I have two .54 GPRs, one flint and one percussion. They are great rifles and wonderful shooters. The Pedersoli is also a good looking rifle, but you can buy two GPRs for every one Pedersoli. The Pedersoli is just too high price for a production gun. Just my thoughts.

 

[mykeal]

Unfortunately I can't provide a comparison. I also have two GPR's, one percussion and one flint, both in .54 cal. I built the flint from a kit; the percussion is a factory gun. I think they are excellent rifles.

I do have a Pedersoli 12 ga sxs shotgun. From that gun I will say that Pedersoli is also an excellent gun. Fit and finish are very nice. I do not see that the higher cost of the Pedersoli is entirely justified by better workmanship or materials, but it is a very nice gun.

 

[MikeChapin]

I don't have either rifle but I know enough people who shoot a GPR that I usually recommend them to people getting their first rifle. They are rugged, good shooters.

Like Cowboy, I feel the Pedersoli is overpriced but that's just me. If you want to go high buck TOW has a Jedidiah Smith commemorative Santa Fe Hawken for about $250 less than the Pedersoli ( Santa Fe ). I have had one of these for about 25 years and I can guarantee that they are tack drivers and look more like a Hawken than any of the other production rifle.

 

[Pork Chop]

Exactly what is "wrong" with the Great Plains Rifle with regards to comparing it to a true Hawken rifle? The Santa Fe is usually stated as being very close. I am looking at the photos and the only real differences I see are the rear sight, a very slight perch belly in the butt stock and a subtle change in the curve of the trigger guard. The LOP on the GPR is shorter, so visually the stock is different, but that is about it. Am I not seeing something?

Not casting stones, and this is directed at no one. I am just trying to learn.

 

[bwhoffman]

I have never heard anyone complain about their lyman GPR!
great gun for the money, good reputation, excellent starter gun!
pedersoli markets some really nice stuff, but youdotend to pay a premium for that.
The gpr has proven itself time and again and still holds it own against others.

my opinion only!

 

[Grey Hawk]

I have both the GPR .50 in Flint and a percussion and just found and picked up a .54 Percussion Barrel. I have not owned a Pedersoli but have seen and held them at our local Cabela's. I like my GPR's and may order a Hunter barrel. I guess if anything the Lyman GPR offers more flexability in choices and price.

Grey Hawk

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

Go to Track's site and click on Guns For Sale, then click on percussion rifles. The third rifle down is a GPR. The next three are Hawkens--maybe not the best examples, but you should see the differences. And remember, Lyman called their rifle the Great Plains Rifle--not the Hawken rifle. They knew better I guess.

 

[MikeChapin]

Exactly what is "wrong" with the Great Plains Rifle with regards to comparing it to a true Hawken rifle? The Santa Fe is usually stated as being very close. I am looking at the photos and the only real differences I see are the rear sight, a very slight perch belly in the butt stock and a subtle change in the curve of the trigger guard. The LOP on the GPR is shorter, so visually the stock is different, but that is about it. Am I not seeing something?

Not casting stones, and this is directed at no one. I am just trying to learn.

You pretty well covered it. The only other thing I can think of off the top of my head is the GPR has a coil spring lock and has the lock bolt centered rather than up on the bolster. The GPR does not pretend to be a Hawken but they come closer in looks than any other reasonably priced rifle.

The Santa Fe is a melding of several museum Hawkens. Uberti took the measurements and combined everything to come up with the dimensions of a generic Hawken. The only gripe I have is they did the same thing to the bore and came up with a .53 caliber rather than just go with a .54.

 

[Pork Chop]

I WAS comparing photos on Tracks site. The differences that I pointed out are really splitting hairs - except for the sight and that is easily replaceable. The price difference is significant between the GPR and the Santa Fe. A few minutes with a mallet, a file and a new rear sight, and it is in the same league as the Sante Fe. If you are building from a kit, all of that can be accomplished as part of the build.

Regarding the coil spring - if someone has to pull the lock to see if it is coil or leaf spring, then there the detractor is really digging to find SOMETHING to dislike - just for the sake of disliking.

I guess I just don't get it...

 

[Swampman]

If I could afford the Pedersoli, I'd get it. It's just better looking & finished IMO. Pedersoli has an excellent reputation for producing high quality products.

The GPR is an excellent product for the money IMO.

Neither are really good copies of real Hawken rifle IMO.

 

[greyghost]

I agree with all these fellers. The only thing Pedersolli makes that I would trade my GPR for might be the Quigly sharps. Maybe !! :shake:

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

I don't know what to tell you--the rifles look completely different to me. And if you lay them side by side, they look completely different. A true copy of a Hawken looks nothing like a Lyman GPR. The differences, both subtle and gross are as glaring as a neon sign. And the way that they are constructed is even different. I think that the best thing for you to do is find someone nearby with a good, accurate handbuilt Hawken copy and compare it side by side with a GPR. That should expose the differences. I'm not sure that comparing it to an Italian copy is a good idea since they took some liberties to ease mass production--something the real Hawken doesn't lend itself to.

 

[mykeal]

There are people who are obsessive about details. :youcrazy: It takes all kinds to make a world. There are even people who are obsessive about the people who are obsessive. :youcrazy: :youcrazy: When I made an observation about one member doing just that I was accused of making a snide remark. :cursing: So, we just move along, wondering at the marvelous variety that keeps us from being bored to death. :applause:

 

[MikeChapin]

...
I guess I just don't get it...

Me either. I have two Hawken pattern rifles, the Santa Fe and a fullstock flinter I built a couple of years ago. They are nice and I enjoy them but I'm not even close to being a Hawken snob. I just don't understand some people that want to talk down someone else's stuff just because it doesn't fit their idea of what something should look like.

When they were being sold the Santa Fe, back in the late seventies and early eighties, was in the same boat as the Pedersoli. They were about twice as much as the GPR. The GPR was running just a little under $300 and the Santa Fe was about $550.
I picked mine up when they were discontinued and were about the same price as a GPR at the time. The reason I got it was it was the only production rifle that had a 15" pull and reputation rather than it's adherance to the Hawken lines.

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

The question was asked regarding what was "wrong" with the GPR appearancewise compared to a true Hawken. Nobody was running down the GPR, just trying to point out sources that clearly show these differences. No obsession--just fact. The GPR is a fine rifle in the style of a half-stock plains rifle. We've done this one before, it has been explained in detail before, and here we go again. Oh well...... :surrender:

 

[Swampman]

Since no 2 Hawken rifles are alike, perhaps we should just use the term Plains Rifle, and be happier. :v

 

[MFP308]

I've owned my GPR 54 for over two years now and still love the thing. It shoots better than I can. With all the praise the gun got here and on other sites, that for the price, I couldn't go wrong. Also I was new to the BP game and needed a gun to learn with. I figured that if I really like shooting PB I could then afford another gun if I didn't spend all my money on something else. So far I don't want another gun to replace this one. That doesn't mean that I don't want more BP long guns. It does get under your skin.


Mike

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

Except for the fact that there is such a thing as a Hawken rifle and most people can tell the difference. Plains rifle is just a generic, catchall term for a type of heavily built rifle made by a number of gunmakers during a certain time period in our history. So when someone says they have a plains rifle they aren't really giving out much information. Hawken or Dimmick or Leman convey a precise image to knowledgeable people. To those who think all "plains rifles" are the same or that a GPR looks just like a true Hawken none of it will make any difference. This is a rather pointless discussion since those who understand the difference can never seem to make those who don't grasp the differences and it usually winds up in a P/C H/C brawl with Hawken afficionados being called snobs or worse. Been there many times before--won't do it again.

 

[Swampman]

Every Hawken is unique. Personally I don't believe any of them were originally flint. Some are slightly built, some are as heavy as cannons. No 2 are alike.

I know the difference, and have since the early 1980s.