Period Correct??????????????

tg: I was wondering? Was your very first rifle p.c.?
Most of us in muzzleloader hunting never knew what p.c. was.
I would not have known anything about p.c. were it not for the DEBATES and opinions presented on forums like this.
People like rollingb and birddog6 showed me through patience and understanding was a true p.c. rifle was.
I used T/C Hawkens and Renegades for years to hunt with and one p.c. snob told me I was no different than a guy using an in-line scoped rifle.
I beg to differ with THAT observation.
Once again the point is tolerance adn acceptance of others. I see nothing wrong with calling a hunter a "traditional hunter" if his rifle is a Lyman GPR or Cabelas cap lock, or a period correct jeager.
If we are not tolerant and unerstanding of each other we split ranks and that's the worse thing we can do.
You can't walk the walk if you don't understand what the "walk" is.
People don't know what they don't know. We can be an asset or an ass. I'd prefer to be an asset and be helpful and teach people. Maybe we can generate more interest in truely traditional rifles as well as traditional values by being tolerant and understanding that everyone won't drop a grand and more on a hand made rifle.

 

I have nothing against any kind of ML for hunting--BUT--I think the original spirit and intent of ML only hunts have been corrupted by inlines, scopes, sabots, etc. :shake: You want to use them in regular seasons? fine. As to first guns being PC...PC to what? Inlines are PC to the present day. My first ML was an underhammer--PC to the mid/late 1800s. Then I got into the 'mountain man' stuff and went through a phase of sidelock percussion rifles--my second rifle I made myself using only hand tools and original methods as much as was known. It was a longrifle with a nipple/drum conversion from flint. Then I built a copy of a real .58 Hawkin I saw in a Santa Fe (or Taos?) museum. Now I am into 1750s-1770s and shoot a 44" long swamped barrel plain southern flintlock. I hunted with these guns to try to "fit in" to my period interests of the time, whether mountain man or middle ground hunter....If I was starting new, liked the mountain man era and had little money, I'd get a Lyman GPR and be proud of it.....but I'd feed it round balls and real BP. :imo:

tg: I was wondering? Was your very first rifle p.c.?
Most of us in muzzleloader hunting never knew what p.c. was.
I would not have known anything about p.c. were it not for the DEBATES and opinions presented on forums like this.
People like rollingb and birddog6 showed me through patience and understanding was a true p.c. rifle was.
I used T/C Hawkens and Renegades for years to hunt with and one p.c. snob told me I was no different than a guy using an in-line scoped rifle.
I beg to differ with THAT observation.
Once again the point is tolerance adn acceptance of others. I see nothing wrong with calling a hunter a "traditional hunter" if his rifle is a Lyman GPR or Cabelas cap lock, or a period correct jeager.
If we are not tolerant and unerstanding of each other we split ranks and that's the worse thing we can do.
You can't walk the walk if you don't understand what the "walk" is.
People don't know what they don't know. We can be an asset or an ass. I'd prefer to be an asset and be helpful and teach people. Maybe we can generate more interest in truely traditional rifles as well as traditional values by being tolerant and understanding that everyone won't drop a grand and more on a hand made rifle.

 

Mike R. I agree that in-lines, scopes, pellets and so forth are NOT in the spirit of traditional at all. Not even a little bit.
This is the traditional HUNTING forum. There is an in-line hunting forum.
I'm merely pointing out that I consider factory made traditional "type" Lymans, Cabela's, T/C's "in the spirit" of traditional hunting, though clearly not period correct according to some.
Not everyone that tries to hunt in the traditional spirit knows how to build a p/c rifle.
I have ALL the tools necessary to build my own rifle. I lack SKILLS and time, I buy my guns from builders with experience and skills.
I want owners of T/C, Lyman, Traditions, Cabela's rifles to feel at home on this site.
No one must own a hand built p/c rifle to be considered a 'traditional hunter'.

 

[tg]

No, my first gun was a production model, like most but it had a steady diet of RB and primitive sights....". snob told me I was no different than a guy using an in-line scoped rifle.
I beg to differ with THAT observation." Absolutely....untill you use modern bullets, sights and all the doo dads that are designed to make the gun more like the modern guns in performance. The projectiles and sights are big issues as I see it....had the RB and fixed sigfhts been required for hunting many years ago we would not be talking about "inlines" pro or con now. If one has to use adjustable sights, peeps, and bullets, there were some available a long time ago....why not find replicas of originals to use? then it would be a "traditional outfit"
However one describes what they do is their concern, the loss of a special experience or connection with history does not fall upon the other folks, and no one has said it is wrong not to be PC or traditional, just suggested that a bit of thought about the whole picture be taken before throwing around some of these terms that many like to hear rolling off the tounge, each will make their own choices, hopefully they will be made objectively based on fact and logic as such choices are rarely regretted later.

 

[Plains99]

Boy, I agree with Claude on this one. It would be fun to go period correct on a hunt but modern muzzleloader regs often prevent total period accuracy because of blaze orange requirements and the like. We've had some big fights in Kansas over where to draw the line on these things. Some of the boys want to do away with sabots, fiber optic sights, in-lines and who knows what else? The problem is that it is too late for that and it would disenfranchise a lot of hunters who have already made their inline purchases. We want as many muzzleloader hunters out there as possible to justify our special season status. If Buck the ranger in all his historic regalia runs into Inline Charlie wearing his designer Mossy Oaks in the field, who cares? As long as both are having fun and the special season is preserved.

 

Hey! if you have the tools and the desire, it is not that hard to learn to build your own. I had help in the form of a local builder (in Tulsa at the time--late 70s)who taught a school for several of us on building traditional ML rifles. Cost me $300 for parts and $25 tuition. You cannot find a deal like that today, but similar opportunities exist, plus several good books on building. Nowadays arthritus keeps me from building much, although I recently finished a flintlock pistol from parts I assembled over the years. Also local builders in many areas will seriously undercut the $1000 tag you mentioned earlier. I have recently bought 2 totally custom rifles from a local maker for $400 and $700. They have top quality barrels and locks and great workmanship. :thumbsup:

Mike R. I agree that in-lines, scopes, pellets and so forth are NOT in the spirit of traditional at all. Not even a little bit.
This is the traditional HUNTING forum. There is an in-line hunting forum.
I'm merely pointing out that I consider factory made traditional "type" Lymans, Cabela's, T/C's "in the spirit" of traditional hunting, though clearly not period correct according to some.
Not everyone that tries to hunt in the traditional spirit knows how to build a p/c rifle.
I have ALL the tools necessary to build my own rifle. I lack SKILLS and time, I buy my guns from builders with experience and skills.
I want owners of T/C, Lyman, Traditions, Cabela's rifles to feel at home on this site.
No one must own a hand built p/c rifle to be considered a 'traditional hunter'.

 

[Darkhorse]

As an older fellow whos been over the mountain once or twice I think that a lot of people are taking this PC thing way to far.
True, 30 years ago I wouldn't have shot a deer with anything but one of my own hand cast balls. And handmade leathers and powderhorns were the only possibilities. But things have changed. For one, I prefer goretex to leather when its raining or dewey. And thinsulate and wool now gets the nod. I also find a leather possibles bag retains more scent than fabric so now they mostly stay at home hanging on a hanger.
Back in the mid seventies I collected an array of Blackington medals and tropys at several levels of blackpowder competition. Primitive open sights only of course. Now I have fitted fiberoptic sights to two of my flintlocks.
They still shoot roundballs and blackpowder. Its just now I can stay in the woods until dark and actually expect to see my sights when a buck appears.
PC is still fine and I like it but I like it more when someone else is doing it.
If you are intent on going to shoots or rondys where the PC Nazis are ranting and raving then by all means PC is the way to go.
But after 30 years of Muzzleloading I find some of the opinions and statements of self proclaimed Mountain Men to be comical.
The very worst thing we can do is intimidate and scare off new shooters with a bunch of ridiculous requirements. I just don't get it.
Understand of course, my fudging in PC doesn't extend to inlines. They are still and will always be an abomination.

And I don't intend to scare any new builders off but, the parts alone for my last rifle totaled $700. I don't see how anybody could build one of that quality, sell it for $400. and even expect to break even. I still think you get what you pay for but what you get is well worth the cost.

 

The $400 rifle was a steal--the maker just wanted to get some $$$ to buy more parts...he's retired and builds for fun and small profit. The $700 rifle parts cost about $350+/- if I recall and include a small Siler lock, Lonhammock barrrel and cast steel furniture....it can be done. P.S. the wood is grade 3 maple with very nice curl. Right now I have parts for a .54 Lancaster: Chambers Golden Age lock, Getz swamped barrel, fine grade 4 wood, Chambers brass hardware, etc....I have about $615 in the parts, but they are all top grade. You CAN put together a very nice plain southern rifle with top grade barrel and lock for under $400 in parts.... :m2c:

 

[Hoyt]

I just got a strong urge to do my hunting with flintlock rifles and shotguns. Problem was I didn't have any and haven't to this day even shot one. I'm just getting into it for the challege more or less. I put a post on here about trying a first build from a kit and I noticed some replies had PC in them. I thought it meant politically correct for a while..then I realized it meant period correct..I think. Anyway I just want to hunt with flintlocks..and am not at this point interested in doing any research or reading about their history..etc.
The reason I went to the more expensive custom type kit is I didn't want to wait a yr. to get one built and I didn't want to buy a manufactured gun because I knew I would no longer get it then I would want the custom. I am trying to stay PC as much as I know how to just because I would like to feel how it was in the old days to hunt as they did back then.
Anyway to each their own..I don't want to step on any toes with my ignorance about what is PC or not..I just want a good gun to hunt with just as any serious hunter would have back in the old days...this forum has been a lot of help.
Thanks to you all.

 

[Huntinfool]

SOLD!
Hoyt, I have a friend who's got a Chambers kit rifle about 95% built he wants somewhere in the range of $800.00 for it basically the price of the parts.

It's been sold already.
Chuck

 

[Claude Mathis]

Anyway I just want to hunt with flintlocks..and am not at this point interested in doing any research or reading about their history..etc.

Nobody should have a problem with that. I certainly don't.

I think there may be a misunderstanding that anyone who strives to be historically accurate (however they define that) is on a crusade to convert others to do the same. That's simply not true. The misconception manifests itself every time I hear the terms "clothes nazi" or "fashion police".

Labeling anyone who pursues historical accuracy as a "nazi" is not only inaccurate, it's ignorant. So far, I haven't heard one person on this Forum say that it's not an individual choice - so why the debate?

Please drop the labels and deal with people as individuals.

 

I agree, Claude...if you just want the experience of old time hunting with a flintlock, the clothes don't matter--and in many states are restricted anyway...I don't know why sneaking through the woods with a longrifle and wearing camo overalls would feel any different than wearing a linen hunting shirt--it never has for me...when I was a kid I'd play Dan'l Boone in my jeans and Tshirt and used a long stick I cut with my scout knife that looked SORTA like a longrifle--to me anyway--and in my mind I was a frontiersman in full dress...didn't feel any different when I went into the mountains near my home with that stick...I typically do not hunt in period dress, but I know some that do. I am going on a period squirrel hunt this fall for the first time, though....been huntin' them critters for about 50+ years now..... :yakyak:

 

[tg]

" I haven't heard one person on this Forum say that it's not an individual choice "

Good point Claude... I often comment on the PC aspect of mant things in topics that come up, not to try and force anything on anyone only to offer another perspective for anyone who might be interested in the PC factor....many who would like to be historicaly correct are lost in the malestorm of stuff that is not but represented as so even by well known suppliers and builders.

 

[Richard Allen]

Traditional hunting is term that covers a very large period of time. What a matchlock era hunter considers traditional is very different from what a Rocky Mountain fur trapper feels is appropriate.

Everyone has an opinion about what is period correct for their era and how far they are willing to go to reach whatever level of correctness they want to achieve. There will always be those are willing to do everything possible to hunt as it was done in their chosen era. The purist will do the research and will do everything he can to use only equipment that can be documented to have been used by hunters during the time he is attempting to portray. He sets his goal high and works hard to reach it, that is his level of comfort.

Then there are those that consider themselves traditional hunters as long as the firearm they are using loads from the front, regardless of what they put in it. He sets his goal lower and that is his level of comfort, it ain't wrong - it's just different.

As long as they go their own ways and don't try to justify their goals they don't bother anyone, but both types can be a real pain in the ass when they go out of their ways to justify their goals and try to convert the rest of us to their way of thinking. I don't appreciate hearing a greasy braintan and linen clothed longhunter explain why an item is wrong for a certain time frame any more than hearing a yellow-chrometan and paisley shirt wearing buffalo hunter say "iffen ole Jim'd a had it he'd a used it'.

One is just as annoying as the other when he's trying to push his opinions down my throat.

Richard/Ga.

 

[Ohio Joe]

One must follow the game laws. Example; if your required to wear hunter orange during the muzzleloading deer season, you wear it. It's just that simple...

If you feel you need to be period correct to a specific time period, then dress and arm yourself accordingly... That is your choice as long as your legal...

Folks have been hunting with muzzleloaders since the very first person took one on a hunt... Generations have used the muzzleloader since then to this day... The muzzleloading firearm has never missed a hunting season!

Everyone who hunts with a muzzleloader is exactly what some folks worry about... That hunter is "Period Correct"!

 

[kentucky bucky]

The only people that have ever truly been PC have been dead for at least 150 years.

 

"The only people that have ever truly been PC have been dead for at least 150 years."

More truth than THAT has never been spoken! Well said.

 

[Claude Mathis]

"The only people that have ever truly been PC have been dead for at least 150 years."

More truth than THAT has never been spoken! Well said.

I have to tell you guys, I'm getting real tired of this.

These petty debates waste everyones time. I can't understand why so many people have a problem with what others do.

There are thousands of people involved in reenacting, living history and experimental archeology. They know full well, better than most, what it means to be historically correct. They don't need someone who is not involved to tell them how it is.

If there are those who do not or can not appreciate the activity, I suggest they steer clear of the subject. It does not concern you and no one is asking you to participate.