Proof Hawken made a flint

[DuncNZ]

There is no doubt J&S Hawken made full stock rifles , they were $5-6 cheaper than the half stock versions . Most were made with a non hooked ( detachable ) patent breach with a snail type shield to protect against cap splatter . The books I have , Baird and Hanson , both have pictures of these rifles . Jacob Hawken opened his St Louis gun shop in 1815 , this is a year after Shaw tried to patent the percussion cap , which makes me suspect that his first St Louis rifles were flintlock . The Hawken bros undertook firearm repairs including restocking . There is no logical reason to suppose they may have converted an early flintlock rifle to cap lock in their own style, they were certainly capable of it . Their full stock caplock rifles mainly had a fixed ( as opposed to hooked ) patent breach with a snail cap splatter protector ,
The problem with Bairds books is the quality of the photos and the inclusion of many modern rifle copies , he jumps about a bit too much .
Hanson thinks the first rifles Hawken made in St Louis were full stocks , and because of hard use not many survived , although they occasionally made full stocks on special order all their lives .

 

[DuncNZ]

William Hawken actually ended up in Denver and was still making the traditional plains style rifle as late as the 1860's. As for someone making current replicas, try John Bergman. Believe he is in Tennessee.

He was supplying rifles to the miners and overland pioneers .

 

[Grenadier1758]

William Hawken actually ended up in Denver and was still making the traditional plains style rifle as late as the 1860's. As for someone making current replicas, try John Bergman. Believe he is in Tennessee.

That William Hawken was Sam's son and not the William Hawken that made the pictured rifle.

It is believed that during the early years of the Hawkens in St. Louis, most of their gun work was in the repair and refurbishment of rifles and shotguns. Not many guns were being built. As their gun repair business grew, they utilized the new percussion cap and, in many cases, may have converted existing flint locks to percussion. @Khufu's pictures clearly show a rifle of Hawken architecture with a lock that was converted from flint. While the barrel has a drum screwed into the barrel, it doesn't necessarily prove that the rifle barrel was originally flint. The pattern of pitting around the drum is consistent with the barrel only being fired with the drum in place.

The Hawken brothers has a small shop with limited production capability. They could not compete with the rifles being made in the East for the trade. Lemans, Henrys, Deringers, and Tryons flint rifles were much cheaper for supplying the fur trade demand than rifles the Hawken brothers could produce. While this is speculation, I believe they made the decision to focus on the new, easier to produce and with plenty of caps available for reliable firing, they focused on high quality percussion rifles and percussion rifles, pistols and shotguns for the local trades.

The Hawken Brothers became known for their high quality percussion rifles. It would not surprise me if they would have sent someone asking them to build a flint lock rifle to another shop. They didn't need be building any rifles other than their famous percussion lock rifles.

 

[rhart]

William Hawken actually ended up in Denver and was still making the traditional plains style rifle as late as the 1860's. As for someone making current replicas, try John Bergman. Believe he is in Tennessee.

I'm thinking you may be confusing the brother William Hawken with Samuel Hawken's son William (also a gunmaker) who followed his dad to Denver. I don't believe the brother William left the area of his business back East for any appreciable period of time.

 

[david58]

It shows that there were full stock flintlock Hawken style rifles made, by a brother of the Hawken brothers from Missouri, so people that say a flintlock Hawken rifle wasn't made and that its not PC, this proves they are wrong, if you want to argue over which Hawken made it that's up to you, for those of us that want to use a full stock flintlock around thread counters here is the proof they were made, that's all that matters, and given the time frame the JS Hawken brothers started making and when percussion guns came into being, there is no way that flints weren't made by them, my .02 you can argue with yourself because your opinion doesn't trump facts

The thread counters can be, well, interesting to deal with. But one also has to be careful of context. With regards to Plains Rifles, one is understood to be speaking of J and S Hawken in Saint Louis. Yes, there were quite a few rifle builders in the family, and we know that their father Christian and early on many of the other family members built flint rifles.

Since the fur trade era saw the "plains rifle" as a half stock (generally) percussion rifle, the context we consider the Hawken name in for that era is the St. Louis shop, not a cousin in Maryland or Denver or wherever. That being the case, one would not have expected to see a flint, half stock, St Louis Hawken called a plains rifle.

Part of dealing with thread counters is to make sure one hasn't selected an isolated or singular example to hang one's hat on. We generally want to go with what was common, rather than what was rare or exceptional, because our confidence in what is common is generally higher when it comes to being pc.

Don't let the thread counters tell you when you are having fun. However, if accuracy is your goal, it's best to not get into the half stock flintlock Hawken whirlwind - go percussion for pc, flint for fun.

David
NM

 

[SDSmlf]

given the time frame the JS Hawken brothers started making and when percussion guns came into being, there is no way that flints weren't made by them, my .02 you can argue with yourself because your opinion doesn't trump facts

As you like facts, wasn’t the percussion cap patented in 1807, with caplock British guns being made in the Regency Era (1811-1820)? When did Jake and Sam start their business?

Do you know who commissioned the earliest documented J and S gun? It was for W H Ashley. And it’s ignition system was?? The year was 1823. So should this be considered what we call a Hawken Rifle Plains Rifle? Or just a gun made by Jake and Sam?

And just for discussion, if Jake’s and Sam’s great great great Uncle Tonoose back in Europe made a matchlock rifle before his relatives came to North America, would that be considered the first Hawken?

 

[TNTraveler]

Speaking of, Is there anyone who makes a kit or builds full stock hawken replicas?

Track of the Wolf has two different kits

 

[Khufu]

The thread counters can be, well, interesting to deal with. But one also has to be careful of context. With regards to Plains Rifles, one is understood to be speaking of J and S Hawken in Saint Louis. Yes, there were quite a few rifle builders in the family, and we know that their father Christian and early on many of the other family members built flint rifles.

Since the fur trade era saw the "plains rifle" as a half stock (generally) percussion rifle, the context we consider the Hawken name in for that era is the St. Louis shop, not a cousin in Maryland or Denver or wherever. That being the case, one would not have expected to see a flint, half stock, St Louis Hawken called a plains rifle.

Part of dealing with thread counters is to make sure one hasn't selected an isolated or singular example to hang one's hat on. We generally want to go with what was common, rather than what was rare or exceptional, because our confidence in what is common is generally higher when it comes to being pc.

Don't let the thread counters tell you when you are having fun. However, if accuracy is your goal, it's best to not get into the half stock flintlock Hawken whirlwind - go percussion for pc, flint for fun.

David
NM

just because the majority of surviving rifles were percussion does not diminish the probability of early J&S rifles being flint guns even one surviving flint gun proves the existence of flint Hawkens. the one certain example would be enough evidence to suggest there were more than one produced. I find it difficult to accept that anyone would copy the J&S style of butt plate, trigger guard and cheek rest before J&S became famous and put it on a flint gun. it is much more likely that their very early guns were flint and they carried the features on into there more famous percussion and half stock guns. by the same logic, the earlier guns would have been used longer in the fur trade, when conditions were more harsh and fewer guns would be expected to survive.
I have never seen an example that was a converted half stock, but that does not mean they did not exist, but it is unlikely that they did not exist, but I am convinced that they did in fact make them in full stock. perhaps they were limited to their earliest offerings but even the lock plate on the converted gun is in the shape of the hawken rifle. without seeing a signature it is not possible to prove conclusively that this rifle is truly a J&S rifle, the circumstantial evidence is enough for me, I can see no other explanation for a full stock, flint conversion rifle with so many J&S features not being one of theirs. and honestly, to be accurate most of the guns used in the fur trade were trade guns and lemans and other less expensive options, just as we see some BMWs and Mercedes Benz cars on the road, the vast majority are the more affordable options. so finding one example of a flint Hawken is kind of a big deal.

 

[OldMaineWoodsman]

The whole point is to enjoy and have fun. Some documentation and or records simply do not exist, have been lost to history, or have not appeared. It's also fun to speculate, but that is all it is.

If you want to carry and shoot a flintlock, do so and have fun. While there is much known about the Hawken Shop (Jake & Sam), there is also unknown and yes, speculation.

We know that not everyone heading West carried one. As to the impression or reenacting use of the Hawken type rifle, we can never actually capture or relive the life and hardships that those men endured.

Just try to be as accurate or correct as possible and have fun. Back when I participated in reenacting the Great War, a younger guy commented as to how realistic the environment was. My thought was, well considering we are not really being shot at or shelled daily, there are no bloating corpses out in No Man's Land, no rats, maggots, or lice, we are not in knee-deep water, and your head isn't exploding in front of me, yeah, it's pretty realistic.

 

[Daveboone]

Speaking of, Is there anyone who makes a kit or builds full stock hawken replicas?

Many, depending on the level of accuracy you are looking for. The Hawken Shop actually has the original tooling /dies, etc. used in the 1800s hawkens, and offer a kit. I guess that would be considered a real deal Hawken!

 

[Daveboone]

Probably no other subject so quickly draws so much attention as anything about Hawkens.

 

[ronaldrothb49]

William Hawken actually ended up in Denver and was still making the traditional plains style rifle as late as the 1860's. As for someone making current replicas, try John Bergman. Believe he is in Tennessee.

Whole lot of conflicting info out there on the Hawken family. Everything I have seen on the youngest brother William says he never left Maryland. However after retiring from J & S Hawken Samuel supposedly moved to Denver and opened a gun shop there. Samuel had a son named William. I would think that is probably the William in Denver

 

[Comfortably_Numb]

I have probably handled more than a half dozen original fullstock Hawken rifles. All were Caprock and were never converted from flint. They are slab sided ungainly things. I'm not sure why they were so popular. The Hawken bros. competition, Dimmick made guns that are much more attractive. I wonder if Dimmick sold more guns than the Hawken boys?

 

[rhart]

just because the majority of surviving rifles were percussion does not diminish the probability of early J&S rifles being flint guns even one surviving flint gun proves the existence of flint Hawkens. the one certain example would be enough evidence to suggest there were more than one produced. I find it difficult to accept that anyone would copy the J&S style of butt plate, trigger guard and cheek rest before J&S became famous and put it on a flint gun. it is much more likely that their very early guns were flint and they carried the features on into there more famous percussion and half stock guns. by the same logic, the earlier guns would have been used longer in the fur trade, when conditions were more harsh and fewer guns would be expected to survive.
I have never seen an example that was a converted half stock, but that does not mean they did not exist, but it is unlikely that they did not exist, but I am convinced that they did in fact make them in full stock. perhaps they were limited to their earliest offerings but even the lock plate on the converted gun is in the shape of the hawken rifle. without seeing a signature it is not possible to prove conclusively that this rifle is truly a J&S rifle, the circumstantial evidence is enough for me, I can see no other explanation for a full stock, flint conversion rifle with so many J&S features not being one of theirs. and honestly, to be accurate most of the guns used in the fur trade were trade guns and lemans and other less expensive options, just as we see some BMWs and Mercedes Benz cars on the road, the vast majority are the more affordable options. so finding one example of a flint Hawken is kind of a big deal.

I understand what you're saying and agree with much, if not all, of it. However, statements like "I find it difficult to accept that anyone would copy the J&S style of butt plate, trigger guard and cheek rest before J&S became famous and put it on a flint gun" presupposes that the firearm design style(s) in question originated with the Hawken brothers - maybe the Hawken brothers were copying the style of other makers (at customer's requests perhaps). Since I've read that percussion cap rifles met with some resistance initially (due to possible supply issues) and perhaps didn't begin to really start catching on until early to mid 1830's (someone correct me if I'm incorrect - a few early adopters doesn't indicate widespread acceptance) it seems obvious to me that the Hawken brothers must have made at least some 'plains rifles' in flintlock ignition systems between the mid 1820's to early 1830's - after all, as an example, I don't think many cap lock weapons were in use during the battle for the Alamo in 1836 (by either side)...

 

[Comfortably_Numb]

J&S were copying English sporting rifles.

 

[William Sublette]

Probably no other subject so quickly draws so much attention as anything about Hawkens.

Everyone argues like they actually know.

Both sides of the debate ....


Nobody knows.



It's curious, and gets old.

 

[Comfortably_Numb]

Everyone argues like they actually know.

Both sides of the debate ....


Nobody knows.



It's curious, and gets old.

I know everything. It gets old when people don't listen.

 

[William Sublette]

You'll fit right in.

 

[TNTraveler]

Probably no other subject so quickly draws so much attention as anything about Hawkens.

Looks that way, seems like there would be a dedicated Hawken page, where people could share this info and list their sources and discuss the topic in depth

 

[TNTraveler]

The fact that there where probably hundreds of thousands of ML produced as a whole in the 18-19 century, and less than 1% survived, and that the J&S Hawken only would have represented less than 1% of all ML made and only a handful of early ones would have been flint and that most if not all went out west where they were used, abused, lost stolen, its not unreasonable that none survived,