• Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

Question on pedersoli Charleville vs 1795 Springfield

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Youngblood

40 Cal
Joined
Mar 31, 2022
Messages
301
Reaction score
362
Of those of you who have owned or handled both, is there any differences other than the lock plate markings?

In the pics ive seen it looks like maybe the comb has a slightly different shape, maybe?

Ive been looking for a Charley but if the 1795 is near identical, maybe i should go with that.

Thanks
 
I haven't handled the Pedersoli but my understanding is that the 1795 springfield is idendical to the 1766 Charleville, except markings. Don't know if Pedersoli stayed true to that or not. I love The Charleville's. The French for one time in history was ahead of all the rest when it comes to firearms. There is one thing that Pedersoli used to do that I really don't like and that is they held the front band on with an unsightly SCREW instead of a spring clip.

Jack
 
I haven't handled the Pedersoli but my understanding is that the 1795 springfield is idendical to the 1766 Charleville, except markings. Don't know if Pedersoli stayed true to that or not. I love The Charleville's. The French for one time in history was ahead of all the rest when it comes to firearms. There is one thing that Pedersoli used to do that I really don't like and that is they held the front band on with an unsightly SCREW instead of a spring clip.

Jack

There are subtle differences in the lock Jack.

A friend of mine purchased a 1795 kit and a 1766 pedersoli lock thinking it would drop in but the plate on the 1766 was a little longer and not as wide. It can work but I would say its not a good idea, just get the 1766 Charleville kit from Dixie Gun Works and modify it was really the better option.

The pedersoli 1795 stock is shaped more like an authentic 1766 but is still oversized and is missing the flute details, which really can’t be corrected because more wood is needed to round out the dish shape (as seen in the picture below). Lodgewood MFD’s Dave Stalvo has done that defarb on the 1766 pedersoli because the butt stock on that musket is very oversized and more wood is there to work with.

The bands on the 1795 are the same bands used on the pedersoli 1816 musket, smaller than the 1766 charleville bands because the rear band on the 1766 is a friction fit.

Compared to the originals both guns are oversized in every aspect and are missing the fine details of the butt stock flutes, this unfortunately is tough to overcome because Charleville butt stocks of the 1763-1774 partners had a dished in type of flute that made the butt stock rounded on the flute and narrow in the wrist (tough to explain).

1795’s were not as detailed as french guns, 1795’s had larger lock panels and the flutes on the butt stock were more flat and straight. 1808 contract muskets pretty eliminated this feature.

The most accurate reproduction of a Charleville musket is by the Rifle Shoppe, and the most accurate specimen of a 1763 in an untouched or altered condition is in Williamsburg and the Museum Arms in France.
 

Attachments

  • CD9DBB50-D5C0-4749-AD6B-FCD64A332F85.png
    CD9DBB50-D5C0-4749-AD6B-FCD64A332F85.png
    492.3 KB
Last edited:
Back
Top