Thompson Center Hawken Variants

[Urban Coyote]

Virtually any model of firearm that has been produced or recognized as a standard undergoes changes, some subtle others obvious. The Thompson Center Hawken, let's please not get into the weeds over it's lack of true Hawken authenticity, certainly went through change during it's many years of production. There were changes in stock shaping, escutcheon plates, hammer shape, warnings stampings, QLA muzzle, and sight changes as examples, there were more. Since apparently company records were destroyed in a fire years ago dating these guns is difficult. If these guns were Winchester 1994s, depending of the variations, desirability and pricing would be over the board.

Thompson Center built a whole lot of muzzleloaders but the Hawken models were their flagship. I was curious if people might think it worthwhile to share what information or preference you have about Thompson Center Hawken variations. Maybe some photos, and/or if your certain about time frame your gun was produced in it might give others an idea about timw period. I'm think about factory built guns only.
.

 

[tom in nc]

I'd love to see some responses to this thread.

I have several T/C rifles and only one has "Renegade" stamped on it. The lone one in my first pic is a .54 caliber .
In my second pic the top gun has no maker's stamp, only a serial number 89 624xxx. I can't say for sure that it is a T/C. It is the only flintlock.
Gun #2 is a .50 caliber T/C Renegade. Note no patch box.
Did Renegades not have patch boxes?
Gun # 3 is an unnamed T/C .50 caliber with a patch box.
#4 is a .45 caliber T/C with patch box, also no model name.
I would like to know, is the flintlock even a T/C? What about the last two, are they Hawkens?

 

[SDSmlf]

Maybe some photos, and/or if your certain about time frame your gun was produced in it might give others an idea about timw period. I'm think about factory built guns only.

I’ve owned more TCs than I could begin to count and still own quite a few. Purchased many new and or have original paperwork from when purchased new by others. Well over a dozen original receipts still in the records file cabinet.

That said, except for one or two guns (and one of those has a warranty replacement barrel), I would call all of them mixmasters. Barrels, stocks, triggers, trigger guards, sights, etc, have been swapped, traded and exchanged over time.

There are some manufacturing changes on various components that occurred over time (sights, trigger guards, nose caps and wedge escutcheons for example) that kind of, sort of, date within a window as to when the particular component was manufactured. Guessing many other folks have similar stories.

All that said, what do you consider the critical defining component, the barrel, which has a serial number? Or the stock, with no serial number, but lacking the dreaded K if factory built?

Guess one could limit the survey to factory assembled guns that are still in the sealed box. Anything else is conjecture. Too many guns made, made over too many years, with components having no identifying date marks to conclude much else other than appropriately when the particular component was manufactured. Oh, and if there are any final questions on those components, the original manufacturer’s records were lost in a fire.

Wish you luck.

If these guns were Winchester 1994s, depending of the variations, desirability and pricing would be over the board.

I’m not sure what the uniqueness, charm, desirability or value of a Winchester 1994s would be? I know I have a number of Winchester pre 1964 guns that have some collector value. Some are 1894s and others are early WWII M1 Garands. Not sure what that has to do with TCs which started production around 1970.