The only plave I have seen that group mentioned is in the write up for that gun, maybe a few of the Traditions folks started a group to validate the gun? I have also seen the write up the puts the Blue Ridge as good from the F&I to the Alamo, most production gun writeups strtch history a bit to say the least, I think many are used for liberal events for Rev war and later it depends how close you want to come, but it is hard to habg the HC/PC tag on them for any specific time frame.
-
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
Traditions flintlock
- Thread starter rickjf
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
Guest
:hmm: Then....Nope! I never heard of that bunch.
OK, let me make this perfectly clear...I have a Traditions Pennsylvania Longrifle and there is nothing about it that is even close to being authentic for the Rev War Period.
It does indeed have a cheek piece, but certainly does not have a swamped barrel. It has an ungainly Roman Nose that gave me lots of bruises on my cheek until I changed the way I used it. The wrist is tall and narrow and the forearm is plank-like. It is made from walnut which would be unusual for an American rifle, but not so much for an English one.
It is highly decorated, with three stars on each side of the forearm, a weeping heart on each side of the wrist and a pierced patchbox. The wood on the forearm meets the barrel with a squared off edge (water will run down it) instead of gracefully curving into the barrel. All of the decoration would have been highly unusual for Rev War, but fairly common for golden age guns (after Rev War ended and there was a plethora of gunsmiths trying to sell to a shrinking market). The butt stock has a crescent shape to it, but not as pronounced as some. The butt is only 1¼" wide. The wrist is thinner and about 2" tall.
I bought the gun because I was looking for a rifle for reenactment and the claim on the Traditions sight about it holding the "enviable" status of authentic for Rev War reenactments....That is BUNK!
Shortly after buying the rifle, a member of our reenactment unit who built both longrifles and muskets started educating me about Rev War rifles. I was never told I couldn't use it for reenactments, so I continued to use it until I could purchase a better rifle. But boy did I know better and it was always a bit of a disappointment. With my buddies help and guidance, I pickled the barrel and replaced the adjustable ramp sight with a primitive longrifle one. That changed the look of it a bit.
All that said, even with the small lock on that rifle, it has been a good shooter and the particular one I have has a tiger stripe to the wood. If you're not using it for reenactments and you like the look of it, you would probably enjoy it. You would need to learn to pull your head back a bit to sight the rifle without getting bruised, but that can be done. Get a close look at the vent and it's location relative to the pan when you pick one out. Mine is center of pan at the top which is ideal, but I've seen some at bottom of pan near the front or rear, which causes lots of ignition problems.
After saving up, I bought a beautiful early Lancaster rifle with a nicely tuned Queen Anne lock, swamped barrel, very narrow graceful forearm (literally less than half as tall as the Traditions) built by our own tg .:hatsoff: The butt is about 2¼" wide and the wrist is wider than it is tall. It is a great rifle built on a piece of beautifully figured maple, and I only wish I had borrowed something else for reenactments while I saved up to buy a good rifle the first time around...or maybe I don't because I wouldn't have ended up with this rifle now. I will remain forever grateful tg decided he had too many guns to keep, and that no one else noticed this rifle before I did. tg built a beautiful rifle that continues to be a pleasure to use and I'm proud to own it.
Although it is about 4" longer than the Traditions, it is about 2-lbs. lighter, which also makes it much easier to trek around with. So, if you haven't already spent your money, save it and get an historically more accurate gun for reenactment. TVM offers some better choices at not a lot more than the Traditions and you might want to look at some of their offerings if the money is burning a hole in your pocket. Otherwise you could save up and hope tg or one of the other talented builders around here decides he has too many guns again.
Twisted_1in66 :thumbsup:
It does indeed have a cheek piece, but certainly does not have a swamped barrel. It has an ungainly Roman Nose that gave me lots of bruises on my cheek until I changed the way I used it. The wrist is tall and narrow and the forearm is plank-like. It is made from walnut which would be unusual for an American rifle, but not so much for an English one.
It is highly decorated, with three stars on each side of the forearm, a weeping heart on each side of the wrist and a pierced patchbox. The wood on the forearm meets the barrel with a squared off edge (water will run down it) instead of gracefully curving into the barrel. All of the decoration would have been highly unusual for Rev War, but fairly common for golden age guns (after Rev War ended and there was a plethora of gunsmiths trying to sell to a shrinking market). The butt stock has a crescent shape to it, but not as pronounced as some. The butt is only 1¼" wide. The wrist is thinner and about 2" tall.
I bought the gun because I was looking for a rifle for reenactment and the claim on the Traditions sight about it holding the "enviable" status of authentic for Rev War reenactments....That is BUNK!
Shortly after buying the rifle, a member of our reenactment unit who built both longrifles and muskets started educating me about Rev War rifles. I was never told I couldn't use it for reenactments, so I continued to use it until I could purchase a better rifle. But boy did I know better and it was always a bit of a disappointment. With my buddies help and guidance, I pickled the barrel and replaced the adjustable ramp sight with a primitive longrifle one. That changed the look of it a bit.
All that said, even with the small lock on that rifle, it has been a good shooter and the particular one I have has a tiger stripe to the wood. If you're not using it for reenactments and you like the look of it, you would probably enjoy it. You would need to learn to pull your head back a bit to sight the rifle without getting bruised, but that can be done. Get a close look at the vent and it's location relative to the pan when you pick one out. Mine is center of pan at the top which is ideal, but I've seen some at bottom of pan near the front or rear, which causes lots of ignition problems.
After saving up, I bought a beautiful early Lancaster rifle with a nicely tuned Queen Anne lock, swamped barrel, very narrow graceful forearm (literally less than half as tall as the Traditions) built by our own tg .:hatsoff: The butt is about 2¼" wide and the wrist is wider than it is tall. It is a great rifle built on a piece of beautifully figured maple, and I only wish I had borrowed something else for reenactments while I saved up to buy a good rifle the first time around...or maybe I don't because I wouldn't have ended up with this rifle now. I will remain forever grateful tg decided he had too many guns to keep, and that no one else noticed this rifle before I did. tg built a beautiful rifle that continues to be a pleasure to use and I'm proud to own it.
Although it is about 4" longer than the Traditions, it is about 2-lbs. lighter, which also makes it much easier to trek around with. So, if you haven't already spent your money, save it and get an historically more accurate gun for reenactment. TVM offers some better choices at not a lot more than the Traditions and you might want to look at some of their offerings if the money is burning a hole in your pocket. Otherwise you could save up and hope tg or one of the other talented builders around here decides he has too many guns again.
Twisted_1in66 :thumbsup:
Russ T Frizzen
70 Cal.
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2004
- Messages
- 5,007
- Reaction score
- 421
Ya don't suppose Traditions would make up this group just sell a few rifles to less knowledgeable buyers :hmm: ??? That would be dishonest.....
"I will remain forever grateful tg decided he had too many guns to keep,'
I am also very pleased that the Lancaster found a good home where it will be used, I have a kind of odd take on guns I guess...I think they need to be used, I used to shoot three times a week, but as I shot less the guns got used less and less, I see this is as bad as putting an innocent man in jail,whether it be a CVA Kentucky or a Brooks or Immel custom they deserve to be used for what they were created for, as I could no longer give then what they needed I found those who could.
I am also very pleased that the Lancaster found a good home where it will be used, I have a kind of odd take on guns I guess...I think they need to be used, I used to shoot three times a week, but as I shot less the guns got used less and less, I see this is as bad as putting an innocent man in jail,whether it be a CVA Kentucky or a Brooks or Immel custom they deserve to be used for what they were created for, as I could no longer give then what they needed I found those who could.
Rick Davis
40 Cal.
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2006
- Messages
- 149
- Reaction score
- 1
twisted_1in66 said:
I agree with this, the Traditions PA rifle is more a post-war design. A closer war time design would be their Kentucky flint ( Link ). This model is much simpler, lacks the set trigger and the lavish decoration on the stock.
Wartime rifles were much more austere, and plain in appearance. I have a few photos of ARW wartime rifles from Valley Forge for anyone who wants a look.
Here are a few links: http://i147.photobucket.com/albums/r290/PA_Rifleman/VAFO pics/S4011381.jpg http://i147.photobucket.com/albums/r290/PA_Rifleman/VAFO pics/Muskets-overall.jpg http://i147.photobucket.com/albums/r290/PA_Rifleman/VAFO pics/Jaeger-actioncloseup.jpg
Traditions Kentucky in flint retains the modern octagonal barrel found on the PA rifle. It also appears Traditions is the US distributor for these rifles, not the manufacturer.
I still bought the PA Rifle in flint anyway because I teach a short class on Pennsylvania gunmaking in our local school, and it isn't limited to the ARW period. As a lot of school projects, it's low budget and the Traditions was perfect for a pass-around.
It is, and remains, a production gun. I compared the Traditions product line with some of the previous offerings from Spain, these are far better. Ardesa appears to be the main producer of the low-end production guns on the market right now. Here's the Ardesa Kentucky rifle ( Link ), compare it to Traditions (link above)
Last edited by a moderator:
I got my Traditions "PA pellet.50 flintlock" repaired by cannibalizing another lock. I had a CVA lock so took the tumbler from it as I discovered that the sear had been truly broken by some one who had not set the adjustment screw. They apparently broke the tumbler off by pulling the trigger to hard. I functions and throws a very nice spark. Much better salution than spending $55 an hour with Traditions. I will report in as I try it out. :thumbsup:
tg: just reading this thread. I am just getting in to F&I with very little help on which rifle is correct for period. On very little info I bought a Pedersoli Frontier Standard Model in 54cal.#S266. From the posts I have read you seem to know what is right for this period. My question is did I make a $500+ mistake? Please reply via my email add. BOR
paulvallandigham
Passed On
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2006
- Messages
- 17,538
- Reaction score
- 87
The French and Indian War occurred in the late 1750s-60s, and ended in 1763. Frontier models usually refer to guns used on the western plains from 1830-1890.
Our real problem with knowing what is historically accurate is the lack of rifled guns that can be actually dated to that period, or before. There is one gun believed to date to 1750, that has a rifled barrel, but the dispute has continued on whether this gun was rifled later, or was actually a rifle used during that period. The military arms used on both sides were smoothbore muskets, and we have plenty of examples of those arms existing in museums on both sides of the Atlantic.
Our real problem with knowing what is historically accurate is the lack of rifled guns that can be actually dated to that period, or before. There is one gun believed to date to 1750, that has a rifled barrel, but the dispute has continued on whether this gun was rifled later, or was actually a rifle used during that period. The military arms used on both sides were smoothbore muskets, and we have plenty of examples of those arms existing in museums on both sides of the Atlantic.
This little traditions rifle has more in common with inline except for the ignition system. I changed the sling swivel by drilling out the factory swivel so I can use a removable sling. This makes removal of the barrel for cleaning much easier
I am learning!!! I twisted the topjaw screw in half by putting on to much pressure on it. I found a suitable replacement at the lumber yard with a hex machine screw of the same pitch for .35 cents. Not authentic but little in the gun is "authentic". I made working flint from locally found flint rock. The saga continues.
Similar threads
