[ARCHIVED THREAD] - muzzle loader opinion (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 10/6/2014 4:50:48 PM EDT
|
I'm kinda torn as to what to do. Was talked out of a thumb hole stock a number of years ago when I bought the gun new. Now I really want one as they just seem crazy comfortable to me and seem to help me have better/ more constant trigger pull.
It's a Thompson Center Omega with a black composite stock, stainless barrel, shooting 3 pellets of pyrodex under barnes sabots. Here's my dilemma, if you could call it that. It's an absolute tack driver by muzzle loader standards even with being lazy and using those filthy pellets! I'm talking clover leaf at 100 yards minimum. ...usually better than that. Leave well enough alone? Get the laminate thumb hole stock? I'm so conflicted |
| Years ago, I bought a T/C Thunderhawk inline with a thumbhole stock. This is the only one I have ever seen (sure someone will have one), it's like a small carbine style with a 20" barrel. I have taken a bunch of deer with it and won't have another without a thumbhole stock. |
|
Quoted:
op I got the very gu. your talking about but mines camo, killed the buck in my anatar with it. glad I went with the thumbhole, only issue you have take your thumb out to set the hammer.. good luck. Looks like a great buck! Wish Michigan regulations weren't so F'd up. We would have a lot more chances at 3.5 year old deer. To the other more traditional guy's, I use the smoke pole instead of my mossy 500 for our general gun season. That damn mossy kicks like a damn mule. It's accurate enough, but no where close to the TC. I'm too lazy to measure powders for my inline so I'm not going civil war style lol. |
|
Quoted:
The incomparable Eric Kettenburg. Look him up. Be prepared to be amazed. Quoted:
Quoted:
Who built that flintlock? Thanks. I like its 1760-70ish lines. Don't care for the Federal Period flintlock. It's time for me to build an Evan Marshall rifle. |
|
Quoted: Thanks. I like its 1760-70ish lines. Don't care for the Federal Period flintlock. It's time for me to build an Evan Marshall rifle. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Who built that flintlock? Thanks. I like its 1760-70ish lines. Don't care for the Federal Period flintlock. It's time for me to build an Evan Marshall rifle. |
|
How well do those thumbhole stocks work when you shoot left handed?
I have only had to shoot deer 2 times left handed, but those two times I really had no way to take the shot any other way. You should have gotten the encore, its a better gun. Those omegas seem kind of junky to me. |
|
Quoted:
I'm kinda torn as to what to do. Was talked out of a thumb hole stock a number of years ago when I bought the gun new. Now I really want one as they just seem crazy comfortable to me and seem to help me have better/ more constant trigger pull. It's a Thompson Center Omega with a black composite stock, stainless barrel, shooting 3 pellets of pyrodex under barnes sabots. Here's my dilemma, if you could call it that. It's an absolute tack driver by muzzle loader standards even with being lazy and using those filthy pellets! I'm talking clover leaf at 100 yards minimum. ...usually better than that. Leave well enough alone? Get the laminate thumb hole stock? I'm so conflicted If you shoot it well then leave it alone. You may end up spending money to make it shoot worse. |
|
Quoted:
I'm kinda torn as to what to do. Was talked out of a thumb hole stock a number of years ago when I bought the gun new. Now I really want one as they just seem crazy comfortable to me and seem to help me have better/ more constant trigger pull. It's a Thompson Center Omega with a black composite stock, stainless barrel, shooting 3 pellets of pyrodex under barnes sabots. Here's my dilemma, if you could call it that. It's an absolute tack driver by muzzle loader standards even with being lazy and using those filthy pellets! I'm talking clover leaf at 100 yards minimum. ...usually better than that. Leave well enough alone? Get the laminate thumb hole stock? I'm so conflicted Don't mess with the gun if it's shooting that well, especially this close to season. Do that next year, and be prepared to spend a lot of time, gunpowder, and bullets screwing around to get the screw torques right, and hope nothing more is needed. I'd back the load down and start shooting loose gunpowder, too. |
|
Quoted:
The incomparable Eric Kettenburg. Look him up. Be prepared to be amazed. Quoted:
Quoted:
Who built that flintlock? He's good. Jim Kibler is better. Kettenburg probably still has an edge with respect to obsolete finishes. |
|
I've got the TC encore in stainless....
It's got that really deep cut on the stock. Almost like a reverse pistol grip.... Sorry best way to describe it . I like it more then a thumb hole style. And mine is a tack driver also, but I use 100 grains (2 pellets). The magnum load is a little tough on my shoulder and all my shots are under 100 yards anyway. Muzzloader season kicks off this weekend so I guess I will throw some smoke down range this week for fun. |
|
Quoted: He's good. Jim Kibler is better. Kettenburg probably still has an edge with respect to obsolete finishes. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Who built that flintlock? He's good. Jim Kibler is better. Kettenburg probably still has an edge with respect to obsolete finishes. Kettenberg forges his own locks and casts or forges his own hardware. The number of builders who do this is very, very few. The number who do both well are, well, 2-3. The number who also research like Kettenburg, well, I honestly do not know if there are more than 2 that are currently working at this level. YMMV. |
|
Quoted:
IMO - do it right, or don't do it at all!!! 
http://m1.i.pbase.com/g1/72/325172/2/129101001.bmMvwVQ3.jpg http://m2.i.pbase.com/g1/72/325172/2/129100982.yRIu6n6F.jpg I'll see your Thompson/Center and raise you... two more Thompson/Centers.
|
|
Quoted: I'll see your Thompson/Center and raise you... two more Thompson/Centers. http://i1082.photobucket.com/albums/j377/victor751/c731bf24-12f3-4751-ade0-96d1dd2c6e75_zps4595823f.jpg https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5597/15464273632_2457943954_b.jpg Quoted: Quoted: IMO - do it right, or don't do it at all!!! http://m1.i.pbase.com/g1/72/325172/2/129101001.bmMvwVQ3.jpg http://m2.i.pbase.com/g1/72/325172/2/129100982.yRIu6n6F.jpg I'll see your Thompson/Center and raise you... two more Thompson/Centers. http://i1082.photobucket.com/albums/j377/victor751/c731bf24-12f3-4751-ade0-96d1dd2c6e75_zps4595823f.jpg https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5597/15464273632_2457943954_b.jpg But the brass on the flinter is too shiny, and the frizzen isn't worn enough....   Still traditional is the only way to go!!!
 |
|
Quoted: Nice! But the brass on the flinter is too shiny, and the frizzen isn't worn enough.... Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: IMO - do it right, or don't do it at all!!! http://m1.i.pbase.com/g1/72/325172/2/129101001.bmMvwVQ3.jpg http://m2.i.pbase.com/g1/72/325172/2/129100982.yRIu6n6F.jpg I'll see your Thompson/Center and raise you... two more Thompson/Centers. http://i1082.photobucket.com/albums/j377/victor751/c731bf24-12f3-4751-ade0-96d1dd2c6e75_zps4595823f.jpg https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5597/15464273632_2457943954_b.jpg But the brass on the flinter is too shiny, and the frizzen isn't worn enough.... Still traditional is the only way to go!!!  |
|
Quoted:
Nice! But the brass on the flinter is too shiny, and the frizzen isn't worn enough....
Still traditional is the only way to go!!!
That picture was taken right after I got it. I had just polished all the brass. I always do that when I acquire a gun, along with cleaning up the rest of it and tuning the lock. It's part of the process of making it 'mine'. Then I let the brass yellow/tarnish naturally with use. And I had just replaced the old frizzen with the improved version, so it was brand new. I replaced the hammer a bit later. The barrel in that picture is a custom .36. I also have a Green Mountain .50 barrel for it. The only thing it doesn't have is a T/C barrel. 
|
|
Quoted: That picture was taken right after I got it. I had just polished all the brass. I always do that when I acquire a gun, along with cleaning up the rest of it and tuning the lock. It's part of the process of making it 'mine'. Then I let the brass yellow/tarnish naturally with use. And I had just replaced the old frizzen with the improved version, so it was brand new. I replaced the hammer a bit later. The barrel in that picture is a custom .36. I also have a Green Mountain .50 barrel for it. The only thing it doesn't have is a T/C barrel. Quoted: Quoted: Nice! But the brass on the flinter is too shiny, and the frizzen isn't worn enough.... Still traditional is the only way to go!!! That picture was taken right after I got it. I had just polished all the brass. I always do that when I acquire a gun, along with cleaning up the rest of it and tuning the lock. It's part of the process of making it 'mine'. Then I let the brass yellow/tarnish naturally with use. And I had just replaced the old frizzen with the improved version, so it was brand new. I replaced the hammer a bit later. The barrel in that picture is a custom .36. I also have a Green Mountain .50 barrel for it. The only thing it doesn't have is a T/C barrel. What is the "improved" frizzen, I'm not aware of that - maybe I need one. I've not had ignition problems with a properly set flint but I've had issues getting it there...
|
|
Quoted:
When you get to the 2-3 guys operating at this level, IMO, you are picking the pepper from the fly shit with saying who is "best." Kettenberg forges his own locks and casts or forges his own hardware. The number of builders who do this is very, very few. The number who do both well are, well, 2-3. The number who also research like Kettenburg, well, I honestly do not know if there are more than 2 that are currently working at this level. YMMV. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Who built that flintlock? He's good. Jim Kibler is better. Kettenburg probably still has an edge with respect to obsolete finishes. Kettenberg forges his own locks and casts or forges his own hardware. The number of builders who do this is very, very few. The number who do both well are, well, 2-3. The number who also research like Kettenburg, well, I honestly do not know if there are more than 2 that are currently working at this level. YMMV. I agree about Kettenberg's historical knowledge. There are other men that equal that, but they either don't build guns, or not as well. I saw Kibler go through his first three or four guns and I don't think there is anyone currently with the artistic eye, and the hands to turn that into near perfection. I wouldn't limit the number of great modern builders to just a handful, but they all bring something a little different. I appreciate the work that improves the genre, too; 18th century and Golden Age guns are great, but let's not get stuck. |
|
Quoted: I agree about Kettenberg's historical knowledge. There are other men that equal that, but they either don't build guns, or not as well. I saw Kibler go through his first three or four guns and I don't think there is anyone currently with the artistic eye, and the hands to turn that into near perfection. I wouldn't limit the number of great modern builders to just a handful, but they all bring something a little different. I appreciate the work that improves the genre, too; 18th century and Golden Age guns are great, but let's not get stuck. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Who built that flintlock? He's good. Jim Kibler is better. Kettenburg probably still has an edge with respect to obsolete finishes. Kettenberg forges his own locks and casts or forges his own hardware. The number of builders who do this is very, very few. The number who do both well are, well, 2-3. The number who also research like Kettenburg, well, I honestly do not know if there are more than 2 that are currently working at this level. YMMV. I agree about Kettenberg's historical knowledge. There are other men that equal that, but they either don't build guns, or not as well. I saw Kibler go through his first three or four guns and I don't think there is anyone currently with the artistic eye, and the hands to turn that into near perfection. I wouldn't limit the number of great modern builders to just a handful, but they all bring something a little different. I appreciate the work that improves the genre, too; 18th century and Golden Age guns are great, but let's not get stuck.  I'm impressed with your level of knowledge of these guys. |
|
Hell yeah, traditional!
Got my first flintlock deer last year... a monster 175 lb doe. I'm likely going to pass up any buck this year unless it's a monster and just let my buck tag convert into a flintlock either-sex tag again. Grab a T/C Hawken flintlock, they quit making them a short while ago. 
|
|
Quoted: Hell yeah, traditional! Got my first flintlock deer last year... a monster 175 lb doe. I'm likely going to pass up any buck this year unless it's a monster and just let my buck tag convert into a flintlock either-sex tag again. Grab a T/C Hawken flintlock, they quit making them a short while ago. http://i192.photobucket.com/albums/z234/mditt8671/1555360_10201209464226587_475787011.jpg Nice! Good for you!!!
|
|
Quoted:
What is the "improved" frizzen, I'm not aware of that - maybe I need one. I've not had ignition problems with a properly set flint but I've had issues getting it there... The original lock geometry isn't the best. It works well enough, but there was room for improvement. The hammer was redesigned with a slightly different angle, and the frizzen received an improved heat treating process. Switching out the old hammer and frizzen for the new ones improves sparking and reliability (assuming you're using good quality flints in the first place). No other changes need to be made to the lock. The new hammer can be identified by it's shape in this picture. The new one (on top) has a more plain style. The older one has a more pronounced curve and that spur right above the screw. 
You'll also need a new top jaw and screw to go with the new hammer. The frizzen is easy to identify. The old one had the usual case hardened finish. The new one has a black finish (you can sorta see the difference in the picture above, and the picture below). One note about the frizzen. When I got mine, the part that the screw goes through was a bit thinner than the old one, so it was a sloppy fit. I heard from some other guys who didn't have this problem, so apparently T/C had a bit of variance in their specs with these things. A comparison shot: 
I filled the gap with a small brass washer from the hardware store and it's fine now: 
T/C stopped making sidelocks a couple of years ago, they don't have any more spare parts. You can get them on ebay. Search for muzzleloader707, he sells parts for T/C and CVA. I've bought several things from him, he ships fast. Tell him you want the new improved ones. If he doesn't have what you need in stock, send him a message. He'll get it for you. |
|
Quoted:
Hell yeah, traditional! Got my first flintlock deer last year... a monster 175 lb doe. I'm likely going to pass up any buck this year unless it's a monster and just let my buck tag convert into a flintlock either-sex tag again. Grab a T/C Hawken flintlock, they quit making them a short while ago. http://i192.photobucket.com/albums/z234/mditt8671/1555360_10201209464226587_475787011.jpg Cool picture. |
|
Quoted:
Inline muzzle-loaders're icky. http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_vb_Yo_ELC48/TCPzEh50YrI/AAAAAAAAd6Q/l7eO_2UPo8Q/s1600/P1010205.JPG +1 Inlines/caplocks/pyrodex/sabots. Imho, they take away the fun of shooting a smoke pole. I get it, if you're just using it as a tool to harvest a deer.  " />
 " />
|
|
Quoted:
He's good. Jim Kibler is better. Kettenburg probably still has an edge with respect to obsolete finishes. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Who built that flintlock? He's good. Jim Kibler is better. Kettenburg probably still has an edge with respect to obsolete finishes. Check out Brad Emig. Hand forged bbls and locks. Everything made as it was in 1770. |
|
Quoted:
When you get to the 2-3 guys operating at this level, IMO, you are picking the pepper from the fly shit with saying who is "best." Kettenberg forges his own locks and casts or forges his own hardware. The number of builders who do this is very, very few. The number who do both well are, well, 2-3. The number who also research like Kettenburg, well, I honestly do not know if there are more than 2 that are currently working at this level. YMMV. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Who built that flintlock? He's good. Jim Kibler is better. Kettenburg probably still has an edge with respect to obsolete finishes. Kettenberg forges his own locks and casts or forges his own hardware. The number of builders who do this is very, very few. The number who do both well are, well, 2-3. The number who also research like Kettenburg, well, I honestly do not know if there are more than 2 that are currently working at this level. YMMV. There are a few. Emig I mentioned. The House brothers. Agree that there are very few. Hell, even back then, most guys didn't do it all. There were barrel makers. Lock makers. Furniture casters. |
|
Quoted:
Understood. But if Eric Kettenburg built it, it's likely period-correct in every possible way. He studies this stuff to a level of detail that is beyond beyond. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Who built that flintlock? Thanks. I like its 1760-70ish lines. Don't care for the Federal Period flintlock. It's time for me to build an Evan Marshall rifle. I don't think he made a mistake. It is correct for an early rifle. That's why I like it. I just don't like the modern stuff (heavy inlays in lieu of relief carving, crescent shaped buttplate, percussion (unless it's a minie gun)). |
|
Quoted:
The original lock geometry isn't the best. It works well enough, but there was room for improvement. The hammer was redesigned with a slightly different angle, and the frizzen received an improved heat treating process. Switching out the old hammer and frizzen for the new ones improves sparking and reliability (assuming you're using good quality flints in the first place). No other changes need to be made to the lock. The new hammer can be identified by it's shape in this picture. The new one (on top) has a more plain style. The older one has a more pronounced curve and that spur right above the screw. https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5601/15278265767_edb80eb24a_b.jpg You'll also need a new top jaw and screw to go with the new hammer. The frizzen is easy to identify. The old one had the usual case hardened finish. The new one has a black finish (you can sorta see the difference in the picture above, and the picture below). One note about the frizzen. When I got mine, the part that the screw goes through was a bit thinner than the old one, so it was a sloppy fit. I heard from some other guys who didn't have this problem, so apparently T/C had a bit of variance in their specs with these things. A comparison shot: http://i216.photobucket.com/albums/cc298/Jumpshot2755/002_zps3c11fdaa.jpg I filled the gap with a small brass washer from the hardware store and it's fine now: https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5599/15278350737_95687ed030_b.jpg https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3928/15278295688_12ce859be7_b.jpg T/C stopped making sidelocks a couple of years ago, they don't have any more spare parts. You can get them on ebay. Search for muzzleloader707, he sells parts for T/C and CVA. I've bought several things from him, he ships fast. Tell him you want the new improved ones. If he doesn't have what you need in stock, send him a message. He'll get it for you. Quoted:
Quoted:
What is the "improved" frizzen, I'm not aware of that - maybe I need one. I've not had ignition problems with a properly set flint but I've had issues getting it there... The original lock geometry isn't the best. It works well enough, but there was room for improvement. The hammer was redesigned with a slightly different angle, and the frizzen received an improved heat treating process. Switching out the old hammer and frizzen for the new ones improves sparking and reliability (assuming you're using good quality flints in the first place). No other changes need to be made to the lock. The new hammer can be identified by it's shape in this picture. The new one (on top) has a more plain style. The older one has a more pronounced curve and that spur right above the screw. https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5601/15278265767_edb80eb24a_b.jpg You'll also need a new top jaw and screw to go with the new hammer. The frizzen is easy to identify. The old one had the usual case hardened finish. The new one has a black finish (you can sorta see the difference in the picture above, and the picture below). One note about the frizzen. When I got mine, the part that the screw goes through was a bit thinner than the old one, so it was a sloppy fit. I heard from some other guys who didn't have this problem, so apparently T/C had a bit of variance in their specs with these things. A comparison shot: http://i216.photobucket.com/albums/cc298/Jumpshot2755/002_zps3c11fdaa.jpg I filled the gap with a small brass washer from the hardware store and it's fine now: https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5599/15278350737_95687ed030_b.jpg https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3928/15278295688_12ce859be7_b.jpg T/C stopped making sidelocks a couple of years ago, they don't have any more spare parts. You can get them on ebay. Search for muzzleloader707, he sells parts for T/C and CVA. I've bought several things from him, he ships fast. Tell him you want the new improved ones. If he doesn't have what you need in stock, send him a message. He'll get it for you. You're only gonna get so much out of those CVA or TC locks. Once you've played with a well built Siler or L&R, you'll see the difference. Correct mating of the frizzen and main spring is very important, as is the frizzen impingement on the frizzen spring. |
|
Quoted:
+1 Inlines/caplocks/pyrodex/sabots. Imho, they take away the fun of shooting a smoke pole. I get it, if you're just using it as a tool to harvest a deer. http://<a href=http://i1326.photobucket.com/albums/u660/ridgerunner9876/DSCF7907_zpse076c989.jpg</a>" /> http://<a href=http://i1326.photobucket.com/albums/u660/ridgerunner9876/DSCF7905_zps6cf61a42.jpg</a>" /> Quoted:
Quoted:
Inline muzzle-loaders're icky. http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_vb_Yo_ELC48/TCPzEh50YrI/AAAAAAAAd6Q/l7eO_2UPo8Q/s1600/P1010205.JPG +1 Inlines/caplocks/pyrodex/sabots. Imho, they take away the fun of shooting a smoke pole. I get it, if you're just using it as a tool to harvest a deer. http://<a href=http://i1326.photobucket.com/albums/u660/ridgerunner9876/DSCF7907_zpse076c989.jpg</a>" /> http://<a href=http://i1326.photobucket.com/albums/u660/ridgerunner9876/DSCF7905_zps6cf61a42.jpg</a>" /> Nice. |
|
Quoted:
I don't think he made a mistake. It is correct for an early rifle. That's why I like it. I just don't like the modern stuff (heavy inlays in lieu of relief carving, crescent shaped buttplate, percussion (unless it's a minie gun)). Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Who built that flintlock? Thanks. I like its 1760-70ish lines. Don't care for the Federal Period flintlock. It's time for me to build an Evan Marshall rifle. I don't think he made a mistake. It is correct for an early rifle. That's why I like it. I just don't like the modern stuff (heavy inlays in lieu of relief carving, crescent shaped buttplate, percussion (unless it's a minie gun)). Agree that's about a 1760ish. My personal favorites are the 1780-90 Lancaster style. JP Beck made some beautiful rifles. Still the wide butt but with angular lines and thinner wrist. Generally leaning towards smaller calibers by that time, too, to conserve powder and lead for a longhunter. |
|
Quoted:
Check out Brad Emig. Hand forged bbls and locks. Everything made as it was in 1770. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Who built that flintlock? He's good. Jim Kibler is better. Kettenburg probably still has an edge with respect to obsolete finishes. Check out Brad Emig. Hand forged bbls and locks. Everything made as it was in 1770. I met him at Dixon's a few years back. There was someone else there forging lock parts, too, but I don't recall his name. |