Author Topic: Any idea who really made this plains rifle? (Read 8529 times)

mparker762 · « **on:** May 15, 2016, 12:47:20 AM »

I'm not really into plains rifles, but I ran into this today at a local show and it immediately looked odd even before I saw the name on the barrel. 54 cal half-stock rifle in approximately the plains style. Oddities include (a) brass furniture (b) diamond instead of oval wedge escutcheons (c) checkered wrist (d) engraved lock plate (e) odd-looking lock plate with extra holes (f) patchbox (g) the washer on the lock bolt on the other side isn't teardrop shaped. Forgot to take a picture of the left side showing the lock bolt washer, and forgot to take pictures of the muzzle, but the rifling is narrow-groove rifling, and the bore diameter widens to nearly groove diameter near the muzzle in the old-fashioned way to ease loading.

It's signed S Hawken St Louis, but there's no way for a (h) Gun Show (albeit a collector-oriented one in a major city) with a (i) 4-figure price tag.

So any idea what it really is? I apologize for the photos, after I got home I realized the flash was on.

https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=77C9CA406F82D88!116251&authkey=!AEf10xQhbZPvRFY&v=3&ithint=photo%2cjpg

Don Stith · « **Reply #1 on:** May 15, 2016, 03:42:10 AM »

What am I doing wrong. I only get one picture and that is the close-up of the lock

Mike Brooks · « **Reply #2 on:** May 15, 2016, 03:48:40 AM »

Quote from: Don Stith on May 15, 2016, 03:42:10 AM

What am I doing wrong. I only get one picture and that is the close-up of the lock

Me too.

mparker762 · « **Reply #3 on:** May 15, 2016, 04:37:09 AM »

You should be able to click right to see the rest of the gallery.

mparker762 · « **Reply #4 on:** May 15, 2016, 04:42:48 AM »

Here's links to the rest of the pictures in the gallery.

https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=77C9CA406F82D88!116256&authkey=!AMoSzw5nAlzhnPc&v=3&ithint=photo%2cjpg

https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=77C9CA406F82D88!116254&authkey=!ADt32lCO451QEZU&v=3&ithint=photo%2cjpg

https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=77C9CA406F82D88!116253&authkey=!AOga4q8lLevYexI&v=3&ithint=photo%2cjpg

https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=77C9CA406F82D88!116257&authkey=!AOob1wT5HExq1S8&v=3&ithint=photo%2cjpg

Don Stith · « **Reply #5 on:** May 16, 2016, 04:18:21 PM »

Too late now, but for future reference, these pictures would be helpful:
Overall butt stock, including butt plate, both sides
Nose cap
tang

That trigger guard was used by dozens of makers from Ohio to California, including St Louis.
The flash guard between lock and tang was often used in Ohio
That is about all I get from what you provided

oakridge · « **Reply #6 on:** May 16, 2016, 08:09:19 PM »

I don't know who made this rifle, but I know who didn't. I'm surprised Don Stith didn't comment on the barrel markings.

crankshaft · « **Reply #7 on:** May 17, 2016, 04:24:33 AM »

Is this where we mention someone (allegedly) has some original Hawken stamps, and isn't afraid to use them? ?

Hungry Horse · « **Reply #8 on:** May 17, 2016, 06:28:35 PM »

A local man had a similar rifle marked S. Hawken St. Louis on the barrel. Many of its small features did indeed seem to be consistent with the work of Sam Hawken's shop, but it was only .40 caliber, and was assumed to be one of his rifles built for local consumption. This one being .54 cal. is a pretty suspicious, but wrist checkering, and brass fittings, are not inconsistent with the latter production of the Hawken's shop.
Let the buyer beware.

Hungry Horse

rich pierce · « **Reply #9 on:** May 17, 2016, 06:47:30 PM »

It appears the gun has been stored and refinished. Barrel has zero patina. How can the checkering be that sharp? Lots of questions about this gun.

Lampro · « **Reply #10 on:** May 21, 2016, 11:33:34 PM »

This appears to be the same gun, the description is interesting.
http://www.rockislandauction.com/viewitem/aid/66/lid/1135

smokinbuck · « **Reply #11 on:** May 22, 2016, 03:45:42 AM »

Have to agree with Rich on this one. The metal may have been cleaned up, bad idea, but the checkering looks brand newMark

Hungry Horse · « **Reply #12 on:** May 22, 2016, 08:39:05 AM »

My guess is the checkering was probably worn, and full of gunk, and somebody recut it. The same moron probably over leaned the barrel.

Hungry Horse

mparker762 · « **Reply #13 on:** May 23, 2016, 12:59:56 AM »

Quote from: Lampro on May 21, 2016, 11:33:34 PM

This appears to be the same gun, the description is interesting.
http://www.rockislandauction.com/viewitem/aid/66/lid/1135

Yes, That definitely appears to be the same gun. The front sight had also been moved on the one I saw, I didn't mention that in my original post since it didn't seem relevant to the inquiry. I'm not into plains rifles but the obvious flintlock conversion was what first caught my attention. I didn't even notice the barrel stamps until I was taking pictures of the lock and tang, then all the other oddities about this gun simply compounded the mystery.

rich pierce · « **Reply #14 on:** May 23, 2016, 04:45:36 AM »

Could have been built for the local trade. I'm not yet convinced the lock is converted from flint. Where is the screw hole for the frizzen spring? Why no remnant of the pan? Lock plate perfectly fits the drum.

Don Stith · « **Reply #15 on:** May 23, 2016, 02:29:32 PM »

That lock has always been percussion. Nose cap appears to be brass. To me that puts it way east of the Mississippi . The OP knew it was not a Hawken. His subject shows that

mparker762 · « **Reply #16 on:** May 23, 2016, 04:39:26 PM »

Quote from: rich pierce on May 23, 2016, 04:45:36 AM

Why no remnant of the pan? Lock plate perfectly fits the drum.

Seen in person, there's some roughness on the plate under the drum, and the plate doesn't actually fit the drum very well, you can see where it was filed to fit. I suspect it was polished and cleaned up much later, probably by whoever "restored" it.

PPatch · « **Reply #17 on:** May 23, 2016, 08:58:38 PM »

Here's a thought...

It is possible that the Hawken shop replaced or rebored/rifled the barrel of a customers existing rifle, there were many plains rifles similar in style to the Hawken being produced both in St. Louis and back east in the mid to late 1800s. They, the Hawkens, were doing quite a bit of that sort of work during the gold rush as stated by Neb Roberts and as quoted in "The Plains Rifle" by Charles E. Hanson Jr. (page 43):

"I have been told that back in 1849 when the first rush of gold seekers started to California, the Hawken shop recut many of the small bore rifles these pioneers had and made them from 42 to 50 calibers, depending on the size of the barrels.
It is my opinion that the Hawken you mention having locks like the Kentuck rifles. were some of those rifles that Hawken converted to his plains rifle type, instead of being rifles that were originally made by him. Of course when the Hawken brothers were were 'rushed' with work for pioneers who stopped over in St. Louis to get their rifles, had many different types of locks, because Hawken just recut the barrel to larger size and used the rest of the rifle in its original condition, including the lock, nipple, etc."

If just the barrel was replaced or rebored/rifled in the Hawken shop would it then have the Hawken stamp? I don't know. Also, the rifle in the current auction is 54 caliber, a bit up from the 50 cal Ned Roberts mentions.

dave

rich pierce · « **Reply #18 on:** May 23, 2016, 11:55:52 PM »

Lots of possibilities. I am more sure of what it is not (a purpose built plains rifle from the Hawken shop) than of what it is.

Without the stamp it's a $600 rifle more or less?

News:

Author Topic: Any idea who really made this plains rifle? (Read 8529 times)

mparker762

mparker762

mparker762

oakridge

mparker762

mparker762