Do we desire a Kibler Hawken kit?

[Dan'l 1946]

This one in the Smithsonian is what I would like to see in original flintlock form. It was obviously a flintlock that was converted. I saw it at the Smithsonian when I was there several years ago.

https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/search/object/nmah_414955

The Smithsonian Hawken has a flintlock converted to percussion, but other than the lock, there is zero evidence that the rifle was flint. The lock panel isn’t notched for the cock to stop on the lock plate. The breach is a percussion bolster. It’s much more likely Sam used an old flintlock converted to percussion on a built to be percussion full stock, than that the rifle was restocked, rebreached and the lock was reused.

If Sam Hawken built that rifle as a percussion piece and converted the lock, he was definitely having an off day. It looks like the job was done by a drunken chimpanzee using a hacksaw and some dynamite. One thing to note is the lock says S. Hawken, and if it truly is an early rifle, it strikes me that it should be J &S Hawken. Just a thought....

Sam built rifles before he went to St. Louis. The lock could have been a recycled lock from earlier, a well known practice in those days. During the height of the original Hawken shop days, they would use any locks they could get their hands on. Isn't there another Hawken besides that one that has a converted lock with the regular percussion bolster.

Sam did build rifles before  he partnered with Jake, but he didn't build what we think of as a Hawken rifle. And he didn't perform sloppy work like  that.
 

[Top Jaw]

Well, this one has certainly generated some chatter.  My thoughts on desirability of a half stock percussion later period Hawken kit.   I think there are a few potential pluses in pursuing that, although some have said they have no desire for such a kit, or question the market for it.   I think the market would not be limited to the hard-core flintlock shooter necessarily (although this is an iconic gun that I and many in this group would love to own).  I think there is a secondary (and bigger) market among the in-line hunting crowd that wants to take a step back toward tradition, but doesn’t want to jump straight to a flintlock.  This could be marketed as a hunters gun in that case.

If this gun could be made with the traditional Hawken look, but also with a mind toward weight reduction for hunters - with a tapered barrel, and possibly a hollow under rib, I think there would be an appeal there.  Especially among muzzle loading hunters or those that currently only own an inline.  This would also give Kibler a use for shorter pieces of wood that he probably has on hand from cutting up boards into stock blanks.  My two cents. 

[MuskratMike]

As much as I like Mr. Kibler's work, I have no use for a Hawken of any kind. Living out here in the Pacific NW you see all sorts of them and I have owned several. Now that I am older and hopefully smarter I have no use for these poorly balanced way too heavy clubs. I'll stick with the rifles I have but could be talked into the fowler.

[heinz]

A poorly balanced Hawken is one that is not built correctly.  Go back and review Herb's posts.  Most modern Hawken repros have pulls that are 1/2 inch to an inch too long combined with a barrel that is too long.  And remember they are horseback guns.  Get up on a horse for two or three hundred miles with a well-balanced 44 inch barreled  Kentucky rifle and you will be looking for a Hawken or a hacksaw.

[flinchrocket]

I examined that rifle in Cody this April. It's not a Hawken. The rifle was made by Jacob Fordney. The top barrel flat shows evidence of peening which was then overstamped with the Hawken stamp.

I can only go on what the display card said, it was in a case. Did you tell them it wasn’t a Hawken? What was their response to your discovery? Is it still displayed as a Hawken?

[RAT]

Yes, the acting curator has my opinions on the rifle. The rifle was removed from the case and we were able to examine it, take photos, and take measurements. I don't have these yet. I was with a friend of mine, he still has this information and photos. I can't share any photos when I get them. There's a possibility they may be published in the future. Stay tuned.

[flinchrocket]

That’s strange, I couldn’t even get them to straighten out their pictures of the Hawken rifles when they were all mixed up online. How did you determine it was a Fordney?

[RAT]

First, it simply doesn't LOOK like a Hawken product.

If you google Jacob Fordney rifle, you'll find several pictures of museum owned rifles. Compare them to the one at Cody. Especially the patchbox. It's pretty obvious. Other smaller details are also the same.

Also, Hanson published information about Fordney Indian trade rifles purchased by the government to distribute (1838), but never did. Later, they were converted to percussion by Henry Leman (in 1861). They were apparently given to pro-union Indians recruited in Missouri and Arkansas in 1862. See MFT Quarterly Winter 2010. I'm not saying this is one of those government purchased rifles (only 250 were purchased from Fordney).

Fordney also supplied rifles to the AFC, some with single triggers and some with double set triggers. See The Encyclopedia of the Fur Trade, Vol 1, Firearms of the Fur Trade.

I have more information, but I think we're getting a little too much off-topic, so I'll stop there.

[flinchrocket]

I don’t think we’re too far off subject. We wouldn’t want mr. Kibler to copy a J. Fordney when he was told it’s a Hawken.

[RAT]

My first suggestion was about creating an easy-to-assemble kit that doesn't require a shop and all the tools required for non-CNC type kits. My first rifle build was just such a kit. I assembled it on my kitchen table in an apartment. It wasn't fun, and the result wasn't as good as I would have wanted. That experience, and feedback I've gotten from people who have built Kibler kits, tells me his kits fill a niche for these type of folks.

The more new people we can bring into muzzleloading the better off we'll all be. Otherwise it dies. Earlier this year I bought several Kibler locks. I was very impressed with their quality. When speaking with Katherine, she was telling me about all the new people that were ordering kits from them. These are people who have never fired a muzzleloader, are not reenactors, and in many cases have never fired a modern firearm. Let's make them feel welcome.

I was thinking of something that appeals to a wider audience. Can be assembled by new folks with less experience and with fewer tools. And would appeal to people who want to move into something traditional, but are not reenactors.  Not everyone who buys a Sharps rifle dresses up like Matthew Quigley. Everything offered in kit form seems to be for folks east of the Mississippi. People on the west bank have more square miles of this country, but seem to always be forgotten.

Before you get your panties all twisted about that comment, think about this. I had a conversation with my niece last week. She lives in Connecticut. She was complaining about how small Rhode Island was. Really? Connecticut is so much bigger? Connecticut fits between Bozeman and Billings... the long way. God I LOVE the west. Just saying.

IF a kit was offered with the goal of satisfying those who reenact the west, and want to be authentic, I'd suggest a Lancaster trade rifle (the most common rendezvous rifle) or the J. J. Henry English or new English trade rifles (the 2nd most common rifles). These, of course, would be flint.

Once again, that doesn't add to the diversity of kit offerings. Most are already flint. Few are offered in percussion.

With that, I'll let this thread fade without any more comments from me. It had a lot of legs, more than I expected when I started it. And boy... do people really HATE Hawken rifles!

[Mike Brooks]

Out of nearly 400 guns I have made I have shipped maybe 5 west of the Mississippi.

[heinz]

RAT, nice explanation.  I would agree.   And I love good Hawkens

[Woodland]

I'm not going to add my 2 cents as to what Mr. Kibler should do, that is his business.  My reply is in response to the last few posts from RAT and Mr. Brooks.  I live on the west coast, and am both relatively young and relatively new to this hobby.  I am 40 yrs old and got into this about 2 years ago.  A Hawken rifle is what lured me into the world of black powder.  Living in the Cascade mountains lured me to the "mountain man guns". Google led me to a "Hawken kit" that turns out was nothing like a Hawken rifle.  That led me to a kit from the Hawken Shop which is about 30 minutes from my house.  Building that kit made me learn a lot of skills and led to less finished kits, and ultimately to building from a plank.  I suspect that those on the west coast, who do not have a connection to the earlier rifles as our history doesn't go back that far, are more inclined toward the mountain man and cowboy era.  On the rare occasion anyone gets to go into my gun safe, the Henry and Winchester rifles are the main attraction not the front stuffers.  Just an observation on my part that maybe a Hawken rifle draws more interest toward this hobby from the west side of the big river. 

Jon

[Scota4570]

One thing that might appeal to a larger audience is a percussion version of the SMR.  It could be done without  additional CNC programming by offering a conversion of the flint plate that used a drum.  A new hammer would be needed of course.  ....I know orders are backed up already.  I'd buy one on general principle. 

[flinchrocket]

As for the percussion SMR,I would rather see a new plate machined out that would use the flint internals instead of butchering a new flintlock.

[Scota4570]

That is what I meant.  Either lop of the pan of an existing plate or reprogram the mill to make it look like a conversion of a flintlock.  Whatever is easier.  The holes for the flint parts could remain.  A hammer with a 1.6" swing fits. 

[Taylorz1]

Its funny how geography shapes perspective. If you go to a shoot near me(west of big muddy)its 90% Hawken or Hawken wanna be guns, 5% trade rifle and 5% longrifle. If you ask 10 non muzzleloading gun  people to name a famous period maker of muzzleloaders I bet you will get 8 people saying Hawken and two people saying Thompson Center. If I set a pretty average Hawken on a rack here next to a Herschel House poor boy nobody will even look at the longrifle. If you went to a western rendezvous  of the American Mountain Men you will see a couple J Henrys and Lancasters amongst the old grey beards and a bunch of Hawkens. The complete opposite seemed to be true when I lived on the east coast. Vive la difference but I still want a Kibler hawken Kit...actually I want 5 of them from .45-.62cal.

Z

[moseswhite]

Any one who has ever thrown up an original Hawken rifle to his/her shoulder knows how well they balance and feel !!!!!

[moseswhite]

 Someone mentioned the steel mounted J. Henry that Charles Hansen has noted in several publications as it being the missing steel mounted trade rifle . This rifle is NOT  a J. Henry rifle . The only part on that rifle that is marked J. Henry is the lock . the rifle in my humble opinion is a North Carolina rifle and the rifle is maker marked on top of the barrel . It is also a small caliber rifle and not a large caliber rifle as we are led to believe. There is however the real steel mounted J. Henry rifle in a private collection . I'm not at liberty to say who has this rifle but one does exist !

[Bob Roller]

Any one who has ever thrown up an original Hawken rifle to his/her shoulder knows how well they balance and feel !!!!!

I have handled and fired the Hoffman&Campbell rifle credited to J&S Hawken and carried by Francis Parkman in 1847 and it had a 42"barrel and weighed 15 pounds and it wasn't hard to handle.I was about 35 then and now at 85 I don't think I could handle it to shoot standing.The accurate copies made by Tom Dawson of the later Hawken rifles handled well and I think even now I can shoot one.
Bob Roller

[Bob Roller]

One thing that might appeal to a larger audience is a percussion version of the SMR.  It could be done without  additional CNC programming by offering a conversion of the flint plate that used a drum.  A new hammer would be needed of course.  ....I know orders are backed up already.  I'd buy one on general principle.

A Chamberfs or Kibler kit minus the cut out for the flint lock could easily be a caplock SMR and a Chambers or Davis lock could be used.I have made a LOT of caplocks for such simple rifles and at one time a number of good looking hammers were available but don't know about now.
Bob Roller

[Frank]

I don’t think I would want a percussion gun with the shortage of percussion caps that shows no sign of letting up.

[Mike Brooks]

I'm developing severe Hawken fatigue and Kibler isn't ever going to offer a Hawken kit..... 

[Frank]

I'm developing severe Hawken fatigue and Kibler isn't ever going to offer a Hawken kit..... 

Agree

[flinchrocket]

Someone mentioned the steel mounted J. Henry that Charles Hansen has noted in several publications as it being the missing steel mounted trade rifle . This rifle is NOT  a J. Henry rifle . The only part on that rifle that is marked J. Henry is the lock . the rifle in my humble opinion is a North Carolina rifle and the rifle is maker marked on top of the barrel . It is also a small caliber rifle and not a large caliber rifle as we are led to believe. There is however the real steel mounted J. Henry rifle in a private collection . I'm not at liberty to say who has this rifle but one does exist !

At least we can agree there was such a thing. Now you have me wondering what it looks like. Iron mounted rifles are my favorite.