Post by: KHickam on January 25, 2014, 03:41:54 PM
Post by: KHickam on January 25, 2014, 08:32:57 PM
Anybody know where on the web to find the info
Post by: ridjrunr on January 25, 2014, 09:52:48 PM
20 guage
.50 Virginia rifle
And then the Pedersoli
In that order,IMO
But it could depend a lot on your past and background as well I think.
Like where you came from and what you have done in your life,where you worked and where you have been living.
Post by: gunmaker on January 26, 2014, 12:54:02 PM
Post by: Roaddog on January 27, 2014, 06:35:27 AM
The remains of two long rifles were found at the bottom of the Snake River near Murtaugh, Idaho from 1811.Armament of the overland Astorians. the locks in place is a trade musket. I hope this will help. I got the book on Amazon.
Post by: mario on January 27, 2014, 09:12:30 PM
Personally, from my research in my mountain man days, I'd stick with the VA rifle.
Hanson wrote about the Hawkens, etc and IIRC, his view was that the most common long gun for the MM was an eastern rifle (late Lancaster or Southern Mountain) or a trade rifle.
Mario
Post by: ridjrunr on January 30, 2014, 08:58:35 PM
IMO, thats why, of the guns mentioned, the 20 would be a better bet.
Post by: gunmaker on January 31, 2014, 01:09:05 AM
Post by: Captchee on January 31, 2014, 07:38:42 AM
In the L&C journals you will also read of clarks small rifle taking elk which was a 36 cal .
It was however concluded that the issue was that the produced wound channel was to small to bleed well on such big game. Not that it would not suffice to kill , which it proved to do .
Myself I would agree with Mario and would be keeping the long rifle and the smoothbore
Post by: gunmaker on January 31, 2014, 11:43:28 AM
Post by: mario on January 31, 2014, 11:00:48 PM
Quote from: "ridjrunr"
Cal. was also a big issue, many but not all of the eastern longrifles were of smaller cal., at least smaller than one would want for Bison and Grizzly bear.
IMO, thats why, of the guns mentioned, the 20 would be a better bet.
If the question were "What would be better for large Western game?," yes.
But the question was more along the lines of "What would be the more historically accurate gun of these three?".
Mario
Post by: ridjrunr on February 01, 2014, 12:19:35 AM
Post by: Captchee on February 01, 2014, 07:28:51 AM
However mush of that was later towards the end of the fur trapping hay day and the beginning of really heavy market hunting and westward expansion . Its also IMO seen more in the south west then in the northern areas.
As such I don’t believe a ½ stock is a must have for the portrayal your asking about Dan .
Mario would be more creditable for information then myself . But my opinion would be that a full stock of reasonable caliber , would be as common if not more common for the time period your speaking of
Post by: Captchee on February 01, 2014, 07:30:19 AM
However mush of that was later towards the end of the fur trapping hay day and the beginning of really heavy market hunting and westward expansion . Its also IMO seen more in the south west then in the northern areas.
As such I don’t believe a ½ stock is a must have for the portrayal your asking about Dan .
Mario would be more creditable for information then myself . But my opinion would be that a full stock of reasonable caliber , would be as common if not more common for the time period being ask about .
Post by: Riley/MN on February 01, 2014, 01:25:37 PM
Quote from: "KHickam"
Well, I am trying to get down to just one gun -
Keith, just how hard did you hit your head in that fall a while back?.....
Post by: KHickam on February 01, 2014, 01:38:19 PM
Post by: Riley/MN on February 01, 2014, 02:01:45 PM
Post by: Spotted Bull on February 01, 2014, 02:26:46 PM
My two cents...keep the smoothie.
Post by: mario on February 02, 2014, 12:23:59 AM
Quote from: "ridjrunr"
very true but didnt the trend in reality,move away from smaller caliber eastern longrifles and move more towards the larger caliber half stocks and trade guns? Lemans, Hawkens and others?
Yes, but as Captchee stated, is was later. If we were talking, say 1840-50s, definitely. But the period specified was pretty early. Lewis and Clark were only back for a few years by 1810.
Leman didn't start making rifles until the 1830s (first Gov contract was in 1837) and the Hawken Bros. didn't turn out more than a few hundred rifles (earliest known was 1823).
An American Fur Company order with Jacob Gumph of PA in 1828:
100 rifles "to be 3 feet 7 or 8 inches in the barrel, to carry a ball 40 to 45 to the pound."
That's only .470"-.488" ball.
Trade guns are, well, timeless. But that wasn't one of the choices given.
Mario