Buffalo guns

[Dirty Dan Dawkins]

Hello again. Just a few things. I have handled several guns  now at the gun stores, shows, etc. I find the Spring field trap door to handle like a pressure treated 4x4, it's out. A high wall I have shot and liked fairly well. Would assume a low wall only has a line of sight change. I have yet to see a rolling block or a Ballard. Have handled plenty of Sharps. Still like them. I want a longer gun, not a calvary carbine. I know it all depends on my comfort , but are there any significant differences any of you can point out from your experiences with various guns? I know this is hard to describe, ya know, how does it feel different? It is a handling and balance question.  Any insight? I am a tall guy, if that would make a difference to any of your opinions and comments on ergonomics and balance.

[St. George]

When you get into the higher-dollar Sharps - you can get longer barrels fairly easily - but you may have to wait some time for them to build your rifle.

The Trapdoor Springfield fits and feels just fine - to me - and I'm tall, myself.

I guess that part of it's what you get used to, and since the military never varied a whole helluva lot - all military rifles fit me well.

I shoot a Springfield Model 1875 Officer's Rifle - the custom trapdoor rifle, with a tang rear sight.

Uncle Sam teaches the shooter to form a 'pocket' and a 'stock weld' - so that the rifle's butt is securely positioned at the shoulder's 'pocket' that's formed as the elbow raises and the shooter's cheek keeps the same position from shot to shot.

Practice that for awhile - until it feels second nature to you.

The Remington Rolling Block and the Ballard are both solid, period rifles - and they have their own 'feel'.

You're looking for an explanation of personal comfort and no one can adequately describe it to you - they can just know when it's right 'for them'.

Now - if you want a .45-70 Rifle that you 'may' find more comfortable - and if a single-shot isn't an absolute - then look at the Browning Model 1886...

Good Luck,

Scouts Out!

[Delmonico]

Would also depend on what you want out of your gun.  When you say "Buffalo Gun" I take that in the historical sense.  The 1885 Winchester is one of the best rifles ever made, but it ain't really a Buffalo Gun.  The last profitable hide hunting was in the spring of 1883, they was not enough left in the fall to  make a profit.  NCOWS does not allow it for their buffalo shoots for that reason.
The Low-Wall was just a smaller action for smaller calibers, I have one that wasre-barreled to 22 Hornet in the 1940's.

The Trapdoor was a military design and it feels kind of like a club because that was it's secondary duty.  Plenty of hide hunters started out with one in the early 1870's, Cody was a meat hunter, but that is what he used.

The Sharps is the famous one, it has it's good points and some bad such a a fairly slow lock time, heavy hammer and mainspring, plus a firing pin that has to go around the corner.

The Roller has a lot going for it, but most don't have a really good trigger pull and set triggers are scarce.


There were at least a few Ballards used on the hide hunts, they have a fast lock time and perhaps the best trigger of the lot, down side, they are expensive either repro or original.

Myself I shoot a Pedersoli Sharps I bought in 1994, to me Sharps just says Buffalo Gun.  Probally not a really good answer, but an honest one.

[Advertising]

[Chance]

Del, the honest answers are always the best.

Chance

[Dirty Dan Dawkins]

I guess the reason the Springfield I handled felt so bad was that the butt didn't fit well to my shoulder, that along with the action. It was however an original, I believe built in the 1880's. The dealer wanted $600. Which makes me wonder if I shouldn't have bought it anyways for my "collection" (if you can call it that) and do some work on it to slick it up. The mechanics of it were rough. Hence my description on handling. It was part of a large gun sale of some 300 plus guns of an old hermit that had passed away. That's quite a story in itself. Almost all of the guns were originals prior to 1900 and going as far back as pre Revolutionary War. Quite a collection, but all guns were poorly maintained, some needing minor work, others major internal work ( the levers, Henry's, 66's, 73's etc, were all  like operating a bumper jack). Was that a good price for an original Trap Door?

[St. George]

Without seeing that particulat Trapdoor and gauging overall condition - putting any sort of price on it is impossible.

On the other hand - there are still a lot of original rifles out there, so...

You don't 'slick up' original guns - you clean them carefully and shoot them once in awhile - especially the military ones whose markings need to be clear and visible in order for their value to rise.

Pedersoli currently makes a Trapdoor - and Harrington and Richardson made one before them - either are suitable for C&WAS.
Their wrist area is a little smaller than an original, as well - making them a hair lighter - and that may change your sense of 'feel'.

As Delmonico says - 'Sharps' = Buffalo Rifle to pretty much everybody who sees one and scouting about for a nice one is time well-spent.

Vaya,

Scouts Out!

[Delmonico]

One other note, since the Trapdoor is really just a breechloading conversion of a muzzle-loader even if they were build from scratch, with some basic gunsmithing skills could add a double set trigger to one, not any decent original of course but one of these built from odd parts ones or one of the Pedersoli's.  This was done with some of the Sporterized ones in the period.  One must remember a good trigger is vital to any long range shooting, with out it all the fancy sights, custom loads and barrels are really worthless, the trigger is in my opinion the most important thing needed for long-range work. 

I am a fairly good triggersmith that understands how to polish but not change parts, I have the trigger on mine so it can be set to right at an oz. safely and it has about 1/32 slack. 

[Fox Creek Kid]

Firstly, I shoot what I term a real Buffalo gun: a 15 lb. 44-77. It's a Shiloh I had rebarrelled. The 44-77 was THE most popular caliber for the 1874 Sharps. The 45-70 only surpassed the 44-77 when you include the 1878 Model for numbers. Shooting a 500-550 gr. grease groove bullet in a 45-70, 45-90, etc. is not what the hide hunters used. I believe the biggest bullet Sharps loaded for a 45-70 was a 420 gr. paper patched load. Today's silhouette shooters have distorted history a lot to suit the game.    By far the vast majority of buffalo were shot with smaller PP bullets, e.g. 380, 405, 473 gr.. Theres is a WORLD of difference between grease groove & PP bullets that can be summed up with one word: wiping. Unfortunately (IMHO  ) NCOWS so called "Buffalo Shoots" don't recognize the difference let alone those using "smokeyless" powder. So, you have to decide if you want to be authentic and lose or shoot "smokeyless" and win. There is no way an "authentic" shooter can compete with a person who does not have to wipe or use a blow tube (which there is no evidence buffalo runners used). In conclusion I would only offer one piece of advice. Yes, Pedersolis are fine rifles with exemplary barrels, but there is a pride of ownership factor that comes with a Shiloh that is priceless. You receive no comments such as "oh, that must be your "starter" rifle." If you can save $1000.00 you can save a little longer for $2000.00 and never regret that you bought the best. Before anyone "flames" me let me add that I own numerous Italian "clones" and love each one dearly, but for the "wow" factor I unlimber the big Shiloh buff'ler rifle. Buy a Shiloh. 

[Delmonico]

I like your thinking as far as pride in a fine gun, but in my opinion the Shilo's are to fancy for a buffalo gun, yes extra grade wood could be had, but most likely not an option a Buff Runner would have chosen.   Many used the heavier guns, but also many accounts will tell you these fellows also often found they had went to far on weight.  Also modenr compitition such as the buffalo hunt's such as NCOWs puts on does not really repersent true hide hunting because the ranges are to far.  Most Buffalo for hides were shot at the 150-300 yard range.  Yes some were shot at longer ranges, but mostly as a show off for others. 

Do the buffalo hunt type shoots come close to real life, no not any more that shooting lots of steel targets at close rage with several guns and calling it "Old West."  Do folks have fun doing both, I would guess so or they wouldn't keep doing it.

[Dirty Dan Dawkins]

  Bravo Mr. Delmonico. You get our "Spirit of the Game" Award this evening!!!!!!!!!

[Delmonico]

Almost forgot, Yes Sharps did not load a 500 gr 45-70 but other companies did, I can't but wonder if all buffalo hunters used only "Sharps" brand ammo.  As for reloading I guess they could put what ever they wanted in it.  I don't think that violated the "Buffalo Hunters Ammo Rules of 1873."

Of course it took the Army till 1881 to figure out that a 500 gr bullet was better than a 400 + or-.

[Fox Creek Kid]

Del, the FDMR Buffalo Shoot earlier this month was 275 yds. max. Ackley Buffalo Shoots go out to 400 yds. max. I have never once read where a buffalo runner regretted a rifle too heavy. Can you quote a primary source here?    My Shiloh has a plain Jane military butt and a Hartford fore end per original Hartford era rifles. Straight grain walnut is on mine as were most original rifles. The answer for me is if you had your choice of a free Pedersoli or a free Shiloh which one would you take?    I will agree with you that probably most hide hunters got as close as they could to shoot as lead was astronomical then at $0.10 lb. or better. It only made good fiscal sense to get as close as possible & not miss.

[Delmonico]

When I get my mess cleaned up in the loading room library I'll dig that, Mayer (sp) told how he killed far more with his 11 pound gun than his 16 because the 16 was to heavy.  Since I take it yer offerin' me a free Shilo, send er on over, if yer orderin' me one, get me a 50-70 carbine, cause I like to walk when I hunt deer better than sittin'.  The Pedersoli is to heavy for me for walikin' all day.  No I'm not lazy just another old cripple.  BTW I hunt in the proper clothing for the Sharps, kind of makes it a little more historic.

So grab yer 15 pounder next year when you chase that deer.  Yep folks walked some back then from time to time.

[Dirty Dan Dawkins]

This whole argument of dollars and cents does have a lot of merit, ya know when ya talk quality. But let's take this in another direction to maybe make a point about spending $1000 or spending $2000. Let's look at gun leather for example. I know fellas that have spent upwards of $6-7-800 on gun leather. SOME, not all, will argue all day long it was a worthwhile investment , custom made to fit them and their style of shooting and that I am wasting my money if I do the same and I can't be competitive unless I do otherwise. Heck most of these fellas aren't at what I'd call at a "competitive" skill level themselves. Heck I shoot comparitively as well with my cheap ol' slim jims ( of course many incur procedurals for getting in to big of a hurry). Besides, would a cowboy working for wages spend what to many is a one , two or even three weeks wages on holsters? I think not. I figured his gun, horse and saddle would come first and often being used , a "starter" gun, so to speak, a used saddle and an old or green horse. Heck they probably made their own holsters more often than we may realize. To each his own and with what God gave them to work with, be it dollars or sense (not cents). Few of us are blessed with both. Let's just have fun,  learn a little history, swap a few jokes and drink a few beers!

[Delmonico]

Well I'm doing what I do because I have fun doing it, not trying to outspend someone else.  But I do know I have more invested in period cook gear than most anyone else.  Do I need all of it, no, do I enjoy it, yes.  But I live, eat and dress the part as much as I can in our modern society.  I ain't a weekend warrior. 

What one has to do is have fun at this, as long as you follow all the rules for the game you choose, then don't worry about what others think.. If they don't like the way the rules are set up, they are free to set up their own game with their rules, others have.

[Dirty Dan Dawkins]

I was speaking of the young cowboy just getting started with limited resources, little need for flair, braggin rights, just getting by and trying to find his way on the frontier, as I to am new to all of this and find participating with items of good quality at least allows me to participate whereas items of premium quality and all of it's accoutrements does not. What next , a $400 soule site?

[Fox Creek Kid]

Soule sights are NOT period correct for the hide hunting era as they did not come out until the mid 1880's and then were only used by Eastern Schuetzen types and as Del pointed out earlier, hide hunting for all intents & purposes was dead (no pun intended) by 1883.
P.S. buy the Hoke sight as it closely copies a Reminton LR sight & is better as well as easier to read. 

[Fox Creek Kid]

Del, I forgot to add that Frank Mayer has pretty much been discounted as a reliable primary source on many points as he was approx. 90 when he was writing. After all, antelope skin for patching bullets?

[Dirty Dan Dawkins]

I have seen the Hoke sights and they have been higly recommended by others as well.. I am sure that is the direction I'll go. Once I find a gun that is.   Maybe I can get one of them "free" Sharps I've heard about. I wouldn't have wanted to of won the Tom Selleck rifle. The taxes would have been hell!!!!!!!! lol
I really need to order that Mike Venturino book too! Seems I keep hearing about it as a good resource on buffalo guns.

[Delmonico]

Fox Ol' Boy, once again we run into the "if I like what they say I use it, if I don't I discount it."  But I'm used to that.  BTW when you order my carbine from Shilo, just plain buckhorn sights.