Austrian Lorenz Repop

[militiaman1835]

Re: Loyalist Arms cone In Barrel 18435/40 musket

Back in the 1970's I took a Navy Arms Japanese made Charleville and bought an original conversion hammer, brass pan plate, and musket nipple from S & S Firearms and did a cone in barrel conversion for CW. Looking at the repro 1835 it would be easy to buy the flint version they sell and do or have done by someone a conversion yourself. Just food for thought...I may do one myself. Jim Hensley

[58 lorenz]

Re: Loyalist Arms 1854 Lorenz Is here!

Mr. Corbin: Here is a rather poor photo I took to show why my original bayonet will not fit the LA Lorenz (I was holding the bayonet up to the muzzle and trying to take a pic at the same time). Either the sight has to be moved, or the end of the bayonet must be removed-Not an option.




Doug Price

[trippcor]

Re: Loyalist Arms 1854 Lorenz Is here!

Doug,
First thanks for taking the time to post the information and to do the comparison. My unit, the Armory Guards, is considering a mass purchase of the LA repro but want to make sure we know what we are getting into. It looks like the front site could be moved to fit the original which is not a big deal. I guess the ultimate question is "Is the weapon worth the money?".

[Craig L Barry]

Re: Loyalist Arms 1854 Lorenz Is here!

Wick:
The plural of "Lorenz" is M-1854 Austrian rifles.

Tripp:
The actual (better) question is "What are your alternatives?" If your unit was issued the m-1854 Lorenz, and there is really only this one reproduction...What are your choices? Is it better to have a more accurate reproducton (say an Enfield) of the wrong rifle-musket? Or the imperfect LA M-1854 Lorenz?

I will leave that question to the philosophers...ultimately it is a decision your unit will need to make. My recommendation would lean towards the M-1854 Lorenz such as it is and make any corrections...but it is certainly understandable to proceed in an entirely different direction. For example:

The sight problem is going to be a bit tricker than you might imagine. The Lorenz sight is offset to accomodate that twist in the bayonet socket. If you merely remove and braze the existing sight back on the barrel at an angle to accomodate the bayonet the sight blade will be pointing off at about 30 degrees left. One of the concessions you may need to make to use this reproduction is a standard US or P-53 Enfield (or no) bayonet, or have some front sights custom made. And that is just the beginning.

[Jimmayo]

Re: Loyalist Arms 1854 Lorenz Is here!

Looks to me that the barrel is not extending far enough beyond the front band. The barrel on my original extends 3.25 inches beyond the front band. The socket on my original bayonet is 3.125 (approximately). Makes for a nice fit.

[Jimmayo]

Re: Loyalist Arms 1854 Lorenz Is here!

Looks to me that the barrel is not extending far enough beyond the front band. The barrel on my original extends 3.25 inches beyond the front band. The socket on my original bayonet is 3.125 (approximately). Makes for a nice fit.

Here is a picture. The barrel protrudes just a skosh bit from the end of the bayonet

[ACo.]

Re: Loyalist Arms 1854 Lorenz Is here!

I started out being a fan of the efforts by Loyalist Arms and am still in favor of their attempts but there are a number of serious problems shown in the side-by-side photos posted by Lorenz58:

(1) The wrist of the stock is too long, this also means that there is a problem with the comb of the stock and the cheekpiece (see #2) - fixable.

(2) The cheekpiece is completely wrong, the current effort, both in shape and form, looks like a cheekpiece used on a modern hunting rifle. Unacceptable. - also fixable.

(3) The side plate is close but the lock bolts are all wrong - easily fixable.

(4) The hammer and bolster are both way off - fixable with some expense but both need to be done.

(5) They need to move the front band back the proper distance from the muzzle. This will also require moving the middle band back the same distance since the current spacing looks good. This is absolutely required and doable with minor expense.

(7) The ramrod needs tweaking but it is getting better.

(8) Make a good copy of the bayonet and get it over with. That or reconfigure the barrel's outside dimension to accept the original bayonet - that may well be the best option from a long term production standpoint. At any rate, the use of a Springfield or Enfield bayonet is totally unacceptable and no serious reenactor should allow that option. Why should the user have to modify the relatively correct front sight to fit a bayonet that was not meant to be used with the gun and probably never was in actual fact during the period? It would be a serious hole in the impression being attempted.

Of the above, 1, 2, 3 and 5 are easily done with reasonably little expense. Numbers 4, 7 and 8 will require more work and expense but need to be done so that the reproduction will come up to the standards that should be required by the reenacting community

In the photographs the bands do look reasonably good. There are no comparison pictures of the triggerguard and buttplate but by what is shown they appear to look acceptable? Here is my question: Are they using an original gun to make the reproduction or are they trying to go by pictures and the whim of the makers in India who may not be at all familiar with the Lorenz? If the latter is the case this could be the problem. There is nothing like having an original in hand to make the job easier and the results would be far better; a reproduction should not even be attempted without using a good pattern.

[LibertyHallVols]

Re: Loyalist Arms 1854 Lorenz Is here!

Here is my question: Are they using an original gun to make the reproduction or are they trying to go by pictures and the whim of the makers in India who may not be at all familiar with the Lorenz? If the latter is the case this could be the problem. There is nothing like having an original in hand to make the job easier and the results would be far better; a reproduction should not even be attempted without using a good pattern.

To the above statement:
Hallelujah and Amen!!!!!!!!! My point precisely on this or any other reproduction widget. Well stated, Reverend Hern!!

To the rest of your post: Very well-stated and I concur on each point.

[Craig L Barry]

Re: Loyalist Arms 1854 Lorenz Is here!

We all concur, but it is really a matter of cost. Let's look at this "lock, stock and barrel". There are no service providers who currently "de-farb" the Loyalist Arms Lorenz. It would need to be a do-it-yourself project. Items # 1 and # 2 you will find are easier said than done. For example, what kind of wood was used in period gunstocks? The Loyalist Arms gunstock is not American walnut. It is not even European walnut or beechwood. It is something called Spanish Cedar. The wood is soft. A good repro Lorenz really needs a walnut or beechwood stock, like the original. I asked a professional gun-maker about this. He recommended another gunstock to do this right, or at least the back half of one. Then you can address the necessary changes to the cheekrest as well. I would recommend the whole stock if you are going to do this since the bands need to be relocated on the forestock, too. It is about $250 for a walnut stock blank, unfinished.

The Loyalist Arms smoothbore .62 barrel...what can be done with it? Not much. So figure replace the barrel with a re-lined original? Okay so now you have replaced the stock (at $250), and the barrel ($300). You are now in this project for over $1000, including the cost of the reproduction out of the box, and the hardware (hammer, lock, side plate) still needs some attention. Finally, will an original bayonet fit now? It might or might not. The original M-1854s were often part numbered to match rifles with corresponding bayonets. Period accounts indicate soldiers would sometimes use a mallet to hammer a mis-matched bayonet onto the barrel of their Lorenz.

We can agree on the standards of the community, and I don't mean to be discouraging but if you want that sort of weapon you would be hard pressed to create it out of one of the Loyalist Arms products. It is important to be realistic about the potential afforded by the reproduction such as it is. What are you getting that is useable if you want to try to "get it right"? A buttplate, a couple barrel bands and maybe some lock internals. When you get into the kind of total cost for really de-farbing the LA M-1854 Lorenz, one would be well advised to consider a "put together" of mostly original disassociated parts with repro parts to fill in. You would be time and money ahead, and end up with a better weapon.

[LibertyHallVols]

Re: Loyalist Arms 1854 Lorenz Is here!

OK...
I think this horse has been beaten enough. The evidence is in and has been discussed. What say you: Thumbs Up or Thumbs Down?

Me: Thumb Down

The effort is worthy of praise and may not yet be over. However, the shortcomings are significant and well-stated by Messrs Hern and Barry.

As Messr Barry pointed out in his most recent post, one would spend less money, stress, and time having a custom rifle crafted than to correct the shortcomings of the LA reproduction. (Remember: The parts from the Rifle Shoppe are $670. Assembly might be another $500 or so, versus $1000 and work still to-be-done to correct the LA Lorenz)

[ACo.]

Re: Loyalist Arms 1854 Lorenz Is here!

OK...
I think this horse has been beaten enough. The evidence is in and has been discussed. What say you: Thumbs Up or Thumbs Down?

Me: Thumb Down

The effort is worthy of praise and may not yet be over. However, the shortcomings are significant and well-stated by Messrs Hern and Barry.

As Messr Barry pointed out in his most recent post, one would spend less money, stress, and time having a custom rifle crafted than to correct the shortcomings of the LA reproduction. (Remember: The parts from the Rifle Shoppe are $670. Assembly might be another $500 or so, versus $1000 and work still to-be-done to correct the LA Lorenz)

I have to agree on all counts. I did consider at one time getting the Rifle Shoppe parts, they are excellent and the work is well within my ability but another project took precedent - also using TRS parts. :D At any rate, if the work of making a Lorenz from the TRS parts were done by me for someone else, I would not consider selling it for less than $1200, possibly more. Oh, and the prices have risen in their new catalogue, BTW. I'm sure they will update their website soon... Anyway, makes an original sound more attractive all the time doesn't it?

As far as the work I suggested, that could/should be done in the production by the maker, I was not suggesting the work be done by a purchaser though I can see where it may have sounded like I was saying that. The project by Loyalist is a good one and I applaud their efforts so far but it can be better - it may drive the price up a little, but they would sell more to happy purchasers. I hope they will consider it but they may not and I can't see as how I would blame them since they do sell a lot of similar quality reproduction guns to reenactors (and shooters) already.

[Rebbeh]

Re: Loyalist Arms 1854 Lorenz Is here!

I agree that the gun needs some work, but what i'm curious about is why so many people see this gun as almost sacrilige to have? i've noticed a few people who have said "I applaud the effort", and i agree. it's about time. but there is so much scrutiny about this particular repop. just curious as to why? from the posts i've read, and how i come out of the readings of such, it looks to me like everyone is tearing apart this gun, before they even give it a chance. i know it's constructive critisism, but sheesh! i don't see a whole lot of threads about how bad the Enfields are in this hobby. everyone just takes those for granted. but since this is the Austrian Lorenz, people have been scrutinizing it almost non-stop. it's almost maddening to see. if ya don't like it, and you think it's wrong, then don't buy it. simple. i'm not trying to start arguments with anyone, but seriously.... enough is enough. please, contact Armisport and Euroarms and tell them to get on the ball and fix those Enfields!

[Jimmayo]

Re: Loyalist Arms 1854 Lorenz Is here!

I agree that the gun needs some work, but what i'm curious about is why so many people see this gun as almost sacrilige to have? i've noticed a few people who have said "I applaud the effort", and i agree. it's about time. but there is so much scrutiny about this particular repop. just curious as to why? from the posts i've read, and how i come out of the readings of such, it looks to me like everyone is tearing apart this gun, before they even give it a chance. i know it's constructive critisism, but sheesh! i don't see a whole lot of threads about how bad the Enfields are in this hobby. everyone just takes those for granted. but since this is the Austrian Lorenz, people have been scrutinizing it almost non-stop. it's almost maddening to see. if ya don't like it, and you think it's wrong, then don't buy it. simple. i'm not trying to start arguments with anyone, but seriously.... enough is enough. please, contact Armisport and Euroarms and tell them to get on the ball and fix those Enfields!

Mr. Gladden:
The Lorenz is a relatively new reproduction weapon on the scene which is dominated by bad repros. Everyone already knows how bad the Enfields are and there is not much that can be done to change that.

Some have waited years with high hopes for a repro Lorenz and have never had the opportunity to examine an original. Wouldn't it be nice to know how the reproduction compares to an original before buying one?

What is going on in this thread is called "discussion". It is what we do on this forum, sometimes in nauseating detail but there is always something to be learned.

[Craig L Barry]

Re: Loyalist Arms 1854 Lorenz Is here!

Oh, there are many threads on the AC Forum, as well as monographs (by Geoff Walden) and fairly significant content in a recent book (The Civil War Musket) on the sad state of reproduction "Enfields". Interestingly I actually contacted representatives from both EOA and Armi Chiappa (Armi Sport) about their products, including their Enfield, while researching material for The Civil War Musket. This is a story for another day...

The real issue is not whether any one "likes it" or not, but rather how close the Loyalist Arms Lorenz repro is to an original M-1854 (it is ballpark), and what exactly can be done to correct the main flaws?(not much) The importance of any of this discussion is not do I want one (I don't), or the enthusiast for whom close is close enough, but rather the exchange of information from various subject matter experts that own or are familiar with original M-1854s as to how well this particular reproduction would meet the needs of different levels of enthusiasts. If someone is a "Get It Right to the n-th degree" enthusiast (ie: Watchdog or Civil War Historian reader), they would be very frustrated with this particular product. Somebody wanting a reproduction Lorenz that is "in the ballpark", well here it is. The Italian Enfields out of the box are not particularly good reproductions of the kind of P-53 used here by both sides during the Civil War-era, but they have walnut stocks, rifled barrels of roughly the same caliber and can be accuracy modified into a reasonable facsimile of a US Civil War P-53. The point is you can not really do the same thing with the Loyalist Arms Lorenz, except at very great expense. This is good information (I think) for someone contemplating a purchase.

What I have found is that for most readers on the A-C Forum, "ballpark" won't cut it. There are more what will it take to "Get It Right" types posting here. This is not judgmental, and like anything else what musket you carry is a subjective and a purely individual decision based on unit guidelines and what your unit was originally issued. "Thumbs up" for some of us, "thumbs down" for others. The nauseating detail Jim Mayo mentions is actually the thing I like best...a student of the hobby can learn a lot posting and reading posts on this site. Others are going to find aspects of these discussions are a soporific, chloroform in an electronic media format.

[TKlas]

Re: Loyalist Arms 1854 Lorenz Is here!

Hi gents,

I just wanted to express my support of the sharing of information on this thread which has been excellent. Mr. Barry has a good grasp of the AC view of this project. I think through detailed suggestions to Loyalist and with patience, perhaps in a few years they will have some of the kinks worked out so enthuaists like myself would take a peek at their offering. No one here is making fun of Loyalist and they are trying something no other manufacturer has been able to do on a consistant basis. I personally wish them well and hope the changes that have been pointed out can be improved and worked on.

I still would recommend sticking to an original at this time given all the information for those whom are detailed orinated. :) It all depends where your comfort level is with the accuracy of your reproduction and replica uniform & equipage. For many of us, we would be grinding our teeth at this time as an owner of the current offering.

Best Regards,