Tweet
Re: Loyalist Arms 1854 Lorenz Is here!
This all comes under the "For What Its Worth" category...
Well, not too bad, they are making a good effort. One thing that we have to remember about the Lorenz is that the originals were not completely interchangeable and there were variations when it comes to cheek piece/no cheek piece and the percussion bolster and lock. The M1854 is what we have here; the bolster and lock are of that model. The M1862 has a lock and bolster form closely matching the P53 Enfield. There may be some confusion on the part of some when it comes to this but this is, overall, a pretty close approximation of the Austro-Hungarian M1854 rifle musket. Also, bear in mind that the Lorenz was a hand assembled gun with much variation from lot to lot in one arsenal/maker’s production and there can be some relatively wide variations by modern (US 1842 - 1865 production) standards. These will manifest themselves when comparing originals to each other. In other words, two people in different places, each with a good eye for proportion, can have two different originals and compare them to one of these repops and come up with entirely different opinions – one good and one bad.
There is still one glaring problem, that being the ramrod of course. The shaft is shaped incorrectly and the brass head? Ouch, to say the least. It may be the best we can hope for and if so, there is the Rifle Shoppe who makes a good reproduction of the original, brass band and all. That beings said, will it fit in the groove and hole of this repro?
There are some minor problems:
(1)The rear sight appears to be a little off, but that can be fixed in later production runs, the base is the most noticeable problem and that is easy to fix in production.
(2)The sideplate is pretty good but the location of the forward lock bolt has an extension that is a little too low – again, easy to fix in later runs.
(3)The shape of the lock plate, hammer and bolster is good but the mating of the bolster and the lock is downright sloppy and needs to be better. Withought holding it in my hands I would say that the problem is that the front of the plate needs to move up. In other words, the shape of the parts is okay but the mortising of the lock needs to be adjusted. Fixable.
(4)The shape of the left lock panel has been mentioned as being wrong but that is an easily fixed problem.
(5)The shape of the cheek piece can be altered, it is off especially at the front, easily fixed.
Good things:
(1)The stock shape is overall pretty good.
(2)The wood is not walnut but the grain structure and the color are reasonable.
(3)Overall, the hardware (butt plate, trigger guard, bands) is okay. Some refining could be done but the fit and finish along with shape is certainly as good as anything we have seen out of the Italians.
(4)A bayonet is coming. If it is a good reproduction and made of good metal so it won’t bend, or worse, snap off, then the package will be complete.
(5)Markings are minimal with the date only shown but if other marks (inspection, proof, etc.) can be added that would be a plus, however, be careful what you wish for – too close to perfect and you start getting into what collectors and the general antique community frown on as fakes believe it or not this is a serious consideration outside of our very small and insular world.
(6)The price – Very good if the above fixes (and maybe a few others) can be made and the price can be kept in the current ballpark.
There will inevitably be comparisons made to the original, there should be, that is what we are all about, getting as close to “real” as we can get. With prices on original equipment rising the way they are we do a grave disservice to the past and to our pocket books by using originals in the field and we verge on silly by having to treat gear as if it is worth its weight in gold, especially in our hobby where security of our property is often non-existent when in the field at an event, no matter how big or how small. I’m not sure what the current going rate of an NRA Antique VG+ to excellent condition Lorenz is these days, but that is the condition we should be using to portray a soldier in 1863, not one in a lesser degree of condition with staining and obvious 140 year old damage and dirt accumulation. To clean and polish an original to look that way is wrong and even foolish – you will destroy its intrinsic value as a piece of history. They only option to this reproduction is to purchase the excellent parts from “The Rifle Shoppe” and make your own - the parts will only run around $800 (maybe a little more!) and if you have the skills in metal working and wood working to make a presentable piece, you will be happy. If not (they are not “snap together" kits!) you will have to find a person with the skills and pay them dearly for their work. Not only metal filing, polishing, hardening and tempering but also some minor wood carving skills and not to mention properly applying a correct 19th Century wood finish. (I've done it and it is not for everyone!) And all of the above to duplicate the skilled hand work of a proffesional armorer in Austria-Hungary whose work was inspected and passed by men whose job it was to be certain that only the best work got into the hands of the Emporer's troops. It takes skill and time... The end cost will be roughly the same as or maybe slightly more than the current original’s price. In my personal opinion (maybe not really worth much to others) I think we have a good piece here that can be used with some changes. Others may disagree... Sorry to be so long winded. :o
This all comes under the "For What Its Worth" category...
Well, not too bad, they are making a good effort. One thing that we have to remember about the Lorenz is that the originals were not completely interchangeable and there were variations when it comes to cheek piece/no cheek piece and the percussion bolster and lock. The M1854 is what we have here; the bolster and lock are of that model. The M1862 has a lock and bolster form closely matching the P53 Enfield. There may be some confusion on the part of some when it comes to this but this is, overall, a pretty close approximation of the Austro-Hungarian M1854 rifle musket. Also, bear in mind that the Lorenz was a hand assembled gun with much variation from lot to lot in one arsenal/maker’s production and there can be some relatively wide variations by modern (US 1842 - 1865 production) standards. These will manifest themselves when comparing originals to each other. In other words, two people in different places, each with a good eye for proportion, can have two different originals and compare them to one of these repops and come up with entirely different opinions – one good and one bad.
There is still one glaring problem, that being the ramrod of course. The shaft is shaped incorrectly and the brass head? Ouch, to say the least. It may be the best we can hope for and if so, there is the Rifle Shoppe who makes a good reproduction of the original, brass band and all. That beings said, will it fit in the groove and hole of this repro?
There are some minor problems:
(1)The rear sight appears to be a little off, but that can be fixed in later production runs, the base is the most noticeable problem and that is easy to fix in production.
(2)The sideplate is pretty good but the location of the forward lock bolt has an extension that is a little too low – again, easy to fix in later runs.
(3)The shape of the lock plate, hammer and bolster is good but the mating of the bolster and the lock is downright sloppy and needs to be better. Withought holding it in my hands I would say that the problem is that the front of the plate needs to move up. In other words, the shape of the parts is okay but the mortising of the lock needs to be adjusted. Fixable.
(4)The shape of the left lock panel has been mentioned as being wrong but that is an easily fixed problem.
(5)The shape of the cheek piece can be altered, it is off especially at the front, easily fixed.
Good things:
(1)The stock shape is overall pretty good.
(2)The wood is not walnut but the grain structure and the color are reasonable.
(3)Overall, the hardware (butt plate, trigger guard, bands) is okay. Some refining could be done but the fit and finish along with shape is certainly as good as anything we have seen out of the Italians.
(4)A bayonet is coming. If it is a good reproduction and made of good metal so it won’t bend, or worse, snap off, then the package will be complete.
(5)Markings are minimal with the date only shown but if other marks (inspection, proof, etc.) can be added that would be a plus, however, be careful what you wish for – too close to perfect and you start getting into what collectors and the general antique community frown on as fakes believe it or not this is a serious consideration outside of our very small and insular world.
(6)The price – Very good if the above fixes (and maybe a few others) can be made and the price can be kept in the current ballpark.
There will inevitably be comparisons made to the original, there should be, that is what we are all about, getting as close to “real” as we can get. With prices on original equipment rising the way they are we do a grave disservice to the past and to our pocket books by using originals in the field and we verge on silly by having to treat gear as if it is worth its weight in gold, especially in our hobby where security of our property is often non-existent when in the field at an event, no matter how big or how small. I’m not sure what the current going rate of an NRA Antique VG+ to excellent condition Lorenz is these days, but that is the condition we should be using to portray a soldier in 1863, not one in a lesser degree of condition with staining and obvious 140 year old damage and dirt accumulation. To clean and polish an original to look that way is wrong and even foolish – you will destroy its intrinsic value as a piece of history. They only option to this reproduction is to purchase the excellent parts from “The Rifle Shoppe” and make your own - the parts will only run around $800 (maybe a little more!) and if you have the skills in metal working and wood working to make a presentable piece, you will be happy. If not (they are not “snap together" kits!) you will have to find a person with the skills and pay them dearly for their work. Not only metal filing, polishing, hardening and tempering but also some minor wood carving skills and not to mention properly applying a correct 19th Century wood finish. (I've done it and it is not for everyone!) And all of the above to duplicate the skilled hand work of a proffesional armorer in Austria-Hungary whose work was inspected and passed by men whose job it was to be certain that only the best work got into the hands of the Emporer's troops. It takes skill and time... The end cost will be roughly the same as or maybe slightly more than the current original’s price. In my personal opinion (maybe not really worth much to others) I think we have a good piece here that can be used with some changes. Others may disagree... Sorry to be so long winded. :o
It will always show. And yes, I have done it! (Restore more than a few originals that is, not the 80 year old lady!) It takes careful and thoughtful work and I do have the hard learned experience, but I found out years ago that there are many collectors that will not touch a restored piece even if the work is well done, unless it is a very high value Golden Age American longrifle or a high value Victorian English double rifle, both valued in the tens of thousands of dollars. Rogue, if you decide to go through with the project, get help from a mentor and follow the advice of both Herr Schmidt and Jim Mayo to guide your hand. I do wish you the best, you may discover a hidden talent and the work well done can be rewarding. :)
Comment