Tweet
Re: ArmiSport issues
The conventional thinking is that the reconversion process has compromised the integrity of the barrel, breech area, etc however I would think this would vary from weapon to weapon. Hoyt and Whitacre (I think) both have Lorenz rifled barrels if the rest of the weapon is sound. Having made a fairly careful study of the M-1854, their cult like following is something of a mystery to me. But, I have done a Lorenz put together and it was not as difficult (or complicated) as the Enfield, which had more to do with the parts I started with than anything else. I just find the Lorenz unrefined, actually crude and primitive compared to the P53 design. Hook type lock, barrel found predominantly with block rear sights, kind of clunky lock function, top band is merely ornamental rather than functional as the weapon is sort of a 'tweener size between rifle and rifle-musket. Opinions vary on their merits, I suppose, but a Lorenz put together could be fairly easily accomplished especially if you only need to fit a new barrel...meaning you began with a good lock assembly and stock already integrated. Part of being a cruder functioning weapon is (of course) a certain simplicity of design.
Todd Watts is toying with doing a Lorenz w/ Blockade Runner. The BRI museum has a minty example with a long range rear sight that would be excellent to copy part by part, and if he can be convinced to trouble himself that might be a M1854 Lorenz repro worth having as an option. The current India made Loyalist Arms Lorenz repro is off in ways that are not easily remedied, but let's not get into all that.
The conventional thinking is that the reconversion process has compromised the integrity of the barrel, breech area, etc however I would think this would vary from weapon to weapon. Hoyt and Whitacre (I think) both have Lorenz rifled barrels if the rest of the weapon is sound. Having made a fairly careful study of the M-1854, their cult like following is something of a mystery to me. But, I have done a Lorenz put together and it was not as difficult (or complicated) as the Enfield, which had more to do with the parts I started with than anything else. I just find the Lorenz unrefined, actually crude and primitive compared to the P53 design. Hook type lock, barrel found predominantly with block rear sights, kind of clunky lock function, top band is merely ornamental rather than functional as the weapon is sort of a 'tweener size between rifle and rifle-musket. Opinions vary on their merits, I suppose, but a Lorenz put together could be fairly easily accomplished especially if you only need to fit a new barrel...meaning you began with a good lock assembly and stock already integrated. Part of being a cruder functioning weapon is (of course) a certain simplicity of design.
Todd Watts is toying with doing a Lorenz w/ Blockade Runner. The BRI museum has a minty example with a long range rear sight that would be excellent to copy part by part, and if he can be convinced to trouble himself that might be a M1854 Lorenz repro worth having as an option. The current India made Loyalist Arms Lorenz repro is off in ways that are not easily remedied, but let's not get into all that.
That is a very insightful post along with really cool words showing either you are highly intelligent or merely trying to baffle us with B.S.!:D Thinking about it throughout warfare not only in the CW, really succesful leaders tend to be the ones that view the men merely as organisms that operate the war machinery. The ones that spend all their time caring for the organisms and not the machines are loved by the organisms, but are pretty well trashed when they come up against leaders that actually use their men to operate the weaponry. Patton, of course, leaps into mind.
Comment