Weapons Discussion

[guad42]

This is really a two parter, so I probably should have divided it as such, but here goes.

The many fine people who use these threads were very helpful in my decision to upgrade muskets in the past few months, from a Indian '42, to a very nice Armi Sport 1842, and I am ever endebted to their advice. The new musket is a far superior arm. I thank you.

However, in looking over the many products sold by Dixie and others, I am confused by the strange pricing between the various makers (Euro, Pedersoli, Armi Sport, etc) and certain items.

Why are certain muskets, which seem to require the same basic amount of materials, labor, and craftsmanship, so much more expensive than others?Why is an 1842 Smoothbore less than half of the price of an 1816 Flintlock? Why suddenly are all flintlocks (Brown Bess, 1816s, 1795s, Charlevilles, etc) so bloody expensive? Is it the euro? Is it import laws? Varying demands?

Part Two: On the subject of flintlocks and early "civilian" percussion arms, why is it so impossible to find a reproduction that is not thousands of dollars (custom), or historical/fantasy (reproduction)?

Sam Dolan

[western reb]

Re: Weapons Discussion

Sam you presented some of the questions that I have, so I'm looking forward to those who respond. I would love to get my hands on an 1816 conversion but the price range for such a weapon is a deterring factor.

By the way, we missed you pard at CR.

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Weapons Discussion

Hallo!

Short questions, long answers...

In brief and to over-generalize...

Why are certain muskets, which seem to require the same basic amount of materials, labor, and craftsmanship, so much more expensive than others?Why is an 1842 Smoothbore less than half of the price of an 1816 Flintlock? Why suddenly are all flintlocks (Brown Bess, 1816s, 1795s, Charlevilles, etc) so bloody expensive? Is it the euro? Is it import laws? Varying demands?

It is not usually the weapon, it is the combination of quality and quality control contracted for in the reproduction, the fall of the U.S. Dollar and the rise of the Euro, and various market factors such as supply and demand and what the market will bear. Pedersoli generally limits itself, and prices itself differently than EuroArms or Armi Sport.

Part Two: On the subject of flintlocks and early "civilian" percussion arms, why is it so impossible to find a reproduction that is not thousands of dollars (custom), or historical/fantasy (reproduction)?

NUG, demand causes supply. We have taught the Italians how to treat us in any Period. For the Civil War, we do that by decade after decade repeatedly lining up to buy so-so accurate/authentic "Enfields" and "Springfields."
Because we buy them, and buy them, and happily buy them as they are- there is little or no incentive for the Italians to:

1. Change and improve the "attention to detail" in terms of workmanship/craftsmanship form, fit, function, size, proportion, dimension, measurements, etc., etc., compared side-by-side to the originals. For decades now, we have largely "passively agreed by our buying behavior" to accept oversized and overweight versions of a model of P1853
Enfield' NOT EVEN USED in the Civil War!

2. Our continued buying of " P1853 Third Model Enfields" and "M1861 Springfields" is the meat of the industry. As such, there is no or little incentive for the Italians to risk tooling up for something "new" that may not sell due to lack of interest or reluctance to pay the current costs for development and production. For example, the Austrian M1854 "Lorenz."

Again, this is being brief and over-generalized.
A somewhat "exception" to the samo-samo was/is the M1842. IMHO, it showed that the Italians were at least "partially" listening, and did a "better" (by degree) job vis-a-vis to the original than they have done with the Enfield and Springfield.
Plus, EuroArms did dump the old blackened brass barrel bands on their Enfield, and Armi Sport did replace "4th Model" Enfield barrel bands with the ACW correct "3rd Model" (BSAT type) even if they cyanide gas color them instead of heat-bluing.
And, to a lesser extent, did offer "variations" on the M1861 theme with the M1855 and the M1863 "Springfield."

BUT, because we have taught the Italians that their reproductions can be "less than Correct," (Enfield, Springfield, M1842, "M1816," "M1816 percussion conversion" but we will still keep buying and buying. And with a few lads complaining on CW boards and fora mostly.... things will not change very much.

And the same is true for Pre-War era civilian guns where decades of buckskinners and rendezvousers have taught that the Italian concept of the Thompson-Center "Hawken" concept was a "close enough," "good enough" repro of an Eastern "deer" rifle or a Western "plains" rifle.

And now we are teaching the Indians and some U.S./Canadian importers that poor Indian reproductions of either Italian reproductions or poor rerpoductions of original firearms are desireable BECAUSE of the lower cost.

Others' mileage will vary...

Curt

[Craig L Barry]

Re: Weapons Discussion

Flintlocks are more expensive because Pedersoli produces most of them. There is no reason other than that. Pedersoli produces a US 1861 out of parts made by Euroarms for twice the price. The Italians see the ACW hobby as losing ground to the SASS and WW2 hobbies. In fact, this year they will be the first where SASS (Cowboy/Single Action) shooting sales will be higher than US Civil War musket sales. There is something to chew on.

Phil McBride visited the Armi Chiappa (Armi Sport) factory in Brescia, Italy recently and wrote an essay on what he found out about the declining sales of ACW weapons. It will run in a future edition of CCG.

[guad42]

Re: Weapons Discussion

Curt,

As always, I appreciate your comments and your response.

Your point is well taken. The sad part is that the outfits offering the Indian Muskets tease us with their wider array of different arms (Pomeroy's and so forth) - the cost of which is quality and debated safety.

Not being ignorant of historic guns, I was initially taken in by these providers until first hand use and of course the AC community set me straight.

I feel as though we pay more money for the weapons that the old timers would have felt were the outdated, obscure, or plain lesser weapons (1816s versus 1861s)

-Sam Dolan

[guad42]

Re: Weapons Discussion

Flintlocks are more expensive because Pedersoli produces most of them. There is no reason other than that. Pedersoli produces a US 1861 out of parts made by Euroarms for twice the price. The Italians see the ACW hobby as losing ground to the SASS and WW2 hobbies. In fact, this year they will be the first where SASS (Cowboy/Single Action) shooting sales will be higher than US Civil War musket sales. There is something to chew on.

Phil McBride visited the Armi Chiappa (Armi Sport) factory in Brescia, Italy recently and wrote an essay on what he found out about the declining sales of ACW weapons. It will run in a future edition of CCG.

I would have thought it was the other way around, considering the massive increase in the cost of the late century cartridge reproductions as well as some of the less than eye pleasing changes to certain models for import and changing guidelines.

-Sam Dolan

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Weapons Discussion

:) Hallo!

Volume is a severe mistress... as numbers rise and fall.

While I do not have numbers as the Civil War Community is not a central organization with an active member number count, and SASS membership numbers are sequential and do not reflect members that have quit...

SASS memberhsip numbers between say 2000 and 2007 went from a few thousand to over 70,000.
Also while not substantiated (yet), production "back-orders" for "cowboy" type guns is said to be between 50,000 and 70,000.
And some writers attribute CAS to be THE fastest growing "costume and gun" sport/hobby.

While the Civil War (and other periods) are in another cyclical decline.

Not that it is historically relevent, and not that a typical Cw soldier purchased is own weapon (but they did complain about not having quality and/or current arms), if we say a Civil War longarm cost between say $12 and $18 in a period where an unskilled worker made a $1.00 a day and skilled worked say $2.00 and change for a six day 12-14 hour day week( or even a soldier making $13 a month) - divide the cost of reproduction arms by a "typical" working man's wage today...
We are the beneficiaries of modern "mass production" technology and industry. ;) :)

Curt

[Craig L Barry]

Re: Weapons Discussion

Another good point. The issue should be less what they cost, which in historical terms is very reasonable, and more "Why aren't they any better?" The reason is of course, economics.

As far as numbers go, since there is no governing body of the hobby and no "membership" with a firm number of participants, it's all just a good guess. In a sense one can expect certain folks to leave the hobby as others enter. Those leaving sell off their kits, and those entering are in the process of building kits. If one depends on "sales" of new weapons as a barometer, the ACW hobby is in a down cycle compared to SASS. This much can be confirmed. Every year sales decline from the year before, or so say the Italian manufacturers.

[Longbranch 1]

Re: Weapons Discussion

Sam,

As regards point 2, civilian arms....

While these 2 vendors deal more in late 18th and early 19th century arms, the quality and price can't be beat. And American manufacture to boot.

Rustic Arms.

http://www.earlyrusticarms.com/index.html

Jim Chambers Flintlocks.

http://flintlocks.com/order.htm

Hope this helps,

Regards,
Kevin Ellis,
26th NC

[tmdreb]

Re: Weapons Discussion

Another good point. The issue should be less what they cost, which in historical terms is very reasonable, and more "Why aren't they any better?" The reason is of course, economics.

As far as numbers go, since there is no governing body of the hobby and no "membership" with a firm number of participants, it's all just a good guess. In a sense one can expect certain folks to leave the hobby as others enter. Those leaving sell off their kits, and those entering are in the process of building kits. If one depends on "sales" of new weapons as a barometer, the ACW hobby is in a down cycle compared to SASS. This much can be confirmed. Every year sales decline from the year before, or so say the Italian manufacturers.

Sounds like Hollywood. Keep putting out the same old stuff every year, keep raising the price until it's not worth the money, then gripe that no one's buying.