is this a good rifle 58c enfield, has anyone tried this gun?

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's an Armi Sport musket that's simply being marketed by Traditions as a kit with a warranty.
I'm not sure how much money is being saved over an Armisport factory assembled gun.
Whenever you buy a kit, you get whatever they put in the box.
It's like opening a box of chocolates. ;)
 
You usually don't save much money with the kit version of these guns. BTW, the gun referenced in the OP is a "blem," "factory second," or "floor model" that is $125 less than the kit version marketed by the same vendor.
 
AlexanderA said:
You usually don't save much money with the kit version of these guns. BTW, the gun referenced in the OP is a "blem," "factory second," or "floor model" that is $125 less than the kit version marketed by the same vendor.
Click to expand...
i looked all over the website on traditions but to order one of the seconds I guess you have to call them to order? I like to buy online using a cart...
 
Before you actually buy and Enfield (of whatever manufacturer) find one on a range/in a store and see if the stock will let you get down on the sights. (!)

The Enfield is one of the very few (only two) long guns I own that has the problem --- for me. Beautifully-made gun though.
In general, I'd suggest the '61 Springfield as safest/practical bet if you're looking to get into the rifled musket game.
 
MEHavey said:
Before you actually buy and Enfield (of whatever manufacturer) find one on a range/in a store and see if the stock will let you get down on the sights. (!)

The Enfield is one of the very few (only two) long guns I own that has the problem --- for me. Beautifully-made gun though.
In general, I'd suggest the '61 Springfield as safest/practical bet if you're looking to get into the rifled musket game.
Click to expand...
also I was thinking on a mold to cast my own minie balls bullets etc. any advice as to which ones perform the best?
 
MEHavey said:
Before you actually buy and Enfield (of whatever manufacturer) find one on a range/in a store and see if the stock will let you get down on the sights. (!)
Click to expand...

I was wondering that from looking at the pictures. I had that problem with a TC renegade I had just a few months ago. I could not get my face low enough on the stock to comfortably be able to use the open sights. I looked at installing taller open sights but ended up just selling the gun. Too bad because I really liked that rifle.
 
Last edited:
Chiappa is the same company as Armi Sport.
Yes, a person needs to call Traditions to see if any factory seconds are in stock.
Saving $300 on the 3 band kit from Old South sure is an attractive deal.
That kit doesn't cost much more than the price of a gun made in India.
 
Pedersoli has a uniformly good reputation as to quality, but is uniformly more expensive (by hundreds of dollars) than Chiappa (Armi Sport). Chiappa can be hit or miss on quality and/or authenticity. The Chiappa M1861 Springfield is heavier and clunkier than an original, but the Chiappa M1842 is spot on, and is almost indistinguishable from an original.

The Pedersoli M1861 Springfield is made on tooling formerly used to make the Euroarms version. This Pedersoli/Euroarms M1861 is/was closer to an original than the Chiappa is, but is not as close as the (long-discontinued) Japanese Miroku. If you can find a Miroku, buy it. (I have the Pedersoli, Euroarms, and Miroku versions. The Pedersoli and Euroarms versions are identical.)

I think Chiappa does a decent job on the M1853 Enfield. I would not pay the differential to get a Pedersoli in this case. Of course, the best Enfield repro was made by Parker Hale years ago.

The Enfield does have a distinctly different feel when brought to the shoulder than does the Springfield. (The stock is shaped somewhat differently.)
 
AlexanderA said:
Pedersoli has a uniformly good reputation as to quality, but is uniformly more expensive (by hundreds of dollars) than Chiappa (Armi Sport). Chiappa can be hit or miss on quality and/or authenticity. The Chiappa M1861 Springfield is heavier and clunkier than an original, but the Chiappa M1842 is spot on, and is almost indistinguishable from an original.

The Pedersoli M1861 Springfield is made on tooling formerly used to make the Euroarms version. This Pedersoli/Euroarms M1861 is/was closer to an original than the Chiappa is, but is not as close as the (long-discontinued) Japanese Miroku. If you can find a Miroku, buy it. (I have the Pedersoli, Euroarms, and Miroku versions. The Pedersoli and Euroarms versions are identical.)

I think Chiappa does a decent job on the M1853 Enfield. I would not pay the differential to get a Pedersoli in this case. Of course, the best Enfield repro was made by Parker Hale years ago.

The Enfield does have a distinctly different feel when brought to the shoulder than does the Springfield. (The stock is shaped somewhat differently.)
Click to expand...
thanks for your help on whats good etc! so one question hows the traditions versions are they good/bad as to quality compared to these other makes models?
 
midland man said:
so one question hows the traditions versions are they good/bad as to quality compared to these other makes models?
Click to expand...
Traditions, like Dixie, Cimarron, Taylors, etc., is just a sales channel for the Italian manufacturers. I think if you buy a given product from any of these sales channels you will get basically the same thing. There may be differences in the warranties offered.
 
AlexanderA said:
Traditions, like Dixie, Cimarron, Taylors, etc., is just a sales channel for the Italian manufacturers. I think if you buy a given product from any of these sales channels you will get basically the same thing. There may be differences in the warranties offered.
Click to expand...
thanks for the advice plus this video of hickok45 of him shooting this gun is what inspired me to get into Bp military guns!
 
AlexanderA said:
Pedersoli has a uniformly good reputation as to quality, but is uniformly more expensive (by hundreds of dollars) than Chiappa (Armi Sport). Chiappa can be hit or miss on quality and/or authenticity. The Chiappa M1861 Springfield is heavier and clunkier than an original, but the Chiappa M1842 is spot on, and is almost indistinguishable from an original.

The Pedersoli M1861 Springfield is made on tooling formerly used to make the Euroarms version. This Pedersoli/Euroarms M1861 is/was closer to an original than the Chiappa is, but is not as close as the (long-discontinued) Japanese Miroku. If you can find a Miroku, buy it. (I have the Pedersoli, Euroarms, and Miroku versions. The Pedersoli and Euroarms versions are identical.)

I think Chiappa does a decent job on the M1853 Enfield. I would not pay the differential to get a Pedersoli in this case. Of course, the best Enfield repro was made by Parker Hale years ago.

The Enfield does have a distinctly different feel when brought to the shoulder than does the Springfield. (The stock is shaped somewhat differently.)
Click to expand...
you know I found this rifle I believe you were talking about so after looking at it looks to be a nice rifle! https://www.dixiegunworks.com/index...Dixie+Model+1842+Springfield+Musket+--+Rifled
 
midland man said:
also I was thinking on a mold to cast my own minie balls bullets etc. any advice as to which ones perform the best?
Click to expand...

Wait until you get the actual musket before getting moulds and sizers. You'll need pin gauges or something similar to measure, will likely be a range of .574 to .577 and possibly up to .580. For best accuracy you'll need to know this and size the minie 1 to 2 thousandths smaller than the bore. A lot of folks find an 0ld style Lyman 213 shoots well, Ive had the lighter wad cutter styles do well along with the improved style minie.
 
midland man said:
now I been looking at this one its only $65 over the traditions kit and its complete so for that price looks good to me! https://www.dixiegunworks.com/index...uct_name/PR0106+2+BAND+ENFIELD+RIFLE+DEFARBED
Click to expand...

I'm not sure on Chiappa build quality when it come to these, but I do like the 2 band over 3 band when it comes to Enfields.

Maybe just me but they seem more accurate. And, if you're being timed reloads are quicker with the 6 inches less barrel length you're having to ram/pull a rod through, gets you back on target a hair faster.
 
I would never buy another kit gun. The one I built was just OK, but you never get your money back because its a "kit" and its hard enough to sell or trade any kind of muzzle loader let alone one you built.
 
midland man said:
you know I found this rifle I believe you were talking about so after looking at it looks to be a nice rifle! https://www.dixiegunworks.com/index...Dixie+Model+1842+Springfield+Musket+--+Rifled
Click to expand...
I have that exact gun (the Chiappa rifled version of the M1842 musket). It's in the rack next to my original M1842, and there's no discernible difference.

When I got it, the only fault was that the bayonet lug (on the bottom of the barrel) wasn't quite in the correct spot. This is held on by hard silver solder, and I was able to un-solder it and reinstall it in the proper place without too much trouble. The fact that the finish is "in the white" means that this can be done without ruining the finish. (Silver solder requires at least a MAPP torch.) (The front sight on this model is part of the front band.)

Remember that this model is .69 caliber. That's a hell of a slug.
 
AlexanderA said:
I have that exact gun (the Chiappa rifled version of the M1842 musket). It's in the rack next to my original M1842, and there's no discernible difference.

When I got it, the only fault was that the bayonet lug (on the bottom of the barrel) wasn't quite in the correct spot. This is held on by hard silver solder, and I was able to un-solder it and reinstall it in the proper place without too much trouble. The fact that the finish is "in the white" means that this can be done without ruining the finish. (Silver solder requires at least a MAPP torch.) (The front sight on this model is part of the front band.)

Remember that this model is .69 caliber. That's a hell of a slug.
Click to expand...
so does it like roundballs with patch or something else?
 
midland man said:
so does it like roundballs with patch or something else?
Click to expand...
Standard bullet for the rifled version of the M1842 is a .69 Minie ball. The original smoothbore version was most often used with "buck and ball" -- a .69 caliber round ball plus three buckshot. None of these used patches other than the remnants of the paper cartridges. The Minie ball was self-sealing (the skirt would expand on firing), while the "buck and ball" was supposed to be a relatively loose fit in the smooth bore. A patch wouldn't have been appropriate. Remember that for a musket (whether rifled or smoothbore), speed of loading is paramount, and using a patch takes away that speed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

K
  • Locked
Volunteer Rifles
Replies
8
Views
2K
4v50 Gary
4v50 Gary
H
  • Locked
1853 Enfield rifled mukset at 300 yards
Replies
6
Views
1K
hillbilly
H
daboyleroy
  • Locked
Model 1863 Springfield Rifle Musket...a bit of history
Replies
11
Views
2K
AlexanderA
A
forward observer
New addition to the ACW pile, A rare P1853 Enfield maker
Replies
17
Views
646
forward observer
forward observer
midland man
  • Locked
has anyone purchased this kit and built it and hunted squirrels with it?
Replies
18
Views
2K
flembo
F
Back
Top