Lyman Plains Pistol vs. Pedersoli Kentucky Pistol?

[Kynoch]

Can anyone here offer some first-hand insight into a Pedersoli Percussion Kentucky Pistol versus a Lyman Plains Pistol?

I'd like to find a percussion pistol chambered in .54 and these look like the two best candidates?

Thanks.

 

[Steel Horse Rider]

I have a Pedersoli Kentucky pistol that I built from a kit purchased at Dixie Gun Works, but it is in .45 caliber. I enjoy shooting it and it is very accurate for me. I have not had any problems with it in three years. I use CCI #11 caps with it and 30 grains of powder. I have no experience with the Lyman pistol.

 

[mec]

Sort of..... My plains Pistol is a .50 percussion model factory made as opposed to a kit- made for Lyman by Investarms of Italy. It has a version of the same lock used in the Great Plains Rifle-standard action parts but with coil springs replacing the original leaf, a fly in the action that would set it up for a set trigger like the one on the rifle. the Pistol does NOt have a set trigger but a very careful shooter can manipulate it to create a hair trigger effect. It is a consumately accurate single shot pistol

My Pedersoli Kentucky is a flinlock with standard action in 54 caliber. It is also very accurate and of good quality though it would be difficult say which pistol is superior in construction.

The Pedersoli flint is very accurate, reliable, has a favorable lock time and is much better than the more expensive LePage Flint I had a while back

The lyman and other percussion single shot pistos are discussed briefly in a chapter in this book which concentrates on Percussion Revolvers.
http://www.amazon.com/Percussion-Re...rmance/dp/162873695X/ref=cm_cmu_up_thanks_hdr

 

[EljaySL]

I have them both... but my Pedersoli is in flintlock not percussion and my Lyman I bought as a kit and finished it myself.

The short version is that the Lyman is more robust and the Pedersoli is more elegant.

Unfortunately the way the front of the Pedersoli is held together isn't very strong and you should avoid heavy loads in it (although it is possible to reinforce it). I don't think it's a real problem but it's something to be aware of. On the flip side the Lymans as produced by the factory can be really ugly. If you can pick one out in person I'm sure there are nice ones out there but I wouldn't mail order one if you care about looks. I'm sure somebody will take offense at that and post pictures of their lovely from the factory version but that isn't necessarily typical.

 

[davepool]

I built a plains pistol percussion kit and am working on the Pedersoli flintlock kit. I'd give the pedersoli a slight edge in the quality department. Both are good shooters.

From a ease of use stand point the Lyman wins, the barrel wedge and hooked breech makes dis-assembly for cleaning a snap. The pedersoli barrel is held in place by the tang screw and a very small screw through the nose cap into the front of the barrel.

 

[davepool]

I have them both... but my Pedersoli is in flintlock not percussion and my Lyman I bought as a kit and finished it myself.

The short version is that the Lyman is more robust and the Pedersoli is more elegant.

Unfortunately the way the front of the Pedersoli is held together isn't very strong and you should avoid heavy loads in it (although it is possible to reinforce it). I don't think it's a real problem but it's something to be aware of. On the flip side the Lymans as produced by the factory can be really ugly. If you can pick one out in person I'm sure there are nice ones out there but I wouldn't mail order one if you care about looks. I'm sure somebody will take offense at that and post pictures of their lovely from the factory version but that isn't necessarily typical.

They can be spiffed up a bit with a little spit and polish

 

[Kynoch]

I have them both... but my Pedersoli is in flintlock not percussion and my Lyman I bought as a kit and finished it myself.

The short version is that the Lyman is more robust and the Pedersoli is more elegant.

Unfortunately the way the front of the Pedersoli is held together isn't very strong and you should avoid heavy loads in it (although it is possible to reinforce it). I don't think it's a real problem but it's something to be aware of. On the flip side the Lymans as produced by the factory can be really ugly. If you can pick one out in person I'm sure there are nice ones out there but I wouldn't mail order one if you care about looks. I'm sure somebody will take offense at that and post pictures of their lovely from the factory version but that isn't necessarily typical.

Thanks for the wonderful feedback. What is involved with building the Lyman (or Pedersoli) kits? Thanks.

 

[Kynoch]

With all the great feedback here I should also ask, are there other .54 M/L pistols or kits that are comparable to the Lyman and Pedersoli that I should be considering? Thanks again.

 

[davepool]

Thanks for the wonderful feedback. What is involved with building the Lyman (or Pedersoli) kits? Thanks.

Basic hand tools will get the job done. Good set of hollow ground screw drivers, files, sandpaper, exacto knives etc. A dremel tool comes in handy also

The inletting of the barrel, lock and trigger are done for you already, just some very minor fitting required.

The pedersoli i'm working on is going to take a little more work than the lyman. The flash hole in the barrel isn't quite centered in the pan and the nose cap doesn't fit tight enough to the end of the stock. So i am having to take a little wood off the back of the stock where the barrel butts up at the breech this will get the flash hole centered in the pan, the tang will fit tighter in the stock and the nose cap will mate perfectly with the front of the stock.

I'm sure all of the kits have their own little individual quirks, some are fit better than others and some require a little more work, that's part of the fun. Just take your time and enjoy. The lyman was a learning process for me i took that lock apart and put it back together about a dozen times till i could do it with my eyes closed. I spent a lot of time sanding and polishing all the moving parts, mine was pretty rough, cocking the hammer and the trigger felt like rubbing two pieces of 80 grit sandpaper together. It's smooth as butter now.

They are really more of an assembly process than a true build.

 

[Steel Horse Rider]

My Pedersoli kit required a lot of filing and shaping to fit my wants with both the wooden part and the brass parts. I do agree that the barrel retaining method of the Pedersoli is not very good nor robust. If you have a vise (I bought an used Black and Decker Workmate vise before beginning my projects) and basic woodworking tools it is not a hard project. The biggest requirement is patience. I finished mine with Homer Formby's Linseed oil, about seven coats. It looks great in my opinion.

 

[EljaySL]

re: the kits - you could probably assemble it and fire it in about 5 minutes. It's really more about making it look like you want.

Everything brass is quite rough. Expect a lot of file and sanding work.

The barrel should be draw filed to really get everything perfect (and if you want you can do it enough to remove all the writing).

The wood can take quite a lot of inletting, depending on how perfect you want it and how good yours was to start. And then just generally shaping the outside and sanding. If you want you can really make it fit your hand perfectly. I removed a fair amount of wood.

For the metal I used a browning solution and for the wood I used real tung oil, the warmer kind. Neither process is very quick and you have to do a lot of coating something and then letting it sit for a day so this bit was probably a week or two but only a few minutes a day.

It's not fancy but it looks nice and it fits my hand.

 

[bannockburn]

I put together a Traditions Hawken style rifle kit a number of years ago and it was a lot of work, especially in terms of the wood to metal fit (fitting the brass butt plate was a major project just in itself). If you have good woodworking skills, attention to detail, and lots of patience it can be true labor of love.

 

[grimjaw]

I have nothing to say against the Lyman; I've never owned or shot one. I do have the Pedersoli Kentucky percussion .54, though, and it's been great.

 

[Malachi Leviticus Blue]

With all the great feedback here I should also ask, are there other .54 M/L pistols or kits that are comparable to the Lyman and Pedersoli that I should be considering? Thanks again.

As far as a .54 cal pistol goes, I'm Partial to the Thompson Center Scout pistol since you're asking.

 

[Kynoch]

I have them both... but my Pedersoli is in flintlock not percussion and my Lyman I bought as a kit and finished it myself.

The short version is that the Lyman is more robust and the Pedersoli is more elegant.

Unfortunately the way the front of the Pedersoli is held together isn't very strong and you should avoid heavy loads in it (although it is possible to reinforce it). I don't think it's a real problem but it's something to be aware of. On the flip side the Lymans as produced by the factory can be really ugly. If you can pick one out in person I'm sure there are nice ones out there but I wouldn't mail order one if you care about looks. I'm sure somebody will take offense at that and post pictures of their lovely from the factory version but that isn't necessarily typical.

Could you please elucidate a bit? "Ugly" in terms of metal finish, wood finish, wood grain or what exactly? Thanks.

I would like to hear other peoples' experiences with factory-finished Lyman Plains pistols. Thanks again.

 

[4v50 Gary]

Davepool - that shadow line around the lock really enhances your Great Plains. I did the same for my Trapper when I wanted to enhance that ugly duckling.

 

[davepool]

Davepool - that shadow line around the lock really enhances your Great Plains. I did the same for my Trapper when I wanted to enhance that ugly duckling.

Thanks, that was a lot harder to do than it looks, lots of filing and measuring to get it even and consistent on both sides

 

[EljaySL]

Could you please elucidate a bit? "Ugly" in terms of metal finish, wood finish, wood grain or what exactly? Thanks.

Wood finish and the metal to wood fit isn't nearly as nice as on the Pedersolis. And there's a secondary issue which is that Lyman's quality control isn't what it was so if you get second opinions a) keep in mind that the most recent reviews are the important ones (last three years?) and b) some of them are much better than others. It's a quality control issue and I can see buying one in person but not mail ordering one.

 

[Kynoch]

Wood finish and the metal to wood fit isn't nearly as nice as on the Pedersolis. And there's a secondary issue which is that Lyman's quality control isn't what it was so if you get second opinions a) keep in mind that the most recent reviews are the important ones (last three years?) and b) some of them are much better than others. It's a quality control issue and I can see buying one in person but not mail ordering one.

Very difficult around here locally to find either for sale. I suppose the good part is that either can simply be returned if they look bad. Lyman notes in its manual that the finish of the (non kit) pistol can be improved by rubbing it with Tru-Oil or linseed oil. ODD comment to put in the manual of a firearm.

It would be interesting to understand why the Lymans have changed in terms of metal/wood fit over the past few years? Thanks again.

 

[Panzerschwein]

Sorry to hi jack the thread but since we're on the subject, are either of these pistols based on historical models?

I'm looking for my first muzzleloading single shot pistol.

I really like the looks of both of these!

 

[EljaySL]

It would be interesting to understand why the Lymans have changed in terms of metal/wood fit over the past few years? Thanks again.

They've just generally had quality control issues. Sloppy work gets shipped to the customer instead of redone. And there's a surprising amount of hand work in the way they do the wood, so if you have one guy on the line who just doesn't care it impacts the customer, or can.

There's also been a lot more complaints about things not being hardened properly or straight or what have you. If you do some searches it used to be the grain plains rifle was 100% the standard recommended starter muzzleloader and now everybody's well, maybe, sort of, they're OK... and the pistol's kind of in the same place.

 

[EljaySL]

Sorry to hi jack the thread but since we're on the subject, are either of these pistols based on historical models?

I'm looking for my first muzzleloading single shot pistol.

I really like the looks of both of these!

Well, the fact that they offer them in flint and percussion should tell you that they're not targeting anything super specific.

That being said there is such a thing as a Kentucky pistol, at least as a marketing item, and they all look basically the same, stylistically. Frankly I think the flintlock is really popular because it really looks like something a pirate would carry, at least in the movies.

The great plains pistol is mostly just supposed to go with the same companies great plains rifle (and is available in the same calibers, how convenient). The great plains rifle is sort of a hodgepodge of a Hawken or other similar guns used in the frontier days.

They're both perfectly reasonable choices to start with but if you want something more narrowly historic you might look for something with a maker name (that it's a copy of) or a year in the name (usually copies of military models). Pedersoli makes copies of all kinds of stuff and you might Google them and poke around their website. Just as an example the Pedersoli Harper's Ferry is very attractive and copies a specific model but it's a less convenient caliber, and I think it might be more expensive, not sure on that offhand. But you get the idea.

 

[MAKster]

I was just about to ask whether these single shot percussion pistols were actually used historically. Since the percussion cap only became common in the 1830s and the cap and ball revolvers started around 1850 there really wasn't much time for these to be used. I suspect that since these pistols were inaccurate and not that useful most people probably continued to use flintlock pistols and then transitioned directly to the Colt revolvers.

 

[EljaySL]

Well, the Texas Rangers were using single shots when they got the Colt Patersons in the 1830s (1836??), and then I think went back to them as the Patersons broke. They got the initial Colt Walkers in what, 1847?

Hopefully an expert can chime in but I would think that in the 1830s and 1840s percussion single shots would be pretty common and then the 1850s and 1860s percussion revolvers and then 1870s the cartridges start taking over.

 

[Malachi Leviticus Blue]

There where plenty of flintlocks converted to percussion caps and I would think that would include pistols. So historically, it could be accurate depending on the period represented.