Loyalst Arms... getting better?

[skamikaze]

I know it has been beaten to death about the safety/authenticity of Loyalist Arms products, but after looking over one of their weapons I have to ask, Have they become safer?

They still suck, in my opinion, as historical reproductions. The 1842 I examined had a shoddy teak stock, and a butter-soft mainspring, but are these still dangerous guns?

I had heard they were being proofed, and the quality had stepped up some, but didn't know the full story.

thoughts?

[LibertyHallVols]

For the last week, I have been working off and on refinishing the stock of a 1970's Miroku "Charleville" flintlock musket. When I purchased it last fall, it had never been sparked and was still coated in whatever grease was on it when it was shipped from the factory. The sucker is "as new".

The first thing that I noticed about this musket is the wood/metal fit...
It is on par with original muskets in my collection and others I have seen (including a $4,000 US M1861 that was at The Horse Soldier when I was there in July). There are no gaps ANYWHERE on that musket. When I removed the required screws and pins from the triggerguard, I had to beat it out with a mallet because it was so tightly inletted into the stock. Band springs are redundant because the bands don't move.

The springs are like a bear trap and the lock function is crisp and certain.

In short: It is a WELL MADE GUN!!!

None of the Italian manufacturers have matched the level of quality I see in the Miroku I now own. These new makers from across the Pacific seem to have established new lows for historical accuracy, quality, and (according to some reports) safety.

Why even consider a product of markedly lower quality? By spending your money on them, you reward their low quality. If we (as a group) can demand high quality, then suppliers will respond.

[maillemaker]

The 1842 I examined had a shoddy teak stock, and a butter-soft mainspring, but are these still dangerous guns?

I think you answered your own question. If the quality you can see and feel is lacking, why trust what you can't see and feel?

Steve

[skamikaze]

yeah, I have no intention on purchasing one whatsoever. A pard of mine was given one as a gift, and is keeping it at my place since dorms aren't keen on weapons.

It definitely doesn't pass MY standards, but it seems like it could probably pass the "minimum" standard at most events.

Is this an actual improvement? or just a polished turd?

[Blair]

The same work ethics and shoddy materials are employed to manufacture the CW clothing (uniforms) from this Country as is the used in the manufacture of these "non" (pretend/fake) arms.
What would/could compel some to condemn the use of one, while condone or otherwise "sign off" on the usage of the other? Especially when one has the capability to be the cause some real harm!
I really have trouble understanding this contradictory mentality.

[Ross L. Lamoreaux]

As I don't condone any shortcuts, be that weapons or material clothing culture, I don't understand either, but I'll venture to guess that with both, its all about money (or people's lack of it/willingness to spend it)

[Pvt Schnapps]

The original question was "is it safe to fire?" If the weapon is, and doesn't alarm the average reenactor at ten paces, then it can still have a place in the hobby.

Shortcuts help people over the initial logistical hurdles of entering the hobby. For example, I still have my original Indo-Pak uniform. I haven't worn it since I got the first of many better outfits (which I ordered a couple of months into the hobby) but it took those better clothes nearly a year to arrive, during which time I was still able to reenact. I keep that uniform as a loaner and will continue to keep it for that purpose.

For the same reason, and because I seem to miss out on all the great deals for used weapons, and am not sure I'd order one from a stranger anyway, I would definitely consider springing for a loaner that would pass the ten foot rule and not blow up on the user.

This isn't because I don't think proper uniforms and weapons are important. I do, and I wouldn't take either to an event where they would offend other participants. But sometimes a person has to get into the hobby in the first place before they understand the desirability of an upgrade.

Heck, I'll even accept morning reports filled out with pencil on cheap printer paper if it gets people thinking about paperwork. Once they're interested we can talk dip pens and rag content, but until then only Sharpies make my eyes bleed.

So I guess I'd rephrase the original question this way: Are Loyalist Arms weapons like pencil and printer paper or are they still on the level of Sharpies?

[LibertyHallVols]

The original question was "is it safe to fire?" If the weapon is, and doesn't alarm the average reenactor at ten paces, then it can still have a place in the hobby.

As I read the original question, it seemed to be a general question about safety, quality, and other aspects.

So I guess I'd rephrase the original question this way: Are Loyalist Arms weapons like pencil and printer paper or are they still on the level of Sharpies?

Schnapps, I appreciate your willingness to seek a middle ground and stick up for the newbies in the hobby... sincerely! Fifteen years ago, you could buy a brand-new AS '42 for $450-$500 and get it defarbed for another $30-50. Back then, the biggest issue with safety was the person pulling the trigger. Outside of custom-builds, the only choices were EoA or AS and, regardless of which "brand" you preferred, both were reasonable well-made, proofed, and safe to use.

Those days are gone, unfortunately. What we could really use today is a well-built and safe musket that is "reasonably" historically accurate for under $600. What makes the Indy/Paki muskets so problematic is that they have a dubious lineage. Even if you get it proofed or buy some upgraded version with a "shooter" barrel, you will get funny looks from your file partners (and rightfully so!). Regardless of the steps taken, there will always be that doubt with those guns. And safety is about more than just the barrel... if lock parts wear/break, you could lose the ability to safely hold full/half cock.

The answer to your question really depends on the person being asked. For me, they're a sharpie. For other people, they're acceptable from a "10-foot rule" perspective.

[Blair]

M.A.,

Only at a distance of ten feet?
Your eye sight is much better than mine.
However, when it comes to pipe bombs, ten feet is a little too close, for my comfort (especialy in a line of Infantry).
I'll take the immersion experiences of a pencil, printer paper and/or a machine sown button hole any day of the week, and at less than two feet.

[erickelly90thIL]

I have owned Muskets made by Discriminating General, Middlesex Village, and Loyalist Arms and Repair. Loyalist Arms and Repair makes a very nice and serviceable weapon to be used for reenacting purposes. In my experience, Discriminating General and Middlesex guns are absolute junk. Their guns come from New Deli Gunworks. Loyalist goes thru a different gun maker. New Deli Gunworks does not depend on Middlesex and Discriminating General as a company to survive. Which is why the muskets that New Deli gunworks cranks out are certified pieces of crap. However the smaller company that Loyalist chooses to do business with, 100% depends upon the business that Loyalist Arms gives them. Therefore Loyalist can set higher standards on them.

I am a French and Indian War reenactor as well as a Rev War reenactor and speaking on behalf of the mid 18th Century reenactment community, we are VERY grateful to this company for coming out with 1st Model Brown Besses, 1728 French Infantry Muskets, Blunderbusses, French Grenadier Muskets, 1756 Artillery Carbines.......they have given us SO much that didn't exist before they came out with their products. It was either pay 2,000-3,000 for a custom gun or buy a Pedersoli Brown Bess or Charleville. Those were your two options. Why am i going to pay 1600 for a custom gun, that I'm going to play cowboys and Indians with in the woods??

Before Loyalist Arms introduced the 1st Model Brown Bess to the F&I and Rev War community your only choice was a 2nd model Brown Bess or Charleville or a Japanese Miroku Brown Bess or Charleville(which was only available for limited amount of time). The 2nd Model Brown Bess wasn't widely carried by the British troops in America until late in the Revolution. Your only option was to carry a 2nd model pedersoli or a 2nd model Japanese Bess. Thats all you had access to if you were a Brit. The same goes for French Reenactors of the F&I War. Your only option was to buy a 1766 Charleville which is completely incorrect for F&I era. That would be the equivilency of all civil war reenactors carrying Hawken guns for their shoulder arm.

I own 3 Loyalist guns. I own a 1728 Brown Bess(F&I), a 1768 French Infantry Musket(Rev War), and I own a Scottish Regiment Pistol(F&I). They are all very nicely made. I have used them for years with no flaws, nothing blowing me up, nothing exploding and killing others. They are safe. I have seen so much negativity and scalding comments about Loyalist on these forums and quite honestly i can see that you guys just do not have the appreciation and the fondness for them that the F&I and Rev War reenactors have. Not only did they give us options and unique weapons, they gave us choices.

I have noticed that most civil war guns for the past 15-30 years were somewhere in the 475-600 mark. F&I reenactors and Rev War Reenactors have watched their price range for the past 10 years go from $679 to $1100 now. Thats a BIG difference guys. You guys have always had access to a Springfield or an Enfield at a $500.00 price point. Try getting into a hobby like Rev War or F&I and right off the bat your only choice is to buy a Brown Bess or a Charleville 5 years ago at $970.00 dollars! Now they are around $1,100. At least a gosh darn rifle musket has rifling and is accurate! Can you imagine paying over a $1000 dollars now for a flintlock that has a smooth bore inside??? No rifling?? And Pedersoli wants over a $1000 dollars for that?? And you guys can buy an Italian made gun with rifling inside of the same weight and almost same size for about 300-400 less??
I know full well that all these muskets are supposed to have walnut stocks and we can sit here and nit pick at the authenticity levels of their guns. But I am here to tell you that I own 3 of their Flintlock weapons for a different "era" of reenacting and I couldn't be happier with them.
If you ask me, you guys have always had a Zouave, Enfield, Mississippi, Springfield, 63 Springfield, Sharps, Cook and Brother for a long time in an affordable price range. All F&I and Rev War reenactors had was 3!!! Choices. Brown Bess Italian or Japanese, Charleville Italian or Japanese, or Custom.
You guys have always had a SOLID, AFFORDABLE, VARIETY........you guys are "Spoiled"

All i can say is I don't think the Civil War community appreciates Loyalist Arms for all its efforts it has undertaken to get us serviceable, well-made, muskets for the 18th Century Reenactor. Ask any of the men in the Compaignes de la Marine how much they like their 1728's and Tulle Fusil De Chasses from Loyalist. Ask the men of Bagley's Mass. Provincial Battalion how much they love their 1st model Besses, Sea Service Muskets, and Bess Musketoons from Loyalist Arms. Ask the reenactors of the 4th Mass River Valley Colonials Fife and Drum and Line Company how much they love their French Infantry Muskets and well they have functioned and fired at events.

The 18th Century reenactors are very fond of Loyalist and we welcome their newest products with anticipation and "Appreciation".

Eric