Enfield 577 original or Pedersoli

L

LE303

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
13   0   0
Just a curious question . Would you buy a Enfield 577 original or a Pedersoli ?
Maybe thinking of getting into BP shooting , purely for plinking and hunting .
I know the Enfield is ancient and the Pedo is new
Is there any smiths in the GTA area that can honestly check a percussion era Enfield for condition and shoot ability ??
Has any one had any experience with a Pedo clone ??
 
Original will probably take some work to get shooting again but should be fine. Pedersoli work great too. My advice would be to find a used Parker Hale reproduction. I believe the pedersoli do not have progressive depth rifling, making them more sensitive to the components used in loading.
 
I agree that the first choice for shooting would be a Parker Hale. The short musketoons are the most common, but 2 and three band versions do turn up.
 
If you can't find the real thing - and there are still thousands of them around - then the Parker-Hale continuation manufacture are better than the Pedersoli versions by a country mile. I was involved in the return of the original Pattern Room gauges from Parker-Hale to the MoD Pattern Room back in the mid-90's. Parker-Hale had had them on 'temporary loan' since the late 1960's in order to use them to make the tooling for their production of ALL of the similar versions of the P53 rifle and carbine.

Slightly handier to shoot is the two-band .577cal rifle, and the Musketoon, a true carbine, is the handiest large-calibre BP brush gun imaginable. Loaded with a 535gr Minié bullet over 95gr of 3F, it's a sure-fire deer dropper up to a hundred yards or so. Mine, serial number 1168, was a birthday present back in 1974, and gets shot most weekends, especially on guest days.

The successors to Parker-Hale, Euroarms, can be well-made, but look like frawks, with their matt-oil-finished stocks. Pedersoli, even at this end of the scale, can still produce some real surprises, and two of the last four I saw in-store had foresights misaligned - not funny for a $1500 replica. The other two had clear gaps around the lockplate. ALL of my guns of that era, two Sniders and two Enfields, have wood-to-metal fits around the lockpalte that defy description in their precision.

Me, I'd hold out for a P-H.

BTW, most of the .577cal rifles here in UK that one sees being shot by the MLAGB are the real deal, still safe after all this time - but please remember that here in UK we have the back-up of two national Gun Proof Houses to ensure that they are shootable.

tac
 
If your interest is history, then go with the original. If your interest is more towards shooting, I would go with a reproduction. Snider rifles for me (they use the same barrel as the percussion Enfield) are one of the most difficult rifles to shoot accurately, in my experience. I do have an original percussion Enfield but have only shot it a few times. The bore is several thousandths oversize. Both percussion Enfields and Sniders in my experience have very shallow rifling and if you are shooting minis, I think the shape of the recess and thickness of the skirt of the mini are very critical for accurate shooting

cheers mooncoon
 
tacfoley said:
Pays yer money and makes yer own mind up.

There is something special about shooting an original that no modern replica can provide.

As for a Pedersoli being made of modern steel, remember that so too is a Parker-Hale.

tac
Click to expand...

I have a 577-450 and a Snyder, both original's
 
I've returned a Ped Sharps for poor quality control. It's hard to find one that doesn't suffer from poor wood-to-metal fit, gaposis between the lock plate and receiver, poor finishing, etc.
If you had never owned or handled a Sharps from Shiloh or C. Sharps, you'd be happy with a Ped.
 
Original antique Enfields that are in real nice condition are not cheap.

If your interest is history, then go with the original. If your interest is more towards shooting, I would go with a reproduction.
Click to expand...

Mooncoon summed it all up^^

I have two antiques, one in near mint shape that was a British Stores gun that was loaned for Canadian Militia use out of New Brunswick. (Enfield Manufactured)

The other is a "Tower" U.S. Civil War issue, well used but still nice.

As the other fellows said, Parker Hale all the way.

They are getting more scarce, but they alway's seem to turn up for sale.

I echo the other remarks on Pedersoli, any that I have seen, have issues.

The issues are bad enough, that I would just hold out for a Parker Hale.

I own a Parker Hale Short Rifle. (2 Bands)

One word says it all, excellent.

Snider Enfields are another way to go.

They are somewhat plentiful, usually nice condition and are Canadian Collectable.
 
Last edited:
Your comment on wood to metal fit was of great interest, and sitting here next to my rack of rifles I picked up my Snider target 1872, and an 1861 Springfield. On both of these rifles I will agree the lock to stock fit is
as you put it "defy's description". Also examining two newer Pedersoli rifles, a P53 and a Springfield trapdoor, the fit on both are very tight on the wood to metal. I would also suggest that the passing of time and the nature of wood itself would contribute to the almost perfect tolerance.
Regards, WRXS.
 
I owned a PH 1858 and held a pedersoli 1858. The Parker hale hands down beats the pedersoli in quality, it's like comparing a nork 1911 to a pre war colt 1911.
 
The Sniders need a .600" projectile, ball for Snider chow and bullet for brass case.
The muzzle loader P53 or springfield using the .577 "minnie" have never shot well for me, and I have tried just about everything.
Regards.
 
Who makes a suitable .600" calibre barrel? Right now, nobody.

AFAIK, there are no replications of a Snider rifle/carbine of any kind, by anybody. So we are talking about starting from scratch for a Snider action. NOT going to be cheap, for sure.

tac
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom