I was given a cva hawkins rifle that was purchaced in the 1970's. can anyone tell me what the rifling twist might be? and is pyrodex or any other blackpowder besides traditional powder safe to shoot in this gun? Thanks.

Pyrodex is black powder replacement, its safe in all black powder firearms and measures the same.

Your gun should be 1:66" twist unless its marked otherwise on the barrel. You might be able to email or call CVA and give them the serial number and they can tell you.

CVA made a Mountain rifle and a Big bore mountain rifle that I know of in the 70's, some of them had a USA made barrel and others had Spanish/Itailian barrels. Most times the twist was 1-66 twist for round balls, they had a strange breech system that made ignition of the the fake powders like Pyrodex very difficult. It would be better to stay with Blackpowder, or at least use 20grs or so of blackpowder first then the fake powders. Only testing will tell. They are some very fine shooters and they do have a good following among the blackpowder crowd.Because they were the low end in price many of us started out with them.

Probably a roundball twist of 1:66 -- but it may be faster. I had one that fired both ball and slugs (like the MaxiBall) very accurately, so it might be a compromise twist like 1:48. Use nothing in this rifle but black powder or black powder substitutes like Pyrodex or Triple7 !! Smokeless powder of any type will turn it into a bomb.

old gunner. I also have a CVA Hawkens, and .45 KY long rifle. Both will shoot pyrodex just fine. As with any black powder rifle keep it clean, and you won't have to many problems with ignition. The 45 is a lot more accurate than my .50 Hawkens is.

One thing that helps with these older CVA's when using black power subs like 777 is to change out the standard nipples for a Musket nipple. These offer much better ignition.

The twist is 1 in 48". Try to get some FFF Goex if you can.

The twist is 1 in 48". Try to get some FFF Goex if you can.

Maybe not... My CVA St. Louis Hawken from the same era is definitely twisted 1 in 66".
Any BP or substitute can be used in these arms.

Old Gunner, measure the twist of your Hawken to make sure:

....Tightly patched cleaning jag on ramrod all the way in to the breech.
....Hash mark the ramrod flush with the muzzle in line with the front sight.
....Withdraw until 1/2 turn is achieved.
....Measure distance from muzzle, multiply times two.

http://www.thebuckskinner.com/barrel_chart.html

They are a T/C Hawkin knock off and as such they copied the unusual barrel twist too. Too bad really. 1 in 66" would have been a lot better.

"Any BP or substitute can be used in these arms."

Yes, they just don't work very well.

As far as barrel twist I have no idea, but you might want to try different kinds of powder to see which shoots the best. Me and my dad have t/c hawkens 50 cal flintlocks that are exactly the same and his can't shoot the load I use near as well as mine does.

Powders can surely make a difference, but just as inportant in roundball shooting -- if not MORE important -- are ball diameter, patch thickness and type (material, weave), and lube. Small changes in any or all of these features can make a HUGE difference in accuracy.

http://www.thebuckskinner.com/barrel_chart.html
They are a T/C Hawkin knock off and as such they copied the unusual barrel twist too. Too bad really. 1 in 66" would have been a lot better.
"Any BP or substitute can be used in these arms."
Yes, they just don't work very well.

Well mine is definitely 1 in 66", and the blanket statement about what powder will or will not work is unfounded.

Each rifle is at least to some extent a case all its own.

The chart provided by that link above is incomplete since no 1 in 66" Hawken appears listed and they certainly did make them.
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.gunsandammomag.com/firearms/images/FDcva_st_louis_hawkL.jpg&imgrefurl=http://gundirectory.gunsandammomag.com/detail/gun_715/Rifle_9/cva_132&h=85&w=398&sz=6&hl=en&start=2&um=1&tbnid=b9zMVXfSSN6dhM:&tbnh=26&tbnw=124&prev=/images%3Fq%3DCVA%2BSt.%2BLouis%2BHawken%26um%3D1%2 6hl%3Den%26sa%3DN

Mine came with the plain hardwood stock, not the fancy maple.

Some T/C Hawkens were made with a slow 1:60" or 1:66" twist too. My neighbour has an early caplock with the slow twist.

Bye
Jack

While a slow twist may be theoretically optimal for round ball, and a fast twist may be theoretically optimal for conicals, one of the beauties of muzzleloading is that very few things are written in stone. 1:48 is a "compromise" twist, between fast ans slow. While we tend to think of "compromise" as a dirty word, 'tain't necessarily so. The odds are that with a bit of load development such a rifle may provide sterling accuracy with either type of projectile. I have such a rifle, a .45 caplock marketed in the '70s by Sears, made by Miroku. Using MaxiBalls and 60 gr. of FFFG, it will keep all its shots on a playing card at 100 yards, and I have used that load with total satisfaction on deer for years. With a .440 ball, .015 matress ticking patch lubed with a 50/50 mix of Murphy Oil Soap and alcohol, and 45 gr. of FFFG, it is squirrel-head accurate at 50 yards.

THAT is a "compromise" I can live with!

pisgah--- Very well said!!!! Compromise does usually refer to something inferior but you are so right about it being a 'compromise' you cN live with. I shoot my 54 caliber 1 in 48 twist Lyman's trade with big old round balls and can hit a squirrel's head at 50 yards. Now I don't know of any better shooting accuracy from any gun with any twist than that... Yes 1 in 48 is a compromise twist I can live with, too!

My brother had a .54 cal T/C Renegade with 1:48'' twist. It shot round ball just fine, enough so he never bothered to test it using Maxi Ball or Maxi Hunter... .54 ball was entirely enough for whitetails.

I find that I can usually sell the 1 in 48" twist barrels on ebay for nearly enough to buy a new Green Mountain slow twist barrel, and that way I don't have to compromise.

The black powder subs have been so problematic in all my traditional rifles that I've given up on them. Pyrodex in particular is more corrosive, and much harder to clean up than FFF Goex. I also shoot flintlocks, and it's even worse in them.

Choices are good, and that's why we have then I expect.

Pyrodex in particular is more corrosive, and much harder to clean up than FFF Goex.

I'm with you 100% on that! It's so hygroscopic the fouling sucks moisture right out of the air during bench work creating a huge, muddy funk.

I guess the 'hook' was supposed to be that the fouling was softer, requiring less swabbing between shots and easier scouring to remove... He!!, it removes itself all over everything! You need to swab frequently just to keep from being inundated.

Vilest filth ever, IMO.

(But my Hawken did shoot good using it.:rolleyes: )

I am new to this forum but not new to muzzle loading by any means. I started with them over 35 years ago. Long before there was there was these modern inlines that share very little with true muzzle loading. I have 45, 50 and 54 cal smoke poles and all are traditional. The 54 I have I bought about 33 years ago. It is a very early Renegade with very deep groves in rifling compared to later TC traditional style guns and with a 1 in 48 twist. It will shoot a tightly patched (.015 or so thick) .535 round balls very accurately with about 90 grains to 110 grain (by volume equivalency) of Pyrodex P. (I did modify the sights shortly after I got it to a outline V notch in rear with a small white triangle under notch to aid alignment and a extended brass blade in front tapered to a point and it aims nicely) I have used FF, FFF and Pyrodex RS and P in this gun and found FFF and P to shoot best groups with round balls and foul the least. RS and FF works better in it with maxi balls and such. I have no issues with Pyrodex fouling bore or making a mess and can shoot 20 or 30 rounds or more with no problems reloading it vs black powder. The 30th shot loads about as easy as the second shot. With black powder you were about hammering down the bore on 3rd or 4th shot if you did not take time to clean it a bit. I have never had a misfire or ignition problem with gun and pyrodex if it was properly cleared and loaded. When hunting in winter or foul weather I never cleared my gun at end of day and I left it outside in cold in a vehicle truck or such so it would not sweat in a warm room. I might at most change cap the next day if I felt it needed it but I have been known to seal cap on it with finger nail polish in rainy weather. It has alway fired when asked to and the 54 cal RB with its unimpressive ballistics is very effective in the field. Even at 75 yards and more it will pass completely through a deer broadside most of the time or at least lodge on far side. It is a proven 100 to 125 yard gun on deer when need be, beyond that bullet drop get to be a big problem quickly. Never needed more than one shot and never had to chase one far afterwards. How much more power do you need? Personally I think that primitive season need to be primative with no fancy inlines or sabots and patched round balls or lead maxi type bullets. If you need more power, get a bigger caliber. For what it is worth, if i was facing down a big wild boar or a bear with a muzzle loader, it would be with my 54 with a stiff load and a 450 grain plus slug, not a 50 shooting sabot bullet with any powder charge. There is no substitute for caliber and bullet weight when the going gets tuff and at 54 cal and above even a RB is very deadly even on bigger game. I sometimes hunt with a light weight 50 I have but it too is RB and I use it when I am in tight cover and covering a lot of ground too and shoots are likely to be 50 yards or less and not over 75 yards or so. 45 is for plinking/target with RB's and low recoil and lower costs (less powder and lead) I consider a 45 RB a bit light for deer but if it was under 75 yards and I could pick my shots (broadside) I would use it rather than stay home. A 45 with a heavy lead slug (240 grains or more) in a good shooter would be very deadly on deer too under 100 yards or so. Beyond that, it would not be killing power, it would be bullet drop. (54 with a maxi would be same way in that bullet drop would be a issue long before killing power was) RB's in a 54 lets you have a better hunting trajectory and good killing power without the fierce recoil of a maxi in it. I closing, I might add that when I run into other hunters in the field and visit a bit, when they see I have a 54 cal it always raises some eyebrows because many have never even seen a 54 cal muzzle loader up close and traditional to boot. Oh, one more thing, on time I was hunting and stopped to visiting a bit with another hunter, while wee where chatting a deer broke cover and ran broad side to use at about 75 to 85 yards. Not full steam but a fair clip. Cover was open so I took my time to draw a bead on with proper lead and touch it off. The other hunter was impressed when it went down a few yards later. It turned out to be a perfect heart shot that exploded heart into small pieces before exiting far side. I had to tell him though I was aiming for the lungs and pulled shot about three or four inches lower than I planned. (I think I got it on a mid air hop between bounds)

That flys in the face of everything I've used, done, seen, heard about from my fellow shooters, and read over the last 30+ years but I'm glad it's working for you.

You must be living right.

That flys in the face of everything I've used, done, seen, heard about from my fellow shooters, and read over the last 30+ years but I'm glad it's working for you.

You must be living right.

No, more like using them right. Many muzzleloader users today do not know how to properly patch/RB size (based on bore size and rifling depth) and properly feed a large bore muzzle loader. It is getting to be a bit of a lost art with sabots and inlines taking center stage as the latest rage. They look at the ballistics, shotgun primer ignition, easy load pellets and sabots and say this is the way to go but the problem is that these charts do not reflect performance on game in field. A 54 or 58 RB does not even have to mushroom to cut a larger wound channel and they retain nearly 100% weight at impact velocities. (with jackets bullets in sabots, expansion is a "must have") I am not knocking a 50 RB as it can be effective too in some uses but the big bores in RB's are very effective well beyond what ballistics suggest. BTW, I plan to explore using 294 grain Lee Minnie loads in a classic style Hawken 45 this summer and hunt with it in fall. Granted it is not a RB load but RB in 45 is kinda light and it is not sabot load either nor inline and classic in concept using pure cast lead and should prove to be very effective even if its ballistics with MV's around 1400 FPS are unimpressive as well. I am also considering getting a custom fast twist barrel for it and trying out some cast 475 grain Lyman bullets in it. They should turn out a "unimpressive" 1100 FPS or so with "small" 70 charge and provide classic 45/70 heavy bullet performance in a muzzle loader with extreme penetration rivaling the big bores. BTW, as far as what I consider to be the best RB cal for most hunting, it is a tossup between a 54 and 58. My reason for this is that while a 58 is a bit more effective, it is possible to drive a 54 cal RB in a good barrel a bit faster and with a bit less recoil and a somewhat flatter trajectory and serious 54 cal conical loads have better downrange energy than 58's. (heavy 50 cal conical bullets can be pretty serious too) All this heavy conical loads though have some very serious recoil though too that RB loads in same caliber do not have.

Those who have not seen a big roundball work can have no conception of how well they DO work. I have a .58 flinter that just plain flattens deer out to 100 yards, and used to have a .62 smoothbore that was even more impressive at ranges out to 50 yards. Low velocity, and a loopy trajectory that limits range, but absolutely deadly.

BTW, almost all of the original Hawken rifles had 1-in-48 rifling twists. There is disagreement over whether this was because the Hawken brothers thought this was "best", or whether their rifling setup would only turn out 1-in-48.

Those who have not seen a big roundball work can have no conception of how well they DO work. I have a .58 flinter that just plain flattens deer out to 100 yards, and used to have a .62 smoothbore that was even more impressive at ranges out to 50 yards. Low velocity, and a loopy trajectory that limits range, but absolutely deadly.

BTW, almost all of the original Hawken rifles had 1-in-48 rifling twists. There is disagreement over whether this was because the Hawken brothers thought this was "best", or whether their rifling setup would only turn out 1-in-48.


Well said on the RB concept. As you well know 54 cal RB's and larger are very effective. When you go from a 45 to 50, you increase RB weight about 40% which is a big jump. When you go from a 50 to 54, you increase bullet weight about another 30% which is a big jump too which adds to it effectiveness along with increased caliber. A 58 adds about 18% to weight of a 54 RB. If you could get a long enough and "fast" enough 58 cal barrel it would make about the perfect RB gun with a good trajectory (for a RB) and power for ANY North American game withing its effective range. (though a 54 could basically "fit" here too) Once upon a time I considered have a custom 62 cal flintlock built. That would have been a conversation piece and a very serious weapon for sure any very deadly well beyond 100 yards if you could plot range and rainbow trajectory properly.

My "take" on the 1/48 Hawkin brothers twist was that they used it as a compromise twist that could shoot either RB's or conical. This was supposedly appealing to the hunters that they were marketing their guns too because their livelihood and very survival depended on a gun that could adapt to their needs.

It is amazing how in the mid 1800's that these hardy souls (mountain men and such) opened the north west with a "inferior" cap and RB and thrived until expansion pushed them out too. That alone speaks well of the effectiveness of a RB in right cal for application. The "fifty" was the standard in that is was a compromise between power and amount of powder and lead needed to be carried in weight. (a important factor when you are living off land months at a time) In reality, there was a lot of them made in the 48 to 52 cal range, not just 50's. (a 52 would have been a nice round)

"BTW, almost all of the original Hawken rifles had 1-in-48 rifling twists."

But they were deep. The T/C 1:48 shallow rifling is greatly inferior to an original Hawken, and most other barrels.

"BTW, almost all of the original Hawken rifles had 1-in-48 rifling twists."

But they were deep. The T/C 1:48 shallow rifling is greatly inferior to an original Hawken, and most other barrels.


The rifling on my on my old, very early TC 54 Renegade mics .541 on lands and .565 on grooves (.012 deep). The 50's of that era that I have seen had much shallower rifling. (usually .006 to maybe .008 at most)

I've seen lots of them that were more like .003-.004.

I have a TC 45 "Hawken" that mics only .450 and .461 or about .0055 deep groves. Shallow grooves do best with slugs and such as they do not have to distort as much to tightly/fully fit bore.

A friend of mine has a .50 and a .54 CVA Hawkens. Both are 1 in 48" twist. Both are tack drivers with round ball and Lee REAL bullets. The T/C barrels in 1 in 66" twist are marked "Round Ball". The standard barrels are 1 in 48" twist. The T/C shallow grove is a compromise between round ball and conicals. My .54 T/C Hawkens is deadly at 100 yards with the 380 grain REALs.