Thanks, GM54-120 for the information regarding LHR and Mr. Laney. Mr. Laney is still being carried as the Director of LHR.

If S&W did not purchase LHR i find it very strange that S&W would allow Mr. Laney to remain as Director of LHR while employed by S&W.

Mike Garland was the president of LHR but he went to GVS NA
https://www.linkedin.com/in/michael-garland-7a67a03a

So the question remains, who actually owns LHR now?

Patrick Hanley is still listed as VP of sales
https://www.linkedin.com/in/patrick-hanley-87722026

It sure appears Mr Laney is now the owner while being employed by S&W.
http://www.manta.com/c/mbyw91c/lhr-sporting-arms-llc
http://www.buzzfile.com/business/Lhr...C-603-335-8091

Actually, nobody needs to own LHR now. TC only needed to buy the patent rights to the Redemption muzzleloader, and maybe (I don't know) they were owned by an individual. It's quite possible that LHR is simply no more. Happens all the time.

In fact, this is probably good business sense on TC's part. By simply purchasing the patent rights instead of the whole company, TC(S&W) does not have any warranty obligation to anyone that owns a Redemption. Sucks for Redemption owners though.

If the business still exists and its a LLC then it must have an owner on record somewhere. There should even be a record of its closing if that has happened.

The only info i can still find lists 2 employees and about $120k in revenue. If they are no longer making anything then where is that revenue coming from? My guess is a royalty fee from S&W for the rights to the Redemption patents.

Pretty sure TC is making the guns now. They don't have GM barrels anymore.

What you suggest might make perfect sense. Keep the company "alive" so that it receives income in the form of patent royalties. Nothing wrong with an employee of S&W also owning a company that is receiving $$ from them. I don't know tax rules for beans but there might be a benefit to this. The only snag I can see is whether keeping LHR afloat means they still have to honor Redemption warranties.

Wonder whether any Redemption owner attempted to contact LHR regarding their warranty?

Bingo!!!!!

Interesting read http://www.namlhunt.com/tc-strike-1.html

Good Luck with that one T/C

Quote:

You will be seeing a lot more of this rifle design on these pages since Thompson/Center Arms is now coming on board as a Primary Sponsor of the NORTH AMERICAN MUZZLELOADER HUNTING website.

Well yeah most of us knew that for quite awhile.....Its pretty obvious don't ya think?

Quote:

Okay, let's just get it out of the way right now, before we go any further...Thompson/Center Arms, now of Springfield, Massachusetts, now owns the rights to the rifle design which came to market a few years back and was marketed as the Redemption.

Quote:

For about a half hour...I swapped out the barrels, swapped out the forearms, swapped out the butt/receiver assemblies, and even swapped out the components of the T/C Strike/LHR Redemption unique breeching and breech plug arrangement. Everything fit and functioned perfectly!

The most interesting part i found to be surprising.

Quote:

One feature I was exceptionally pleased to find on the T/C make of this rifle is that the company has continued to use a Green Mountain barrel on the newly re-named T/C Strike.

Quote:

The only real change I have seen is that the new T/C Strike barrel features the company's QLA System ... which is a fancy way of saying the barrel comes with a recessed muzzle.

Its a shame such a experienced hunter still mounts a scope so badly. Maybe if he used a scope with more than 3.25" of relief instead of trying to market his Hilux TBML scope it would not be as big of a problem.

Love how the scope is up against the scope mount.

Did the LHR version have a QLA? I thought it didn't? I didn't know GM even made a barrel with one.

The Strike has one. That's why I thought TC was making the barrels now. I could have swore Tom said his didn't have the GM stamp on it?