My 209x45 is one of the most finicky rifles I've ever owned. On the replacement barrel from T/C now and doing much better with grouping but still seems a bit inconsistent. The first .45 wouldn't group anything I tried, and I tried a bunch!
Have yet to shoot the 209x50 that's been sitting in my gun cabinet for months but would expect it to be far easier to cope with based upon reports from numerous other owners. Both rifles have excellent triggers thanks to a factory rework on one and Bellm springs on both.
My recently acquired SS Huntsman came with a superb trigger - I was honestly shocked by how good and how consistent that trigger is. The hammer on the Huntsman still looks like it belongs on something you might use to drive nails. The rifle is smaller but it is comfortable to shoot even with my large frame. The Hunstman ramrod is an easily broken, telescopic affair but the Encore muzzleloader comes with a ramrod that can be a real pain if loading tight sabots. The sights on the Huntsman are of synthetic and on the delicate side, but work well if reasonable caution is exercised (based on reports from other owners, my iron sights always are the first things removed - can't use 'em).
One place in particular where the Encore takes a strong lead is the design of the breech plug - as good as it gets IMHO for 209 rifles. The Huntsman of course uses an orange primer carrier which has both its positive and negatives but I would rather see a more Encorish breech plug and eliminate the plastic. A plus for the Huntsman primer carrier as compared to the Knight disc is the Huntsman carriers have frequently provided over 100 shots on a single carrier (again, from others' input). They are durable. The removal of the breech plug and removal tool provided for the Huntsman is also inferior to the Encore. The tool provided by H&R/NEF leaves a LOT to be desired. As a result of the plug design and cut in the barrel for the carrier tab, the Huntsman blowback is considerable while the Encore has nearly none.
Both designs offer a bit of a challenge in selecting the right scope/mount configuration but the Huntsman hi-rise hammer makes the process far more restrictive.
Lockup of the barrel to action seems equally solid for both rifles although the Encore design would seemingly excel in that regard. The barrels on both the SS Encore and the Huntsman look as though they might have came from the same factory. The Huntsman uses a slightly coned crown (which I prefer) while the Encore uses T/C's QLA which I find to be of questionable worth.
I was able to achieve a 1+3/8" 100 yard group with the Huntsman after trying only a few load combinations. The little rifle is accurate.
Given all factors as I see them, the Huntsman represents tremendous value for the person willing to overcome a few obstacles. The Encore IS the superior rifle, but that superiority is likely not matched by the price differential.
The standard Huntsman muzzleloader is built upon the SB1 action. To achieve better barrel interchange options, one should buy an NEF based upon the SB2 action. Buying the standard Huntsman expecting to later add a .308 barrel will lead to serious disappointment. To my knowledge, the only additional barrel that is allowed to be fitted to the Huntsman SB1 (by the factory) is a shotgun barrel.
I would recommend either rifle. For someone that wants the advantages of a reasonably well-made breakopen rifle on a budget, the Huntsman is surely the right choice.
