thought i would throw this video out there . Thanks to Birddog 6 for posting this on another forum
There is one thing Im not sure I agree with in the video and that�s the recommendation of not using 3F powders in a rifle . maybe one of you experienced modern shooters could explain this to me as 3F is commonly used in both smooth and rifled traditional guns . so im not to sure what the reasoning behind this comment was
I also wish they had gone into showing the effects of duplex loading. For some reason here in the last couple years I have been seeing cases of this . IE people mixing powder . In a couple cases even low base smokeless with Black powder and in a couple other cases , low base mixed with modern synthetic Powders . None of which IMO is a very smart thing to do .
Past that I thought showing the barrel failures was interesting . Not so much the failures themselves , but how each manufactures barrels handled the failures.
thought i would throw this video out there . Thanks to Birddog 6 for posting this on another forum
There is one thing Im not sure I agree with in the video and that�s the recommendation of not using 3F powders in a rifle . maybe one of you experienced modern shooters could explain this to me as 3F is commonly used in both smooth and rifled traditional guns . so im not to sure what the reasoning behind this comment was
I also wish they had gone into showing the effects of duplex loading. For some reason here in the last couple years I have been seeing cases of this . IE people mixing powder . In a couple cases even low base smokeless with Black powder and in a couple other cases , low base mixed with modern synthetic Powders . None of which IMO is a very smart thing to do .
Past that I thought showing the barrel failures was interesting . Not so much the failures themselves , but how each manufactures barrels handled the failures.
They wasted a lot of guns making that video and it was pretty unbiased since they used 3 different brands. Pretty informative and drives home the point that you have to be careful when you load a muzzleloader... No clue why the 3f was mentioned other then maybe there is inconsistency in the material from different manufacturers.
I have a friend that is a gun dealer and he muzzle load hunts. He has been using modern smokeless powder in an encore for years...He thinks bh209 is too expensive. Oh well and I hope nothing happens to him he is a great guy to deal with.
No clue why the 3f was mentioned other then maybe there is inconsistency in the material from different manufacturers.
i was thinking the same thing . 2F does have a lower pressure spike so that could be the case .
i also found it interesting that the failure of both the CVA and TC rifles barrels seemed to be similar � though I would agree this is just by looks of the video so hard to tell for sure �
Used some fffg in my T/C renegade this morning (max 90 gr), so far so good. I sure get less hangfires with the 3f in a sidelock.
Guys, do what I do and use the "block" feature. You will be surprised how liberating it is. Whenever one who I have blocked comes up in a thread, I just smile and go to the next post. Way more fun than getting upset and trying to respond to someone who will not listen. They live for upsetting the cart, so I don't play that game.
There is one thing Im not sure I agree with in the video and that�s the recommendation of not using 3F powders in a rifle . maybe one of you experienced modern shooters could explain this to me as 3F is commonly used in both smooth and rifled traditional guns . so im not to sure what the reasoning behind this comment was.
Like the good Captain questioned, I also wondered why they indicated in the video that FFFg wasn't to be used in rifles... especially since I've used FFFg Swiss in my two .50 caliber Hawkens (percussion caps) as well as my .50 caliber Shenandoah (flintlock) with success and fine accuracy. However, I must admit that I don't shoot really heavy loads in any of my traditional muzzle loaders. As best I can recall, I don't believe I've ever loaded more than 80-85 grains of FFFg in my rifles... and most of my shooting is done with considerably lower amounts of FFFg.
Now... smokeless powder??? That's a whole 'nuther ball-game!!! I guess some folks jus' have to learn "the-hard-way".
Jus' my 2 cents...
Strength & Honor...
Ron T.
It's smart to hang around old guys 'cause they know lotsa stuff...
IIRC FFFG would be OK with round balls in small bores like .45 or .50 but when you get into conicals or .54 cal and bigger FFg is the way to go. I doubt many shoot round balls in inline rifles.
I like to do my hunting BEFORE I pull the trigger! There is only one kind of dead, but there are many different kinds of wounded.
One thing I can say is if you load that load of HS-6 pisto powder in any modern smokeless rifle, it is going to do the same thing. Back in the days od my misspent youth, one of the neighbor boys got a hold of a 50 cal smooth bore musket. No black powder was around nor did we even know about it. We would steal 12 gauge shotgun ammo and strip it down for the powder.We had some cylindrical sinker molds that fit just right.
On evening , wanting to impress a rich neighbor kid, we poured two 12 gauge powder charges in it, stuffed some newspaper down it and then poured all the BB's from same down the barrel, topped off with more newspaper.
Being a little smarter, I stepped back a few feet, and the rich kid being smarter than both of us put together, backed off another 10 ft or so.My neighbor touched it of and the results made this video look like child's play. My neighbor ended up with arm and facil lacerations and BB"S imbeded in the side of his face and arm.I end up with BB"s imbeded in my side and arm.Luckily no eye sight was damaged. Not having a hospital within miles,the rich neighbor kid's dad was a dentist and he plucked all the BB"s out of us both and stitched up the lacerations.. All without anesthetic.
That did not hurt at all compared to what we got when our fathers got homne from the mine that day.
That was one day when stupid did get fixed.
If God wanted you to walk and carry things on your back, He would not have invented stirrups and pack saddles
Yes... it was a VERY large load of a smokeless, fast-burning PISTOL powder to boot, but I guess he was trying to make a point.
But like Saddlesore wrote, "... that load of HS-6 pistol powder in any modern smokeless rifle, it is going to do the same thing."... and that's FOR SURE !~!~!
Strength & Honor...
Ron T.
It's smart to hang around old guys 'cause they know lotsa stuff...
Myself I think the 120 grain charge of smokeless was a good point . Not so much that anyone would load that much in a smokeless gun , Or could for that mater .
But what would happen if you mistakenly loaded a max charge of smokeless in place of BP or its equivalent. So while we maybe able to say ; who would ever do that . The reality of it is that if someone did not know better and exchanged smokeless for BP, they very well could .. My bet is that even � that charge of smokeless , measured by volume would have produced much the same results . so the question is was this charge 120 grains by volume or by wieght . Im thinking it was by volume
For those of us that know better though , there actually IMO is more in the video that�s not commented on . Now granted this was done with extremely high pressures , as was pointed out Take a look at the first test . . Here is what im noticing a) on the Knight the bolt stayed in place . On the CVA the receiver stayed intact . Not much left of the TC action . All 3 are missing the breech plugs . It would appear though that on the Knight and the CVA , those plugs did not go directly back into the shooter
b) the Knight rifle barrel steel held its integrity . Notice that the Knight barrel pealed back but still appears to not be missing piece . But on the CVA and TC both barrels have lost large sections . But is this due to differences in designs Ie plunger action vs. break open ?
c) relates to the last part of b) and maybe plays a part in the reason the Knight faired differently then the CVA and TC . Take note of the stock . Its wood . Notice how the integrity of the stock on the knight , held while the two synthetic stocks came apart . The synthetics provided from what I can see , no protection from the failure . While the wood stock sure seams to even at this great of pressure failure .
Well cva has a great movie there . Swampman700 these were not all spanish muzzleloaders but it was right on. Now 3ffg ive been hunting with these 40 plus years in still learning but here goes 3 fg start with 70 gr then work up my thompson 50s &54 with 3fg loose shoot good with 90 gr both guns my cvas shoot good with 80 gr 3fg powder My pennyslanva 50 work good with 80 gr also maxi or round balls .When using 3fffg reduce 10 gr from 80 an work up. But with remington-s 3fg is two hot for them there from the other side of spain
IIRC FFFG would be OK with round balls in small bores like .45 or .50 but when you get into conicals or .54 cal and bigger FFg is the way to go. I doubt many shoot round balls in inline rifles.
i use and have used for 20 some years , 3F in my 54 for both ball and conical and in my 62 for ball . accracy is fine , no issues . it used to be kinda a rule that 3F was for 54 and below and 2 F for 54 and above . then about ??? 10 years back people started say 50 was the break point . personaly i find 3F much better in just about everything but for shot loads . well traditional muzzleloading anyway
txhunter58 is the stock on your rifle solid or is it a honey comb type afair ?. it looks like both the CVA and TC are honey comb type stocks
CVA uses a heavier duty stock material than TC. Its much sturdier and doesnt have that loud thunk sound when something hits the stock. Another reason i like cva.
CVA rec'd much bad press in the '90's over quality concerns. These faulty steel alloy and tempering problems were corrected many years ago.
I've owned a CVA Optima for several years. I bought it second hand from my friend's son who had to have the latest and greatest Apex model. It came without an Owners Manual. I contacted CVA and they kindly sent me a PDF link.
I use Triple 7 powder. 105 grains produces best accuracy for me and I've certainly tried many loads. The crusher sabot cup and .430 Hornady XTP 240 grain bullet is my hunting load.
The various F powders are virtually obsolete. Yes, they were fine in their day but Triple 7 and others provide better performance and slightly cleaner,too. Unless you already have a container of FFF, I wouldn't consider hunting with it.
That being said, there are scores of muzzle-loader hunters who favor the Hawkins style of the early 1800's. They love their FFF powders loaded from genuine ox horn powder containers along with leather fringed jackets and the whole Jeremiah Johnson/Jim Bridger outfits. I have no quarrel with these dedicated hunters. They won't be changing anytime soon to Triple 7. Each to his own I say; my focus is scope sighted and easy to operate and clean.
IIRC FFFG would be OK with round balls in small bores like .45 or .50 but when you get into conicals or .54 cal and bigger FFg is the way to go. I doubt many shoot round balls in inline rifles.
90 grains of 3f is an excellent load for the .72 caliber Long Land Musket. 2f is good for blanks.
1st Special Operations Wing 1975-1983 919th Special Operations Wing 1983-1985 1993-1994
"Manus haec inimica tyrannis / Ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem" ~Algernon Sidney~
Shoot 90 gr of 2F with 535 cast bullet in my .452 Whitworth. Works just fine, no drama at all. Think about all the black powder cartridges that use even hotter loads ? Ballistics about like a 45-70-500 smokeless load.
90 gr also in my .61 Baker flinter with a custom 1.4 ounce pure lead custom maxi ball. Ballistics about like a Brenneke 16 ga Boar slug load.
Real muzzle loaders don't use 209 shotgun primers........
That caution about using FFFg in rifles is fairly common. I don't know the original source but have heard it before. I have heard it as "Don't use in rifles" as "Don't use in calibers larger than .50". The theory is that the finer granulation, as compared to Fg or FFg, exposes more surface area to the flame front and thus the powder burns more quickly and pressure spikes more sharply. Seems that FFFg use in smoothbores is not subject to the same caution...at least I have not read about that. The most I have read (and done) is to reduce charges by 10% from FFg.
Quote
But what would happen if you mistakenly loaded a max charge of smokeless in place of BP or its equivalent. So while we maybe able to say ; who would ever do that .
I am trying to envision a scenario in which such a thing could happen "mistakenly". I cannot imagine circumstances under which such a mistake could be made. I can imagine someone doing such a thing out of ignorance of the consequences but that is not the same thing as mistakenly loading as described. If I were at the range or hunting, I would have to be carrying a flask of smokeless propellant along with my BP. I'd have to have filled that flask at home.
Duplexing....the Lyman Cast Bullet manual has quite a few loads that are duplexed. Paul Matthews in his books about BPCRs frequently mentions duplex loads. If I want to use a sub powder like Pyrodex or 777 in my flint guns, I have to duplex with BP to kick start. Pete
Last edited by PeteD; 06/09/11.
To be on the wire is life. The rest is waiting. Karl Wallenda
While I would agree with 3F having more surface area , thus a quicker burn , faster spike ��. The rest makes 0 sense Your most accurate load for a given rifle is still going to be in a given pressure range . By reducing the 3F load , what your doing is dropping the pressure closer to what 2F would provide .
the duplexing i was speaking of Pete , isnt duplexing Bp or the Synthetics . what i was getting at is duplexing BP with smokeless. As to someone mistakenly loading that much smokeless. We can call it ignorance or what ever word we want to use . Its still comes back to being a mistake . A couple years ago , at our local range we had a fella show up with his son , an old Jukar rifle and a old can of red dot . Said the gun was his dads and he wanted to show his son how to shoot it . Toney Roberts who owns Mountain Top Trading , up in N Idaho , often places what was a very nice smoothbore in front of his trade tent . He loaned it to a fella who somehow managed to load the thing with smokeless . The gun is now the most wicked looking piece of metal you ever saw
Speaking for myself , nothing , absolutely nothing surprises me anymore . The number of people walking around with out a working brain cell . Simply is un countable
The rest makes 0 sense Your most accurate load for a given rifle is still going to be in a given pressure range . By reducing the 3F load , what your doing is dropping the pressure closer to what 2F would provide .
I didn't say that it made sense.....just reporting the rationale as I have heard it. As I understand it, the pressure profile is a different curve than, let's say FFg. Narrower, I suppose. The peak is arrived at more quickly. I am guessing that it would be easier to get into an overpressure excursion. Assuming the same weight powder charge, let's say 90 grains, that 90 of FFFg is going to produce more pressure (or is it the same pressure more quickly?) than an equivalent load of FFg assuming that the same weight projectile is used. The duplexing of BP with smokeless is what I was referring to in the Lyman book and in the Matthews books. A typical entry in Lyman - 50/90 Sharps: 498 grain cast bullet, 7.1 grains of SR4759 and 63 grains of FFg (Max load). The rule of thumb is 10% of the total weight of the charge is smokeless. Pete
To be on the wire is life. The rest is waiting. Karl Wallenda
There is no such thing as a unsafe muzzleloader, its all in what an how you put it in, 80 gr of 2fg or 3fg will kill deer out to 125 yards fast all day long with ever bullet u use sabot,round ball, maxi, buffalo bullet
understood pete your just passing on info . no issue also as i understand it that would be correct concernig 3F . but i do not belive this to be critical
while this may be true a) is a cased bullet b) the guns reciever is of a complete diffrent design
your not dealing with a drum bolster or a snail bolster with a cleanout or for that mater a nipple which is derectly subject to the pressures of the bore
There is no such thing as a unsafe muzzleloader, its all in what an how you put it in, 80 gr of 2fg or 3fg will kill deer out to 125 yards fast all day long with ever bullet u use sabot,round ball, maxi, buffalo bullet
Even light loads can be dangerous in the spanish made muzzleloaders.
1st Special Operations Wing 1975-1983 919th Special Operations Wing 1983-1985 1993-1994
"Manus haec inimica tyrannis / Ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem" ~Algernon Sidney~
There is no such thing as a unsafe muzzleloader, its all in what an how you put it in, 80 gr of 2fg or 3fg will kill deer out to 125 yards fast all day long with ever bullet u use sabot,round ball, maxi, buffalo bullet
I am light in the loafers and can be dangerous to to other hunters when out hunting
Fixed it for you, I would like CVA to sue you and Wakeman for Libel
Fixed it for you, I would like CVA to sue you and Wakeman for Libel
dont forget Traditions . they could join CVA . not to mention with the seemingly over whelming . Maybe even the Spanish firearms industry could get involved and do a class action . Folks like Aguirre y Aranzabal (AyA), Arrieta y Cia, Pedro Arrizabalaga, Armas Garbi, Ardessa and Grulla Armas Maybe we could even get Winchester to dance into the mix and join a class action
im sure folks would even chip in little money to get that started . I don�t have much but I would dump a 20.00 in for the cause
Fixed it for you, I would like CVA to sue you and Wakeman for Libel
dont forget Traditions . they could join CVA . not to mention with the seemingly over whelming . Maybe even the Spanish firearms industry could get involved and do a class action . Folks like Aguirre y Aranzabal (AyA), Arrieta y Cia, Pedro Arrizabalaga, Armas Garbi, Ardessa and Grulla Armas Maybe we could even get Winchester to dance into the mix and join a class action
im sure folks would even chip in little money to get that started . I don�t have much but I would dump a 20.00 in for the cause
He claimed he could easily kill an African lion with his 30-06 . We will raise funds for that if he promises to use the 700 and that ammo on his lion hunt.
Swampy, spanish muzzleloader are safe if you use them accordingly. Even the best american made is destroyed when you do wrong. Just to remind you, most of the firearms used in Cowboy Action Shooting are italian (except Rugers and some Shiloh rifle or some original) do you see them explode often... The same thing in muzzle loading international comp where some spanish began to show up. In Europe, even black powders are controlled by proof house and ours are at least as good as yours in US of A. Most of the problem with firearms come from bad utilisation or misunderstanding by users...It's why (and dumb lawyers too) you're obliged in the USA to write such crazy sentences on the barrel of firearm: read the instruction manual before use. Tradition, CVA or Lyman (no they are not US made)are safe and tough enough if you don't try to make them 300Bee...I used a Lyman in Quebec when living there and in France to (bought from Midway Germany)without problem. I refer my loading stuff to Lyman Blackpowder handloading manuel and i'm happy like that. Dom
Experience is a lantern, carried in our back, only lightening already walked path. (Confucius)
i think it was nef that used a press in style bushing. They stopped making it pretty quickly due to them popping out and hitting the shooter in the face.
Swampman, today CVA barrels are made by Bergara which comply to the Euro proof house ( to be sold in Europe all the Dikar barrels were proofed). Bergara is a modern barrel making plant that was put in activity by US specialists from Shilen (if i recall well). The Bergara booth in the IWA show in Nurnberg is managed by more US citizens than spanish ones. The Bergara plant is modern and efficient. They use good steel as good as yours in the US and quality is serious. So the Dikar adventure is behind CVA. Note they recalled some serie of muzzleloader that were "risky". Go to Bergara web site you'll find good infos. I maintain as most specialists and independant proof testing units that 99% of problems with muzzle loaders come from misuse or misunderstanding of loading and care procedure. Then as all man made products you can have a failure sometime.... Dom
Experience is a lantern, carried in our back, only lightening already walked path. (Confucius)
Swampy i'm not so fluent in english it's may be why you don't understand what i wrote: Dikar barrels for Europe were ALL proofed. Read the Wakeman report it's written and it must go like that in EEC. Dom
All the APEX barrels are Bergara's, go to Bergara web site.
Experience is a lantern, carried in our back, only lightening already walked path. (Confucius)
Swampy i'm not so fluent in english it's may be why you don't understand what i wrote: Dikar barrels for Europe were ALL proofed. Read the Wakeman report it's written and it must go like that in EEC. Dom
All the APEX barrels are Bergara's, go to Bergara web site.
Marseille,
Your information in your previous post is correct, please accept our apologies for Swampy not accepting your information as accurate. Please do not judge us all here for "Swampys" arguements on this forum. He is a problem, but we would be glad to give him a one way ticket to France or any where for that matter.
no where near the amount of remingtons that have gone up in smoke.
Misuse is just that. You take a couple red necks, get a couple beers into them, they buy a muzzle loader, dunk it into a creek and try to see if it will still fire, isnt the products fault if it explodes.
From what I have seen even those that failed � minus the recall � failed do to improper loading and poor maintenance. Lets remember that the recall by CVA was also voluntary . They saw a potential for an issue and pulled the guns . No different then 90% of the recalls on automobiles that we all hear about every day .
Most times even those are derived from someone having an issue . . Sometimes the result is that folks create issues to collect from what they see as deep pockets. How many of those cases happen we just don�t know . But as with the case of automobiles, we do know that it does happen
The other thing ,is that IMO , TB purposefully did not maintain the savage he blew . Was it part of his tests ??? I don�t know and don�t care . If truth were fully known RW , imo may also fall under this same category . Detailed photos like those shown of TB�s gun would be needed , as well as truthful descriptions of what happened . But that�s never going to happen in either case . As to why no lawsuit . This is just my opinion but the biggest is money . Has all the Bla , Bla effected CVA sales . No not really . Until that actually happens and only if the cause can be traced directly to RW or the likes of swampman here , there isn�t IMO any real reason to sue . No mater how much many of us would like to see that happen
or stop thinking anyone is addressing you or wants to hear your continual Bla bla bla . So you know and to make it clear , in this case I am addressing you . If you would actually watch the video , you would see that every one of the guns were purposeful blow up
Mark's still on a jihad to prove to us and Rick that 24HCF needs a moderator because, in his mind, we're too unstructured, deregulated, and "mean" to some people.
So, he simply trolls his absolutist BS on several issues.
He's admitted as much, said he'd quit, gave ihis word to Rick on that, and crawfished on his word damned near immediately.
He does have some good info, but chooses to do this crap rather than anything useful.
That he does, and that it continues, says much on many levels, IMHO.
He does have some good info, but chooses to do this crap rather than anything useful
I know he does as i have read the info on other forums that i moderate ,. He also doesn�t act the way he does here . If he did I would bann his sorry A$$
As for your word, Mark... do you really want me to go back and find the post YOU made in that regard? You're already lying, trolling, and doing exactly what you told Rick you'd not do. Do you really need to be shown to be dishonest?
He does have some good info, but chooses to do this crap rather than anything useful
I know he does as i have read the info on other forums that i moderate ,. He also doesn�t act the way he does here . If he did I would bann his sorry A$$
BTW - you just pegged it, squarely.
He wants Rick to institute moderators (he's said so), and thinks by acting like this he'll eventually either get that, or kill the forum. Of course, he'd want to be one of those moderators, so what does that really say?
As for your word, Mark... do you really want me to go back and find the post YOU made in that regard? You're already lying, trolling, and doing exactly what you told Rick you'd not do. Do you really need to be shown to be dishonest?
Thats because im a moderator on GBO Anything stupid he says get deleted. The mods and admins have been talking about banning him since 2 years ago.
As for your word, Mark... do you really want me to go back and find the post YOU made in that regard? You're already lying, trolling, and doing exactly what you told Rick you'd not do. Do you really need to be shown to be dishonest?
Thats because im a moderator on GBO Anything stupid he says get deleted. The mods and admins have been talking about banning him since 2 years ago.
I didn't give my word, (whatever that means.) I gave up on the campaign as I told Rick I would. Now I'm just making sure the truth is told.
I've not been posting here that long, but from what I can tell, you aren't making sure "the truth" is told. That thread where the guy clearly stated he didn't want a Prostaff and you kept recommending it over and over like it was the best scope out there made me 100% certain of this. While I have used a Prostaff quite a bit, and it's a good scope for the $100 price range you can get them on sale or used for, it doesn't have great glass or really anything else great for that matter. There are a ton of of scopes in the $2-300 range that are quite a bit better.
Infact, I've seen you spread BS about how Remington doesn't have the problems that they clearly do. Where is your proof that they don't have these problems?
I've seen you spread rumours about spanish muzzle loaders being unsafe? Where is your proof. I can't say you are right or wrong there as I don't know the truth, which is why I started a thread about it, but so far everything I've read is pointing to you being full of it. So where is your proof here?
Seems that you like to tell us all a bunch of bs and claim it's the truth, but I've yet to see you provide facts for any claim you've made.
Are we really supposed to take a guy seriously that thinks a Nikon Prostaff is a great scope, or that his Remington 700 ML that's a super outdated design and not a great one at that is the best? I think we can all come to our own conclusions here.
That being said, if you can provide proof or facts I will gladly believe you, and apologize to you, but until then why do you keep insisting on telling people stuff that you have no idea about?
He does have some good info, but chooses to do this crap rather than anything useful
I know he does as i have read the info on other forums that i moderate ,. He also doesn�t act the way he does here . If he did I would bann his sorry A$$
I too have ran several forums in my day, and I do not understand at all why the admin doesn't ban him from here. I've only been posting on here a short time and It seems like every post he makes is full of it giving people bad information.
Ban me for telling the truth? Why are you so afraid of the truth?
You're a liar, a fraud, a troll, and a disgrace to the knowledge you actually do have.
Damned sad, really.
The only place you pull this schit, is here, simply because Rick allows you to be an ass. Everywhere else, you're different, because idiocy is not tolerated.
So it's not ok for me to act like you and the rest?
If you STARTED acting like other folks here, it'd be more akin to the way you act elsewhere.
I.e., not espousing utter BS, not trolling on any/every thread you think you can get a rise with your standard crap, not outright lying, not talking about schit you haven't a clue about.
Basically, quit doing (again) what you told Rick you'd quit doing before.
The schit's old, Mark. And, you're better than that. As your track record here before you lost your f'kin' mind and your track record elsewhere shows.
Other than an occasional tounge in cheek post, I truly believe everything I post to be factual. I don't post on matters which I have no experience. I already quit doing what I told Rick I'd quit doing.
1st Special Operations Wing 1975-1983 919th Special Operations Wing 1983-1985 1993-1994
"Manus haec inimica tyrannis / Ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem" ~Algernon Sidney~
Other than an occasional tounge in cheek post, I truly believe everything I post to be factual. I don't post on matters which I have no experience. I already quit doing what I told Rick I'd quit doing.
Either you are stupid to an unbelievable degree (and per evidence elsewhere, you aren't), or that's laughable on it's face.
Ban me for telling the truth? Why are you so afraid of the truth?
So where are the facts to back up the truth? I'd really love to see you prove me wrong, but so far I've seen you just keep posting that you are telling the truth without being able to provide any evidence. Others however, can provide evidence to back up their side of things.
Other than an occasional tounge in cheek post, I truly believe everything I post to be factual. I don't post on matters which I have no experience. I already quit doing what I told Rick I'd quit doing.
If you really believe half of the stuff you post I really feel sorry for you.
So are you going to provide any proof to back up anything you say?
What exactly should I believe btw? Should I sell off my nice scopes and get a Prostaff so that I can have a ton of chromatic aberration and crappy turrets?
Before you ask, yes, I had a Prostaff, so I know how they are. They are very good for the $100 you can get them on sale for now, and they are durable, but that's about it. They aren't anywhere near the quality of several of the scopes you can get in the $200 range.
Or should I buy a new Remington so that I can more than likely have problems with it? Every single person I know that's bought a Remington in the last 4 years has had to have a gunsmith work on it right out of the box, as they have all had issues. That's not such a good track record. Remington used to make stuff that anyone would be proud to have their name on, now they basically just make crap.
Cant say about Graybeards . On the TMA i can tell you as a Founder that the only people who have the power to Bann is the BoD by vote . but Mods can lock people down , pending review . Our rules in fact do not allow the manor that a lot of things are allowed to be done in , here. So no he doesn�t act that way there
Mark posts over on TradRag at times . I am also the moderator for the traditional Muzzleloading forum there and cannot remember having any issue with Mark . have there been times we disagreed , yep . but i would have to say that far more , i agree. when that happens i say so . But here . I think he has clearly shown , that he has no purpose other then to troll and raise his thread count . Ill also be frank , I have and will continue to ask the powders that be to remove him . I believe that he is a potential danger to new folks . I also believe that the time may come when his being aloud to continue un checked , very well may become a liability to this forum internally and maybe legally at some time . He also has become such a constant irritation to the more knowledgeable that people cant even help those with questions . For in short order the thread turns into something like this one .
As I said in another thread . Its almost like given topic have to be about him . Every post has to be addressing him and as such needs his reply , comment or opinion. It doesn�t help to block him because in the end you would have to block everyone else .
Sad deal really because his only real value IMO is to raise the number of hit�s the web site gets
we dont need a moderator . what we need is moderation of the situation concerning the removal of a Troll . Of which we seem to have only one
Quote
I care if folks get injured or not. That's why I post the facts.
no you dont . if you did you wouldnt be so one sided in you oppenion . which is frankly all you post .
but lets try and get back on track here . im going to post a few of the Remington lawsuits for injury and or death . following those ill post a link to Remington's oppenion on the subject . try to look past this being about centerfire and try to relate the points to how it pertains to muzzleloading
On November 14, 1982, Mike Lewy went deer hunting on the family land where he and his parents, Evelyn and Jack Lewy, lived. He returned home around noon and entered his basement living quarters, placing his loaded Remington Model 700 bolt-action center fire 30.06 rifle (M700) on a couch. Prior to going to bed at around 10:30 that evening, Mike remembered the loaded rifle and decided to unload it. Mike pointed the rifle toward the ceiling and proceeded to unload it. The design of the rifle required the safety to be moved to the fire position in order to lift the bolt handle to eject a chambered cartridge. When Mike placed the safety on the fire position the rifle discharged and the bullet penetrated the ceiling striking his mother in the upper left leg while she was seated in a living room chair. Mrs. Lewy required hospitalization for slightly more than a month, but she has now apparently recovered from the accident.
Mrs. Lewy and her husband filed suit against Remington Arms and the K-Mart Corporation for damages, alleging three separate theories of liability: strict liability -- design defect, strict liability -- failure to warn, and negligent failure to warn. The Lewys alleged two design defects: 1) the bolt lock feature which required the rifle to be in the fire position when unloading and 2) the fire control mechanism which is susceptible to firing on release of the safety (FSR). Evelyn Lewy claimed damages for personal injuries and Jack Lewy claimed damages for loss of consortium. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the Lewys on all three theories of liability. Evelyn Lewy was awarded $ 20,000 in compensatory damages and $ 400,000 in punitive damages while Jack Lewy was not awarded monetary damages.
now lets take a look at Remington�s side . which by the way , in so many words once again points the shooter error . as you watch this video keep in mind these things . improper modification and improper maintenance. While this concerning the Walker trigger . I would point out that the improper maintenance theory also applies to muzzle loading regardless of the type of failure .
Also very same argument that Remington is making concerning the numbers of guns sold , also is valid IMO concerning CVA and the many other companies using Spanish products . IE the numbers of lawsuits vs. the number of sales .
As such , I would like to try and pull this topic back on track . So when you watch this video of Remington�s side of the story , try to keep in mind how this shooter error and poor maintenance issue applies to muzzle loading . Be it Spanish made , US made , Italian made . Modern or traditional. My hope is that people will then realize why it is that the vast amount of time ANY failure of a firearm can be traced to shooter error . doesn�t mater if its RW , TB or Joe Snuffy ,who has the issue . All to often what seems to be fact , is only fact if the story is twisted so as to produce a fact that simply isn�t there
All that is a moot point. Anytime the subject of dangerous muzzleloaders comes up you guys won't to change the subject to something else. That's why I know I'm right.
1st Special Operations Wing 1975-1983 919th Special Operations Wing 1983-1985 1993-1994
"Manus haec inimica tyrannis / Ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem" ~Algernon Sidney~
All that is a moot point. Anytime the subject of dangerous muzzleloaders comes up you guys won't to change the subject to something else. That's why I know I'm right.
the only person here wanting to change the subject , is you how about you do this . exsplain for all the good people here just how its a moot point . present some factual evidence here and we will go over it . prove your point past your opinion . thats what people want to see . thats what we want to read not just your continued bla bla and one liners . show us what forms your opinions . ill give you all day to do that as im out to the range for a days shooting . i seriously hope to read something of value from you tomorrow. If not , then stop posting
I care if folks get injured or not. That's why I post the facts.
Like the time you took it upon yourself to advise a guy on elk bullets, never having shot an elk?
A guy going on possibly his last elk hunt no less.
Then proceeded to say you'd killed hundreds of elk, or some such nonsense.
I said it then, and I'll say it again, someone should put their foot square in your ass for crap like that. Giving bad advice to a guy going on his last elk hunt is about as low as one can get.
I care if folks get injured or not. That's why I post the facts.
Like the time you took it upon yourself to advise a guy on elk bullets, never having shot an elk?
A guy going on possibly his last elk hunt no less.
Then proceeded to say you'd killed hundreds of elk, or some such nonsense.
I said it then, and I'll say it again, someone should put their foot square in your ass for crap like that. Giving bad advice to a guy going on his last elk hunt is about as low as one can get.
But you'll probably go lower.
He is here to disrupt, adds nothing of value absolutely nothing and Rick sits by and does not ban him. I guess Rick likes Carnivals.
The truth [bleep] is you cannot start a thread anywhere on this site without getting your credibility questioned, you are a standing joke. All you can do is instigate or attempt to instigate other posts . Yes I am calling for you to be banned. You are more deserving of that honor then anyone that has been banned before you. You have no Honor,Values,Integrity nothing.
nope sorry . if we apply the very same reasoning that your beloved Remington has applied with the walker trigger Next is that the subject again comes from RW, ,,,,,,,,,,,who else So again if we look to the Remington walker trigger issue . Can we say RW is any different then those who Remington claims to be less then truthful because their pay is derived from the benefits of the issue.
So we start with nice fancy images of breech plugs . But again following the same lines Remington�s using in their rebuttal, where is the documentation for the rifle the plug was removed from . What was the condition of the rifle it came out of . Who pulled the plug . Was it done correctly . Was it ever reinstalled and thus done incorrectly . All these thing we don�t know and RW makes sure to admit or IMO stay vague so as to support his opinion.
Then reading on more , RW goes on to bash CVA for producing their rifles out of the US , at a lower production costs .. So what, that�s the way the largest % of US business works . Does anyone here think the parts in US made vehicles are made here in the US . Hell if you don�t take the time to check Vin numbers , the whole vehicle may be made outside the US .
Then he goes on to tout the US barrel industry . But conveniently omit that here in the US SAAMI standards are strictly voluntary . That barrels producers here most commonly do batch testing. . He mentions GM . Yet he does not mention issues that company has had or for that mater that others have had . He then brings up extruded barrel . But no mention that extruded barrels were also sold by US makers for a very long time . Remington�s muzzle loading rifles marketed in the 70�s , carried extruded barrels . So did Browning , Ithaca . Douglas barrels were also for a very long time , extruded . I find it also interesting that he drops a line qualifying his choice of rifle because the gun is made by a company that also make center fire rifles . So once again we are to accept that this means they are safe . Never mind these very companies also have a long line of lawsuits against them . Remington being one
He then starts into the issue with proof testing . Once again though without an consideration that we here in the US are basically being ask to Trust that a US company has complied with a given standard with nothing more then their word .
He closes with a photo of a destroyed rifle. But again we are ask to take his word and the word of the owner , as to what happen and why .
I would again point out that the who article that you have posted is the very same thing Remington is fighting . The very same points Remington is making in the video applies here . But in this case you are accepting what RW is saying , while at the same time taking the opposing stance concerning Remington . I cant say there is anything wrong with that . Its your opinion and your welcome to it . But that opinion is no more fact then the opinion of those claiming the Remington 700 walker trigger is un safe . Lets not forget they also have not only deaths but injuries to back up their stance . So once again what you have done is provide a link , to another persons opinion. At least RW somewhat backs his opinion up . However once a person realizes that his lively hood is derived and benefits from that opinion, it then becomes suspect . The real odd thing for me is this . We are ask to accept what RW says . Yet at the same time being ask to not accept the findings from a whole lot of others to disagree . Never mind those people are actual shooters , testers . Not Johnny come lately writers . Strikes me as the very same thing as watching the nightly news telling us how the economy is improving . When in fact its very clear that its going the other way
if he acted like this in person, im afraid i'd have to slug him in the jaw. And im not usually a violet person to be honest. Just have the hopes that the jar would knock some sense into crap that god put between his ears.
if he acted like this in person, im afraid i'd have to slug him in the jaw. And im not usually a violet person to be honest. Just have the hopes that the jar would knock some sense into crap that god put between his ears.
He is not worth it. He is a chitt stirrer and likes nothing better then doing what he does best.
Well guys swamp gas is the same at graybeard. I don't know how he avoids being banned there either. When we push him in the corner he'll go underground but he never really goes away. Or listens to reason. He's dumb as a fencepost. And flaunts it. I wish you guys luck with him.
![[Linked Image]](http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y242/captchee/fega20small_zps0913cc7b.jpg)
go lightly with that one, i got a flesh wound from it 
Hes a troll just like you swampy.
Anything stupid he says get deleted. The mods and admins have been talking about banning him since 2 years ago.