It's hype - well, sort of.
If you break it down, the parts are - by themselves, factual - but the overall premise of a 300 yard *hunting* muzzleloader for Joe Average is a far stretch. It's easy for "Joe" to overlook the fact that for such feats, one must be intimately familiar with one's trajectory AND THE RANGE OF THE TARGET.
All this stuff is easy enough to repeat on a firing range (long-range target shooters do it all the time), but in field conditions, above average knowledge, skill, and patience are required. Of course - one could be helped by the use of an electronic range finder. But remember - even Mr. Epp admits to field accuracy of THREE TIMES his bench rest figures. That means the BEST he can count on at 300yds in the field is 9" groups. How does that compare with the old "paper plate" standard? Pretty poorly, if you ask me - and we haven't even discussed the issue of being able to repeat this performance over and over without fail. And the article doesn't even touch on the inaccuracies of range estimation, unkown wind velocities, and movement of targets' effects on field accuracy.
Nevertheless, it's an idea that interests me. While I have no expectation of ever being able to make 300yd shots with my .50cal Knight Wolverine, I have experimented with long-range loadings in the PR bullet. For me (and I have fairly good eyes), anything over about 150yds requires a scope. So this type of hunting - in Idaho, at least - must be done outside of muzzleloader seasons. And that is as it should be.
So what's the point? Well, for me, it's the possibility of using the same gun for all hunting. It will still always be limiting in the centerfire seasons (it will NEVER approach the capabilities of my .300 mag - which I sold) - but for me, it is about hunting.
And, for the record, I am against making ultra-PBR shots on game with any weapon (i.e. no "holdover"). Those kind of shots are fine for paper targets, and even fine for military snipers - but they have no place in big game hunting, IMO.
-FreeMe
