Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Muzzleloaders My New Sidekick

I got the 2-7X32 Nikon Prostaff mounted in some Weaver rings that were in my parts box. I need to get a Metrics Unlimited breech plug.

I managed to get my Sidekick to the range today and get off a few shots before it started pouring down rain. These 3 were taken at 50 yards. I had 2" of fast running water under the bench when I took these shots at 50 yards. 90 grains of BH209, Winchester primers, Metrics Unlimited breechplug, T/C 240 Grain Cheap Shots. Recoil was very moderate, clean-up was about like cleaning a regular hunting rifle and I used Hoppes #9.

It's a shame Remington doesn't bring this one back. We have almost nothing to choose from now.

Right, the choices are so meager I'm thinking of giving up on muzzleloading altogether.

These are guns that should be with us. Remington realy don't know what they have in the H&R brand guns .Better then there single shot every thought of being.

Doc

There are still a few used guns worth owning. I'm stuck with those right now. Maybe Knight will come back....

Knight Rifles lost all its market share in the domestic ML market. It was not worth the investment or risk to invest to revitalize a dying company.

Doc

Some might say the same thing about T/C.

With a 53% market share in the U.S. they can say it but it will not be factual. CVA has the next largest market share with the balance in the smaller companies.

Doc

Yeah, with no good choices left these days, I'm surprised anyone can even kill a game animal with these new rifles.

Personally, I wish Remington would bring back its bolt-action muzzleloader--now there was an idea who's time had come--a bolt-action muzzleloader.

Smokey,

You have a way with words.

Doc

Remington 700ML is the best. T/C has been losing money hand over fist.....CVA will get rid of them too.

T/C is losing money hand-over fist?

Well, I don't know about that but at least their rifles are still in production. I guess the 700ML would be too, if people ever bought 'em.

I bet the "bolt action" makes 'em faster to re-load, huh?

Not really faster but very accurate and so easy to find a load for.

Myself, I'm waiting for someone to bring out a lever action muzzleloader.

no more difficult then a bolt action set up smokepole .
back in the 70s i built one from a marlin 30.30 frame

In fact wasn�t there someone just a few years back that was marketing a rifle that looked like a lever action but wasn�t a functional action ???

past that . remember TC isn�t TC anymore TC is just a name . S&W now makes TC

The T/C Scout looked a little like a lever action. I do remember the one you're talking about, but I don't remember who made it.

Actually, I have a hard time seeing how a bolt or a lever serves a useful purpose on a muzzleloader.

The bolt guns are more accurate. The lever makes no sense.

Ah, the bolt on a muzzleloader makes it more accurate, does it?

That makes a whole lot of sense. Would you care to explain how a bolt makes a muzzleloader more accurate?

both carry a bolt . be they lever of bolt action
Do they do anything really different then say a hammer type action .
Well no not really when it comes to a muzzle loading application
Unless you consider an added amount of safety , considering how the bolts lock up .
But even in that area both are very close

As for usefulness . Well it would be about as useful as a break open or a bolt action .
No real difference in loading or priming .
All the lever does in a muzzle loading application is serve as a way to action the bolt and thus cock the firing pin .
And one could produce either an exposed ignition or closed , by simple modification of the bolt itself
The thing though is it really comes down to consumer mindset and cost of production .
a lot more folks relate to a bolt action configuration . IR the Remington 700 type being the most common .

As to accuracy . you will have to explain to me how you conclude a bolt action is more accurate then a lever action?
Is my 30.30 Winchester or marlin as accurate at 300 yards as say my 65X55 Swed ? No . but that has nothing to do with the action

Now I would be the very first to admit I know less them many here when it comes to modern marketed muzzle loading rifles .
But I honestly think the decline of folks are seeing is very much like the decline in traditional muzzleloader companies in the lat 1970�s-early 80�s
Production costs are on the rise .
Manufactures are producing a product with high liability .
The consumer market isn�t willing to pay much more then is being charged now .
Top that of with no real resale value .

Beating as much of the above as one can and you have a better chance of staying in business.
that�s why the importers like CVA , Traditions , Lyman , will stay around while companies like Knight , White , close up while others like TC an Savage end up against the ropes .

The money isn�t in the guns . Its in all the other items that come along . IE new bullets , powders and such . But even with them , the money tapers away . But as long as they keep coming out with something new that has a low production cost . Yet is capable of carrying a high retail price . That market will stay fluid

Aw, c'mon cap, I wanna hear him explain why a bolt action muzzleloader is "more accurate."

Fixed barrel.....much faster lock time.

Much faster than what?

Only the Savage is faster. Just the fact that it's a Remington makes it better than the rest.

OK, quote the lock times for the Remington and others.

Google must be slow this morning.




Actually, that's incorrect since remington no longer makes them, you should use past tense.

Telling that they were discontinued.

do what ????
what are you talking about
are you saying a lever action berrel is fixed to the reciever in a diffrent way then a bolt action?

that some how the firing pin in a lever action travels noticably slower then the pin in a bolt action ?

now i could see miliseconds slower in the case of say a a winchester 64 . but i seriously doubt its enough slower that you or anyone else would ever be effected by it

it think he is googling oppenions again Smokepole




but again this doesnt hold true for all lever actions and I suspect any acuracy issues has far more to do with bullet preformance and shooter . then it does with the type of action

The most successful new muzzleloading rifle launch was the T/C "Omega" rifle, followed by the Encore pro hunter in numbers of units sold.

Once the Omera hit the market the ML "Bolt action" was to die a slow death. The demise of the Bolt action ML was not due to the lock time on the trigger or the accuracy of the barrel. Closed drop lever breech designs provided acceptable accuracy and a much easier to clean ML rifle platform. (bingo)

The fact that the bolt action Remington 700 ML was discontinued long ago and Knight rifles new rifle products could not complete is evidence to the evolution to the drop lever breech designs on ML rifles.

The Rem. 700 ML followed the rest of the dinosaurs.

Doc

Spot on analysis

I think you're wrong about that.

Doc, I agree with all that, but IMHO, another reason all of the modern muzzleloaders with long actions like the bolt action bit the dust was that for practical purposes all the actions accomplish is to add length and weight with absolutely no benefit in return. If your hunting consists of walking 200 yards to a tree stand, not such a big deal but if you need to cover a lot of ground, especially in the mountains, weight matters. Unless you're a guy like captchee who totes long-barreled traditionsl rifles and wool blankets for a bedroll, that is.

That's why I like my Triumph.

yep granted .
however i would point that even thought a long abarrel . if the rifle is ballanced properly , you dont really notice the diffrence
i did a quick google and see that the Omaga wieghs in at 7 lbs. i sure would have thought it would have been less then that
so i would then have to ask , how does it ballance .
is it nutral or forward ?

i would dare to guess probably rather nose heavy . forward

my Hershel wieghs in at just a tad over 7lbs and carries a 42 inch 54 cal iron barrel .
it ballances exsactly 4 fingers in front of the lock .
i can tell you carring it is a dream be i craddles , one handed or over the shoulder .
infact i would rather carry it over a long distance , then i would my 65x55 without a sling

Savage CEO Ron Coburn, who hunts with a 10ML himself, promises that every new Savage 10ML-II is capable of 1-1/2 inch accuracy at 100 yards,


1 1/2" groups? Hell my $188 cva wolf does that, no it does better than that.

my cva hunterbolt does 1.5" groups with 90gr BH209 and a 245gr powerbelt and it doesnt cost an arm and a leg.

accu trigger is funny. My brother in law was shooting his 22250 savage 2 days ago and it kept going click, click, bang, click, bang.

Oh, so now Randy Wakeman is the authority we're all quoting?

How about this gem off his website, it's his review of the "bolt action" wonder gun:

""Unfortunately, the 700 ML / MLS rifles have some serious flaws. As supplied, the trigger varies from over 6 lbs. to in well in excess of 7 lbs. as measured by my trigger pull gauge.

The buttstock is hollow, which helps to explain the rifle's muzzle heavy feel. The ramrod is poorly designed and painful to use. Worse yet, the barrel can easily be lifted away from the flimsy plastic forearm no matter how tightly the lug screws are tightened.

The hex-head bolt stop screw on the tested model is fussy. Finger-tight, the bolt falls right out. Tightened firmly with the supplied wrench, the bolt is locked in place and does not move at all.

The instruction manual suggests that you stick a coin in a vise to disassemble the bolt. A coin, and a vise to hold the coin, is not included in the supplied tools. These Remington muzzleloading rifles are the only ones I have seen that do not come with all tools necessary for disassembly. The front trigger guard screw is a very small hex-head, much smaller than the other two 5/32" Allen head stock screws. To remove the barreled action for a though cleaning you'll have to hunt for a wrench, as well as your vise.

The 3-way ignition (#11 caps, musket caps, and 209 primers) breechplug comes with a 209 shotshell primer nipple installed. Unfortunately, the blow back with 209 primers is fierce, the worst I have encountered. This is due to large vents that surround the primer. And the 209 primers stick in the 700ML after virtually every shot. Included with your new Remington is a green handled primer pick, so you can pry out the spent primers.

The supplied weather shroud is a tube that fits over the end of the bolt, then ensconces the primer nipple. Currently, the Remington WebSite states "NOTE: The Model 700 ML Weather Shroud is not intended for use with 209 primers." This information has not yet filtered into the instruction manual (!), but it is good advice. Firing the rifle with the weather shroud in place directs most to the gas right into your face. If you must shoot a Remington 700ML / MLS with the weather shroud in place, the #11 cap ignition is the least painful option.

A 700 MLS was test fired for this article. With the feel of flaming sand impregnating itself into my face, this gun truly is a pain to shoot. It kicks like a mule, is decidedly muzzle heavy, and the barreled action is poorly fitted to the molded stock.

In a recent widely distributed article I suggested that the prospective muzzleloading buyer was better off looking to a true black powder company to fulfill their needs. Remington has confirmed the veracity of that suggestion. Remington has apparently left the muzzleloading business, no longer participated in NMLRA events in 2004, and has no production scheduled for their 700ML in 2005.""


Yep, I gotta agree with you swampy, Wakeman sure knows his stuff!!!!

Wakeman's article is outdated. You should know that. There's a muzzleloader that beats both the Remington and the Savage in ignition time. Get a clue.

Mine's A Triumph, Cap, and I really like the way it handles and balances. I'll weigh it and get back to ya.

Bigblock,

I have no doubt to your CVA groups. I have the highest respect and admiration for Ron Coburn of Savage. Ron took a bankrupt gun company
and turned it into a very profitable and viable gun manufacturer. I would rather have a Savage centerfire rifle than any Remington.

OPPS...here comes Swampy on my butt.

Doc

pay him enough and i ll bet he would say that a Jukar was the best gun on the market .

is that also where you got the bullets dont transfer energy oppenion swampman




thanks . could you tell me where she ballances as well ?

You're full of [bleep].

T/Cs are ok I just wish they didn't bore them so tight you have to hunt down special projectiles and sabots that will fit down the barrel. At least a T/C is safe to shoot.

hey i just realized something funny!!

swampy likes randy wakeman but wakeman calls the rem 700 a piece of junk LMAO!!

Too bad Sako doesn't make muzzleloaders their locktime is 1/2 that of a Remington 700. I like the lock times on TC's and CVA's just fine and I GET 1" groups easily with either and I use a Nikon BDC scope with the rice grain reticle. Owned a 700 muzzleloader once , its probably serving its purpose better as a trotline sinker these days.

Right now the Savage has them all beat for accuracy, safety, and looks. The 700ML was the easiest to work up a load for and next to the Savage the strongest muzzleloader ever built.

The Remington 700ML shoots about everything including patched round balls really well.

The T/C have issues and the spanish muzzleloaders are dangerous.

That's because on any modern muzzleloader, "lock time" is waaaaaay down the list of factors that affect accuracy.

No it's just as important with a muzzleloader as it is with any rifle. That why boltaction muzzleloaders are so accurate.

That's the best you got? Come on swampy, at least go down swinging.

Actually, you're the one that's full of s h i t.

You don't know what you're talking about, as far as the Savage and Remington MLs having the fastest ignition times of any muzzleloader.

And you don't know what you're talking about when you say "lock time" makes a difference, practically-speaking, in the accuracy of modern rifles.

But still you spout.

Since you don't have a clue, I'll throw you a couple. If you think a "bolt action" was innovative for ignition, think really innovative.

If you think Remington is the top of the heap, think of the muzzleloading rifle brand you like to dump on the most.

And then think about the fact that said company has a rifle with faster ignition than either of the two rifles you say are the fastest of all.

And then go out and buy one of these rifles with the fastest ignition, since ignition time is so important to you.

savages are dangerous

6 lbs., 8.3 oz. And she balances 4 1/2 inches in front of the trigger.

very good , thank you

O.K. I'm convinced, I should just stick with a caplock.

I agree. Go with what suits you best, never a bad idea.

Second strongest ML action ever invented? Really?

I'm thinking that Sharps might have a thing or three to say about that.

You're welcome cap, what's your idea of where a good rifle oughta balance?

The most ignorant statement ever made on the ML forum.

Doc

I think he claims that distinction on several forums.

.

well it depends on your shooting style.
but a neutral balance should be right about center of the forearm where you would naturally carry it one handed .
at this point she shoulders and carries nicely . but can wonder a little in the target hold when shooting off hand .

normally for a rifle i balance neutral to just a tad nose heavy .
Have a little bit of nose down makes a rifle real steady when shooting off hand . But it does have its drawbacks .
IE its slower in the draw and depending on how heavy it can make for a much shorter hold time .
Also if to nose heavy , the rifle feels heavy and bulky in the carry . Thus you end up rather quickly shifting how your carrying the rifle . OR you end up with a sling and carry it shouldered most of the time

Now if you balance is point is to far forward . The butt will drop in the carry . Thus producing the very same carry issues as a gun that�s to nose heavy . The other difference is that while balancing a gun such makes for a very quick draw . It also makes for a sight picture that wants to wander all over hell and back

When I build a rifle I build it for neutral balance regardless of the length of the barrel and for a piece that�s in the 7-8lb range for an adult

On most center fire designs , be they bolt or lever actions , the balance close or near the ejection port . IE they are very butt heavy .
Not any real issue when your shooting from a rest

In all fairness to swampman fellas . Lock time is important in any firearm .
However I don�t believe there is a gun out there . Minus some of the very cheap ,cheap side locks . That would have a lock time slow enough anyone other then a professional shooter , would even know about it
IMO and again this is just my opinion. But a far bigger issue is just plain crappy poor quality trigger setups..

Well, I think if you're talking modern in-lines, the differences in ignition time are even smaller, harder to detect, and less consequential with respect to accuracy and I'd be willing to bet that swampy doesn't even know the lock times for the majority of rifles out there. And if you're going to make any conclusions about how lock time affects accuracy, the actual lock times are only half the equation. Once you have the lock times, then you'd have to run controlled tests to see how varying the lock time affects accuracy.

Or, just talk out your ass as swampy is wont to do.

Trigger, yes, and barrel/crown/twist rate for your projectile and a host of other variables all relegate lock time to the back of the bus as a factor affecting accuracy in modern rifles.

yep and what about powder burn rates and ignition temps ????

what good does it do to have a cast action . but then use a powder that ignights at say ??? 750 deg vs one that ignights at 400 deg ?

again as you say . all are so minute that 99.9 would nto know the diffrence .
but ha since we are on it . shouldnt we include that to the list

All I can say is the most accurate muzzleloaders are boltactions.

I beg to differ with ya on the bolt action

That's right, that's all you can say.

Maybe if you keep repeating it, and click your heels together three times........

I wonder how many state and national champion muzzleloaders shoot "bolt actions?"

They aren't allowed to use boltactions. They are stuck with antiques.

And you'd be wrong.

you mean like Rigby's , Tryon, Gibbs and Whitworth rifles

Last I read the championships only state that the rifle must be a reproduction of an original or antique.
So since your bolt action is actually nothing more then a plunger type ignition .
Which existed late 17th early 18th century .

Why do you think it wasn�t used as a successful long range ignition platform for muzzle loading rifles ????
Was it a conspiracy or something ????. I bet that�s got to be it .

i say you need to put you money where your mouth is and give it a go
build a replica rifle and potition for acceptance .
tell then you have 200 + years of long range muzzleloading history saying your full of BS .
i think you been googling to much on bolt actions and have decided that what your reading about centerfires also pertains to muzzleloading .
but again thats my oppenion . you have yours .

im still waiting for the : so you figured this out on your own post "
that one post had me spitting coffee LMAO










guys . your only going toget one liners or qoutes from reporters like RW fromt his guy . im a thinking its best just to ignore him

I had a REM. 50 cal when the first came out.. Its was very very accurate. Years ago,,Rem 700.s centerfires were one of the most accurate rifles out there, and had the fastest lock time of all the rifles out there. This was one the the reasons it was one of the most accurate rifles. The REM Bolt action muzzy, was somewhat the same design. If you think a hammer gun is faster than a bolt gun,, you guys have a lot to learn.....

Who said a hammer gun is faster than a bolt gun?

OK. Prove it.

i dont think anyone is saying its faster. just that its not less accurate .

i also submit that while slower . it is not slower to the point you or most likly anyone else on this board would notice it unless the gun was not working properly .

we also should remeber that there are guns out there that shoot far better then the person pulling the trigger is capable of shooting

Yeah, like all the guns I own . . .

If it was possible to have 5 hammer guns,with the same bullet,same amount of powder,and same ignition source,and shoot 3-5 shot groups with these guns,,,,,and then,,if possible, which it isnt,,,,retofit the same guns with a bolt actions, and with the same loads,ect..im think you would get some better groups....not much better, but enough to see the faster lock time of the bolts actions will make a difference..

I like that,,,,(The only Goverment i trust is my 45-70 GOV)...

I'm thinking you wouldn't. So where does that leave us.

But just for conversation's sake, how fast is the lock time of the "bolt action," and how fast is, say, the T/C Omega?

Also, how big a difference in lock time does there need to be before the average shooter will experience a difference in accuracy?

Also, if lock time makes such a huge difference, I'm thinking swampy will rush right out and get the CVA rifle with the fastest ignition time there is.

Now maybe im way off base here . But lets re cap

The original statements were :

1)The bolt guns are more accurate. The lever makes no sense.
2)Fixed barrel.....much faster lock time.
3)Only the Savage is faster. Just the fact that it's a Remington makes it better than the rest
4)All I can say is the most accurate muzzleloaders are boltactions

Now I left some of the bla bla out . But the above is the jest of it

Lets take #1 shall we .
Bolt guns are more accurate . Again I point out that lever actions also carry a bolt .
The only difference is that a fully bolt action releases the firing pin . While with SOME lever actions like on the Winchester 64 or Marlin�s , the firing pin is struck by a hammer . Which can produce slightly slower lock speed /


2) fixed barrel , much faster lock time .
We already covered the lock time so lets hit the fixed barrel issues
With both designs the barrels are fixed to the receiver. Past that you either gave a floating or bedded barrel . Of which by the way is how. Remington got the name of Bedington . Because it take so much bedding compound to properly bed the receiver and barrels.
As to whats more accurate a free floating or bedded barrel ?? Well that still a mater of debate .


Now if one subscribes to the point of view that . Lever actions are less accurate because the stock is a two piece and that the magazine or in some cases loading tube is attached to the barrel .
Then how does this relate to modern muzzle loading when they all carry RR in the same position and most have some type of two piece stock .
I would also submit that if the true issue was the 2 piece stock , then you all would be shooting traditional rifles for the accuracy

3) physically impossible since they both are based off the same action .
With the only difference being that the savage has a stronger lock up . � assuming we are talking about the ML10
So the only diffrence in speed is concerning muzzle loading
a) breech design
b) powder choice

4)All I can say is the most accurate muzzleloaders are bolt actions
Is this because the are slower to cycle ? Which again is negated by the fact we are talking muzzleloaders
Is it because in the prone position you can sometimes achieve a more solid rest
Again we are talking muzzle loading rifles here .
Is it because like with a side lock , you don�t have the internal torque playing a part in ignition. I would point out you don�t have that with any inline ignition .

I have to wonder . Do you understand what the bolt in a bolt action actually does what purpose it serves .



as to Brucie exsample

IF and again it�s a big if , the only way one could do such a test , is to completely remove the human element.
Which mean the guns would have to be mounted and fired electronically in order to discern which design was more accurate
As such lock time would mater 0 .
IE no human element . No issue with lock time .

When you add in a human element then you start adding human variables that effect accuracy . IE Trigger pull . Hold , stance , sight picture , stock fit and design .

Of which again I point out that the biggest issue with all be they blot , lever or side lock . Is a crappy trigger pull . Which will effect a shooters accuracy far more then .a 500 thousands of second , slower lock time .

Like smoke pole . I would agree that if one could do just what you stated . And completely remove the human element from the question so as to base the findings on accuracy of design . I don�t think one would see any difference at all .
�IF� all one was doing was changing out the receivers

LMAO i just got this LOL its been going right over my head

ya , then why isnt her on here toughting the electra for its lock time LOL

good poiont smokepole

Rem. Etronix, anyone?

ROR......

As to the "strongest" ML actions, correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to recall MLs built off the Sharps action, the rolling-block action, and I think the High Wall action. If so, there is frankly NO doubt that any/all of them are a good bit stronger than the Savage or Rem "bolt" MLs.

Given that only the Sharps was designed as a ML action to begin with, it also negates Swamp's assertion that the Savage and Rem are the strongest ML actions ever designed. They weren't ML designs; they were/are centerfire designed actions adapted to ML; and the falling block and rolling block actions likewise modified are stronger.

As to lock-time, I'd like to know how much "faster" the ML700 is than the T/C System 1 or Black Diamond, considering that both of them use a clone (or same) 700 trigger assembly and sear, and the action is similar to the 700, but less than 1/2 the overall operable length of the 700SA, thus having less than 1/2 the lock travel of the 700SA.

Likewise, doesn't NULA make, or made, a ML?

I'd like to see Swamp's figures (backed up by verified data) as to the different lock-times of the MLs on the market today.

OK, here, I got his data for you:

Shawn,

The fastest lock time of any rifle built. Who ever thought up that design did a great job of convincing the Remington maketing people it would sell. It flopped terribly.

Doc

About the same as a "bolt action" muzzleloader. Even Remington admits the only reason they put a bolt on it was so it'd look familiar to people who were unfamiliar with muzzleloaders.

Of course, it's out of production too.

Ha ha! I've got a flintlock that has quicker lock time than any of them! It's based on a Remington bolt action, so it's gotta be more accurate to boot!

About the only riflemen who can possibly benefit from an action with a few microseconds quicker lock time are competitive benchrest shooters. The rest of us hunters/experimenters can't tell the difference. (And I'll bet even most of them couldn't tell the difference in a blind "taste test".) Kind of like debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

You know, I guess I have been an azzhole calling, proving, and showing Swampman to be an idiot multiple times over.

However, me being an azzhole in calling him an idiot does not change the fact that he is an idiot.

Res ipsa loquitur.

While very true Swampman is either a troll or retarded. My vote is for a retarded troll.

Shawn,

YOU are not an azzhole...just a lawyer. Chilly enough for you this morning?

Doc

Well, does that mean you're gonna go out and get one?