Howdy all,

I live in Utah, and have purchased a dedicated hunter permit. This means I get to hunt archery, muzzleloader, and rifle season. While I am an avid archery hunter, and love rifles, I am ignorant of muzzleloaders.

I need to purchase, and familiarize myself with one. I don't have a preference as of yet about inline or more traditional. I know this is a debated topic. I would like to hear opinions about which make and model to purchase. If you would like to include arguments for traditional styles or more modern styles, please keep them short.

What is important to me is:
reliability
ease of use
accuracy
affordability
fit and feel

Thanks for the input.

I would say that you would be happy with anything from CVA. An inline is the way to go if you want ease of use. CVA's are very accurate, and very affordable. They have many models and I am sure there is one to fit you.

Quoted from another thread

Quote:Originally Posted by chris1488
I have a chance to buy a traditions .50 caliber. Its a break action inline with a stainless barrel and synthetic stock for 200 bucks. Is that a good gun? Is it worth 200? Its in good shape as far as scratchs go. Open sights on it.

Chris

Best look at any BPI (CVA, Traditions, Winchester) very sceptically. I was in that market a week ago and after doing some research found that their barrels are suspect, with proofing well below safe pressures at any load. I chose to go ahead and spend more money on the front end rather than learn the hard way with a blown out barrel and a maimed face.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/unsafe_muzzleloaders.htm

Cheers

I steered away and bought an Austin & Halleck 420. The Thompson Omega seems to be very popular and has a great rep. Lots of folks love their Knights as well. Can't forget that the initial outlay of money on the gun is really the smallest part of the cost of shooting a ML.

Cheers

Just noticed you said Utah...Might wanna check out the A&H, made in Provo. Ray Crow and the guys up there really are craftsmen.

I've owned mine a week and had it out to the range last night and was AMAZED. Nothing at all like my old Hawken. I too am new (reentering ML'ing after a 25 yr hiatus). These boards and Modern Muzzleloaders boards have been invaluable...do the homework before buying.

Cheers

I'm a flintlock kind of guy so I'll throw a little bias that way and suggest that taking game with a true to form primative rifle is quite satisfying. But, along with this you must have the conviction of understanding that you can have perfect firings 300 times in a row on the range and when you get an absolutely ideal shot on a trophy animal, there is always that slim chance things won't go and you'll only hear the flint snap the frizzen open or have a smoking flash pan and a no fire on the main charge. For me, that's part of the challenge and the way the game goes.

Likewise, an inline may not fire when you want it to as well so things are not all that different. But, then again, loading a jacketed bullet wrapped in plastic into a rifle that is burning some kind of synthetic powder ignited with a metallic primer sealed in some water proof plastic wrapper is not any different to me than chambering up a primed case in my '06 and dumping the IMR-4350 and a 180gr pro-hunter down the tube.

Meeting somewhere in the middle, you have the caplocks. Not quite as contrary as the flinters can sometimes be but yet still traditional enough to qualify for great hunting satisfaction.

I would suggest thinking long & hard about your choice and making sure you are satisfied with what you want, not with what someone else wants. I will tell you that you should not fall for all the BS advertising claims made about inlines....search the web and you'll find dozens of first hand accounts of people loosing wounded game because they beleived the hype and didn't try it for themselves before hitting the woods. If you choose to go with a more traditional gun, I would strongly suggest you look at bigger than the normal calibers offered in off the shelf guns. .50 & .54 are piddle once you shooting a .62 and then when you want a little more power & range and you up to a .72, the .62 starts to really seem quite puny too despite the fact that the .62 will knock the crap out of about anything within 150yds and deer size to 200 yds without incident, the .72 really starts the serious shooting and hunting provided you get a properly built rifle and barrel that will allow you the opportunity to run it at full throttle instead of settling for lesser loads to make up for having rifling with too fast a twist.

Just noticed you said Utah...Might wanna check out the A&H, made in Provo. Ray Crow and the guys up there really are craftsmen.

I've owned mine a week and had it out to the range last night and was AMAZED. Nothing at all like my old Hawken. I too am new (reentering ML'ing after a 25 yr hiatus). These boards and Modern Muzzleloaders boards have been invaluable...do the homework before buying.

Cheers


A&H is in Prpvo? What? I'll have to go to thier website now. How could I not know this? I looked at a few inlines today (in Provo). Nothing really caught my eye. Too modern / space age looking. Wasn't a single wood and blue gun in the bunch. Is there an inline with more of a look and feel of a more primitive weapon.

I am still undecided. Please keep the input coming.

Here are some TC muzzleloaders. The third one down on the left is an inline, Walnut stock and blued.

http://www.tcarms.com/TC_HTML/TC_Muzzle01.htm

Wasn't a single wood and blue gun in the bunch.

Precisely why I chose the A&H. Beautiful curly maple and classic lines.
http://www.austinhalleck.com/index.htm
Check em out...

Cheers

Checked out a few more today. The one I liked best of the in stock guns was a Knight Vision. Very simple, with the look and feel of a shotgun. Anyone have any experience with this gun? Are they too new? Who has the best prices? Pros and cons ?? Supposed to be waterproof.

Emailed A&H to see if they'd give a tour. Nobody seems to stock them. At least not the nice lookin ones. Matter of fact, I've yet to see a wood and blue in-line on a shelf. I was told they have a bit of blow back/ venting from the primer? The fellow who told the story said he had a scope on his, and he would have to clean off his scope after a trip to the range. Any truth to this?

I've also yet to see a sidehammer that looked nice, and comfortable to shoot. Pointed, narrow buttplates? somebody explain the thinking of the era. Were the rifles so barrel heavy they needed the hook under the armpit to hold them up? There seem to be very few of these on any shelves. Certainly haven't seen one that caught my eye.

I'm rather dissapointed with the gun and sporting goods stores selections. Seems everything I'd like to look at, nobody has. I don't get it. What's with all these plastic, ugly, "feature loaded" gismos (I still may buy one)? Most of them seem awfully light to me as well. I prefer a slightly heavier gun then has become popular. All thes plastic ones seem like they'd kick like a mule and dance all over?

I've also read a bit about savages new smokeless capable gun. Are these on shelves yet? Thoughts on these? Other than they are a pipe bomb.

I prefer building & shooting period rifles of German/East European design. Straiter stocks with wide buttplates, big bores (14mm & up) and barrels that are not too long. I think the period American rifles are pretty to look at but have to agree with you that while most hold nice they are very uncomfortable to shoot especially with what I consider appropriate hunting loads.

The Jeager styles that I prefer were designed to shoot well, hit hard and not be cumbersome to handle while hunting. 40"+ barrels may be perfectly fine on the range but they don't do nothing for me in a thickly wooded environment except get hung up on everything in sight. I hunted two seasons with a .45 kentucky style flintlock sporting a 42.5" barrel and it was the biggest pain in the @$$ I have ever taken hunting. While it did manage to put some meat on the table, I would no longer consider hunting big game with anything less than a .54cal anymore.

This is a TC renegade with a Green Mountain Stainless steel LRH barrel, and lyman peep. I added a packmyer pad to help tame it down a bit. This gun with the adjustable peep sight is constantly shooting 1.4" groups at 100 yards. Ron

http://www.hunt101.com/img/386767.jpg

This is a TC renegade with a Green Mountain Stainless steel LRH barrel, and lyman peep. I added a packmyer pad to help tame it down a bit. This gun with the adjustable peep sight is constantly shooting 1.4" groups at 100 yards. Ron

http://www.hunt101.com/img/386767.jpg


Thats a nice looking rifle. I like the set up. Getting me thinking about deer season already. Might have to build me one like that. What caliber, twist and what are the part numbers for those Lyman sights? I want to check those out.

Thanks for the pic Ron. That's a nice rig. I love the peep. I will look at your set up.

Must confess ignorance to the differences between european style and american style. How about some makes and models to look at?

The stock and lock is a TC renegade. The Barrel is a 50 cal Green Mountain Stainless Steel LRH, the twist is 1-28.
The rear sight is a Lyman 57 SML. The front sight is a Lyman 17AML. The front sight comes with several inserts for the globe but i was not real wild about them. I ordered a Lee Shavers Sight insert card.
http://www.egunsmith.com/
http://www.hunt101.com/img/409025.jpg

I like the post in the 17AML but I wanted a finer post for long range. The Shaver posts are tiny! I also like the fine crosshair that shaver has. I have mine sighted out to 250 yards. There is room on the 57 sight to sight in much farther than that. This is my best group at 100 yards with this set up.
http://www.hunt101.com/img/393233.jpg

Thats some good shootin. I am getting a list started now. Thanks for the info.

Hi there
I am a recent convert to muzzle loaders, and have gone the side lock route, mainly due to availability, but also because I figure that if I am going to shoot a ML, it might as well be a traditional one.

As a result of cost, I went for the Traditions brand. I know that they do not seem to be well thought of by many subscribers, but be that as it may, I can speak only from my own experience.

I have two ML's, namely a Traditons deerhunter and a Traditions Hawken Woodsman. Both shoot better than I can.
Both are .50 perc 1:48 twist - one has a 24inch barrel, the other a 28 inch.

They are simplicity itself to load and shoot - I have shot only lead conicals so far - 330 grain reals and 360 and 395 grain hunting loads - I like 80 grains of FFG powder, but have shot 90 grains in both. Does give improved ballistics in 28 inch barrel, but with reduced shooter comfort. Both good for deer/pig out to 100 metres - based on trajectory - basic sights don't allow much further shots anyway.

Mis-fires - only when I don't do what I am supposed to do.
Maybe 3 in total - always when I have not cleared the gun properly before loading, including firing off at least three caps to ensure nipple is clean and clear.

Inlines may seem more familiar, but I believe their loading procedure is more complicated than a sidelock. Simply charge it, seat the bullet and place the cap - ready for action.

My ML's on three hunts have accounted for 3 warthogs - first was a blank, next got two, last got a single.

Main thing is to enjoy this new journey you are embarking on.
Rodders

I'm glad to hear you're getting such good accuracy. My Lyman 1:48 flintlock will shoot the 320 grain Lee REAL's excellent to 50 yards but only with a 3/8" wad over the powder and a charge of 120 grains FF. Beyond 50 yards they start going wild and with anything less than the 120gr charge, they won't group at any range. Tried other conicals, both lighter & heavier and none worked well at all. Have not taken any game with the REAL's but their performance during animal simulation testing was disappointing to say the least. I went on to design my own conical which does have much better simulation performance and accuracy but I've got a few minor changes I still want to make to it.

If you're not using a wad under the conicals, you ought to give it a try. I get mine from Circle Fly but given your location and the cost of things there, I'd suggest making your own. Not sure what you have available, my wads are made from fiber board which is pretty much just compressed paper waste. I have used shoe box/milk carton type card board under bullets loaded with blackpowder in cartridge rounds. For the muzzleloader, I'd suggest trying to find some 1/4" to 3/8" thick fiber board but if you can't, use the thinner cardboard and simply use 3-5 thinner wads instead of one thick one. I've never had much luck with softer wads like the wool felt type in anything. Others say they work well for them but I haven't seen anything positive myself. About any paper, vegetable or wood pulp type product just fine for wadding. Wads should have an outside diameter of at least .005" over the "groove" diameter, not bore diameter which would be the across the lands. Optimum with paper card types wads is .008" oversize and for fiberous wads is .010" to .012" over groove.

I've got no time for in-lines. Tried several, didn't like any of them and saw nothing they can do that my sidelocks won't do.

If you're not happy with the factory sights, why not replace them? Pretty simply project if you have some basic metal working tools. I'd leave the rear sight as is and change the front one first. Best thing I have found for a front blade is a CuNi (copper nickle) alloy, place to find this is out of an old electrical disconnect switch, knife blade types are premium donors. If you can't locate any CuNi, just about any copper alloy will work but the CuNi provides a lot more tensile strength. You can make the dovetail out of the copper as well but steel works better simply because you can make a tight fit and beat it in without easily damaging it. Make the front blade high with the rear side facing you slanted with the top toward the muzzle on a 30° to 40° angle, this will help it collect the ambient light. Polish the rear of the blade (side you'll be looking at) to as near a mirror finish you can get and tarnish or blacken the rest of it, this will prevent glare off the sides. The copper blade will collect a lot of light making shots in overcast or dim light much easier while still maintaining traditional authenticity. If you're not happy with the rear sight, you can make one of these too from a simple chunk of mild steel or cast iron. Cast iron will be more suseptable to breakage but is much easier to work with especially if you take to filing it out of a solid block. Optional method is to make a blade the way you want and solder it to a dovetail. If you go with the fixed hight rear sight, make your front blade very tall and file it down as necessary to adjust your vertical point of impact. If they are off center for horizontal impact, you can drift both rear and front sights off center as necessary to adjust this (moving both front & rear in opposite directions a little bit makes it less obvious they are not centered when looking at the rifle).

Oh, depending on how the factory sights are made, it is possible to simply cut off what you don't want on them and re-use the dovetails on these sights which will save you the hassle of makng your own.

If you run into trouble or have questions on the sights or anything else, feel free to email me. markkw@earthlink.net

Thanks for all the info.
Too bad your rifle won't shoot heavier conicals.
Mine seem to max out at +/- 400 grains - anything heavier tends to become erratic.

I tend to use REALS for target shooting, as they shoot to almost the same point of impact as my hunting bullets (made by Bushveld Muzzle Loader Supplies here in SA)

I will try wads, but unless the improvement is major I will leave them out as that simplifies the loading procedure.

I am pretty happy with my sights - they are just a little coarse for distance shooting.

The deer hunter has fibre optic sights - little untraditional, while the hawken has buckhorn rear sight and a brass front sight.

Most times the wads will help. Try a few different combinations because like everything else, some things work and others don't. Forgot to say above, thick fiberous gasket material works great for wads but please be absolutely sure it is not abrasive or it'll rip the snot out of your barrel! Other thing you can try which works for some people is wadded up tissue paper, toilet paper or other similar types of thin light paper. Small amount crumpled up and stuffed down the bore over the powder and the bullet seated firmly on top of it. This can readily start fires in dry brush or grass though so take appropriate precautions when using these types of wad materials. Let me know what you find.

Howdy all,

I live in Utah, and have purchased a dedicated hunter permit. This means I get to hunt archery, muzzleloader, and rifle season. While I am an avid archery hunter, and love rifles, I am ignorant of muzzleloaders.

I need to purchase, and familiarize myself with one. I don't have a preference as of yet about inline or more traditional. I know this is a debated topic. I would like to hear opinions about which make and model to purchase. If you would like to include arguments for traditional styles or more modern styles, please keep them short.

What is important to me is:
reliability
ease of use
accuracy
affordability
fit and feel

Thanks for the input.

Should you buy an inline, Knight & Thompson Center offer you the best overall value. Either the Knight Vision or the Thompson Center (T/C) Omega would be fine choices. Both have outstanding warranties -- far superior to entry-levels like CVA & Traditions.