Muzzle loader thoughts

[Shovelbuck]

Is technology getting out of hand? This can be looked at in a couple different ways. We really can't say that inlines are the greatest development the past 20 years as they've been around at least since the early 1800's. So is it the rapid twist and shallow rifling. Nope, it's been here since the mid 1800's. Is it bullets instead of round balls? Nothing new there either. The muzzle loading manufactures of today may claim to have changed muzzle loaders but actually all they've done is improve on long existing designs. Sabots are an item though that I can find no early history of. They can and do make a drastic improvement in accuracy. The powders of today are also much better and safer. I prefer the real thing but on some guns it's allmost manditory to use a substitute. Scopes, where legal really make a difference. So there are are 3 most important things in my opinion the past 20 years to muzzle loading, Better optics, sabots, and powders. I lean both ways on the high tech issue. While I like how well my "new age" front stuffers shoot, as I get older and the hunt, not the kill is more important, I find myself putting on the skins and carrying one of my flinters. What are your views?

 

[moosehunter]

shovelbuck. You make some very good points with the improvement manufactures made to the muzzleloader. I don't own a flinter and probably never will. I still have a sour taste in my mouth with my old stuffer not going off when it was suppose to. I figure deer hunting is hard enough to do with realiable equipment. To me, still knowing I am only gonna get one shot at a deer is the challenge with a muzzleloader.

 

[kbgibby]

Shovel,

Along with powder, I'd add the use of 201 primers as a reliable ignition source. Combined with a hot, clean burning powder, you're bound to have more consistent loads pushing that bullet. The lack of burning rags hanging off it doesn't hurt either.
I'm with moosehunter when it comes to reliability, and although the hunt is the most important part of getting out, my time in the field is also very limited. Whether I hold out for a good buck or decide to harvest a nice fat doe, I want to know the gun is going to work.

Five months and counting!

Threebeards

 

[Shovelbuck]

I forgot about the primers! I don't use them but see where they could be a real asset. After rereading my original post I found a big mistake. Sabots are nothing new either. Just an improvement of a patched ball. If I had the quality of bucks running around here like Iowa does I'd probably be carrying all the high tech stuff too. I'm usually out for a fat doe for the freezer with the m/l so carrying a flinter isn't a big hinderance. We also can't use scopes here in Ne. so were talking 100 yd. and closer anyway. If I could hunt with this legally here's the gun I'd use. 38 cal. heavy bench rifle. It's built to the "high tech" specs of the 1880's. It shoots a crossed patched long 38 cal bullet twisted by 1 in 18 twist rifling. Underhammer ignition that is basicaly inline. Meaning a straight path to the charge. It's fitted with a replica vintage 4x scope. I wouldn't want to carry it far though. It weighs 25 lbs.

 

[kbgibby]

That's a sweet-looking gun, Shovel and, I imagine, fun to shoot. How long is the barrel? To weigh 25 pounds, I'm assuming it's fairly long.

Threebeards

 

[moosehunter]

Cool looking smoker there shovel. That heavy a gun I bet kicks bout' like a 22.

 

[Shovelbuck]

The barrel is 31 inches not counting the false muzzle. But at allmost 2 inches across the flats there's a lot of steel there. You hardly feel the kick at all. It's like nothings there. The sound is quite faint also with so much steel to absorb the sound. Here's a link to a short story about the gun. Jays Page