Can You Help?

[tenngun]

One has to want to fiddle with a gun to use traditional. A rugged rifled musket is pretty much the easiest of all ml. Big caps, easiest to clean, tough, good looking in terms of shinny brass, limited stuff to go wrong.
And still it’s a pain to use.
We have moved so far from DIY.
Food services will deliver ready to cook meals to you, with little bags of premesured spices, you can vacuum your house with a robot, and your refrigerator can order food from the grocery store for you.
I smoke a pipe. Everyone who smoked for centuries smoked a pipe. But then along came cigarettes, and pipes became the stuff of fuddy diddies.
Easier sells

 

[Sam squanch]

There is a Swedish/ Norwegian website that showed a very modern looking muzzleloader inline shotgun, that was made well before 1900.

 

[Rebel bull]

Actually, why people are walking away from BP (traditional ) muzzleloaders is due to several reasons. And trust me, just about every time I go to the range here I try to help younger folks understand traditional ML's. Many younger folks walk up to me and enquire about mine, so I explain things to them. They all seem interested but I would wager not the first one went any further with their interest. IMO, it has little to nothing to due with folks not helping.

These are the actual reasons that I see why folks are more interested in MM than us folks that prefer the old side lock, traditional ML's.

1. There is hardly any sporting goods stores that carries traditional ML's, if any at all. They get no exposure in the general public. Therefore, traditional ML have, in essence, become a thing of the past.

2. Even if there were sporting goods stores that carried traditional ML's, folks want any equipment that gives them an advantage while hunting. A scope is highly thought of for poor light condition hunting conditions. Some MM have screw in breach plugs, which is another advantage to some folks. Primers that are are covered and not really exposed to moisture, etc.

3. Black powder is difficult to find in any sporting goods stores. So folks have gotten use to using alternative substitute propellants.

4. Limited shooting accessories at sporting goods stores, such as conical, patches, RB, caps, etc.

5. MM are basically the only type being promoted by magazines, TV adds, internet, TV hunting shows, etc.

6. Many folks want the easy way out for just about everything and anything nowadays. They don't want to take the time to learn how to clean and shoot traditional ML, or with learning the proper patch, ball, powder combination. And they especially do not want to fool around with messy BP that is difficult to come by, other than internet order and having to pay Haz Mat fees.

7. And the main reason, IMO, is because MM gives them an advantage on a big buck or elk. The effective ranges are extended along with better longer range accuracy. Composite stocks and stainless barrels are better for foul weather hunting, a built in safety, slings and/or sling studs, and on some MM a scope, all right out of the box.

I vow to keep my traditional ML's and hunt with them for as long as I am able, but the cold hard facts are, they are much like the steam engine, they are quickly becoming a thing of the past. Technology sells, whether we like it or not.

at my clubs range we welcome everybody most of the time it doesn't take very long for the modern shooters to find out that we are having more fun then they are. then they take a couple of shots with our traditional guns and ask how they can get trigger pulls like ours. then they are baffled by us scoring better then they are when they are using scopes. sometimes they come back and have a mass produced side lock and want to learn, but if we as a group bad mouth the modern stuff we are missing the opportunity to bring them into our sport. and really standing side by side with them they haven't won any money yet !!!!

 

[Spikebuck]

Back in the 1970s I read an article by a guy that was shooting a .50 BAR round from this heavy bench gun. He would ‘hunt’ by setting up a rest on a hill side with clear lines of sight of several miles. And shoot at a thousand yards.
I thought it disgusting
Till I got to the end of the article.
He addressed my concerns. And asked the question of how a shot from a guy who knew his gun and how it would work at different ranges and weather conditions so he could shoot, and make a clean kill at eight hundred yards was different then a shot on an equally unsuspecting deer from a bow at fifteen yards.
In both cases the hunter is unknown to the deer, and the deer is taken by surprise.
I didn’t have an answer.

I do.

Getting within 15 yards of a wary wild animal takes great HUNTING skills. Drawing a bow, especially one you cannot hold back for two minutes, can be tricky and must be timed to avoid detection. The animal's senses of sight, hearing, and especially smell can easily catch the hunter at close range. One little errant breeze and it can be all over but the crying, for the hunter.

You can get a marching band within 1000 yards of animals.

In order to buy his answer you have to look on a hunt as simply an exercise in killing, and not in matching wits with your quarry on more equal footing...one the animal wins more often than the hunter.

Shooting animals well from great distance takes great shooting skills. I give those "shooters" that. But I give them a low score for demonstrated "hunting" skills.

Saw a hunting show with two "snipers" on a mountain shoot two big bull elk nearly 1500 yards away on another mountain side. One used the high powered sniper rifle while the other gave readings and big bull one dropped. None of the other elk ran because they had no idea why "Fred" just fell over! Sniper #2 took the rifle while #1 read off readings. Big bull #2 dropped. The rest of the herd still just stood there...no chance of seeing or smelling or hearing them.

While I marveled at the shooting skill, the hunting part was minimal to non-existent. I guess they did have to be able to glass animals nearly a mile away.

 

[Sparks of Dutch Glory]

This is a big rabbit hole to go down
I see this in archery as well
While I may cling to my Flinter for life along with my stick bow The times they are a changing. How many folks like us bemoaned the introduction of the cap lock I. The 1800's?
With the rapid decline in hunting overall we realistically must "follow the money" and see that some people will always jump onto the next easier thing be it in lines or crossbows which IMHO are really not primitive weapons
But I'm not the governing body of the state and my opinion means little to anyone
I'm just glad PA kept the late season flintlock hunt strictly flintlocks and wish other states would provide that option

 

[LME]

I apologize for my ignorance, but what is an MM? I’m inferring that it means an inline that shoots sabots or maybe has a sealed breech, but what does the MM stand for?

Thanks!

Notchy Bob

I'm glad you asked the question. I wanted to know as well.

 

[Tony Rothrock]

A certain portion of us (humans, especially the male population) have always pushed the edge of the envelope when it comes to restrictions on our activities. Sticking somewhat to the subject at hand we have Bumpstocks, forced reset triggers, AR "Pistols", semi-permanently attached barrel extensions, "Solvent Traps" et al. Remember the Savage 10ML? They discontinued it because too many idiots were pouring the wrong formula powder, in the wrong amount down those barrels and blowing themselves up. But, you can still pay thousands and get a "Muzzleloader" that you shove a bunch of 3031 in and cram a copper jacketed Barnes bullet down that barrel and launch it at speeds equal to or exceeding the cased ammunition that bullet was designed for. While many may look at some these "innovations" with distain, me included, when it comes to the sporting use of these weapons and our interpretation of "primitive", it has been my experience that "Letter of the Law" often trumps Spirit or Intent of the Law. This is supposed to make our legislators and regulators work harder at making the laws and regulations "Right". As a side note, some of these "innovations" actually lead to uses outside the the original scope. Alloys and manufacturing processes that allow that $5000 "muzzleloader" to do what it does are useful in other areas that need high strength steel that can endure those sorts of pressures. So while I don't neccessarily like these things when it comes to the sport, hell I don't even own any caplocks, all my "primitive stuff so far is flintlock, I'm not gonna say they shouldn't try it, see if it works. I'm just not gonna use it and encourage my legislators and regulators to be a little more precise in their definition of "primitive".

 

[Buckskinquin]

I apologize for my ignorance, but what is an MM? I’m inferring that it means an inline that shoots sabots or maybe has a sealed breech, but what does the MM stand for?

Thanks!

Notchy Bob

Thanks Notchy! Wondered myself

 

[Hammond79]

You need to read that again. It wasn't a lack of helping. It was not knowing about modern muzzleloaders, 209 primers, pellets, and skirted projectiles.

I don't buy that for a minute. An inline is not THAT different than a traditional muzzloader. I expect the OP's objection to the type of gun had way more to do with his refusal to help a young sportsman than his ignorance of the components laid before him.

It saddens me. The population of hunters is quickly declining. Taking the time to teach this "greenhorn" might have been an opportunity to show off your traditional muzzleloader, and just maybe spark an interest.

I see a whole lot of this devisiveness and snobbery in many hunting communities and it is downright sad.

 

[Tumbledown]

I don't buy that for a minute. An inline is not THAT different than a traditional muzzloader. I expect the OP's objection to the type of gun had way more to do with his refusal to help a young sportsman than his ignorance of the components laid before him.

It saddens me. The population of hunters is quickly declining. Taking the time to teach this "greenhorn" might have been an opportunity to show off your traditional muzzleloader, and just maybe spark an interest.

I see a whole lot of this devisiveness and snobbery in many hunting communities and it is downright sad.

I don't care what you're buying. I'm going by the OP's words.

Frankly, if someone came up to me with questions about their inline, I wouldn't know what to say, either. Pellets? Skirted bullets? Sorry, I'm not giving anyone advice regarding gun components I'm not familiar with, muzzleloader or not.

 

[LME]

A certain portion of us (humans, especially the male population) have always pushed the edge of the envelope when it comes to restrictions on our activities. Sticking somewhat to the subject at hand we have Bumpstocks, forced reset triggers, AR "Pistols", semi-permanently attached barrel extensions, "Solvent Traps" et al. Remember the Savage 10ML? They discontinued it because too many idiots were pouring the wrong formula powder, in the wrong amount down those barrels and blowing themselves up. But, you can still pay thousands and get a "Muzzleloader" that you shove a bunch of 3031 in and cram a copper jacketed Barnes bullet down that barrel and launch it at speeds equal to or exceeding the cased ammunition that bullet was designed for. While many may look at some these "innovations" with distain, me included, when it comes to the sporting use of these weapons and our interpretation of "primitive", it has been my experience that "Letter of the Law" often trumps Spirit or Intent of the Law. This is supposed to make our legislators and regulators work harder at making the laws and regulations "Right". As a side note, some of these "innovations" actually lead to uses outside the the original scope. Alloys and manufacturing processes that allow that $5000 "muzzleloader" to do what it does are useful in other areas that need high strength steel that can endure those sorts of pressures. So while I don't neccessarily like these things when it comes to the sport, hell I don't even own any caplocks, all my "primitive stuff so far is flintlock, I'm not gonna say they shouldn't try it, see if it works. I'm just not gonna use it and encourage my legislators and regulators to be a little more precise in their definition of "primitive".

I had a dear friend that passed away about ten years ago and his son told me that I was in his will. I had no idea he had done that? He had left me all his rifles and fishing gear. Except what his boy was left. I didn;t realise how many guns and how much fishing gear he had. I had no place to put all the the items. One of the rifles was a Savage 10 M.L. rifle and it came with preloaded tubes with bullet and powder. The powder wasn't black powder but 48 grams of a modern powder the type escapes me at the moment? I did shoot it but some one put the scope mounts on backwards and it shot way to high but the group was good. I didn't like it at all and sold it to a fellow I saw a lot but were not close friends. He offered me $450.00 dollars and I couldn't give him the rifle fast enough. I for one think that it does give a person an unfair avantage with one of these type rifles for mutiple reasons.

 

[Wncman]

One has to want to fiddle with a gun to use traditional. A rugged rifled musket is pretty much the easiest of all ml. Big caps, easiest to clean, tough, good looking in terms of shinny brass, limited stuff to go wrong.
And still it’s a pain to use.
We have moved so far from DIY.
Food services will deliver ready to cook meals to you, with little bags of premesured spices, you can vacuum your house with a robot, and your refrigerator can order food from the grocery store for you.
I smoke a pipe. Everyone who smoked for centuries smoked a pipe. But then along came cigarettes, and pipes became the stuff of fuddy diddies.
Easier sells

I to smoke a pipe. The problem with many folks is the fiddling with one to get the best outcome. The same can be true with black powder weapons. Some can be finicky with loads. For me that’s part of the enjoyment figure it out and keep it running.

 

[jefair1]

There is a Swedish/ Norwegian website that showed a very modern looking muzzleloader inline shotgun, that was made well before 1900.

The Hall carbine was not only an inline, it was a breech losder. Flintlock in 1819 and percussion in 1830s.

 

[Rebel bull]

The Hall carbine was not only an inline, it was a breech losder. Flintlock in 1819 and percussion in 1830s.

that is what i keep telling everybody there is no reason to reject the "mm" crowd as i said earlier let them shoot with you it doesn't take many shots of 90 grains plus to get them to want to shoot my side lock and they don't win any money either ! by the way my load for targets is 35 3f and prb out to 60 -70 yds

 

[Tumbledown]

The Hall carbine was not only an inline, it was a breech losder. Flintlock in 1819 and percussion in 1830s.

Not a true breechloader. The powder goes in the block, the ball seated on that, then it's locked in behind the barrel. No different than c&b revolvers.

 

[Marshhawk]

When I began my quest to shoot a deer this year with my old CVA .45 flinter I quickly realized a had a lot of relearning to do. I now get consistent ignition and accuracy (for me) out of the old charcoal burner, but there's one confound .... my old eyes aren't what they used to be. So, of course now about the time of evening that I lose resolution in the peep sight (apx 5:30 this time of year) the deer show up 10 minutes later (sigh). This would present no problem if I was looking through my Toric, but alas, in for a ha' penny, in for a pound. I must hope that a young foolish deer or a scent-addled old buck walks out when I can get a sight picture.

 

[NotDanielBoone]

Back in the 1970s I read an article by a guy that was shooting a .50 BAR round from this heavy bench gun. He would ‘hunt’ by setting up a rest on a hill side with clear lines of sight of several miles. And shoot at a thousand yards.
I thought it disgusting
Till I got to the end of the article.
He addressed my concerns. And asked the question of how a shot from a guy who knew his gun and how it would work at different ranges and weather conditions so he could shoot, and make a clean kill at eight hundred yards was different then a shot on an equally unsuspecting deer from a bow at fifteen yards.
In both cases the hunter is unknown to the deer, and the deer is taken by surprise.
I didn’t have an answer.
I have taken to smoothbore and flint. I hunt from a natural blind at ground level, found near a trail where I waylay the deer.
My shooting isn’t effected by any one else and what they shoot.
I’ve voluntarily diminished my use of a rifle, sacrificing fifty yards.
A minie ball gun can in the hands of a guy who knows his gun can easily kill a deer at three hundred yards. It’s fully ‘traditional’ but well outclasses my fusil.
Joe with a in-line isn’t going to cost me a hunt, any more then a cross bow or compound cost a longbowmans hunt .
An AR in the hands of a local Nimrod won’t change my hunting.
In lines are not in my opinion needed or good, they are not real ml. But if those shooters help keep me in the deer woods with their fees that’s ok with me

I like your attitude. To me my hunts are about me and not all the others out there doing whatever it is that they do. I am using a .50 flintlock and it is "flintlock season" in SE Pennsylvania, but the rules are such that you can use anything you will as it is a "special regulations area". Long story short, I was talking with some young fellows the other day after dark on the public land I hunt. The big 10 pointer that I saw in September is still outsmarting everyone. The youngsters were using modern rifles, but admitted to missing this buck 4 shots on 2 occasions. The moral: many of these hunters can't shoot, so why care what they do? I have my bow and my flintlock and sit in the bushes and wait. They do what they do. It's better that they are out in the field than protesting the eating of meat.

 

[#BPBReloadingFFL]

No such thing as a "sniper rifle".
You have a rifle and a sniper.
Or the snipers rifle.
Actually sharp shooter
It takes a lot more math to poke a elk at 1500 yards across a draw than it does to shoot one with a flintlock at 50.

I could care less what the other guy uses to shoot or hunt with.

 

[Blitz]

The Fish & Game departments cater to the almighty dollar. As long as people buy tags and licenses they don't care about much else. Make anything easy enough and it will eventually be destroyed by lazy people.

Insteqad of venting on dedicated ML forum we need to complain loudly to our regulatory bodies/
The only thing they care about are votes. Let them know they wont be getting any unless changes are made.

Blitz

 

[DCAN]

Insteqad of venting on dedicated ML forum we need to complain loudly to our regulatory bodies/
The only thing they care about are votes. Let them know they wont be getting any unless changes are made.

Blitz

Simply stating a fact. I worked around the Oregon Department of Failure (fish) and Waste(wildlife) for many years. They are controlled by politicians and special interest groups. I learned long ago not to waste my time trying to change the course of that particular river.