First in-line system?

[paulvallandigham]

:thumbsup:

 

[Claude Mathis]

The rule for not discussing modern MLs here is a good one. These are made simply to sell to people with no real interest in MLs or history. They give the modern hunter something he can use in a "ML" season that looks more like his 270 than a typical of the era ML.

Here we try to stay with traditional, typical of the era, MLs. I see no problem with a passing discussion of oddball *historical* ML firearms. But the existence of these one offs and oddballs does not require us to allow threads on modern inlines, shotgun primers, sabots etc. All attempts to link the modern ML with these historical MLing odd balls is simply wishful thinking on the part of the proponents of the "modern MLs". They were never in general use as much as the "high performance" ML crowd would like them to seem to be.

Dan

Very well said. :thumbsup:

 

[tg]

"". They were never in general use as much as the "high performance" ML crowd would like them to seem to be."

Same can be said for non-military peep sights and connicals before about 1850 or so even after that they were an exception and not the common mans fodder.