Once again I have not criticised only pointed out that most of todays conical bullets are not traditional projectiles, the fact the we can talk about them HERE does not change that, I have queried most of the current makers of conicals and none claim any connection with anything from the past, they are all an attempt to offer a more modern and presumably superior projectile in place of the RB, there have been non RB type projectiles since at least the mid 18th century these were often patched like a rb as they were solid. and flat on the bottom, but that does not make a Buffalo ballet or whatever other modern offering a traditional bullet,no more than an in-line is traditional because there were forms of ignition in the 18th century which COULD be described as in-line by the standards we have come to use to describe todays modern guns, nor is a Pinto wagon a traditional means of transport because there were covered wagons in the 19th century and there were Pinto horses back then also. When you start making something PC or traditional by use of a very broad and loose association much is lost in the translation, and I have quite often expressed my opinions on what is or is not PC or traditional, and it is based on research, logic, common sense......not personal preference and the need or desire to find a better, quicker, more user friendly material or method. Claude has chosen to let anything but in-lines guns be fodder for this forum which is fine but as I said before it does not alter the facts of the matter, it is interesting that you can talk of a saboted pistol bullet, scoped, plastic stocked gun, powered by pellets unless it has a modern ignition system, but that is the rule and so be it, and as far as teaching...anyone who has a genuine interest will already have learned a great deal, about traditional/ PC and gun/gear history before this post ever started. I am not getting into the "traditional spirit" thing ..way to wide of a brush and I chose the reality of the gear itself over a non tangible spirit that basicly says do what you want and call it traditional, but to each his own on how he views his experience, if I were to take any of my guns and put on a modern peep sight and load up a modern conical I would not consider it a traditional outfit, there is nothing wrong with such a rig, it's just closer to the new than the old. I try to find a reasonable definition for what fits into the traditional class of gear, and form and function as close as posssible to what things were like in the past when a choice allows is a good starting point,that which offers an advantage or supposed advantage, or brings us closer to the modern arms and accesories rather than the other direction seem to fail in meeting the mark. There is some difference of opinion as to what is or isn't but the big three are the backbone of the matter, the style gun, the sights and the projectiles. even allowing for a lot of wiggle room most of the modern offerings in the latter two don't cut it, most production sidelocks have held onto enough of the original style to past muster for most peoples taste.
