MVTC, LOYALIST- are they SAFE?,

[David Snellen]

Gentlemen,
I have asked this before on a couple of other sites, but I am still looking for a good answer.
Are the guns from MVTC and Loyalist safe to shoot live rounds from?
I don't want one bloing up on me.
Thanks,
David

 

[mastrsgt]

David,

You need to use the search function. There are numerous threads about these guns. You will get answers of yes and no depending on who responds.

Don R

 

[David Snellen]

Thanks Don, where is that button?

 

[mastrsgt]

Near the top center of the page

 

[David Snellen]

Thanks! Got it.

 

[nkvd]

David

I asked this same question and the responses seem to be about 50/50. But the Indians sure turn out some tempting versions don't they?
But like you I hate to spend that much for a wall hanger :grin:

Cheers,Rob

 

[Parzifal]

YES as safe as any musket.

The 50 / 50 opinion spread goes like this

...One of the 50 percent that likes em- owns em and shoots em,

the other 50 percent seems to have a opinion based on rumor and comparisons with 3000 $$ custom guns more fit for royalty then a field soldier

The loyalist muskets it has been my pleasure to own and fire are not "expensive wallhangars" as nkvd states,

though my piedersoli might be described as a over priced wall hangar, as I have had it for a year and am still working out the problems with it,Its brass is POORLY casted, Its lock made of some super light steel like alloy.

Its ONE redeeming feature is a walnut stock that looks good after I worked it oiled and stained it.


If thats the high level of Italian "quality" Ill be sticking with my loyalist longland.

Cheers :haha:
Jeeze this is tiring, but Ill stand by the musket that stands by me.

 

[bnail]

YES as safe as any musket.

The 50 / 50 opinion spread goes like this

...One of the 50 percent that likes em- owns em and shoots em,

the other 50 percent seems to have a opinion based on rumor and comparisons with 3000 $$ custom guns more fit for royalty then a field soldier

The loyalist muskets it has been my pleasure to own and fire are not "expensive wallhangars" as nkvd states,

though my piedersoli might be described as a over priced wall hangar, as I have had it for a year and am still working out the problems with it,Its brass is POORLY casted, Its lock made of some super light steel like alloy.

Its ONE redeeming feature is a walnut stock that looks good after I worked it oiled and stained it.


If thats the high level of Italian "quality" Ill be sticking with my loyalist longland.

Cheers :haha:
Jeeze this is tiring, but Ill stand by the musket that stands by me.

I've got a buddy who's waiting for his "ranger" bess from MVTC, it's on Back order. I'm very interested in the Pro/con arguments as, as you've stated BBS, most of what's posted is heresay. the one experience I've had is with the LA East India Pattern pistol. The lock was so screwed up it wouldn't fire 70% of the time. turns out the sear and frizzen screws weren't plum and had to be retapped.
the only reasson he's taking a chance on MVTC is because of all the good reviews they've recieved here on the MLB.

 

[David Snellen]

Well, That seems to be more favorable (what I am hearing. What are y'all's opinion on how to proof test? Is a barrel likely to fail AFTER a proof test?
Thanks,
David

 

[Zoar]

david---

It seems to me Proof Testing is done by a qualified company that does Proof Testing. The lab equipment alone needed for proper Proof Testing costs big bucks. If you mean checking your own gun out at very high loads, my first question is WHY the heck would anyone do that?

I own several black powder guns. If the maker, such a Pedersoli, says 40 grains of Black is the maximum recommended powder, I would say I would be an idiot to "test" at a higher load. To load at what the manufacturer says is the maxiumum recommendation is NOT proof testing. Proof testing is substantially HIGHER loads.

I do not own an MTVwhatever, or a LOYALIST gun, But I did look at Loyalist and I am almost certain they have a recommended powder load. So, I would use what is recommended and NOT go higher and you should be a-okay.

 

[hawk]

I have a bess from military heritage.
it has a heavy main spring and sparks 98% of the time(most likly better if I took better care of the flint ).
it shoots fine and if you want a military musket it seems to do the job .
if you are fussy about things like the stock wood and shinny barrel and like a slender stock I wood say save your pennies and buy a hand made bess from rifle shoppe parts and you won't be dissapointed.

 

[torn moc]

David,,,,didnt you ever fire the blunderbuss you had awhile ago? It was made in INDIA...

 

[nkvd]

Hey Bessbattlesystems

I never targeted Loyalist by name if you re-read
my posting I made a statement about Indian made
repro's in general regardless of who sells them here in N.America! :nono:

Rob

 

[David Snellen]

Actually no, I was hurting for money for an engagement ring, and never had a chance.
I sold a bunch of guns, but got the most wonderful woman in the world.
David

 

[Pigman]

We had a similar thread a while ago.
The topic of proofing = Safety was brought up.
http://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/fusionbb/showtopic.php?tid/217920/post/531858/hl//fromsearch/1/

I add the below quoted post to that thread.

As further information since then I have acquired a CVA muzzle loader that has a barrel marked “Spain” and no proof marks.

So not all European guns are proofed.


“This thread has drifted some what.

If possible I think I can summarize some points that I have learned from this thread and others.

- No US or Canadian gun is proofed

- No Japanese gun is proofed

- No Indian Gun is proofed

- No South American Gun is proofed.

- Only Western European guns are proofed if they are to be sold as guns in Europe.

- Some High-end gun makers in the US will "Defarb" their products going so far as to add European proof marks to make the reproduction look like an original. Even if the weapon was not proofed.

- Proofing will not tell you if the gun will fail. All it will tell you is that it did not fail once, at the proofing.

- Many people swear that they will only use proofed weapons unless their "friend" made it then its safe.

- There are no international Proofing standards. In other words, it may have passed proofing in one country and could have failed in another.


This is an interesting topic that we may need to pay more attention to as users of the product. The US may institute some form of proofing some day. This would probably hinder the small builders out there who would see another layer of government regulation and taxes added to their business. Currently Muzzleloaders are relatively unregulated. If we start requiring all weapons to be tested by the government and marked as such we will be starting a regulatory process we may not like.

Thanks,
Mark C. Foster”

 

[paulvallandigham]

In the USA, we have " Product Liability " case law that makes every manufacturer liable for the failure of its product in normal usage. That becomes a much higher standard of " Proofing " than even is used in those few Western European countries that do " Proof " guns made there.

I agree that the last thing we need in this country is More Governmental regulation on guns. The private sector does a far better job than the government ever would do.

 

[mastrsgt]

Paul,

Your statement raises a question for me. If you purchase a gun from an American company that is manufactured in a foreign country and it blows up, do you have recourse against the company that sold the gun?

Don R

 

[cable]

all i can say is that i have a MVTC blunderbuss and MVTC matchlock, and on the very first time I fired each of them THEY BLEW UP AND KILLED ME.
seriously they were inexpensive but do work flawlessly and i do have several pedersolis' and thompson-centers and others and yet i must freely admit that the custom guns I have by people like Ed Parry [Black Hart Long Arms] and other well known makers are wonderful in every way and are my favorites, but the folks at MVTC are very nice and for the $ they seem to be good and safe products.

 

[pichou]

... the very first time I fired each of them THEY BLEW UP AND KILLED ME.

:rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: Did it hurt?

Careful! You know how rumors get around. And people love to bash these guns...

Seriously, though:

1. The fit and finish is poor compared to originals and modern repros. Some have commented that the inletting looks like it was done with a screwdriver.

2. They are made in small workshops by many different contractors. Quality control can be spotty. I have heard MVT does a PDI and also backs up their product.

3. They are safer than original guns, even when the originals were new. If you read the old fur trade journals, they mention guns blowing up all the time. There is only one report of a India gun bursting, and the cause is TBD. Very likely an obstruction, which will cause any gun to burst.

 

[paulvallandigham]

Don: Probably NOT. You would have to show that the American distributor, or the retailor Knew that the guns were defective for the use intended. With American made products, you don't have to show specific knowledge for suing companies in the chain of sale. One of the reasons companies have guns made overseas is not only the lower wage base, but this protection from Products Liability suits here.

When you think about it, it is very unfair to hold retailers and distributors, or jobbers responsible for defective firearms. The guns come packaged by the manufacturer, in several layers of plastic, these days, and are usually not opened until the consumer buys the product. For some retailers, they take one or more guns out of their boxes to display in a rack in the store, to encourage looking, and sales. But by far the most of sales occur with the buyer receiving the item in the factory packaging. Even when there is a gun on display, you are often sold a NIB gun rather than the display gun. Juries are less likely to award significant damages against such retailers under these facts, BTW. But not in all jurisdictions. In anti-freedom cities, for instance, where they are told by the media incessantly that guns are EVIL, and that gun manufacturers are the devil, juries slam every party in the chain of sale. That is why most insurance companies try to settle these cases short of going to trial. Often, deals are made by the Plaintiff to settle out the most remote members of the chain in return for their testimony as to the condition of the firearm when they received it from the manufacturer, or higher links in the chain. The Plaintiff's attorney's strategy is to reach the deepest pocket defendants, and help finance the litigation by settling with the smaller retailers.

This can, and does frequently backfire. I saw a trial in Montana against Sturm, Ruger, and Co., several years ago on Court TV, where the Plaintiff entered into a " High-Low_ settlement agreement with the Manufacturer's insurance company. They capped the award at about 3 million, but put a low settlement figure of something like 500,000. The jury returned a verdict for the Defendant. People in Montana know guns, and hold plaintiffs to a bit higher standard of care when handling them. This was one of those cases where someone shot himself in his leg by loading 6 rounds in an old, 3-screw model SA revolver. Ruger got nailed for the same " Defect in a case in Alaska, back in the 1960s, which led the company to end production of the Colt Style Single Action Army revolvers, and install the transfer bar safety system in their revolvers. The Alaska Supreme Court upheld that judgment, too. The TV commentators on Court TV were all betting on how large a verdict would come down against Ruger, and where is serious shock when the Montana jury in the later case ruled against the Plaintiff. The company wisely called an expert to testify that " Everyone knows you only load 5 cartridges in a 6-shooter, and lower the hammer on an empty chamber!". And, " If you don't know it, you have NO business picking up a single action revolver!"

My kind of witness! :hmm: :thumbsup: