The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Hide > The Art of the Rifle: General

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old February 16, 2013, 12:11 PM   #1
Daekar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 28, 2011
Posts: 458
Bad Bull Muzzleloaders: Holy Smokes!

http://www.badbullmuzzleloaders.com

A buddy of mine showed me the website above, and he's all excited about getting one of those rifles. They're cool, no doubt about that, but I can't help thinking that he's going to be using reduced loads in short order... they claim 6000 ft*lbs at the muzzle using a 300 gr. bullet! That's like two 30-06 going off at once! What do you guys think?
__________________
"... I cannot but conclude the bulk of your [politicians] to be the most pernicious race of little odious vermin that nature ever suffered to crawl upon the surface of the earth." ~ Jonathon Swift
Daekar is offline  
Old February 16, 2013, 12:50 PM   #2
scrubcedar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 3, 2012
Location: Southwestern Colorado
Posts: 478
Drooling (chin wiping) more drooling. The rifle based off of the ruger no.1, lots more drooling. Wow, and some of them are downright beautiful as well.
__________________
Gaily bedight, A gallant knight In sunshine and in shadow, Had journeyed long, Singing a song, In search of El Dorado
scrubcedar is offline  
Old February 17, 2013, 06:28 PM   #3
taylorce1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 18, 2005
Location: On the Santa Fe Trail
Posts: 5,369
Check the regulations in your State before buying one. Where I live you can't use a muzzle loader like that. Full bore bullets or round ball only no Sabot's, bullet can't be more than twice the length of the diameter. No smokeless poweder of pellets, and no optics unless you are handicapped with vision that can't be corrected to 20/30.

Cool ML for sure and they aren't the only ones that build LR ML's. There are several companies out there that build them. Some guys have been successful out past 500 yards with them.
__________________
NRA Life Member
The Truth About Guns
taylorce1 is offline  
Old February 18, 2013, 04:09 AM   #4
Scorch
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2006
Location: Washington state
Posts: 11,407
All I can say is: remember that thing about Newton's Laws? You know, the "equal and opposite" part? 6,000 ft-lbs of energy? How much recoil do you think that rifle would have? 275 gr bullet at over 3,100 fps is faster than a 378 Weatherby. Let me suggest that the recoil will keep you from shooting very many rounds.
__________________
Never try to educate someone who resists knowledge at all costs.
But what do I know?
Summit Arms Services
Taylor Machine
Scorch is offline  
Old February 18, 2013, 09:42 AM   #5
kraigwy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,360
Maybe I'm missing something here.

From what I read on that site is it uses smokeless powder and rifle primers.

Based on common rifles (Remington 700s, Ruger #1, etc).

So it looks to me to be a rifle modified to shoot without a cartridge case with a higher price.

It shoots a 275 - 300 grn bullet faster about 500 fps faster then a 375 H&H or 300 fps faster then a 378 Weatherby Magnum.

I don't know of anything on this planet the H&H or Weatherby would kill so it looks to me the only advantage of this super muzzle loader is..................well no, I don't think I see an advantage.

I bet it would hurt though.
__________________
Kraig Stuart
CPT USAR Ret
USAMU Sniper School Oct '78
Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071
kraigwy is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.06635 seconds with 7 queries