What happened to Muzzle Loaders?

[Steve499]

I have no strong feelings about what equipment others choose to use as long as it's legal in the jurisdiction they're hunting in. We have so many deer around here that any legal harvest method is fine with me. That said, I can't imagine sitting on a stump with a modern in-line across my knees and getting the same feeling about the whole experience as I get with my 1861 Springfield .58. I spend a lot more time during deer season carrying a rifle than shooting it so I've decided to carry something that gives me pleasure just from the carrying. If I really needed the meat I guess that in-line could be a necessity, but I don't and it isn't. I took my .32 muzzle loading squirrel rifle out this morning. I have several scope sighted .22s and .22 magnums which I use regularly but I just get a big kick out of hunting with the old fashioned stuff.
By the way, one of the deer I shot a few years back (with a longbow) ran about three jumps, stopped and looked around, flicked it's tail a few times and started picking acorns up again before falling down. The arrow had passed through without touching ribs on either side. THAT deer apparently wasn't in great pain but I know thats not the norm.
Steve

[Mannlicher]

Problem is that the States did not specify 'primitive weapons only'. All BP is now is just another way to extend hunting seasons.

[JohnKSa]

My take?

If someone is going to take full advantage of modern BP technology then I think they shouldn't hunt during muzzle-loading season.

The point of black-powder hunting seasons is the same as the point of bow-hunting seasons. They are designed around the idea that these hunting seasons handicap hunters significantly.

I don't agree that these extra seasons are used to manage game in any significant way. If they really want to chop the deer population, they could just extend the standard season and/or issue more tags.

The bottom line is that hunting laws and seasons aren't written in stone. If it becomes apparent that the point of muzzle-loading seasons is being circumvented, they'll disappear.

[Rembrandt]

QUOTE butch50: "I am disgusted to see what is happenning to traditional muzzle loader rifles. They began evolving into super high technology blackpowder monstrosities after the black powder deer seasons became prevalent. The original intent of having a muzzle loader season was to create a primitive hunting season.....The hunter would be limited to shots of about 100 yards or less and not be able to reload rapidly".



Your premise is seriously flawed.....in-line muzzleloaders have been around since the 1700's, this is not new technology.

Where does this "less than a 100 yards" come from? Civil War soldiers qualified by hitting a 10" target 10 times at 200 yards. Obviously the Civil War sniper that shot Major General John Sedgwick in the face and off his horse from 500 yards didn't know his firearm was limited to 100 yards.

Geeez....You would think that with all the internet resources available, people would do a little homework and get their facts straight rather than post their personal bias's as truth.

[Charles S]

Butch,

I am a hunter. I love being around hunters, but I don’t think I would like you. I don’t know,
I am judging your personality based on one thread.

I cannot stand your judgmental attitude. Your way is obviously the only way that is correct.

Hunters are having a tough time. There are fewer and fewer of us. I firmly believe that we should embrace each other, and utilize our knowledge to teach, and foster the sport, not to belittle those who don’t do it like we do.

I personally admire those who choose to make their own bows, and arrows and shoot traditional points. Have I attainted that level of skill, no, but I am working toward that! According to you I should just stop hunting until I achieve that level.

I shoot a recurve bow. That is a technologic advantage over a longbow. I guess I am wrong for that.

You never answered the question about your use of camouflage.

I walk in to my stands. I carry my stands in. I still hunt.

Do I look down on others who choose to rifle hunt from stands over feeders and utlize ATVs, no. I try to teach and encourage every rifle hunter I meet. Maybe some will become bow hunters, some will become traditional black powder shooters, some will learn to still hunt.

Until you make your own clothing, walk to your hunting area from your home, make your own powder, and make your own firearm, I suggest you get off your high horse and embrace our sport, our comradery, and use your knowledge to teach, not to judge and belittle.

My 2 cents.

Charles

[butch50]

Rembrandt:Where does this "less than a 100 yards" come from? Civil War soldiers qualified by hitting a 10" target 10 times at 200 yards. Obviously the Civil War sniper that shot Major General John Sedgwick in the face and off his horse from 500 yards didn't know his firearm was limited to 100 yards.

Geeez....You would think that with all the internet resources available, people would do a little homework and get their facts straight rather than post their personal bias's as truth.

I would enjoy reading about this, what are your sources? Snipers making lucky shots at 500 yards do not qualify as evidence that traditional muzzleloaders are consiistenly capable of such shots.

Charles S: I am a hunter. I love being around hunters, but I don’t think I would like you. I don’t know,
I am judging your personality based on one thread.

OK. I am not running for elected office, I am criticizing a phenomenon that I think is ruining our sport.

Charles S: You never answered the question about your use of camouflage.

I thought I had, but that may have been on another thread. No, I do not use camo - typically I dress in workboots, blue jeans, a khaki style shirt, a blaze orange vest and hat.

Charles S: Until you make your own clothing, walk to your hunting area from your home, make your own powder, and make your own firearm, I suggest you get off your high horse and embrace our sport, our comradery, and use your knowledge to teach, not to judge and belittle.

Am I abrasive? Yes. Do you know why? Because I care about our sport to the point that I am willing to irritate the crap out of people to get them to stop and look at what is happening. I am going to paste a review, along with the source of that review. Please read it and tell me that the muzzleloader season is not being, or will soon be, ruined by loophole manufacturers and slob hunters willing to take any advantage they can:

Savage's New Smokeless Muzzleloader
by Jeff Quinn
photography by Jeff Quinn

There are basically two very different points of view concerning muzzleloading rifles for hunting. First, there is the traditional school of thought regarding the rifle and equipment. In this traditional group, most hunters use a side-hammer rifle of either flintlock or more likely percussion ignition, with either black powder or a black powder substitute. These hunters, for good reason, reject any modern equipment such as scope sights and inline ignition.

The other group of hunters, we'll call them the modern hunters for lack of a better term, welcome any new innovations in muzzleloading rifles. They view the muzzleloading hunting season as time to get in more hunting by using a different weapon than their breechloading centerfire rifles or shotguns.

If you adhere to the first, or more traditional, philosophy, this gun review is not for you. This article deals with the most modern and innovative muzzleloader to date. This new muzzleloader will, for the first shot anyway, give away nothing in performance to a modern big game centerfire rifle. This new rifle is the Savage Model 10MLSS-II.

This new muzzleloader from Savage, while perfectly capable of fine accuracy with black powder or Pyrodex, was designed for use with modern smokeless powder, very similar to what is used in cartridge firearms. While black powder or Pyrodex performs very well, as it has for many years, it cannot equal the performance of modern smokeless powder. The main objection that I hear from hunters using black powder or a substitute is that of the daily cleaning chore following the shooting of the weapon. To the traditional hunter, this is just part of the charm of using a more primitive weapon. To the modern deer hunter who just wants to hunt, it is a pain in the neck.

Continued next thread:

[butch50]

Inline technology in muzzleloaders has been around for a few years in its modern incarnation, and has been a welcome innovation by the modern hunter. Inline rifles greatly simplify the mounting of a scope sight, and make the cleaning of the rifle a bit easier. The new Savage uses this inline configuration in their 10 ML muzzleloaders.

Savage makes their 10ML in both blued steel and stainless, the latter being the rifle reviewed here. Both the blued and stainless rifles are identical except for the type of steel used in their construction, with all other specifications being the same. The Savage has a checkered, pillar-bedded synthetic stock similar to those used on their excellent centerfire rifles, and comes equipped with sling swivel studs installed. The medium-heavy barrel is free-floated for its entire length, and is fitted with open adjustable sights. Savage lists the barrel length as twenty-four inches, but the internal length, from muzzle to breech plug measures twenty-two and one-eighth inches.

The action is very similar to the familiar centerfire Savage action, with the changes necessary to function as a muzzleloader. The breech face of the bolt is machined to easily accept a number 209 shotshell primer, providing plenty of fire to ignite the powder charge. On the right side of the receiver, just forward of the bolt handle, is a cocking indicator with a red dot on its surface, which can be easily seen and felt to check the firing condition of the rifle. The safety is, as on all Savage centerfire rifles, right behind the bolt in the top center of the rifle, just as it should be. The receiver is drilled and tapped to accept any scope bases that are made for Savage rifles.

Upon inspection of the 10MLSS-II, as the stainless version is called, the quality of fit and finish is very well done. The gun has a muzzle-heavy balance, which is a real help for offhand shooting, which often occurs when hunting. The rifle weighs seven and three-quarters pounds without scope. The trigger pull, while crisp, was a bit heavy for my taste at about five pounds, but can be easily lightened by a qualified gunsmith. This is about average for a factory rifle, and is understandable in today's litigious society. This weight of pull is probably acceptable to most hunters, but I am accustomed to using a set-trigger on my muzzleloaders. When you only have one shot, you really want it to be on the mark.

What really got me interested in a muzzleloader that used smokeless powder, was the fact that the old hot-water-and-soap cleaning method needed with other muzzleloaders could be forgotten. This fact is probably the main selling point to most purchasers of this rifle, and a good selling point it is. In this aspect of the gun alone, Savage has the market to itself. No other major muzzleloader manufacturer recommends the use of smokeless powder in their rifles, in fact, they strictly warn against the use of anything but black powder or an approved substitute. Being able to come in from a long day's hunt and set the rifle in the rack, without the messy cleaning, is a welcome bonus to most hunters.

While the clean-shooting characteristics of the gun got my attention, what really surprised me is the performance of the weapon, as compared to every other muzzleloader on the market. Savage's literature that accompanies the rifle lists some pretty impressive loads using three different smokeless powders. The data includes loads using Vitavouri N110, IMR 4227, and Accurate Arms XMP-5744, all of which are relatively fast-burning for a rifle powder. The loads listed by Savage will beat black powder loads, with the same bullet weights, by several hundred feet-per-second.

I decided to try some different powders for this article, since Savage had already done the work with the powders listed. All powders were within the same range of burning speed to the powders listed above. I assembled all the necessary components and equipment needed for an exhaustive workout of the new rifle. I was a bit apprehensive at first pouring smokeless powder into a muzzleloader, having been warned most of my life never to do so. I do want to interject at this point never to use smokeless powder in any muzzleloader other than the Savage, until such time that others make their rifles to handle the pressures. Also, you must be very meticulous in measuring the powder, and I strongly suggest weighing each powder charge. This muzzleloader is not for the careless amateur, but for the serious shooter. While a slight overcharge with black powder is no big deal, overcharging with smokeless can cause serious harm to the gun and shooter.

The 10ML uses bullets of either .451 or .452 inch diameter in fifty caliber magnum sabots. Be sure to use the magnum sabots, as the cheap soft ones give unsatisfactory results with the velocities of which this rifle is capable.

All range testing was done on a sunny day with temperatures between 55 and 70 degrees, with slight to gusting winds, which made the task of weighing powder charges difficult with the wind playing with the balance beam scales. Velocities were monitored with the aid of the excellent PACT chronograph. The PACT makes all the mathematical calculations of standard deviation and extreme spreads so that the shooter can concentrate on the shooting. All shooting for groups was at 100 yards, with the aid of a Tasco 4 to 16 power target scope.

The accuracy of this rifle was very good with every bullet tried, but the best were the Hornady 250 grain XTP, the Hornady 300 grain XTP, and the excellent Cast Performance 335 grain LBT-style cast bullet. Of the sabots tested, the Hornady proved to work the best in this rifle. These three bullets shot into five-shot groups of between one and one-and-one-quarter inches at 100 yards. The aggregate group for thirteen different loads was less than three inches.

The loads that proved to be amazing to me used the three listed bullets above with Hodgdon's Lil' Gun powder. This powder, which has already become one of my favorite pistol powders (see Jeff's article at Hodgdon Lil' Gun Powder), turned in good velocities with each bullet tested, and the spreads and deviations were some of the best I've ever seen. I was able to reach speeds approaching that of a .375 H&H Magnum with equal bullet weights. For example, the loads with the Hornady 250 and 300 grain bullets using Lil Gun averaged 2552 and 2432 fps, respectively. The Cast Performance 335 grain averaged 2370 fps with Lil Gun. This relates to around 4300 foot-pounds of energy at the muzzle. As a comparison, this muzzleloader has more retained energy at 300 yards with these loads than the mighty .454 Casull has at the muzzle out of a handgun! This kind of performance from a fifty caliber muzzleloader is amazing. Most other inlines won't do half of that. I also need to interject here that neither Hodgdon nor Savage recommends this powder in this gun. The loads were safe and very consistent in this rifle. I believe that Lil Gun is the best powder to use in this rifle, and beats the performance of the other powders significantly, but I will not list the charge weights here. You will have to determine what is best in your particular gun, but I am sticking with Lil Gun in this Savage.

The significant fact about this load, with either of the bullets, aside from the awesome power, is the trajectory. With a 200 yard zero, you can hold dead-on out to 250 yards without the bullet varying from line-of-sight more than three and one-half inches. This gun is, in capable hands, a 250 yard or better muzzleloader. It will place the bullet on the mark, with power to spare for most any game. With the Cast Performance bullet, this gun has ample power for any animal on this continent.

If you are inclined toward an inline muzzleloader, the Savage is the logical choice. It beats the competition in power, trajectory, and ease-of-maintenance. On second thought, the Savage has no competition, as it is the only game in town for a smokeless muzzleloader. Our local gun dealer, McLain's Firearms in Carlisle, Tennessee, can't keep them in stock. They go out the door as fast as he can get them in. I never really cared at all for an inline muzzleloader, as my old side-hammer Hawken has served me well, but this new Savage is a whole new concept in power and performance, just by virtue of using a propellant that has been around for more than 100 years.

Check out this Savage 10 MLSS-II online at: www.savagearms.com. Suggested retail is $451 in blued steel and $507 in stainless as of this writing.

For the traditional hunter, any inline muzzleloader seems out of place in the woods, but for the modern muzzleloading hunter.......... this Savage just made all other inlines obsolete.

This is your baby.

Jeff Quinn http://www.gunblast.com/SavageML10.htm

How soon will the competition for this gun heat up to the point that you can buy these kind of rilfes everywhere? Do you not think that this rifle is a loophole rifle and that the so called sportsmen using it are not loophole hunters? If this one doesn't bother you, what will? And when?

[Charles S]

Butch,

Thanks for the reply.

I was aware of the new Savage Muzzle Loader, it does load from the muzzle, and it has the ballistics of a modern center-fire rifle. Why should it not, it utilizes modern smokeless powder.

I also agree that shooting deer with a center-fire rifle (that is what it really is) during muzzle loading season is not what the original intent was. The approach I take is to educate others about the original intent and about hunting in general.

For me hunting is a journey not a destination.

Am I abrasive? Yes. Do you know why? Because I care about our sport to the point that I am willing to irritate the crap out of people to get them to stop and look at what is happening.

In truth, you and I have the same goals, we just try different approaches. I do not believe that further regulations are the answer, but I have never believed that the Government fixes anything with new laws, there are always loopholes, and people who ignore them all together. (Poaching is a real problem in my neck of the woods).

I really think that the best approach is to educate the hunting populous. Some will not respond, but some will. I don't think the answer is to exclude others who think differently.

Charles

[Charles S]

If this one doesn't bother you, what will? And when?

The use of the Savage does bother me, does the use of a Thompson Center Encore bother me, no not really, but that is just an arbitrary standard.

I do not muzzle load, but I really would like to. I think that a traditional rifle would be great fun. I have always wanted a kit where I could finish the rifle myself.

Do compound bows bother me, no. There is still a tremendous handicap on the average bow hunter.

What does bother me.

Poaching!

Slob hunters that make us all look bad!

The decline of the sport!

Marijuana fields in the woods.

Meth factories in the woods.

I have plenty of things that bother me more than a person shooting an inline with pyrodex pellets.

Charles

[Trip20]

http://www.dfw.state.or.us/ODFWhtml/...ader_regs.html

Also, the term "slob hunter" I reserve for poachers, and hunters who, in general, treat animals with no respect. I do not think this term should be used for people who use technology to hunt, and fill their legally purchased tags.

[impact]

I do not muzzle load, but I really would like to. I think that a traditional rifle would be great fun. I have always wanted a kit where I could finish the rifle myself.

You should give it a try. It's loads of fun. Despite what some people think. You really don't lose much in the way of power or accuracy with a black powder gun. The only difference is you only have one shot.

Years ago I was reading a article that Hank Willians jr wrote about shooting Black powder vs smokless in a 45-70 or 45 something like 70 or 110. It was a good read. He shot a life size bufflo made from a steel plate at I think 900 yards. He could hit the bufflo most of the time with Black powder loads and about 40% with smokless. Like I said it was a long time ago. But I do remember how the BP shot better. He even let his wife shoot the target and she hit it on her first shot with the BP.

I know of a guy that shoots BP competition. I went to range with him a few times. I can't out shoot the guy at 50 yards with my modern hand guns. he shoots BP hand guns as well. I always thought I was a fair shot with a hand gun!

I have Ruger Vaquero stainless in 45 colt that I load with BP. I use 25grs of 3F BP and I will tell what. It is not a wimpy load. I seems to have just as much power as smokless loads. The BP just makes a mess of my gun. Before I get to 50 rds I need to clean the gun. I'm pretty sure thats why we use smokless today

[Toney]

You know if it was'nt for those annimal activests our hunting
seasons would probbly be a lot different . But i really enjoy ML season
I hunt with both at the same time really like patched ball but that
scope is handy early and late in the day and a second shot is
good to

[454c]

A .45 cal. chunk a lead leaving the barrel at near 375 H&H speeds.No thanks.I'll pass.

By the way,most state regs I've read prohibit smokeless powder in ML.It sounds cool but kinda pointless.

Speaking of poachers and ML,I still haven't seen a repeating ML.You know,the one when you're hunting in ML season and in the distance you hear boom,boom,boom,boom,silence.

[Trip20]

By the way,most state regs I've read prohibit smokeless powder in ML.It sounds cool but kinda pointless.

Really? Last night I was going through state regs for ML season. I got through about 12 states before I got tired and went to bed. Not one state prohibited smokeless powder. I'll get through all 50 states eventually.

[454c]

My use of the word "most" might be a stretch but a fast google search turned up 8 that said smokeless was a no go.

Mississippi was a strange one.In the 'primitive season", they don't allow smokeless in a muzzleloder but you can use it in a breech loader designed pre-1900.I think I just heard Butch hit the floor.

[Charles S]

I think I just heard Butch hit the floor.

LMAO

Charles

[Trip20]

My use of the word "most" might be a stretch but a fast google search turned up 8 that said smokeless was a no go.

Oh I didn't think you were being untruthful. I was just suprised, because as I stated I was just doing that sort of thing and hadn't stumbled across the "no smokeless" states.

Going through the ones I'd reviewed, I thought I was seeing pattern, but who knows the view on smokeless powder may be divided 50/50 through out the states.

[stevelyn]

Having been a dedicated bowhunter since I was a teenager, I've heard the same arguement of divisiveness between the compound shooters and the traditionalist longbow/recurve shooters. It has even extended to having both the traditionalists and compund shooters ganging up on the crossbow shooters. The truth is, the effective in-the-field range of both hand held and crossbows are similar.
What I've noticed about the bickering between the disciplines, is that the anti-hunter/animal rights PETA trash has been out to ban all hunting.
The different disciplines have been quick to point out the challenges of their particular sport in order placate the anti's at the expense of one particular discipline over another, compromising away their rights in hopes that the antis leave them alone.
Of course the proper response would be for hunters of all disciplines to band together to fight the antis rather than turning on each other and diminishing their (our) numbers even more.
Kinda sounds like the plaid-wearing Elmers who turn on their EBR shooting counterparts diminishing all of our rights dosen't it?
The muzzleloading debate is no different. It's a non-issue. Look at who the real enemy is and then tell me if the equipment one chooses to hunt with really makes a difference in the end.

[Charles S]

Of course the proper response would be for hunters of all disciplines to band together to fight the antis rather than turning on each other and diminishing their (our) numbers even more.

+1

Charles

[butch50]

I think I just heard Butch hit the floor.

You sure did!

Of course the proper response would be for hunters of all disciplines to band together to fight the antis rather than turning on each other and diminishing their (our) numbers even more.

We are all united against the anti's - but that doesn't mean we can't also disagree amongst ourselves on how best to pursue the sport.

The muzzleloading debate is no different. It's a non-issue. Look at who the real enemy is and then tell me if the equipment one chooses to hunt with really makes a difference in the end.

With that attitude, why bother having bow and ML seasons at all? Just whatever whenever should be good enough? The real enemy is the hunter who does nothing to improve the sport - the real enemy is the slob hunter.

Also, the term "slob hunter" I reserve for poachers, and hunters who, in general, treat animals with no respect. I do not think this term should be used for people who use technology to hunt, and fill their legally purchased tags.

My use of slob hunter is reserved for the hunters who trash the sport, in this case by using advanced technology during primitive hunting seasons. Of course there are many kinds of slob hunters, the road hunters, the guy who leaves trash behind, etc....

For me hunting is a journey not a destination.

Precisely, and the quality of the journey is far more important that the eventual destination.

[stevelyn]

Uhmmm........butch,

What someone else uses to pursue a game animal has nothing to do with what I choose to use, nor does it take away from my enjoyment of it.

My take on hunting is a little different than your's too. Living in bush Alaska, hunting is more of a necessity rather than a sport. That doesen't mean disobey hunting laws and regulations. It simply means when the freezer needs filled, I can't afford to handicap myself by adding to the challenge. I need to take advantage of and make use of the technology available as long as it falls within the boundries of the law.
Due to safety concerns of human sprawl, bowhunting and muzzleloading only areas are a necessity to effective wildlife management. I support these and the longer seasons that are usually a part of them, and participate when I can.
However, the configuration of the bow or muzzleloader is immaterial and the arguements concerning them are elitist.
The plaid wearing Elmer with the in-line has as much right to be out there during the ML season as the guy in buckskins and a flintlock. The same goes for the bowhunters.

[Art Eatman]

It seems sto me there is a satisfaction in setting a challenge for oneself and meeting it. BUT: It's up to each individual to set his own challenges.

To a great extent I agree with Butch50's overall philosophy about how to hunt. What I don't do is worry about what other people do.

I started hunting and shooting over sixty years ago. I expect myself to have certain levels of ability beyond some youngun who's just getting started. So, if I'm gonna believe I'm better than some other guy, I think I oughta stay quiet about it. Give him a period of time and he may well come to outdo anything I ever managed. "Records were made to be broken."

While hunting over a feeder or using a bunch of high-tech stuff isn't my style, why should I--or anyone--raise a ruckus about those who do? Like I said, everyone gets to set his own level of challenge.

Butch50 spoke of the progression which comes with age and experience. I think the same sort of thing happens with the level of challenge folks set for themselves, generally. You get to a point where, '"Hey, this is too easy!" and try something different...

Doesn't matter. As long as folks enjoy and respect the outdoors and the critters, it's all Just Huntin'.

Art

[butch50]

What someone else uses to pursue a game animal has nothing to do with what I choose to use, nor does it take away from my enjoyment of it.

That is pretty much the crux of the disagreement - I do care what other hunters do. I have seen too many slippery slopes before, and this is another one. Given time hunting will become something completely unrecognizable and without challenge, if we keep allowing technology to run without restraint. Recall that the ML and Bow seasons were designed around the equipment at the time, and even now the equipment is becoming unrecognizable. 10 years from now, if no limits are established, there will be a lot of deer killing happening out there in the woods, but it won't be hunting as we know it.

Doesn't matter. As long as folks enjoy and respect the outdoors and the critters, it's all Just Huntin'.

See above, same comment really.

[Trip20]

Originally Posted by butch50

I have seen too many slippery slopes before...

Could you be more melodramatic? Never mind, don't answer that.

That is pretty much the crux of the disagreement - I do care what other hunters do.

We're well aware of that, butch. You care to the point of insulting plenty of people on this, and another thread.

What do you hope to accomplish? Are you on an "awareness campaign" to make people aware of what an "abomination" the sport of hunting has become due to the "slippery slope" upon which it now resides, which is a directly related to the "maniacal frenzy" brought upon by the “specialized corporations”?

Hunt your way. Everyone else will hunt his or her way.

You've no more right to tell anyone how they should hunt or what equipment they should use, than any anti-gunner has the right to tell you what type of weapons you should own (if any) based on their opinion of what's right and wrong.

[butch50]

Gee Trip - Are you personally offended? Did I push some of your own buttons?

I have a low opinion of some hunters. I do indeed. You know what, I am right to have that opinion of them too.