# Muzzle Loading Get togeather Nov 5th



## Zfish (Apr 5, 2004)

Lundy,


We had talked about having a get togeather this day.. Is that still looking good? Figured I'd make an official topic so we could see if everything is still a go then who we have going.


----------



## saugeyesam (Apr 20, 2004)

i wouldnt mind going to something like that does it have to be a traditional muzzel loader cause i have both types. just say where at.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

Z,

If you have somewhere we can get together and shoot I'm all for it.

It would be a good opportunity to have everyone get the slug guns and MZ's sighted in.

I have a bunch of different bullets and powders for MZ shooters to try if they are having troubles getting it to perform.

I must say that I will be standing way back if anyone is shooting CVA, Traditions, Beartooth, (all BPI MZ's)MZ's. Way too many of the Spanish barrels they use have been coming apart.

If we get enough guys and you want to do it, I'm in


----------



## WalleyeGuy (Apr 9, 2004)

Is this an OGF Bang, Bang shoot`em up?


----------



## littleking (Jun 25, 2005)

what about delaware?


----------



## PoleSnatcher (Apr 6, 2004)

Lundy said:


> I must say that I will be standing way back if anyone is shooting CVA, Traditions, Beartooth, (all BPI MZ's)MZ's. Way too many of the Spanish barrels they use have been coming apart.



I bought a Traditions Tracker 209 last year and never have shot it yet. Is there a recall or anything I should be looking for


----------



## Ðe§perado™ (Apr 15, 2004)

I won't be able to make it. I work Sats. now with this new job.


----------



## DaleM (Apr 5, 2004)

Been shooting my tracker for years with out a single problem. I myself have never heard of any having problems. Kim-- where did you get this info.? Vances told me they haven't had problems with any of their trackers they have sold in the last few years.


----------



## Zfish (Apr 5, 2004)

Im kind of curious as well.. I have a cva Kodiak with the ss barrel. I havent heard of any issues.. In fact every magainze rates it one of the top 5 picks. Everyone I talked to that had it absolutely loved it.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

Posted: Fri Oct 07, 2005 5:30 pm Post subject: Dangerous Muzzleloaders 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dangerous Muzzleloaders 


In my opinion, FAR too many people have had their lives destroyed by reportedly using cheap imported muzzleloaders as directed by manufacturers printed instructions. There are no muzzleloading standards, and there is no governing body in the American muzzleloading scene to effect any semblance of quality control or reasonable safety testing. 

According to one attorney, his client is an ex-marine who has been trained for about 13 years on how to clean, load, and fire a muzzle loading rifle. The accident occurred 3 days after he received the rifle as a gift from his daughter. It was a new Traditions .50 caliber inline. The attorney believes he was using the gun as directed by the manufacturer on the date of the accident. The man has lost his right hand as a result of the explosion. 

Another attorneys report details how a man purchased a new CVA .50 caliber inline, a package of 50 caliber / 50 grain Hodgdon brand Triple Seven propellant pellets, a package of Winchester brand W209 Primers and a CVA brand .50 caliber Complete Muzzleloading Accessory Outfit at a chain store according to the receipt. A short while later, one primer was fired per the instructions and then, to sight in the muzzleloader, loaded 3 of the 50 grain pellets, a .50 caliber PowerBelt 295 grain hollow point bullet with plastic sabot snap-on base and a W209 primer. He fired the muzzleloader and the barrel exploded. His wife was present at the scene of the accident. She transported him to the hospital ER. This man was in the emergency room within about two hours of his new purchase. Two surgeries have already been performed in an attempt to repair the damage to his hand as a result of the explosion. More are indicated. 

In another incident, a different man, with approximately 20-25 years of experience hunting with muzzleloaders / black powder guns, was target shooting on a Saturday with a friend, using his CVA inline. The hospital reports that after being stabilized x-rays were taken which revealed a large metallic FB with spring located at angle of the mandible. 

In yet another CVA incident a man with ten years of muzzleloading under his belt was sighting in a new scope on his CVA inline. His brother and nephew were present. After the catastrophic failure, his injuries reportedly consisted of a torn right nostril from the base of the nostril to just below the right eye socket. It took 40-45 stitches to close this wound. His nose was broken and his right cheek bone was broken. 

A concerned consumer recently wrote to Mark Hendricks, Technical Manager, Connecticut Valley Arms (CVA), 5988 Peachtree Corners East Norcross, GA 30071. The letter describes how a design defect nearly caused the death of this mans son-in-law. It reads, in part, My opinion as a graduate engineer, is that CVA has a critical design defect, which should be corrected immediately, and should require a product recall. 

In addition to this problem, we discussed the rationale for specifying barrel strength, and I asked you what the strength of CVA muzzleloader barrels was. You would only tell me that the minimum specification was 700 kp/cm2. When I asked you what the maximum pressure spec was, you told me that no one knows, and that ignorance is bliss. In other words, you could not tell me at what load pressure the barrel would burst. Is this the same attitude that I heard your customer service technician express when he said that the problem I reported had never occurred, therefore it was not possible? 

Jim Bruno, VP of Traditions Firearms, e-mailed me a while back, stating in part: 

Randy, 
Do you think that we would make a firearm that would not support charges that we advertise and market to the public of the United States of America? I know that you are evaluating and comparing muzzleloaders of different companies in the blackpowder industry and have done a pretty thorough job but understand that every time you write or speak any negative comments about our industry you provide ammunition for the people who do not believe that the 2nd amendment exists. 

Well, Jim, Ill answer you here and now. First of all, you are clearly unaware of what you are selling. You manufacture no muzzleloaders, you merely buy themimporting them from a company in Spain. You have no known testing facilities of your own. You have been unable to show that your imported, cheap frontloaders are tested with the charges you recommendcharges that are not allowed by powder manufacturers. Only someone completely ignorant of all the needless pain and suffering going on today would attempt to turn your incompetence and lack of knowledge about your own product into a 2nd Amendment issue. If you think that the 2nd Amendment is an entitlement for you to foist substandard product, built to unknown or non-existent standards on the American consumer, my opinion is that your mind is as defective as your guns seem to be. 

Terry L. Eby, BPI, National Sales Manager / Retail, e-mails in part: 

Randy: 
I dont consider my language careless and I absolutely stand by my opinion that your position has no basis in fact -- but much in conjecture and assumption. If your implication that we would knowingly put our customers at risk is not defamatory, I dont know what is. 

Well, Terry, the basis in fact will be presented to you by our court system, as your many injured consumers have no other recourse. While your company, BPI is Spanish owned and operated, you as well have no proper American testing facilities. Do you have any at all? The brands you peddle, CVA, Beartooth, and Winchester Muzzleloading still come from the very same factory that the sorely defective CVA Apollo came from, with the same steel, dont they? This is the CVA Apollo gun that had so many personal injury claims against the old CVA, it was forced into receivershipis that not true? There is nothing to indicate that your sub-standard proofs, and poor quality control is any better now than it was then. If you dont believe the printed results from Lyman Ballistic Laboratories showing 25,000 PSI peak pressures in three pellet loads that YOU recommend in your manuals for use in your guns that bear a 10,000 PSI area House of Eibar definitive proof mark, you are welcome to take it up with them. Perhaps your lack of logic is manifested the same way as comments attributed to your technical manager, Mark Hendricks, that ignorance is bliss. Hodgdon powders allows only two 50 gr. equivalent Pyrodex or Triple Seven pellets MAXIMUM to be used in .50 caliber inlines. YOU recommend THREE. By what authority is this done? On what basis is this done? As good doctors say, Its not that what you dont know cant hurt you . . . it can absolutely kill you. 

The huge pity of all this is that proven safe, quality muzzleloaders have NEVER been more plentiful, or more affordable. Knight Rifles, NEF / H & R, Thompson / Center Arms, and Austin & Halleck all currently offer exemplary inline muzzleloading rifles today that you wont be betting your life on. The Savage 10ML-II is the best built frontloader of them all, using the Savage magnum centerfire barrel as a starting point. The affordable Knight Wolverine, proven for twenty years right now, is a shining example of how you can fly first class with a Green Mountain barrel for an economy ticket price. 

The girl behind the counter at Wally World may be oblivious to all this, and apparently large retailers such as Bass Pro and Cabelas are as well. Ive heard and seen enough of this nonsense to last me several lifetimes, I dont have the stomach for much more human blood. The cheap, extruded barreled stuff should give anyone cause for pause. These guns are built like tinker toys, in my opinion. Any propane tank for a gas grill is built to a better, uniform standard of testing for the applicationat least your propane tank must pass hydro. And, it sure isnt just my opinionyou wont find muzzleloading legends like Doc White, Henry Ball, or Del Ramsey that dissent. 

It is my considered opinion that Traditions and CVA branded product with soft, extruded, insufficiently proofed barrels are not fit to be sold, much less used. Id much rather dial in a Knight Wolverine than dial 911. Wouldnt anybody? 

© 2005 by Randy Wakeman, All Right Reserved. 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Wolfhound adds: Stories like this are now starting to get out to the online public. I've read about a few this past year. 

http://www.huntingpa.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/272363/an/0/page/3#272363 

http://www.monstermuleys.info/dcforum/DCForumID14/867.html
_________________
Randy


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

What is the Big Deal About Proof?

Written By Randy Wakeman




Royal Charter of the London Company of Gunmakers was formed in 1637, which led to the formal introduction of "proof" to England. The Birmingham Proof House was established in 1813, and remains in operation to this day. The purpose is unchanged. 

To quote the Birmingham Proof House, "Proof is the compulsory and statutory testing of every new shotgun or other small arm before sale to ensure, so far as it is practicable, its safety in the hands of the user. Reproof is the similar testing of a small arm which has previously been proved. Both necessarily involve the firing through the barrel of a considerably heavier load than is customary in the shooting field, thereby setting up pressure and stress on barrel and action much in excess of the pressure generated by standard load cartridges. Such pressure should, and is intended to, disclose weakness in guns, whether new or used, for it is preferable that weakness be found at a Proof House rather than in the field, where personal injury may result."

There are two civilian bodies that govern manufacturing and proofing standards throughout the world: the C.I.P, headquartered in Liege, Belgium, and SAAMI in the United States. In the United States, SAAMI publishes the standards approved by ANSI that are voluntary in the United States for use by commercial manufacturers. Membership in SAAMI is not law, it is elective.

The CIP standards, however, are compulsory and law. They are also recognized by all member nations (U.K., Spain, Italy, Finland, France, Russia, Germany, etc.). Military standards (NATO, and so forth) can differ from these civilian regulatory bodies. SAAMI centerfire standards are MAP x 1.3. The CIP has their own standard set, however blackpowder arms languish. The current rule set is here, courtesy of the Birmingham Proof House: http://members.aol.com/randymagic/bpcip.pdf . This is where the problems have crept in regarding the so-called "Cheap Charlie" guns perpetrated on the public by Traditions and CVA / Winchester Muzzleloading / New Frontier ("B.P.I."). Made in Spain, the guns are proofed by a C.I.P. proof house, but to the very lowest level allowed in order to get the soft barrels out of the country, and into Cabela's, BassPro, and Wally World. That pressure level has been the 700 kiloponds per cm2 stamped right on the barrels, an archaic term that translates to a bit less than 10,000 PSI. 

A proof mark stating 700kpcm2 does not mean a firearm is guaranteed to fail at a given pressure, clearly many do not. It only means that the proof house states that is the pressure they are tested to. Applying similar standards as used in many centerfires, a 7500 PSI maximum service pressure would be consistent. There are many black powder round ball loads that fall within that parameter, but clearly not today's common 3-pellet loads.

It is my strong opinion that it is that substandard level of testing, with no known testing facilities in the U.S. by Traditions or CVA, that has resulted in the severe injuries I am independently aware of. Lyman Ballistic Labs data has long proved that a typical 3 pellet Pyrodex load can produce 25,000 PSI or more in frontloaders. Yet, the CIP has no requirements for the testing of Pyrodex pellets, Triple Seven pellets-in fact, no alleged "blackpowder subs" at all-just blackpowder values alone as shown at the link above. The very first time the muzzleloader sees this level of pressure, 250% or more of its CIP proof, is often when the consumer pulls the trigger for the very first time. Too often, a call to 911 is the result. All completely needless, these first shot catastrophic failures could easily be avoided. This is in stark contrast to the ultrasound work as published by Pedersoli of Italia, and "over 40 inspections for dimensional changes which would indicate the slightest flaw" there is no evidence that and proper quality controls are in place. Time and time again, Traditions and CVA have been asked if their muzzleloaders have ever been tested to 20,000 PSI? 25,000 PSI? There has been no answer. Yet, they recommend loads in their inlines that exceed 25,000 PSI in their inline owner's manuals all the time. As their victims know all too well-their guns do fail, and I sadly have been privy to a portion of the carnage. The solution is a pathetically simple one: proof their guns to MAP x 1.3, which I believe would eliminate a great deal of the needless bloodshed. 

It will continue as long as the American consumer allows it. They are breaking no laws, they are legally getting their cheap guns out of Spain. Once the containers hit retail in the U.S., they owe the consumer nothing. The CPSC cannot regulate firearms, and the BATF does not classify them as firearms: they are "non-GCA of 1968," non form 4473 arms. The customer's only recourse is to seek compensation for personal injuries after the grievous injuries have occurred. Someone should have a big, big problem with the timing of that; I know I do. How soon people forget that the "old CVA" was forced out of business not so very long ago because of cheap, but flagrantly defective frontloaders! 

It is not that the Spanish are incapable of producing well-tested, properly proofed product. Spanish doubles can be some of the best, but quality comes at a price. Austin & Halleck uses Ardessa S.A. barreled actions; however Austin & Halleck has insisted on a higher level of proof than CVA or Traditions, and they immediately got it. Austin & Halleck also does further testing in the USA, and they are to be commended for both actions that insure consumer safety.

Respectable companies, with manufacturing plants and significant assets in the United States such as Austin & Halleck, Knight Rifles, Thompson / Center Arms, and Savage Arms, build and TEST their guns to a much higher standard. Does that surprise anyone?

Savage Arms does the industry one better in the production of their Savage 10ML-II muzzleloader. Every single Savage 10ML-II is proof-tested to SAAMI center fire levels (MAP x 1.3) before it leaves their plant. It is not a mandatory SAAMI procedure, but Savage does it with all their centerfires-their muzzleloader is built to the same, very high, standards of quality as all their rifles, and each one undergoes personal factory testing under live fire before leaving the plant. 

Lacking any muzzleloading standards or governing body, Austin & Halleck, Knight Rifles, Thompson / Center Arms, and Savage Arms have done their part to make muzzleloading a better place-and they deserve our support for that.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

I'm not telling you what you should or shouldn't shoot, that's all each of your own personal choices.

There is more than enough information available and enough cases of catastrophic failure and injury that my decision is and was easy. It's not worth the risk to me.

To each his own.

Kim


----------



## bronzebackyac (Apr 19, 2005)

So what about them Beng.... No, What about this shoot. Anybody have a place picked out. I think it would be a good time. Maybe even make it a little tourney for those who want to get in it. Have a traditional and an inline class or something. The inline guys have to stand a hundred yards away from everyone else when shooting. lol....


----------



## PoleSnatcher (Apr 6, 2004)

is it really this common? i "thought" i was getting a decent entry level rifle


----------



## noboatdave (May 5, 2004)

Lundy that is a very scary article and the Savage sounds like a great gun but it looks like your source may be a bit biased.

http://members.aol.com/randymagic/savage3.htm


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

There can be no doubt that the source is somewhat biased.That does not however change the record on gun failures that have occured

He strongly supports manufacturers besides Savage, like Knight, TC, A&H, White, H&R. All of these manufacturers have well made, tested firearms, in his opinion and their safety record appears to back that belief .

Again, Each person can do their own research and come to their own conclusions, just as I have.


----------



## Zfish (Apr 5, 2004)

If you guys remember I had a tradional style CVA last year that blew up in my face. The nipple blew out.. I couldnt hear out of my right ear for a few days.. my eyebrows and face got a little singed from the fire blowing out. 

I had a TC that was almost itentical and was extremly accurate and never had an issue.

That being said I read up and talked with cva.. I went ahead and stuck with them to choose the Kodiak. If there were many issues with that particular gun I dont think all the magazines would put that into thier top 5 pick. 

As far as a place to shoot I can ask a family friend that would be in Morrow County By Mt Gilead.


----------

