why are inlines able to take more powder?

[nelsonted1]

I have a 50 Hawken in I think 1 in 48 twist. It shoots round balls best at 40 grains, for targets, reals at 80 or so without losing accuracy. I understand about 100 grains is the max for these rifles.

I have always wondered why inlines are rated at or at advertised at 150 grains capable. Does that mean they shoot well at 150 or is that for advertising or a stress test of some sort.

What I'm wondering about are the guys packing in 150 grains of powder cause it says they can mean it is also efficient at 150 or are they throwing away 50 grains (plus getting pounded)?

Is this some kind of magical deal like bordello creepers making a person into a ghost?

Ted

[mooman76]

My inline is only rated at 100gr. I got mine cheap because they were starting to come out with the new "magnum" inlines. It is because they have better steel that they could rate them that high. I have never shot one but BP get very inefficiant when it gets into the real heavy loads and just an educated guess but I believe there is very little to gain much past 100gr and you are just burning extra powder. Bigger is always better. Right?

[6pt-sika]

I have a pair of Knight Disc Rifles that are rated for 150 grains of Triple 7 , but all I ever use is 110 grains .

One hundred fifty grains in most inlines is a distinct handfull on the recoil recieving end or atleast i think so !

In my flinters I load about 80 grains of BP in my 45 , about 90 in my 50 and 90 in my 54 . They shoot great and should be plenty stout enough to kill the man eating deer of Virginia :smile:

[Lead Fred]

Anything over 80 grains is a waste in most rifles under 54 cal.

You can fill the barrel up, and fire it, it wont hurt the barrel.
It may blow the nipple off tho :p

Dixie Gun WOrks did just that, there is a pic of it in the back of thier catalog

Not recomended to do so <--- liberal mandated safety warning

[StarMetal]

Better steel. For those that think shooting more powder is a waste try shooting over a chrono and look at the results. Yes, lower velocities surely will take deer, but the higher velocities extend your accurate distance and energy distance should you need it.

Joe

[Boz330]

Anything over 80 grains is a waste in most rifles under 54 cal.

You can fill the barrel up, and fire it, it wont hurt the barrel.
It may blow the nipple off tho :p

Dixie Gun WOrks did just that, there is a pic of it in the back of thier catalog

Not recomended to do so <--- liberal mandated safety warning

With BP and slugs this is true to a certain extent, BUT with Pyro or 777 and sabots the velocities are way up above what is possible with BP alone. Taking a deer is one thing but when you go after something like elk that extra energy and trajectory (or lack of) come in handy.

Bob

[KCSO]

Bpttpm line... it sells guns.

You can make a nippled or flintlock traditional muzzleloader that will stand a 150 grain charge but in a traditional rifle that would not be pleasant to shoot. I made a special english stalking rifle in 62 caliiber for an Elk gun for a friend. He routinely shoots very heavy charges and had killed elk and deer at what I would consider twice normal range for a traditional gun, but he practices with another gun or cuts his loads drasticly when not actually hunting or sighting in for hunting. Since I don't hunt at extreme range I see no need for anything over 80 grains of powder and a good round ball.

[StarMetal]

...and it is selling guns. With the new BP substitutes and sabot jacketed bullet on scoped rifle....they shoot darn near like modern cartridge rifles. Not that is my cup of tea. I still use the old Maxi-Ball in my BP rifle and I'm forced to use BP substitutes because BP is getting harder and harder to get in many places now. My rifle can handle the 150 grain charges, but I don't use them because simply I don't need that much and I'm not shooting the extended ranges.

Joe

[Underclocked]

I would say there are next to no inline shooters actually using 150 grains of loose powder (at least among those that have bothered to learn a little more than the salesman told them). Most guns rated for 150 grains are rated for 3 of the dern "50 grain equivalent to something" pellets - not loose powder. "Magnum" is boolchit.

[peter nap]

Ithink it's already been said. It sells guns.
As a traditional rifle builder and a lover of larger bores (.58 and up) and hunting in Virginia where shots are generally short, I usually load 70 to 80 grains.

The only inline I ever owned was a Knight that I got from someone that owed me money. For the fun of it, I tried to blow it up using T7 and 450 gr Great Plains bullets.

I couldn't do it. At 175 grains, I got scope nose and bled all over the thing and at 200 grains, I got bored and quit.
Gave the thing to another friend who wanted an inline but couldn't afford one.

[GabbyM]

I used to use 110 grains of fffg in my 45 cal Hawken. Once the nipple burned out a bit the hammer would recock from the blast out the nipple. Now my trigger is kind of botched up. I did that when I was a teenager and had no more sense than average.

[725]

Agree. It's a fine marketing ploy to sell more stuff. In some cases, however, it seems to be just what the Dr. ordered. If it works for you, go for it. Personally, less is more for me. Very efficient hunting is regularly done in the 70 to 80 grain range. If I were going to Kodiak Island, I'd be loading 150 grains even though accuracy tends to suffer somewhat.

[Hurricane]

Consider that the only thing sealing the chamber is the spring pressure on the hammer on a traditional muzzle loader. Too high a pressure can push the hammer up and release gas on the shooter. GabbyM gave an example of the hammer recocking with a 110 grain load. I once tried a 100 grain load under a maxi-ball and I got my eyebrow hair singed. My safety glasses protected my eyes. I now use 50 grains for plinking with round balls and 80 grains for a hunting load with either round ball or maxi-ball. Both Hodgdon and I recommend not using more than 100 grains when using Pyrodex pellets regardless of the advertising of the gun maker.

[Geraldo]

I found this on another board-the Davenport formula is how to figure out how much BP a given barrel can burn efficiently. That is, beyond 11.5gr per cubic inch of bore you reach the point of diminishing returns in regard to extra velocity. In other words beyond that point your velocity increases won't be worth the extra powder.

The formula is 11.5 (gr of BP)x 1/2 the bore diameter squared, x 3.1416 x barrel length in inches.

Using a 28" .50 , it would look like this: 11.5 x .0625 x 3.1416 x 28 = 63.22gr

I don't completely hold to this formula for a couple of reasons; use of 2f vs. 3 and differences in brand of powder. I've never done all the necessary chrono work, nor do I intend to, and it may have no value with substitutes, but it is a reasonable place to start. Of course the powder companies would be happy if someone developed a 200gr rifle.

My opinion is that if you need a bigger hammer, it's called a .58 or .62, not a .50 with 2-3 times the powder.

[StarMetal]

Why don't your traditionalist start pounding on the magnum centerfire rifle that are just magnum cartridges of standard ones...such as any of the 300 magnums, the 7mm magnum, 270, etc., etc., etc.. Just because you don't like or use them doesn't mean there's no place for them. Ditto to the new breed of inline 150 grain powder shooters.

By the way I'm one of those that does use loose powder in my inline and cast bullet....no plastic sabots or pellets for me.

If we want to get real traditional why don't we push for a bill to band all muzzle loaders that aren't of the old traditional style? hmmmmmm

Joe

[JesterGrin_1]

In many places they are starting to not allow the inline rifles to be used during Black Powder season. As Black Powder season was intended for traditional muzzle loaders not the fancy stuff they came out with when they started Black Powder seasons.

And I am sorry but I agree that these modern rifles that just happen to shoot black powder should not be allowed to be used during Black Powder season.

[StarMetal]

In many places they are starting to not allow the inline rifles to be used during Black Powder season. As Black Powder season was intended for traditional muzzle loaders not the fancy stuff they came out with when they started Black Powder seasons.

And I am sorry but I agree that these modern rifles that just happen to shoot black powder should not be allowed to be used during Black Powder season.

Many states have modified that a step further by making the season you talk about a primitive season and then have a season for the modern stuff.

I'm still hearing the "traditional" talk out of you fellows. Going to dictate what folks can hunt with now?

How many of you shoot the BP substitutes, but yet the BP is available in your area? Tell the truth, do you shoot it because of the so called problems, mess, and having to clean your firearms with BP? Why do powder companies keep coming out with new substitutes..one of the latest being Blackhorn 209 which isn't corrosive or hygroscopic.

Hey how about a spear season, whatya think?

Joe

[frontier gander]

heck traditional sidelocks have been shooting 150gr charges since the hawken days. Todays modern inline shooting 150gr charges is nothing new at all.

Trying to blow up a rifle while you're holding it is the dumbest thing ive ever heard of. Hopefully that scope nose knocked a little sense into you. If you want to blow something up, mount in in a vise or something and tie a LONG string to the trigger and hide behind a steel or cement wall. :killingpc

[StarMetal]

heck traditional sidelocks have been shooting 150gr charges since the hawken days. Todays modern inline shooting 150gr charges is nothing new at all.

Trying to blow up a rifle while you're holding it is the dumbest thing ive ever heard of. Hopefully that scope nose knocked a little sense into you. If you want to blow something up, mount in in a vise or something and tie a LONG string to the trigger and hide behind a steel or cement wall. :killingpc

I think it was TC Arms that said don't believe that story that a muzzle loader will blow the excess powder out the muzzle and not blow the barrel. The said it could be done. That U.S. Navy said don't believe that BP can't reach smokeless powder pressures too.

Joe

[Geraldo]

I'm still hearing the "traditional" talk out of you fellows. Going to dictate what folks can hunt with now?

How many of you shoot the BP substitutes, but yet the BP is available in your area? Tell the truth, do you shoot it because of the so called problems, mess, and having to clean your firearms with BP? Why do powder companies keep coming out with new substitutes..one of the latest being Blackhorn 209 which isn't corrosive or hygroscopic.


To me the primitive vs. inline thing is overblown. If I want to hunt with a muzzleloader I will do so and I could care less if someone else uses a .308, an inline, or a shotgun loaded with slugs. I grew up in a state that mandated shotgun slugs for deer, so maybe we had an unfair advantage when we used muzzleloaders during gun season and others were stuck with Foster slugs from a smoothbore.

[Underclocked]

When I could still see worth a hoot, I shot traditional. Now I own and shoot several inlines. I'm another that doesn't understand all the fuss. It's one shot, loaded in much the same manner, regardless of arc or line. One type can be as accurate as the other in the right hands.

[Lead Fred]

Todays inlines are like todays actresses. All fake.

Plastic this, electric BBQ ignitor, molly this, sabot that, pyro powder.

That aint sportin, its just killin deer modern style, and horning in on the real muzzleloaders special season.

[StarMetal]

Todays inlines are like todays actresses. All fake.

Plastic this, electric BBQ ignitor, molly this, sabot that, pyro powder.

That aint sportin, its just killin deer modern style, and horning in on the real muzzleloaders special season.

They made/make plastic stocked traditional muzzle loaders too..even stainless..what about those? I be your a gun owner that would agree to and sign a bill to take away AR 15's because you don't like non traditional plastic rifles. Am I right or wrong?

I also stated that many states have different BP seasonal that are defined by type of muzzle loader.

Joe

[peter nap]

They made/make plastic stocked traditional muzzle loaders too..even stainless..what about those? I be your a gun owner that would agree to and sign a bill to take away AR 15's because you don't like non traditional plastic rifles. Am I right or wrong?

I also stated that many states have different BP seasonal that are defined by type of muzzle loader.

Joe

This is one of those subjects that always starts an argument...
I don't use inlines. I like traditional rifles. BUT...I don't care if the fellow down the road uses an inline. To be honest, I don't give up one thing to his rifle despite what the marketing people say.

This same argument came up when compound bows were invented and more recently, when the states started allowing crossbows. I'm getting old and switched to a crossbow a few years ago...and I don't kill any more deer than when I used a stick bow.

I am thankful for the ML season, no matter what the others are using. At least the damn dog hunters can't go out then. That's a subject for another argument:mrgreen:

Oh...those plastic stocked, SS caplocks are NOT TRADITIONAL rifles. This is the last one I built while it was in the works. I sawed the tree after the last Hurricane, sawed stock blanks, dried them, carved the stock, had Mark DeHaas make a barrell to my specs. I forged the lock plate, tumbler. sear, fly, springs and used one of Jim, Chambers cocks.
I made the trigger and butt plate and guard and poured a pewter nose, made the thimbles and the screws.
Finished it with homemade Aquafortis and beeswax. Made the sights and breechplug and tang.

That's traditional!

http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa57/peternap/lastflinter.jpg

[StarMetal]

This is one of those subjects that always starts an argument...
I don't use inlines. I like traditional rifles. BUT...I don't care if the fellow down the road uses an inline. To be honest, I don't give up one thing to his rifle despite what the marketing people say.

This same argument came up when compound bows were invented and more recently, when the states started allowing crossbows. I'm getting old and switched to a crossbow a few years ago...and I don't kill any more deer than when I used a stick bow.

I am thankful for the ML season, no matter what the others are using. At least the damn dog hunters can't go out then. That's a subject for another argument:mrgreen:

Oh...those plastic stocked, SS caplocks are NOT TRADITIONAL rifles. This is the last one I built while it was in the works. I sawed the tree after the last Hurricane, sawed stock blanks, dried them, carved the stock, had Mark DeHaas make a barrell to my specs. I forged the lock plate, tumbler. sear, fly, springs and used one of Jim, Chambers cocks.
I made the trigger and butt plate and guard and poured a pewter nose, made the thimbles and the screws.
Finished it with homemade Aquafortis and beeswax. Made the sights and breechplug and tang.

That's traditional!

http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa57/peternap/lastflinter.jpg

Very nice work indeed. No, not trying to start an argument. Just trying to get people to think and most importantly realize that what you may like in a firearm might not be what the next fellow likes. From your post I gathered that. When I lived in PA the primitive season the rules stated the muzzle loader had to be a flintlock, with patched round ball, and iron sights. That's the way I thought it should have been. I believe from hunter crying and moaning they allowed the use of a conical. Next thing you know they'll allow a scope. Should have just left it alone. Anyways the they have a season where you can use the newer stuff. At one time PA had many many whitetails. They needed thinned out. I hear it's not like that anymore.

I like all firearms. I don't want the government to ban any of them. I recently considered getting a flinter, but can't buy BP in this part of TN. I guess I could have it ordered.

I wouldn't exactly claim that a tradition rifle doesn't give up anything to modern inline. These new inlines you see are the top of their breed. There is a rarely seen line that shoot very close to 3000 fps. I don't see a traditional ever doing that. Especially with the accuracy. I started on inlines when I lived in Ohio. It's a shotgun/handgun state only for deer. I just don't like using a shotgun with slugs, although they have those shooting pretty darn good today. So I bought the inline, a TC Blackdiamond, and scoped it, shoot the old Maxi-Ball, have fun and harvest deer. By the way mine is blued not stainless.

Joe

[peter nap]

Very nice work indeed. No, not trying to start an argument. Just trying to get people to think and most importantly realize that what you may like in a firearm might not be what the next fellow likes. From your post I gathered that. When I lived in PA the primitive season the rules stated the muzzle loader had to be a flintlock, with patched round ball, and iron sights. That's the way I thought it should have been. I believe from hunter crying and moaning they allowed the use of a conical. Next thing you know they'll allow a scope. Should have just left it alone. Anyways the they have a season where you can use the newer stuff. At one time PA had many many whitetails. They needed thinned out. I hear it's not like that anymore.

I like all firearms. I don't want the government to ban any of them. I recently considered getting a flinter, but can't buy BP in this part of TN. I guess I could have it ordered.

I wouldn't exactly claim that a tradition rifle doesn't give up anything to modern inline. These new inlines you see are the top of their breed. There is a rarely seen line that shoot very close to 3000 fps. I don't see a traditional ever doing that. Especially with the accuracy. I started on inlines when I lived in Ohio. It's a shotgun/handgun state only for deer. I just don't like using a shotgun with slugs, although they have those shooting pretty darn good today. So I bought the inline, a TC Blackdiamond, and scoped it, shoot the old Maxi-Ball, have fun and harvest deer. By the way mine is blued not stainless.

Joe

The idea is to get hunters out there Joe. What they use makes little difference. The ranks of hunters are getting smaller and in order to preserve land and hunting rights, we need to be one large voice insted of a number of segmented groups.

When I said I give up very little, I mean it's the hunter, not the rifle that makes the difference. So what if someone can shoot ten tings at 300 yards when most deer stands here only have a shooting lane 50 yards long.:drinks:

[docone31]

That is a beautiful Flinter!
Great job.
I never cared for an In-line. Just me.
Don't see them at the range much. Maybe one once in a while. Never the same person either. A few Traditionals. Not so much anymore. My wife and I are alone most of the time in those.
Not such a bad thing.
No matter what type they are, they are not Mattel toys either. There is something about front stuffing.
Inlines still give the smell of Powder!

[waksupi]

Where to start?

I have railed against magnum rifles, after having been afflicted with the malady myself, and hunted with a .338 Win Mag for around 15 years. With a heavy bullet, it proved good for any size game I cared to shoot, but with light bullet, would ruin a LOT of meat. From what I have seen over the years, the 7mm mag is the worst offender, with light projectiles.
Some years ago, there was a move here in Montana to have a separate muzzloading season. It was brought forth by a member of the state advisory board, as he was an inline shooter. He expected wide spread support from the shooters of the state. No dice.
I attended one of the open meetings, and testified against the season, as did hundreds of others who shot muzzleloaders. We did not want to see the "arms race" experienced by other states with these seasons.
The proponents of this season, wanted it during the elk rut. This would have been plain murder on the elk, and would have had serious repercussions on the numbers of elk. Granted, bow season runs at this time, and a fair amount of elk are taken. However, I have had more than one case where I had a bull five yards or closer, and could not loose an arrow, due to obstructions. The ML's would not have this consideration, and the kill rate would have been unsustainable.
In Montana at least, we have a long enough season, and enough untrammeled hunting area if you will get away from a road a few hundred yards, a traditional ML is not a handicap, by any means. No discrimination about what type firearm you wish to hunt with, just get out there and do it. Some of the most consistantly successful elk hunters I know, use flintlocks. Granted, these guys know the mountains, and thier game, but probably no better than many bolt action hunters.
As for over charging a ML barrel with black powder. With a patched round ball, most likely impossible. Ditto for any other projectile. This is assuming a properly breeched barrel, in good condition.
It was nearly 30 years ago now, that the old Sharon Rifle Co, conducted some destructive testing with their barrels. Jerry Cunningham was the guy in charge, some may know him as the later proprietor of Orion Barrel Co.
Blue Jacket Sanders was also involved, as were I believe John Taylor, and Mike Guest.
They loaded up to around 1200 gr. of powder, and one ball per 100 gr. charge. Never hurt a barrel. Then, they began separating the projectile from the charge. They were able to then put bulges in barrels, but no detonations. After trying out the steel barrels, they then did the same testing with cardboard tubes wrapped with duct tape, and found the same thing. Seat the bullet, it would come out, with no damage. Most of this testing was written up in the old Buckskin Report, in a very good discussion on barrel steels, and would be well worth looking for as reference. I know it was also published in a small book, and I wish I would have bought a few copies when available.
I was involved in writing the original ML laws of Montana, and they have proved to be a good basic foundation.
As for spears? Check Montana hunting laws. You will see that spears and atlatls are legal hunting weapons here.
I got a wild hare last month, and have been working on a short Southern Mountain Rifle I should have pics of some time next week. I realized I didn't have a good SHORT hunting rifle. Some eastern long hunters will be aghast!

[btroj]

The ultimate goal of the state in setting season is management. A muzzleloader season in most states is not the most effective management tool. The rifle seaon gets the job done. Were states to limit the type of muzzleloader allowed it would make a marginal management tool even less effective.

Sorry to say it but what the traditionalist muzzleloader hunter wants is not the same as what the state needs. In the end- the state decides what it feels is best and that's what we get.

I personally own both traditional and an inline muzzleloader. Prefer the traditional ones at the range but ease of carry with slings, no worry bout scratches, etc make the inline a no-brainer for hunting. Just my opinion.

[StarMetal]

The idea is to get hunters out there Joe. What they use makes little difference. The ranks of hunters are getting smaller and in order to preserve land and hunting rights, we need to be one large voice insted of a number of segmented groups.

When I said I give up very little, I mean it's the hunter, not the rifle that makes the difference. So what if someone can shoot ten tings at 300 yards when most deer stands here only have a shooting lane 50 yards long.:drinks:

If you re-read my one post I mentioned PA for a long time had a terrible high population of deer. They made changes to seasons and issued more doe tags, had bonus hunt, etc.. They wanted and needed to get more hunters out there. Maybe adding the anykind of muzzle loader season was an effort to cull more deer and please the non-traditionalist muzzle loaders.

Joe

[StarMetal]

Where to start?

I have railed against magnum rifles, after having been afflicted with the malady myself, and hunted with a .338 Win Mag for around 15 years. With a heavy bullet, it proved good for any size game I cared to shoot, but with light bullet, would ruin a LOT of meat. From what I have seen over the years, the 7mm mag is the worst offender, with light projectiles.
Some years ago, there was a move here in Montana to have a separate muzzloading season. It was brought forth by a member of the state advisory board, as he was an inline shooter. He expected wide spread support from the shooters of the state. No dice.
I attended one of the open meetings, and testified against the season, as did hundreds of others who shot muzzleloaders. We did not want to see the "arms race" experienced by other states with these seasons.
The proponents of this season, wanted it during the elk rut. This would have been plain murder on the elk, and would have had serious repercussions on the numbers of elk. Granted, bow season runs at this time, and a fair amount of elk are taken. However, I have had more than one case where I had a bull five yards or closer, and could not loose an arrow, due to obstructions. The ML's would not have this consideration, and the kill rate would have been unsustainable.
In Montana at least, we have a long enough season, and enough untrammeled hunting area if you will get away from a road a few hundred yards, a traditional ML is not a handicap, by any means. No discrimination about what type firearm you wish to hunt with, just get out there and do it. Some of the most consistantly successful elk hunters I know, use flintlocks. Granted, these guys know the mountains, and thier game, but probably no better than many bolt action hunters.
As for over charging a ML barrel with black powder. With a patched round ball, most likely impossible. Ditto for any other projectile. This is assuming a properly breeched barrel, in good condition.
It was nearly 30 years ago now, that the old Sharon Rifle Co, conducted some destructive testing with their barrels. Jerry Cunningham was the guy in charge, some may know him as the later proprietor of Orion Barrel Co.
Blue Jacket Sanders was also involved, as were I believe John Taylor, and Mike Guest.
They loaded up to around 1200 gr. of powder, and one ball per 100 gr. charge. Never hurt a barrel. Then, they began separating the projectile from the charge. They were able to then put bulges in barrels, but no detonations. After trying out the steel barrels, they then did the same testing with cardboard tubes wrapped with duct tape, and found the same thing. Seat the bullet, it would come out, with no damage. Most of this testing was written up in the old Buckskin Report, in a very good discussion on barrel steels, and would be well worth looking for as reference. I know it was also published in a small book, and I wish I would have bought a few copies when available.
I was involved in writing the original ML laws of Montana, and they have proved to be a good basic foundation.
As for spears? Check Montana hunting laws. You will see that spears and atlatls are legal hunting weapons here.
I got a wild hare last month, and have been working on a short Southern Mountain Rifle I should have pics of some time next week. I realized I didn't have a good SHORT hunting rifle. Some eastern long hunters will be aghast!


All I can Ric is that a magnum, in my opinion, was designed for two purposes: one to have more power to take specific large game (be able to drive that heavy and well constructed bullet for deep penetration) and two to extend the distance of the caliber. Now on that last one when shooting a big game animal at long distance (hoping the hunter is accomplished at long range accuracy) it doesn't ruin a lot of meat, but of course who's to know that a hunter might stumble upon a nice animal at very close range. Then I agree with you it ruins a lot of meat. The problem is many hunters buy them because they think it means mucho and that it's a death ray gun, both of which are wrong.

I too would disagree with making a gun season in rut.

Joe

[mooman76]

This post seems to go on and on and when it finally disappears for awhile it pops up again down the road. I've lived in allot of states and can see both sides of the isssue. For record I perfer the traditional ML but I have no problem with the next guy shooting a modern ML but still believe it should be up to each state. Back east there are lots of deer in fact it is over populated and it doesn't really matter what they shoot as much. You come out to some of the western states and the reverse is in affect. You seem to have more (allot more)hunters than deer at times so to ease the pressure and split up the hunters some they have the primitive and BP seasons. I don't really know what I am trying to say but sometimes it seem like some people are arguing and niether person is really seeing the total issue and it is a different issue depending on where you live.

[rockrat]

For many years the "traditionalists" had inlines banned. We got to hunt one or two years before they used their "pull" and had the law changed. Understood that they loved it because then they didn't have to put up with more hunters in their areas. They had it to themselves.
Well, times changed, more people moved in state and started raising a ruckus about why in-lines weren't allowed. Finally, overwhelmed the "traditionalists" and got the restriction rescinded.
Sorry, I kind of consider them primma-donnas. Had a great deer hunting area where I lived and the powers that be changed it to where you could only use a recuve and wood arrows. Guess what they shot! Ruined the area with overpopulation of deer, but they didn't care because they had it all to themselves. Kind of like some people in gun clubs to where they ban things they don't shoot, then have the club all to themselves.
You don't see where the deer/elk populations have been decimated because of the in-lines. Maybe because of restrictions on what you can shoot.
No sabots, no scopes, no pellets, and no using smokeless powder in your gun, only black powder or substitutes. Kind of takes some of the edge away from some in-lines

[Maven]

"I have always wondered why inlines are rated at or at advertised at 150 grains capable. Does that mean they shoot well at 150 or is that for advertising or a stress test of some sort. What I'm wondering about are the guys packing in 150 grains of powder cause it says they can mean it is also efficient at 150 or are they throwing away 50 grains (plus getting pounded)?"

Actually, not all inlines can use 150grs. of LOOSE powder. E.g., I can use three 50gr. Pyrodex pellets, but only 100grs. of loose Pyrodex RS in my Knight Bighorn.* As for the reasons they can use so powerful a charge, I don't think it's the quality of the steel used in the barrels or its thickness, since a traditional ML Green Mtn. bbl. is equally strong and certainly heavier than the one I have on the Bighorn. Rather, I think it has to do with the breeching and the the larger area of the threads on the breech plug compared to those on a standard ML nipple or vent (touchhole) liner. Furthermore, since deer in my neck of the woods tend to be shot at distances considerably less than 75 yds. (which would be considered a long shot), I can't imagine why using 150grs. of propellant under a 300gr. bullet is necessary. It would certainly make the gun deadly at both ends!


*In practice, I generally use no more than 60grs. FFg (Graf's BP) with a patched RB or 80grs. FFg with a T/C or Lyman Maxi-Ball. I'm still monkeying with sabots too and have found that the rifle has a distinct preference for CB's no heavier than 345gr. (Lee 340gr. .45-70CB and orange MMP sabot or RCBS .44cal. PB Keith and green MMP sabot.) when using no more than 80grs. FFg.

[JesterGrin_1]

Maven you brought up a good point about needed power. When I first purchased my T/C .50 I was told to purchase those 500+Gr Boolits for it and use 100GR of Black Powder for hunting. Well I took the ole rifle out with me for hunting and got up into a Tree not a tree stand just a tree lol. I was young then lol. And found a place to sit. A poor Buck came in at about 30 yards. I took the shot and darn near almost made me fall out of the tree and the sight of when it hit that deer is not something I would like to see again. It did work but wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy over kill. Since then I went to round balls lol.

[StarMetal]

"I have always wondered why inlines are rated at or at advertised at 150 grains capable. Does that mean they shoot well at 150 or is that for advertising or a stress test of some sort. What I'm wondering about are the guys packing in 150 grains of powder cause it says they can mean it is also efficient at 150 or are they throwing away 50 grains (plus getting pounded)?"

Actually, not all inlines can use 150grs. of LOOSE powder. E.g., I can use three 50gr. Pyrodex pellets, but only 100grs. of loose Pyrodex RS in my Knight Bighorn.* As for the reasons they can use so powerful a charge, I don't think it's the quality of the steel used in the barrels or its thickness, since a traditional ML Green Mtn. bbl. is equally strong and certainly heavier than the one I have on the Bighorn. Rather, I think it has to do with the breeching and the the larger area of the threads on the breech plug compared to those on a standard ML nipple or vent (touchhole) liner. Furthermore, since deer in my neck of the woods tend to be shot at distances considerably less than 75 yds. (which would be considered a long shot), I can't imagine why using 150grs. of propellant under a 300gr. bullet is necessary. It would certainly make the gun deadly at both ends!


*In practice, I generally use no more than 60grs. FFg (Graf's BP) with a patched RB or 80grs. FFg with a T/C or Lyman Maxi-Ball. I'm still monkeying with sabots too and have found that the rifle has a distinct preference for CB's no heavier than 345gr. (Lee 340gr. .45-70CB and orange MMP sabot or RCBS .44cal. PB Keith and green MMP sabot.) when using no more than 80grs. FFg.


Paul,

Pretty much on the money. The breeching area has been beefed up by the more threaded area and also the primer nipple. A neighbor has a on Traditions inline that wasn't rated for 150 grains and he tried it. It blew the nipple out. He had me look at it and I said the thread in the block are fine, they didn't strip. So he purchased a new nipple or correct thread size and repeated the same thing...blew the nipple it. It was very shocking to him to have that happen so he bought a new Knight. I believe you will find when they advertise the rifles being capable of shooting 150 grains that it will be supported by documented velocity/energy figures of various bullet types and brands. They are trying to show, in my opinion, that these new 150 grains inlines are kicking on the heels of some centerfire cartridges used for deer hunting.

Generally the way inlines are built, that is pretty much a modern centerfire rifle stock and tapped and drilled for scope mounts, are usually easier to shoot more accurate. Couple that with higher velocity and flatter shooting (adding in that sabot can be very accurate with the right rifling twist) the more then likely do out perform the tradionals in that respect. As to whether the user need that much power is up to the individual. I don't use that much powder myself. I do see the 209 primer as a vast improvement over the No 11's and musket caps. That's said in respect to darn near guaranteed 100 % firing reliability.

Joe

[Potsy]

One might also wonder how Savage & some brands of custom muzzleloader are burning smokeless.
I kinda figured it out after a lot of thought.
A buddy of mine bought a Savage, it's cool, but I'm not rushing out to buy one anymore than I was looking to trade my old ball gun &/or my BK-92 for something that shot 150 grains of powder, pellet, rabbit turd, etc.
To me, a scope sight that is easily mounted on an inline is of far greater advantage than any perceived ballistic gain. Or at least it makes it easier to take advantage of the newfound flatter trajectory.
Take a peek at Pacific Rifles' site. There's some interesting stuff on there involving large powder charges, large balls, and trajectory.
Funny thing is, they were doing alot of that stuff back in the 1870's.
It's really untelling how far muzzleloaders were about to evolve had it not been for the advent of cartridge rifles.
As far as traditional or inline laws? I live in Tennessee, the average person can't legally own a 105 howitzer, but we could probably hunt with them if we could own them.

[StarMetal]

One might also wonder how Savage & some brands of custom muzzleloader are burning smokeless.
I kinda figured it out after a lot of thought.
A buddy of mine bought a Savage, it's cool, but I'm not rushing out to buy one anymore than I was looking to trade my old ball gun &/or my BK-92 for something that shot 150 grains of powder, pellet, rabbit turd, etc.
To me, a scope sight that is easily mounted on an inline is of far greater advantage than any perceived ballistic gain. Or at least it makes it easier to take advantage of the newfound flatter trajectory.
Take a peek at Pacific Rifles' site. There's some interesting stuff on there involving large powder charges, large balls, and trajectory.
Funny thing is, they were doing alot of that stuff back in the 1870's.
It's really untelling how far muzzleloaders were about to evolve had it not been for the advent of cartridge rifles.
As far as traditional or inline laws? I live in Tennessee, the average person can't legally own a 105 howitzer, but we could probably hunt with them if we could own them.

Son, isn't that the truth about the 105 howitzer. Some crazy gun laws here in TN for sure. Example: If a 25 auto pistol meets the barrel length requirement it's legal for deer hunting here. Nuts!

About the Savage smokeless muzzleloader. I read an article by Savage about the steel used in it. That barrel is rated like at dang near 200,000 psi!!! They wanted to make sure some room temperature IQ shooter wasn't going to blow it up with smokeless. I've watched the BP evolution and what I see is that it seems the majority wants a muzzle loader, but they don't want the fuss, mess, corrosion, and clean up of BP. Finally I think they have it now int Blackhorn 209 powder. Now I won't lie and tell you I enjoy having to clean BP firearms right away after shooting, but I love the smoke and smell of it. I really miss being able to buy it here in TN.

Joe

[mooman76]

I don't care for the smell but just concider it a minor nusance for the pleasre of shooting.

[Hanshi]

I'm somewhat skeptical of claims made for inlines. While I personally don't like them they do get more hunters out in the field. They're not equal to centerfires nor are they more effective than traditional rifles using black powder, however. The biggest thing is that there is no culture surrounding them and their use. Owners seldom shoot them because they like them, they hunt with them to extend their season. They are usually just viewed as "tools". There are exceptions, of course and the same charges can be applied to centerfire rifle shooters and guns. No one dresses up and attends rendezvous with them or makes the equipment and supplies that go with them. :redneck:

[Potsy]

I think as much as anything, inlines come with much better loading instructions than the import sidelocks that me and most of my buddies cut our teeth on. You either learned to make it shoot, or you gave up on it.

Most folks, traditional or modern, don't care about fiddling with their guns the way we do, working up a good load for a muzzleloader is a lot of work, when I bought my BK-92, the instructions told me what to shoot, I shot it, it started out shooting well. I did not have the same experience with my CVA; though I did eventually learn what it liked. I also had to learn the difference in components (cheap vs. good).

I have a feeling (hope I'm wrong) that in the next 10-15 years in the southeast, most states will have one long rifle season. Between crossbows during bow season and smokeless powder muzzleloaders (and even cartridge guns in some states) it has become simply a matter of how many deer we can get killed every year to state fish and game commisions.

Traditional or inline won't even matter. You can kill 'em with anything from a ball bat to a howitzer. Personally, I'd rather carry the ball bat than a crossbow; repeat shots are easier and they handle better in a tree stand.

[StarMetal]

I'm somewhat skeptical of claims made for inlines. While I personally don't like them they do get more hunters out in the field. They're not equal to centerfires nor are they more effective than traditional rifles using black powder, however. The biggest thing is that there is no culture surrounding them and their use. Owners seldom shoot them because they like them, they hunt with them to extend their season. They are usually just viewed as "tools". There are exceptions, of course and the same charges can be applied to centerfire rifle shooters and guns. No one dresses up and attends rendezvous with them or makes the equipment and supplies that go with them. :redneck:

Look at the ballistics for this bullet: http://www.ultimatefirearms.com/muzzleloaderballistics.php

That beats many 30-30's, 32 Special, 35 Remington's, etc.. It also beats the devil out just about all traditional rifles that aren't safe to shoot such velocities or don't have the right twist for sabots. So you wouldn't call inline muzzleloaders a step up in BP evolution? What would you call it...even...step down? Inlines have their place.

Joe

[Potsy]

So now were up to 4 pyrodex pellets.
No doubt a smokeless model would be cheaper to operate.
If I were to buy another inline, I'd go Savage, being as how I just bought a flintlock kit, it probably ain't happening.
BTW, Ballistic Coefficient aside, when I get it done, my little .40 long rifle should have no problem breaking 2000 fps. Muzzleloading newbs act amazed by that velocity out of modern guns. Of course the ball has been doing it for nigh on 300 years, it does, however, have a tough time hanging on to that kind of speed.
Check out Pacific Rifles' website if you're curious what a big ol' ball can do when properly motivated. The figures to 200 yards may surprise you.

[StarMetal]

So now were up to 4 pyrodex pellets.
No doubt a smokeless model would be cheaper to operate.
If I were to buy another inline, I'd go Savage, being as how I just bought a flintlock kit, it probably ain't happening.
BTW, Ballistic Coefficient aside, when I get it done, my little .40 long rifle should have no problem breaking 2000 fps. Muzzleloading newbs act amazed by that velocity out of modern guns. Of course the ball has been doing it for nigh on 300 years, it does, however, have a tough time hanging on to that kind of speed.
Check out Pacific Rifles' website if you're curious what a big ol' ball can do when properly motivated. The figures to 200 yards may surprise you.

Flintlock, where you getting your BP? What else will work in a flintlock if you can't get BP?

That makes me think. I was complaining to my best friend in PA about how difficult it is to buy BP anymore down here in TN and he said it's becoming that way up there. Well what's ironic about that is PA's primitive season is BP only!!! What will PA game dept do, change the primitive because you can't buy BP anymore?

Joe

[peter nap]

Flintlock, where you getting your BP? What else will work in a flintlock if you can't get BP?

That makes me think. I was complaining to my best friend in PA about how difficult it is to buy BP anymore down here in TN and he said it's becoming that way up there. Well what's ironic about that is PA's primitive season is BP only!!! What will PA game dept do, change the primitive because you can't buy BP anymore?

Joe

Joe, get a few of your friends together and buy a keg or two off the net. The Hazmat charges aren't too bad that way.
I'm running low on Swiss and will have to do the same thing soon. We still have Goex locally but it's so dirty, I hate to shoot it.

[Boz330]

Flintlock, where you getting your BP? What else will work in a flintlock if you can't get BP?

That makes me think. I was complaining to my best friend in PA about how difficult it is to buy BP anymore down here in TN and he said it's becoming that way up there. Well what's ironic about that is PA's primitive season is BP only!!! What will PA game dept do, change the primitive because you can't buy BP anymore?

Joe

Joe you can order BP and some places will ship as little as 5lbs. That makes the hazmat fee a little steep but if you can get a couple other guys to go in on a case it starts to look reasonable. Not sure where you are in TN but if in the western part, Dixie Gun Works is in Union City and they have BP.

Bob

[StarMetal]

Joe you can order BP and some places will ship as little as 5lbs. That makes the hazmat fee a little steep but if you can get a couple other guys to go in on a case it starts to look reasonable. Not sure where you are in TN but if in the western part, Dixie Gun Works is in Union City and they have BP.

Bob


Bob,

Well I'll tell you the deal. I have my C&R license and Grafs honors those. So I was going to make a powder order, whole case, then the woman asked if the address on the licenses was my residence or business. Well of course it's residence, I don't have a business anymore. They won't ship it to me. So I kind of gave up on it as I'm not paying retail for it.

Joe

[waksupi]

Joe, I order cases from Doc Carlson, at Upper Missouri Trading Co. Our club buys from Cooney's. Never a problem delivering to a home address.

[StarMetal]

Joe, I order cases from Doc Carlson, at Upper Missouri Trading Co. Our club buys from Cooney's. Never a problem delivering to a home address.

Do they discount for a C&R license Ric?

Thanks
Joe

[waksupi]

Couldn't tell you, Joe. Never even considered it when ordering. The savings from Doc was enough off of shelf price that I never even asked.

[Hanshi]

Getting back to prb velocities, I was getting 2085fps in my .50 flint LR and 2035fps from my flint Lancaster .45. These were loads frequently mentioned by other experienced flint shooters and not excessive. The muzzle energy of the .50 also beats the 30/30 and 35 Rem. Prb gives up nothing to the inlines.

[Boz330]

Getting back to prb velocities, I was getting 2085fps in my .50 flint LR and 2035fps from my flint Lancaster .45. These were loads frequently mentioned by other experienced flint shooters and not excessive. The muzzle energy of the .50 also beats the 30/30 and 35 Rem. Prb gives up nothing to the inlines.

The key word is muzzle energy, a RB bleeds energy very rapidly and has nothing close to those calibers at a 100yd.

Bob

[Potsy]

A round ball does bleed energy very rapidly.
BUUUT, if a .50 RB runs 2,000 fps (or close to it) it'll be down to a little above 1000 @ 100 yards. This is getting into .357 mag territory with 180 grainers at the muzzle.
If you look at what the big boys can do (.54-.72) @ 2000, it gets even better. Remember this, if a 230 grain .54 ball is down to 850 fps somewhere well over 100 yards (wish I had a chart with RB B.C.'s), that's like holding a .45 ACP (with even more frontal area) right up to a deer's ribs.
I'm not doubting that any conical will hold onto speed better, most of my deer have been killed with 240 grain XTP's @ 1700 out of my knight, but over the years I've come to have a tough time believing that at iron sight range, the ball has that much of a disadvantage. Remeber too, bigger is better with a ball; increasing bore size is the only way to gain B.C. & energy, assuming the equal muzzle velocity. A 340 grain .62 will do much more heavy lifting than a 177 grain .50.