Why I don't like inlines - GRAPHIC!

[waksupi]

I am always concerned when someone shows up with an inline muzzleloader. Most are not familiar with the firearm, which can be very dangerous. Here is an example of using smokeless powder, in what was apparently a smokeless approved rifle.

[Doc Highwall]

That comes from trying to get the velocity too high. I have one and I use 38grains of AA5744 and I found that to be plenty with a 300 grain bullet. As a matter in fact I am selling mine only because of having three spine surgeries I gave up hunting.

[waksupi]

He was loading by volume, rather than weight.

[johnlaw484]

Some people just have no business with gun. This is on of them.

[indymadcaster]

cant blame weapon, powder or boolit uneducated human messed that one up, been gone over before i have had mine for 5 years dependable accurate safe you can load by volume in a ml10 AA5744 VV-N110 would not trade mine for all the tea in china

[870TC]

Maybe just me, but the third picture of the hand appears to be a different injury.
My GUESS as to why it blew up would be, the guy did not fully seat the powder and/or bullet.

[fishhawk]

looks like after stitches and removeing dead tishue. steve k

[mooman76]

If I want to shoot smokeless I get out my center fire rifles that were designed for it. I know this was also but it doesn't make since to me. It's like hubcaps on a tractor. Guys are always tring to push guns beyond what they should. If you want to shoot magnum loads then buy a magnum.

[Marvin S]

Dam that's gotta hurt, there's about a thousand nerve endings in those fingers.

[Gunfixer]

Waksupi
Would you go back and edit your post, "He was loading by volume, rather than weight"
So that it is in a BIG BOLD Font, for those that might read too fast.
Just asking
Bill

[Tazman1602]

Man ya' just hadda post THAT one when I've got a 10-ML II for sale in swapping and sellin' didn't ya?

To tell the truth Wak, I bought mine because it WAS rated for smokeless loads but I ain't never put a load of smokeless in it because I am CHICKEN.

That probably happened because the guy was trying to get 300 WinMag velocities from a front stuffer again because I know a lot of guys that have them and love them, I just can't do it, I'll still with cartridge rifles when I want to shoot smokeless..............

Man that's got to HURT............................for a LONG time it's gonna HURT..........................

[DwarvenChef]

This is a huge issue with low end inlines and marketing. This is not the first time I have seen this issue and pics, not an isolated issue. ANY time you have new people getting into an EASIER mind set of a specialized activity, there are those that will try to get them to give away their money. When I was younger and working in a gunsmiths shop, I was in charge of the ML department, I would get the deer season only shooters looking for more time out in the woods, at no extra cost for themselves. I don't know how many of them blew up their guns with the "black looking powder" they used for their other guns. They would not listen to anything that would cost them more money or go against what their friend told them.

I blew up a bunch of pics from Sam Fadala's tests on BP and smokeless powers, blowing up strong ML Bbls with 10grs of powder. One test was using a TC Bbl, filled halfway with powder and a bunch of RB's loaded on top of the charge, the Bbl didn't blow up, the next photo was the earlier mentioned 10 grains of smokless powder. The barrel blew up big time... It was amazing how many wouldn't believe it,and got peeved off at me for not selling them their powder, Hans would get mad at me about the sale sometimes but suported my actions...

So when people say I'm anti improvement, or what ever the inline crowds call us traditionalist shooters :p , I just remember all the **** that has happened to people BECAUSE of inlines and their marketing and glad I can still count to ten on all my fingers... heck count at all for that mater :)

Will I have inlines in my shop? Yes but only ones I'm sure of and have all the literature for safe use of them free at hand. Also suggest they get into traditionals :)

[Captain*Kirk]

Youch!
Read my lips: Muzzleloaders are for black powder or BP substitute and don't use shotgun primers or sabot slugs or any of that newfangled ****. Those morphodites are ML's in theory only. If you want a .338 WinMag, buy one.
Just my opinion, but a valid one!

[stubshaft]

Man I feel for him.

Hard way to learn a lesson...

[wilddog45]

I own a Hatfield .38 squirrel rifle a Garner Tennesee poor boy .54 a Thompson Center Big Bore .54 and a Lyman .54. I like the nostalsia aspect of muzzleloading hunting.Now they have inlines that use smokeless? They might as well make it legal to use handi rifles.

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

I got the tip of one finger ripped off in a printing press accident . . . 10 months ago, probably will never be right . . . that is gonna hurt for a long time! He is gonna miss that thumb too.

Didn't know one "could" use smokeless powder in one.

[Potsy]

OOOHHH THAT'S NASTY!! Feel bad for the guy.
A buddy of mine's got a Savage. Feeds it SR-4759 and PRB saboted bullets. Drives tacks, shoots flat (flatter than my "muzzleloader"), kills deer dead. I've shot it, and survived.
I usually hunt with a BK-92 Knight with 100grn. FF and a saboted 240 XTP (working on a cast load though).
If I weren't trying to get into the more traditional end (been trying to build a flintlock for months), I'd own a Savage. Great guns, if you're into the latest, coolest, baddest; like my buddy is.
As far as hunter ethics; I live in Tennessee, if you could own hand grenades, you could hunt with them.
As far as safety; I've never been accused of being life threateningly stupid, I try to pay attention, and my appendages (aside from cuts, bruises, and the occasional missing fingernail) stay relatively intact.

[skullmount]

I am always concerned when someone shows up with an inline muzzleloader. Most are not familiar with the firearm, which can be very dangerous. Here is an example of using smokeless powder, in what was apparently a smokeless approved rifle.

I am not sure what a misloaded gun has to do with your dislike of inlines.....I am sure you have seen the bumper sticker that reads, " People shoot other people with guns, guns don't shoot people.

Just wondering if you offer your expertise when you notice a green horn at the range...or do you just move away or leave alltogether.......................?
Some people that I have run into here or there just don't have anyone to show them the ropes.......

[waksupi]

I am not sure what a misloaded gun has to do with your dislike of inlines.....I am sure you have seen the bumper sticker that reads, " People shoot other people with guns, guns don't shoot people.

Just wondering if you offer your expertise when you notice a green horn at the range...or do you just move away or leave alltogether.......................?
Some people that I have run into here or there just don't have anyone to show them the ropes.......

It seems that the few I have run into with an inline, "knew it all", and didn't need help. Then, I moved away.
I have seen more pictures of this type with inlines, than I have seen with traditional types of muzzleloaders. I've been shooting ML's for close to 40 years, and a blown up gun is almost unheard of, and these few generally being barrel obstructions.
While inlines are advertised as being easier to take care of than traditional ML's, they appear to need more maintainence, need parts replaced more often, and are technically more demanding. I do not believe they are the best choice for a beginner, and are more suited for someone who has considerable shooting experience under their belt.

[madsenshooter]

God what a mess. Since I know mine isn't a smokeless rifle, Triple 7 is all it'll see. dieselBenz, there's nothing like bumping that finger, takes years for the ouch to go away. Lost the end of one of mine in a paper cutter that had a hole in the clamp. Saw the ream of paper was a bit crooked, let go of the clamp and my finger was just a tad into the hole. Snick. "Will someone come and get my finger out of this machine?" That was just the beginning, bumped it on the gearshift on the way home, hit a hickory tree. Quite a day!

[Huntsman]

If I want to shoot smokeless I get out my center fire rifles that were designed for it. I know this was also but it doesn't make since to me. It's like hubcaps on a tractor. Guys are always tring to push guns beyond what they should. If you want to shoot magnum loads then buy a magnum.


Exactly, could`nt have said it better!!

[John Taylor]

I was making inlines way before the big companies got into it. I was converting H&R shotguns and using the 209 primers. Had built about 2 dozen before Idaho changed their hunting laws to include that a muzzle loader had to use a percussion cap exposed to the air. I never thought someone would come up with a muzzle loader that was for smokeless except the little 22 beaver or badger or whatever the name was. It didn't really load from the muzzle but had a turret that received the ball and powder.
While it sound great to have a gun that doesn't need as much effort to clean, you miss out on all the other things about muzzle loading. The smoke and smell, if you don't have that then you would never be welcome at a rendezvous.

I do feel sorry for the guy, got to hurt bad. Sometimes lessons in life come hard.

[870TC]

"Would you go back and edit your post, "He was loading by volume, rather than weight"
So that it is in a BIG BOLD Font, for those that might read too fast.
Just asking
Bill"

For the record I did read the entire post before responding. Strangely I found no actual proof as to what has happened to this poor guy. Not calling anyone a liar, I have just seen this picture multiple times before (other places) with multiple explanations and no documentation as to what happened. You maybe didn't notice, I put the word GUESS in bold, in my original post?, or perhaps you were reading to fast also?

[Doc Highwall]

I loaded my Savage by volume with the LEE dipper 2.8cc and if I had the powder level with the top it came out to 38 grains of AA5744. If you read why Richard Lee made them that way in his book it will be apparent it is safe. Unfortunately a lot of people do not read the instructions and understand them.

[KCSO]

What I hear from actual inline owners...

I only got it so I could hunt another season

It's got the range of a ...

It's got more power than...

I didn't know you had to clean these.

It LOOKS like a Ruger why can't I just try IMR 3031...

Are you SURE it won't shoot smokless, I sure don't want to clean it.

Every M/L season since they allowed them. I wish they would just quit messing around and go to a Primitive weapons season and let these folks go back to the single shot smokless rifles they really want anyway and make M/L season traditional RB flintlock only.

[Potsy]

I don't consider any proper loaded inline or a Savage properly loaded with smokeless inherently dangerous for everyday proper use.
I would, however, offer the opinion that the availability of cheap inlines has lowered the mean I.Q. of those in the woods during muzzleloader season.
Once upon a time, if you got a muzzleloader, you had to figure it out for yourself. The manual that came with my CVA in '89 was pathetic. I doubt TC's were much better. You were feeling around in the dark. A lot of guys generally weren't happy about the performance they were getting from their muzzleloaders, there was no internet (as we know it today) piled up with all kinds of free advice (some good, some bad).
When I bought my Knight, it came with a manual telling me what would shoot, I shot it, it shot good, it went hunting.
I still love my old CVA, but a lot of guys quit fooling with any sidelock, either selling them cheap, or letting them rot.
Remember, most guys in the woods, intelligent or otherwise, are not as gun loony (to quote John Barseness) as we are. They just want to hunt.

[Luper]

dang this thread makes me regret getting an optima


P.S.- Forgot to post this earlier but i got an optima to get into deer hunting, not to get another season and here in the mitten shotgun zone we're allowed to buy muzzleloaders. I have had numerous highly educated shooters tell me that in-lines perform better than a shotgun and i still liked that it was partially traditional and the extra season didn't hurt

[JesterGrin_1]

I am sorry I do not see what is so graphic. Especially these days. But it should bring home the danger if one does make a mistake.

As for the before and after pics. If you look close his hand was full of metal of which had to be removed and his hand repaired with not only skin but bone that would have been displaced.

[frontier gander]

Inline or not, if you exceed the max load, especially with smokeless, you're just asking for trouble. Centerfires blow up too. Sometimes from shooter error, sometimes from quality control that slipped up.

If you THINK that just because you shoot a sidelock or a flintlock, this can never happen to you... You better think again! One screw up with a muzzleloader can cost you a limb or even your life. http://gandersmuzzleloadingblog.blogspot.com/2010/01/rush-it-this-could-happen-to-you.html

Why i like my inline.
http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/mm53/thepowerbeltforum/Powder/PowerbeltAPPAccura.jpg

Thats the sweet group ive shot with the rifle! .403" center to center.

Shoot safe!

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

God what a mess. Since I know mine isn't a smokeless rifle, Triple 7 is all it'll see. dieselBenz, there's nothing like bumping that finger, takes years for the ouch to go away. Lost the end of one of mine in a paper cutter that had a hole in the clamp. Saw the ream of paper was a bit crooked, let go of the clamp and my finger was just a tad into the hole. Snick. "Will someone come and get my finger out of this machine?" That was just the beginning, bumped it on the gearshift on the way home, hit a hickory tree. Quite a day!

Yeah . . . this is what I left the Dr. with:
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s220/ShawnTVT/IMG_0915.jpg

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s220/ShawnTVT/IMG_0914.jpg

And this is what he left me with:
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s220/ShawnTVT/IMG_0918.jpg

Looks like this now:
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s220/ShawnTVT/Finger7-4-09.jpg

It doesn't bother me to shoot my revolvers, but if I actually hit the tip . . . well . . . it is not good! Always has a "tight" feel to it, and is cold . . . He ended up severing it at the first knuckle . . .

[DwarvenChef]

dang this thread makes me regret getting an optima




Don't worry about what you bought, just learn how to SAFELY load and use it. That is the main problem seen with inlines, to many "Know It All" types that have to push the boundries. Given that many imported inlines are now under scrutiny of flat out forging proof tests...

Yes I would like to see inlines done away with just because to many idiots think you can use smokeless powders, and that opens a HUGE grey area and damage to reputations of all shooters. If some marketing fool had not tried to get this smokeless powder shortcut put out there we would not see nearly this ammount of damage.

Seen alot of this kind of publicity getting picked up by the gun grabbers and used against us. They like this kind of advertising, they get stronger for it...

[iron brigade]

i had one. shot six deer with it. then sold it. i prefer the traditional rifles. my ml 2 was the most accurate gun in my house. it out shot all my center fires. i even shot duplex loads in it. stupid! velocity was over 2500 fps with a 250 gr bullet.
good bye to that pipe bomb.....

[FL-Flinter]

Don't worry about what you bought, just learn how to SAFELY load and use it. That is the main problem seen with inlines, to many "Know It All" types that have to push the boundries. Given that many imported inlines are now under scrutiny of flat out forging proof tests...

Oh please, let's not go back to the imported in-lines & proof testing again..... Give it up already because there have been more problems with imported sidelocks blowing up than in-lines and most came from India & Pakistan but Turkey, Italy, China and other countries are on the list too. You want to gripe about something, gripe about the money-grubbing dealers who are knowingly buying unsafe imported guns, jacking the price up 300-500% and selling them to unsuspecting customers who don't know any better! These are the dealers who don't care about anything but profit in their pocket! Want to talk about testing and quality, let's talk about all the Pedersoli's that come through with unsafe locks. Let's talk about the "made in India" and "made in Pakistan" guns with breechplugs that are soldered in and poorly done enough that they fail resulting in serious injuries with nothing more than "blank" charges!


Yes I would like to see inlines done away with just because to many idiots think you can use smokeless powders, and that opens a HUGE grey area and damage to reputations of all shooters. If some marketing fool had not tried to get this smokeless powder shortcut put out there we would not see nearly this ammount of damage.

Let's be fair here and talk about all the idiots buying T/C, Lyman and other cheap mass-production sidelocks and loading them with powder that happens to be "black in color" like Bullseye. Idiots and know-it-alls are everywhere like those who tell people, "Just put a little smokeless in the barrel first and it'll reduce fouling so you don't have to wipe between shots." Let's talk about the idiots on the traditional side who have blown-up high-quality custom/semi-custom guns because they tried using "buck & ball" or "double-ball" loads without having a clue about how to properly load such things nor having any clue as to if the gun was designed for such loads. Same note, let's talk about all the idiots who have blown-up custom/semi-custom fowler because they don't know the proper way to load birdshot charges. How many idiots have blown-up custom/semi-custom guns because they chose to partake in the extremely unsafe activities of "running shoots" and "timed shoots"? Point is, none of these problems are created by the "gun" but rather by the stupidity and/or ignorance of the operator.

I want to be perfectly clear about things - I build custom & semi-custom guns of all kinds: flint, percussion, underhammers, handgonnes & matchlocks. I don't give a dang about any other company but my own and I surely don't give a dang about modern in-lines except to say "thank you" to those companies building them because there is no better selling point than to hand a potential client a gun that feels and handles like a piece of sewer pipe strapped to a fence post then hand them one of mine that feels and handles like a gun should. I also don't take issue with anyone who chooses to use a modern in-line because it is what they want, that's the wonderful thing about freedom, just because I don't like it doesn't mean someone else should not be allowed to have what they like. I don't like sports, could care less about watching someone else play a game but many folks enjoy watch so more power to 'em!

Point is the reality of the situation. For those of you who think proof-testing is the answer to anything, bear the fact in mind that most all gun failures, ML or CF, are caused by the operator. You want to talk about proof-testing, let's look at the guns that passed the proof test yet failed at a later time through no fault of the operator - it happens and there is no level of testing that can prevent it ... that's why they're called "accidents" yet when something happens, doesn't matter who's fault it is, if anyone's, someone is looking to place the blame on someone else and thus is the problem with the world today.

The "blame game" is in a large part responsible for the cost of everything we buy today. A couple idiots think it's a good idea to pick up a running lawn mower and use it to trim hedges, they get their fingers chopped off, and rightly so, yet we all pay for the cost because the idiots sued the manufacturer and the retailer with the worst part being that they won! Idiots buy a vehicle they know nothing about, go out on the highway and shift from "D" to "R" flipping their own vehicle and taking out three other innocent people in the process. These idiots sue the mfg for their own stupidity and win because the jury was filled with idiots as well, then we all get to pay the price because mfg's now have to completely re-design transmissions to be "idiot-proof". Were did that get us? Fast forward to Toyota where the throttle stuck open, one lady shifts out of "D" to "R" yet nothing happens because the transmission idiot-proof re-design resulting from the previous law suit resulted in the mfg installing interlocks to prevent some idiot who shouldn't be driving in the first place from causing a wreck by intentionally shifting into "R" at 70mph. Now, the lady who tried to control engine run-away was the victim of idiot-proofing yet she's still suing the mfg despite the fact she didn't have enough brains to turn the ignition key off or apply the e-brake.

Let's talk about proof-testing for a minute too. Do you know how many times I see alleged gun builder claim they proof-test by loading a double+ charge with a double+ projectile ... quite often and anyone with even a hint of knowledge about the mechanical properties of metals knows full-well that while the barrel may have held to that insanely excessive overload, the alleged "testing" has created an over-stress condition and thus induced damage that can very well result in failure of that barrel at some later time. Let's say a barrel has been proof-tested in the proper manner as prescribed by the design and mechanical properties of the assembly and passes without any indication of a problem ... then, ten years later it turns loose with a normal and proper load because of a hidden flaw within the steel, is that now fault of the gun builder? Fault of the barrel maker? Fault of the proof-house? Fault of the steel manufacturer? Or, is it merely and unfortunate accident?

For those of you who think the above is someone's "fault", let me ask you this question ... sawmill cuts boards from a log, gun builder buys the board and makes a gunstock from it. No indication of any problems or flaws in the wood yet at some time later the wrist fractures on shooting and the shooter is injured. Are you going to blame the gun builder? The sawmill? The lumberjack? or God for creating a defective tree?

Yes, I absolutely agree that there are dangerous products out there, re-read my first paragraph. I also agree that there is dangerous advertising too and the focus on profit-driven sales-hype as opposed to common sense is an act of utter stupidity on behalf of the seller and shows complete disrespect for the entire shooting community ... HOWEVER ... if it was not for consumers responding to the sales BS, it wouldn't work so well! (Reference: Thomas Tusser, "A fool and his money are soon parted." and P.T. Barnum, "There's a sucker born every minute")

I have been involved in heavy industries and mass-production manufacturing most all of my life. For those of you who have not, let me give you a glimpse into cost of dealing with stupid consumers and money-grubbing lawyers. One of my former clients mass-produced office furniture. Their engineers completely re-designed a line of large file cabinets so as to reduce the severity of injury should some idiot slam their fingers in the drawer. They also increased cost by installing an anti-tip interlock so that some idiot could not open more than one drawer at a time without intentionally defeating the interlock system. Along comes blithering idiot #1 who intentionally defeats the interlock system and uses the file cabinet as a step ladder. Idiot #1 hires money-grub lawyer and sues the company because no one told him not to use a file cabinet as a step ladder. Idiot jury awards blithering idiot #1 a huge damage award, overturned in appeal thanks to judges who called the stupidity what it was but in the end it cost the consumers of that office equipment over $4 million in legal defense costs and just for the initial secondary warnings sent out to distributors, retailers and customers telling blithering idiots not to use a file cabinet as a step ladder. Subsequently, the cost to the consumers (other businesses using these large file cabinets) rose by roughly $350 per unit because the cabinet mfg was forced to design and mfg further idiot-proofing and print giant owners manuals and dozens of warning stickers in an attempt to protect themselves from blithering idiots. The cost increase followed suit when the businesses buying these file cabinets were forced to train their employees in the safe operation of the file cabinets for such things as telling them not to use a file cabinet as a step ladder. That cost was again passed on to the consumers of their products which is YOU and I. We all get stuck paying in the end so when you hear talk about "mandates" for something, understand that YOU are the one paying for it out of your pocket and 99.99% of that additional cost coming out of your pocket is directly attributed to blithering idiots!

[Three-Fifty-Seven]

AMEN FL-Flinter!

Well said!

When I stuck my finger in the printing press, it was my fault, I blame no one but myself, I thought I knew what I was doing, and I failed to confirm, and get confirmation of what I was looking out for . . . so I'm paying the price, now I make sure I KNOW why I am doing what I'm doing, and how do do it correctly, especially around things that can take my life . . . (Our press runs on 480VAC three phase powering a 50 hp motor . . . lots of moving parts and pinch points)

[Doc Highwall]

I say it is not what you use, it is how you use it. Anything misused can be dangerous, that is why we have the Darwin Awards and a million safety stickers on everything.

[frontier gander]

why do you regret buying an Optima? They are an excellent rifle. The new optimas are pretty bad **** too!

[RugerFan]

ANY firearm is dangerous if loaded improperly. Nothing wrong with inlines if you use your brain.

[Luper]

i love my optima its just reading it makes think i should have saved more money and a side-lock of some sort

[frontier gander]

luper your optima is as safe as any other rifle out there. Sidelock or not, if you screw up, anything can happen. They have videos on you tube of rifles blowing up while hunting due to mud being packed in the bore or something else. Even an ar15 blew up due to a misfire that barely fired off and the next live round kaboomed it.

[fatboy]

give me my old tennessee mountain flint lock any day!

[10 ga]

Seen all this before. Go over to Dougs Message Boards and check out the safety issues forum. I have 8 MLs, 4 sidehammer and 4 inline, and shoot all of them. I consider the inlines just as safe as the sidehammer guns. Inlines have been around since matchlock days. It is not the ignition location, it's the steel and how the gun is handled by the loader or shooter. As MLing is a form of "amunition manufacture" is is subject to lots of safety issues. Fact of it is that if the guy in the original picture was loading by volume with the correct powder instead of weight he would still be within the correct range of suggested loads! I have had my Hunter Safety Instructors certification for over 35 years and have seen MANY blown up guns. Blowing up a gun is not restricted to only inline MLs. In fact inline MLs probably make up the smallest # of guns that I have seen that were destroyed. A fool with a gun is still a fool with a gun no matter what kind of gun it is. 10 ga

[jimb16]

That makes me glad I only shoot flints. OUCH!!!!!

[EchoSixMike]

Guns are not safe; the operator is safe. The same gun is unsafe in the hands of a fool.

I deal with fools on a routine basis; I no longer pity them.

What actually was the debrief on this blown up gun? Excessive load or what? S/F.....Ken M

[blaster]

I've seen these pictures and a couple more like them on a website I think was called American Muzzleloading? As I recall they had a few stories about exploding Savages. They blamed a change in the design of the breech plug from the original.

I read an article a couple of months ago in one of the deer hunting rags where a guy double charged his inline (i don't remember the brand) seated a bullet left the ramrod in and took (tried to take) an anchoring shot on a buck. He walked away with noting worse than 2 black eyes and scope cut stitches from what must have been massive recoil.

Bottom line is, a bad gun might let go any time and a good gun, inlines included, might survive some level of stupid.

[Doc Highwall]

If you look the receiver is intact and the barrel is still screwed in, the barrel burst ahead of the where the powder and bullet would have been seated. Makes me think he was trying to max out the load.

[mike3132]

Guys,

Ive worked with the Savage since it came out and they have been a few gun barrels burst. Not one has been verified to be a bad design or barrel. All of them are shooter error. Savage tests these MLII barrels to 125000 PSI. There are safe or safer than any other brand of muzzle loader. If you like to learn more about this gun please visit us at,
http://dougsmessageboards.proboards.com/index.cgi

Mike3132,
Site Administrator of Doug's Message Board,
The Original Savage Muzzleloader Site.

[waksupi]

Mike, I'd almost bet that 100% could be attributed to shooter error.

[lathesmith]

Pardon me if I am reading something in here that isn't meant, but....I believe the primary points that waksupi is trying to make by saying that he "doesn't like inlines" is: 1) obviously, he don't really care for the "styling", or lack thereof; but most importantly, 2) A little mistake with blackpowder, and I mean just that, BLACK powder, not fakes, or subs--is much more forgiving than the same mistake with smokeless. For example, if you accidently overcharge your front-stuffer with, say, an extra 10 grains of black powder, you may notice a little more recoil, and maybe smoke, but likely not much else. Make that same little mistake with loose smokeless, and--well, simply reference the the initial post for the potential disaster that almost certainly awaits you.

For some reason, the unlearned get the idea that an modern inline is (impossibly) super-strong, and can take anything in the way of smokeless that they can pour down the spout, just without all the "mess" of black powder. I can definitely agree, fooling with smokeless in a front-stuffer is really a game for the experienced only, and not some shortcut for the new rube that is too lazy to take 5 minutes after a shooting session to clean up his firearm. I'll take the mess of black powder any day over the mess that I see in that initial post. Yuck!


lathesmith

[mooman76]

One bad thing about loading the smokeless inline is you don't have to be a loader to do it. I am sure there are probably some here myself and friends included that it would be cool to get into reloading and load some super hot loads. I didn't know at the time how dangerous it was or even the big difference in different powders. That barrel kind of looks like a barrel obstruction, like he got a bullet stuck half way down and fired it anyway but that's just what it looks like. I do believe it was shooters fault whatever it was.

[missionary5155]

Good morning
People make mistakes whether they fire BLACK POWDER or whatever. I have seen BLOWN UP muzzleloaders and all sorts of weapons. Mistakes happen and sometimes it is because someone just crosses over the line of safety.
But lets face it... gun accidents are so small when we compare them to all the other SELF INFLICTED damage people seem to need in their personal lives that sadly end up killing and maiming lots of other people who will never get the chance to "Move aside" because the "ACCIDENT" is driving not shooting.

[mike3132]

I totally agree inlines are not for everyone. Heck, I cut my teeth on a T/C Hawkins back in the early 70's, boy was that a learning experience. Me and my buddy poured our own bullets out of semi-tire wheel weights before we learned we should be using soft lead. I killed my very first deer using that .50 and a 180 grain patched round ball. Man, was I excited!

Smokeless muzzleloading is not that hard if you will just take a little time to read and follow directions but reading and following directions isn't what some like to do! LOL

If any of you have questions about the Savage please stop by our site and ask. Good shooting to all, Mike

[remla75]

I have one of those guns love it fits well and shoot like a ddream cleans eazy also the istructions are very detialed donot over load i have seen pic on other forums sum get away easy sum don't the deer realy do drop fast with it iI even took it to a coupel of shoots real hard to get a round ball good enogh for the shoots twist is to fast I only use 25 gr black powder 2 f and sum paper wads keeps it within 1in at 25 yards

[tek4260]

Only problem with Savage ML rifles is that they did away with the ML-1 :(

[TNsailorman]

I am a "traditionalists" muzzleloader shooter from the late 1960's on. However, the in-lines are for the most part well made and function as intended. The problem is the same with an in-line as with any other rifle, shotgun, pistol; the user can use it any way he so desires and some people somehow equate pushing the envelope way past designed specifications as making them more "intelligent" and more "man". Some do it out of just plain lack of understanding or knowledge. I can understand the minor point of wanting an easier to clean after shooting powder, but you first have to look at the designed specs. and warnings and use them to make safe decisions. I myself, find that black powder rifles are easier to clean than smokeless powder. I can clean a black powder rifle in 30 minutes with hot soapy water, a smokeles rifle takes longer and is far more expensive (bore cleaner and patches) than smokeless. To blame the tool is a version of the old oft quoted phrase of the anti-gun crowd that "guns cause crime", it is the user who determines the safety or lethality of the tool. The tool itself is an inanimate object and is incapable of either intelligence or motive. Although I will never own an in-line, I don't blame the in-line for the problem. It is me or the man/woman behind the in-line that will make it dangerous or safe. My opinion anyway. James

[White Smoke]

I'm not that familiar with the 10ML but I did run across this article about a design flaw. For what it's worth...http://www.hpmuzzleloading.com/Alert.html

[IridiumRed]

I'm not that familiar with the 10ML but I did run across this article about a design flaw. For what it's worth...http://www.hpmuzzleloading.com/Alert.html

All I can say is "WOW"

The guy who did the write up in that link, I'd say he makes a rather compelling argument. I dont know what Savage's reply would be / will be, but.... it does look like trouble

[mike3132]

Toby Bridges had a bone to pick with Savage and the guns designers Henry and Bill Ball. Toby was fired by Savage and soon after this story appeared. Theres a lot more to this story that I cant reveal but lets just say this story was more of a revenge article.

[Multigunner]

Now, notice that from the bottom of the outside barrel threads to the bottom of the unused threads found in the airspace that surrounds the front (unthreaded) half of the breech plug, the barrel steel is only about half as thick as the barrel steel ahead of the breech plug recess. Still, when the seal is lost between the front sealing shoulder of the breech plug and the corresponding shoulder at the rear of the bore, that thinner steel is subjected to the same high pressures as the barrel at its thickest point.


Sounds logical to me.

Personally I prefer more traditional side plate locks , under hammer, or mule ear locks. Nothing basically wrong with the inline concept of course, but from the photos of the blown up rifle the execution seems to have been faulty in this case.

Also while a smokeless load in such a rifle may be safe on paper so far as pressures go, the cartridge case and chamber play a large part in absorbing the initial thrust of the charge against a breech face, the same charge in a muzzle loader applys its full force against the breech plug without any such cushioning effect.
I think that caseless cartridge designs might suffer similar problems.

[PatMarlin]

Toby Bridges had a bone to pick with Savage and the guns designers Henry and Bill Ball. Toby was fired by Savage and soon after this story appeared. Theres a lot more to this story that I cant reveal but lets just say this story was more of a revenge article.

Revenge bone to pick with Savage or not, this guy is dead right in my opinion. No way I would own a Model 10ML II with that breech plug. Doesn't take a Nasa engineer to figure this one out.

Holy cow, I can't believe Savage has not corrected that. .050 steel thickness eventually getting exposed to gas pressures upwards of 50,000 psi? Can we say "possible metal fatigue likely" or ticking time bomb Bullwinkle?

I guess it's cheaper to ignore the white elephant in the room and pay for occational damages... :roll:

That is plain nuts.

[DwarvenChef]

I'm currious if that plug would be reasonable safe with black powder or subs. I think that advertising it as a smokeless using ML sent the wrong messages to the wrong people and Boom!!!

[waksupi]

It would seem that if a breechplug was going to be made in that fashion ,the threaded part should have been butting against the bore, rather than the slip fit forward portion. That just doesn't make sense. Theoretically, the length of the threads is appropriate, as threading beyond the diameter of joined pieces, adds nothing to strength. Was the treading reversed, it would eliminate the problem, I would think.

I'll stick with flinters.

[mike3132]

Revenge bone to pick with Savage or not, this guy is dead right in my opinion. No way I would own a Model 10ML II with that breech plug. Doesn't take a Nasa engineer to figure this one out.

Holy cow, I can't believe Savage has not corrected that. .050 steel thickness eventually getting exposed to gas pressures upwards of 50,000 psi? Can we say "possible metal fatigue likely" or ticking time bomb Bullwinkle?

I guess it's cheaper to ignore the white elephant in the room and pay for occational damages... :roll:

That is plain nuts.

Believe what you want.........if I could tell the whole story about Bridges, Savage and the Balls you might come to a different conclusion.

Ive shot the Savage since the gun came out and put 1000's rounds down the barrel with no ill effect. I feel the gun is as save or safer than any other muzzle loader on the market.

Shooter's error caused the accidents, plain and simple. Mike

[PatMarlin]

We all come to our own conclusions, make our own decisions and I respect yours, but will respectfully stick by mine.

I never felt good about stirring up the waters with a smokeless muzzle loader, but one with a design flaw such as this one- forget about it. That is a recipe for eventual disaster IMO. Metal stress and fatigue happen over time and number of firings.

It's very expensive for a company to admit "We made a mistake" roll back a product and advertising campaign. Recall everyone of them, plus lose future sales and pay off indisputable law suits for years to come.

I would bet the odds of accidents happening are very low simply because not enough numbers of shots are fired by the majority of users.

Think business doesn't add up all the odds and scenarios? I still bet it's way cheaper to ignore the elephant.

[waksupi]

Mike, having a "You don't know what I know" argument is weak. If you have facts, state them. Making statements like that, puts you in the tin foil hat crowd.

[John Taylor]

I read the article by Toby Bridges and while I agree that there is a problem with gas cutting I don't think it caused the barrel to burst. First the threads are not a tapered pipe threads so they do not seal the breach. Any gas leaking past the breach sealing area will not be held by the threaded area. Second, the burst seems to have it's center a few inches from the breach plug indicating that the high pressure was in that area and the rips went in both directions. I have been a gunsmith for a while and have seen my share of burst barrels. Most of the time there will be a mark or ring in the area where the burst started like if there were a bore obstruction. There is a thing called detonation with smokeless powder that happens sometimes and they can't seem to duplicate it in testing. A friend had a SA 45 that took the top of the cylinder off and the top strap , yet the bullet was still in the target group. The powder he was using would not allow a double charge and no one can say just what caused it to blow.
It is my humble opinion that there was an air space between the powder and bullet which would account for the center of the burst to be a few inches from the breach. This can also allow for detonation. If it were detonation I would think the bullet had been about the end of the tear, possibly allowing 4-5" of air space.
As for the gas cutting problem I'll leave that to Savage to figure out.

[45-70 Chevroner]

I'm not a purist when it comes to front loaders but also I don't like inlines they just don't look right. I shoot only side lock cap locks. Flint locks take a lot of concentration to prep for shooting and thats ok because they are great looking and make lots of extra smoke. I think in lines should be classed along with cartridge rifles for hunting. Most states set up hunting with MLs as a primitave hunting sport. Enough said. I feel real bad for the guy though.

[waksupi]

Flintlocks do take concentration. Here is a clip from one of our club members that is always in the top shooters. Observe the proper follow through for a flint lock.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7R1VzjDYAA

[dukenukum]

[QUOTE=Captain*Kirk;828691]Youch!
Read my lips: Muzzleloaders are for black powder or BP substitute and don't use shotgun primers or sabot slugs or any of that newfangled ****. Those morphodites are ML's in theory only. If you want a .338 WinMag, buy one.
Just my opinion, but a valid one![/QUOTE
Testify, my brother these guns are called mutant loaders in my group. real Muzzle loaders have flint locks, percussion caps or match locks.

[45-70 Chevroner]

I'm sure glad I'm not the only one to be waiting in line, "pun intended," to shoot my cap lock. I'm getting to old to start a new shooting game, maybe in my next life. The rock locks are beautiful guns but I just don't have enough time left. Besides I would have to sell several of my other shooters to afford one.

[45-70 Chevroner]

I'm heading out on vacation, Utah, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, and places unknown. Be back in about a month.

[Swampman]

Inlines are as safe as any firearm. They are very easy to maintain. I like all muzzleloaders and see no reason to not shoot them all.

[Rangefinder]

Got this same thing from a friend of mine who owns a BP store and machine shop. I don't remember the specific smokeless powder this guy used, but from what I understand he measured it by volume in a BP flask. The measure, being set up the throw a metered charge of BP is obviously not going to throw the same charge in a different powder--especially a small grain smokeless. That has nothing to do with being inline or traditional BP---it has everything to do with general human stupidity, as do most firearm failures.

[frontier gander]

if the mountain men would have had the choice between round balls VS sabots or heavy conicals and 209 primers, they'd have used the inline as their lives dependable on the gun being reliable.

[PatMarlin]

if the mountain men would have had the choice between round balls VS sabots or heavy conicals and 209 primers, they'd have used the inline as their lives dependable on the gun being reliable.

Now that's an interesting perspective and argument on a tiresome subject.

[waksupi]

if the mountain men would have had the choice between round balls VS sabots or heavy conicals and 209 primers, they'd have used the inline as their lives dependable on the gun being reliable.

That is quite a stretch. Dependability WAS necessary, so the flintlock comes out on top. I have been at more than one shoot where no cap locks of any kind were on the line because of rain, while the flint shooters were all functioning fine.

[StarMetal]

That is quite a stretch. Dependability WAS necessary, so the flintlock comes out on top. I have been at more than one shoot where no cap locks of any kind were on the line because of rain, while the flint shooters were all functioning fine.

Ric,

Lots of new inline designs out there where the caps are totally inclosed and very water proof. I really can't see a tight fitting cap on a nipple being all that prone to rain any more so then a flinter. One of the very facts that they say that killed the flinter was rain. That and who wanted to readjust their flint in the heat of a battle after it had chipped and worn?

Again I say if the flintlock is the best why did firearms evolve?

Why can't you just agree to disagree?

[PatMarlin]

I really want to buy a nice flinter someday.

[waksupi]

Ric,

Lots of new inline designs out there where the caps are totally inclosed and very water proof. I really can't see a tight fitting cap on a nipple being all that prone to rain any more so then a flinter. One of the very facts that they say that killed the flinter was rain. That and who wanted to readjust their flint in the heat of a battle after it had chipped and worn?

Again I say if the flintlock is the best why did firearms evolve?

Why can't you just agree to disagree?

Speed of loading is what killed the ML, or at least made it weaker in the knees.
As for adjusting a flint in battle, I doubt it happened often. A well knapped flint is going to give you 30-40 shots at least, before needing any attention. I've been through two shoots the past few weeks, and that adds up to around 70-75 shots, and have not had to do anything to my flint, aside from wiping off fouling. Not many battles would have lasted that long.
I used to shoot cap locks quite a bit. In wet weather, the caps would draw moisture much worse than a flinter's priming charge.

I agree to disagree! [smilie=l:

[StarMetal]

Speed of loading is what killed the ML, or at least made it weaker in the knees.
As for adjusting a flint in battle, I doubt it happened often. A well knapped flint is going to give you 30-40 shots at least, before needing any attention. I've been through two shoots the past few weeks, and that adds up to around 70-75 shots, and have not had to do anything to my flint, aside from wiping off fouling. Not many battles would have lasted that long.
I used to shoot cap locks quite a bit. In wet weather, the caps would draw moisture much worse than a flinter's priming charge.

I agree to disagree! [smilie=l:

Yes the speed of reloading surely was one issue, but not the single one. As mentioned rain, having to carry two powders, wind, the list goes on.

As to the caps drawing moisture...I can see that....but in my personal experience I've never seen a 209 shot gun primer fail.

Don't get me wrong, I would like to get a flinter someday because as I told you in chat one night I think they are really cool!!!:bigsmyl2:

[Swampman]

That is quite a stretch. Dependability WAS necessary, so the flintlock comes out on top. I have been at more than one shoot where no cap locks of any kind were on the line because of rain, while the flint shooters were all functioning fine.

Having shot flintlocks only for many many years I can say they aren't as reliable as caplocks or inlines. They were replaced very quickly when caplocks came on the scene.

[Swampman]

I just love my new Savage 10ML-II. The workmanship is amazing.

[XWrench3]

well, basicly, you HAVE to be SMARTER than the equipment you opperate! if you are not, these kinds of things will happen to you. it really doesn't matter if it was an inline ml or not. ANYTHING to do with guns, it is better to err on the side of safety!

[daddywpb]

well, basicly, you HAVE to be SMARTER than the equipment you opperate! if you are not, these kinds of things will happen to you. it really doesn't matter if it was an inline ml or not. ANYTHING to do with guns, it is better to err on the side of safety!

I think that says it all. I shoot and hunt with traditional caplocks and patched balls, and I shoot and hunt with a T/C Omega with Powerbelts. I wouldn't give up either. Smokeless inlines? Not for me, but to each his own. If you don't know what you're doing, it's just as easy to blow the barrel off of a centerfire bolt rifle.

[Swampman]

Smokeless inlines are safer than any other type of muzzleloader. If you don't know what your doing you shouldn't be shooting firearms.

[Underclocked]

Waksupi, I'll submit this incident has nothing to do with why you hate inlines. Eh?

[waksupi]

Waksupi, I'll submit this incident has nothing to do with why you hate inlines. Eh?

I don't know if I would go so far as to say I hate them. Aesthetics aside, the problem I see with them, people who know nothing about muzzle loaders, or reloading, buy these with no instruction or common sense. The same person who is afraid to handload cartridges, will buy one of these, and merrily pour powder down the barrel. It seems peculiar over the years, I see more pictures of blown up inlines, than traditional type black powder arms. I have shot at national and international level for thirty years, and ML's for nearly 40 years. I have personally only seen one gun blown up in that time. And that was from pure carelessness, the same that causes inline disasters. Black powder is more forgiving.

[Swampman]

Black powder is more forgiving.

99.9% of all inlines shoot blackpowder.

[SamTexas49]

Hmm ? Comment on "Flintlocks"? that Gent may wish to go watch the videos posted on the reliablity of them, "inlines safer" ? Now how does he conclude that?

[Swampman]

Inlines are safer because they are less complex. In fact they are about as simple as it gets. Most of them will withstand more than 135,000 psi.

[SamTexas49]

Well I never thought any of my Caplocks were to complex .

[qajaq59]

If you load any rifle incorrectly it'll blow. I can't see where it being an in-line has much to do with it.