Inlines

[rking22]

Originally Posted by starmac
Why have one, because a scope would look terrible on my sidelock. lol

I think a lot of guys are getting them, because they can get in the game for 1/2 price compared to a sidelock too.




I think this is a big reason myself. I also think people actually think there is a advantage over the traditionally designed ones. Only one i can see is ignition system.

Andy

Ajax, I think you hit the nail on the head. A functional inline can be made much more "economically" than a sidelock. The "cheap" sidelocks left an opening that manufactures lept to fill. Inlines are just simpler, therefore easier to make reliable. The manufacturers (and media) have done a very good job of convincing "Joe public" that plastic is the best material for a stock. It's economics for them. For instance, screw up a piece of walnut and you have fire wood. Screw up a plastic stock, just regrind it and remold it. Same(economics) with inline ignition, a cheap side lock frequently has issues, now, put in the "work" to learn how to make a good one work and it's very reliable. Without the inlines, there would be less people muzzleloading due to economics.
As far as percussion better than flint? I have no need to pinch and install a new cap with a flintgun when I reload in the woods. Charge the pan with the same powder as the main load and done. Besides I haven't seen a tin of caps (in a store)in a year or more. + one to the 209 system on availability.Flintguns were still in use,in the mountains, 80 years after caps came out, had to be a reason.
I personally will not tollerate the difficulty of loading the sabo load in a dirty bore, Seems the "modern" projectile system is not "all that". Not to mention, the BC of a 240r .429 ain't so hot for "long range"
If I wanted to build a 200 yard rifle ,I would take a page from history, and use a 45 with a full dia bullet and then put a "semi sealed ignition" undehammer on it. Wood for me, and a tapered and flared barrel please, ala "Virgina" guns. Now that's not within any traditional school, but still much better ergonomics (for me) than the current batch of rifles.
Not the "inline ignition" to me, it's the modernizing on the "appearance". It has become the current norm, and will become "traditional" as the current generation "matures". Sunday at the gun club, trying to help another member get his arrows fletched, I offered to loan my Bizenburg and some feathers. 5 middle aged men looked at me like I was nuts. Plastic vanes and compounds are the new traditional now that crossbows are "hitting the seen". We should watch the way we peigionhole based on appearance, that is how our oponents attack ARs vs Leverguns,,, M9s vs Pythons ect.
Yes it's a muzzle loader, no it's not traditional to some of us. No big deal, and I really don't think it has any real advantage over the ol style. Percieved advantages sometimes don't pan out in the field, sometimes they do.
Now that underhammer with a bullet twist and a 457122 lubed with crisco, put a 4X scope on it and there is a real advantage, especially if it has nice tigerstripe or flame maple Gotta get my roundtuit. Opps ,sorry for the long wanderin post..

[Beagle333]

I do not know if you can narrow it that much. If so, what is a traditional car? Traditional house? Traditional lawnmower? Traditional chainsaw?
Traditional encompasses too much to narrow something out specifically, while allowing many others to be included. Make sense?
You cannot take the advancement of history and stop it at a certain spot indefinitely for all people. Sure, it can be an opinion based argument, but it cannot be absolute. You can however, lump a large portion of similar things in as tradition.

'Just because I got nothin' better to do that beat this horse a little....
.... and it's kinda fun.

I was going with the definition of "tradition" as:

tra·di·tion

noun \trə-ˈdi-shən\ : a way of thinking, behaving, or doing something that has been used by the people in a particular group, family, society, etc., for a long time.

You might not can stop it at one certain spot, but I think it is more out of line to jump to the most current end of development and hoist one and declare it is "traditional". When did they start marketing the inlines that hunters are now using? Around 1970-ish? Once we have had inlines for 2000 or so years, then you can point to them and declare that they are traditional, since people have been hunting with them for a MUCH longer time that that ol smoky thing they used back in the first 400 years (with flinters being developed and made popular around 1625, and I believe the copper percussion cap is 100 years old)... but since the sporter-stocked inlines have only been popular for less than 50 years..... I'd go with the old smoke pole as being a traditional muzzleloader.

But I do see your point too. I suppose if we went by my definition of "longest use", then a traditional house would indeed be a cave.

[starmac]

Well this thread has shown examples of inlines way before percussion caps came on scene, sooooo where does that leave us.

I think another reason some people buy inlines is the availability of left handed sidelocks, in fact I don't think, I know.
When I first started looking for a muzzle loader It HAD to be a sidelock (percussion) I bet I had 20 or more shop owners try to talk me into an inline, just to make a sale out of what they had in stock.
I know it lefty muzzle shooters is going to be a small percentage overall, but I like to think we still count. lol

[Beagle333]

Lefty muzzle shooters, it is! I vote for your own season too!


I did buy an inline before I got my first sidelock. And yes, it was just so I could horn in on that early 4 days of muzzie-only season here. It just seemed so much easier to snap in a primer, drop a pellet and stuff a plastic wrapped bullet down the pipe, and I was huntin' like Dan'l Boone and the old guys!
And I didn't have to learn all that mess about measuring the power and selecting the right thickness of patch and tuning the lock and...!


I still think stuffing a round ball is "traditional".... but what do I know.... I paint my boolits.

[Elkins45]

Well this thread has shown examples of inlines way before percussion caps came on scene, sooooo where does that leave us.

I think another reason some people buy inlines is the availability of left handed sidelocks, in fact I don't think, I know.
When I first started looking for a muzzle loader It HAD to be a sidelock (percussion) I bet I had 20 or more shop owners try to talk me into an inline, just to make a sale out of what they had in stock.
I know it lefty muzzle shooters is going to be a small percentage overall, but I like to think we still count. lol

My T/C Renegade is a lefty. I can't even imagine shooting a right handed flintlock...a percussion gun comes close enough to setting my beard on fire already. I can't imagine an actual explosion that cost to my hair!

i didn't remember that as an advantage of inlines, but now that I'm reminded I can certainly add that to the list of reasons that I like my inline gun.

[starmac]

Well I like em all I guess. lol I haven't really played with the inlines much, but I bought a couple once I learned that I was guaranteed success by using one. Mine will probably not be half as successful as they still have wood stocks, blue barrels and can only be powered by a #11 cap, AND I have to pull a hammer back, soooo even though they can't run with the big dogs, and can only be marginally successful, I like em, and that is what matters here. lol Oh yea, one of them will get a scope, which disqualifies it here as a muzzie.

[10 ga]

I voted "who cares", as I don't care. I have 13 muzzleloaders. 5 are inline smokeless ML. 2 are inline smokers and 6 are sidehammer guns. Of the sidehammer really only 2 of them would be considered "traditional" style, one is an original Harpers Ferry 1842 in 69 smooth bore and the other is a "Hawken" replica. The others are pretty well dressed up.

Plus the original poll question is rather grotesquely constructed. I can really get about 3 different questions out of the OP.

Yes, you read correctly, smokeless muzzleloaders! I have 2 Savage MLII, 2 Remmy 700ML upgraded with bolt nose like the Savage and smokeless barrel and Savage breech plug, and a smokeless barrel custom built for my Encore. And yes, SML will outperform smokers in any category you want to address.

10 ga

[starmac]

Awe Man, you just had to bring up the smokeless muzzies, and learn me that even though they are inlines, my wood stocked ones won't keel nuthing now. Dadgumit, I really don't want one of them plastic thingies, but guess I will have to get with the program if I ever plan to succeed in this game. lol

[starmac]

I keep seeing the seal system on inlines are an advantage, and can see the thinking behind it. This got me to thinking. My inlines are the old scouts, which has 2 vents that are between the capped nipple and the powder charge, now I'm wandering if the powder can draw moisture through the vents bad enough that leaving one loaded a few days may not be a good idea??

[Col4570]

A left or right hand Flintlock is not a requirement for safety since double guns have a Lock on each side therefore it is immaterial which shoulder you use.

[Saltner]

I voted no
As in previous comments, these guns have in common only the load from the muzzle, the rest has nothing in common: Stainless steel barrels, ignition system with primers 209, shutter, weapons sights, ready for bases and rings to mount scopes, security systems and considerable use of smokeless powder and even pirodex.

[Lead Fred]

Inlines disgust me. Flatlanders that cant use a flinter should just stay home.

Uneducated back woods hicks used flinters for many years.

Modern folk have to rely on crutches to get the same job done.

Ill put my patched round ball traveling 2033fps up against any of them BBQ pokers, fake powder, modernized junkers

[newton]

I voted no
As in previous comments, these guns have in common only the load from the muzzle, the rest has nothing in common: Stainless steel barrels, ignition system with primers 209, shutter, weapons sights, ready for bases and rings to mount scopes, security systems and considerable use of smokeless powder and even pirodex.

Everything you list is also found on sidelocks except for ready to mount scopes. Very interesting.

[newton]

Inlines disgust me. Flatlanders that cant use a flinter should just stay home.

Uneducated back woods hicks used flinters for many years.

Modern folk have to rely on crutches to get the same job done.

Ill put my patched round ball traveling 2033fps up against any of them BBQ pokers, fake powder, modernized junkers

What about sidelocks? How do you know how fast your RB is traveling? Did'nt know they had chronographs in the traditional days....Is'nt a chronograph a modern tool?

[johnson1942]

lead fred, i always like to point out the value of a rifled flinter by useing the battle of new orleans as an example of what a rifled flinter can do. 3500 british dead or wounded. mostly dead. none got closer that 98 yards. most were head shots. the british were attacking the center where the 500 flint long rifles were because those squirrel rifles were to small of a cal. for war. the first shot fired in the battle was a 216 yard shot by one of those rifle men named morgan. he took a loud and offensive british officer off of a dapple grey with a head shot. only 11 americans died, and most of those was the night before in a scouting night fight. they were mostly native americans helping out. you like and shoot a very good style of rifle. now if i was their with my fast twist sidelocks they would have used me for long range snipeing. my gun shoots real black very well behind a paperpatch bullet. also the inline guys guns shoot real black very well also and if they would have been their with real black and paperpatched bullets their may not have been a battle because all the generals and officers whould have been dead way way out their. i get the drift that every one on cast bullets likes to be independent some what or a whole lot. a flinter gives you that and so does a well managed inline. boy will the noise start on cast bollits when they put electronic triggers on inlines. also this new post with powdercoating baked on to the bullets catches on in muzzleloader. then us paperpatch shooters will cry that its too modern. it will and does shoot as good as any paperpatch. just thank God you have all lived long enough to see and cope with change. remember the sioux who fought custer hand to hand and killed him lived to be close to 110 years old. he saw change few men ever ever saw. when he died in the early 60/s he saw the beginning of the space age and nuclear age. he was born on the prairie hunting buffalo and died in a completely other age. white bull saw also if all live long enough so will you. electric triggers and powder coated bullets. what does flantlander mean? i dont live in those wooded hill whose people call every one else a flatlander. their a canyons not too far from my house if i took you down their and left you their you would never get out no matter how skilled you are in the outdoors in your area. we have deep canyons here and granite peaks

[waksupi]

What about sidelocks? How do you know how fast your RB is traveling? Did'nt know they had chronographs in the traditional days....Is'nt a chronograph a modern tool?

Pendulum chronographs have been around for a LONG time.

The ballistic pendulum was invented in 1742 by English mathematician Benjamin Robins (1707–1751), and published in his book New Principles of Gunnery, which revolutionized the science of ballistics, as it provided the first way to accurately measure the velocity of a bullet.[2][5]

Robins used the ballistic pendulum to measure projectile velocity in two ways. The first was to attach the gun to the pendulum, and measure the recoil. Since the momentum of the gun is equal to the momentum of the ejecta, and since the projectile was (in those experiments) the large majority of the mass of the ejecta, the velocity of the bullet could be approximated. The second, and more accurate method, was to directly measure the bullet momentum by firing it into the pendulum. Robins experimented with musket balls of around one ounce in mass (30 g), while other contemporaries used his methods with cannon shot of one to three pounds (0.5 to 1.4 kg).[5]

Robins' original work used a heavy iron pendulum, faced with wood, to catch the bullet. Modern reproductions, used as demonstrations in physics classes, generally use a heavy weight suspended by a very fine, lightweight arm, and ignore the mass of the pendulum's arm. Robins' heavy iron pendulum did not allow this, and Robins' mathematical approach was slightly more complex. He used the period of oscillation and mass of the pendulum (both measured with the bullet included) to calculate the rotational inertia of the pendulum, which was then used in the calculations. Robins also used a length of ribbon, loosely gripped in a clamp, to measure the travel of the pendulum. The pendulum would draw out a length of ribbon equal to the chord of pendulum's travel.[6]

The first system to supplant ballistic pendulums with direct measures of projectile speed was invented in 1808, during the Napoleonic Wars and used a rapidly rotating shaft of known speed with two paper disks on it; the bullet was fired through the disks, parallel to the shaft, and the angular difference in the points of impact provided an elapsed time over the distance between the disks. A direct electromechanical clockwork measure appeared in 1840, with a spring-driven clock started and stopped by electromagnets, whose current was interrupted by the bullet passing through two meshes of fine wires, again providing the time to traverse the given distance.[2]

[newton]

Yes, but I doubt he was checking his speed on one..... If he is, then I will eat crow. lol

[dtknowles]

Pendulum chronographs have been around for a LONG time.

The ballistic pendulum was invented in 1742 by English mathematician Benjamin Robins (1707–1751), and published in his book New Principles of Gunnery, which revolutionized the science of ballistics, as it provided the first way to accurately measure the velocity of a bullet.[2][5]

Robins used the ballistic pendulum to measure projectile velocity in two ways. The first was to attach the gun to the pendulum, and measure the recoil. Since the momentum of the gun is equal to the momentum of the ejecta, and since the projectile was (in those experiments) the large majority of the mass of the ejecta, the velocity of the bullet could be approximated. The second, and more accurate method, was to directly measure the bullet momentum by firing it into the pendulum. Robins experimented with musket balls of around one ounce in mass (30 g), while other contemporaries used his methods with cannon shot of one to three pounds (0.5 to 1.4 kg).[5]

Robins' original work used a heavy iron pendulum, faced with wood, to catch the bullet. Modern reproductions, used as demonstrations in physics classes, generally use a heavy weight suspended by a very fine, lightweight arm, and ignore the mass of the pendulum's arm. Robins' heavy iron pendulum did not allow this, and Robins' mathematical approach was slightly more complex. He used the period of oscillation and mass of the pendulum (both measured with the bullet included) to calculate the rotational inertia of the pendulum, which was then used in the calculations. Robins also used a length of ribbon, loosely gripped in a clamp, to measure the travel of the pendulum. The pendulum would draw out a length of ribbon equal to the chord of pendulum's travel.[6]

The first system to supplant ballistic pendulums with direct measures of projectile speed was invented in 1808, during the Napoleonic Wars and used a rapidly rotating shaft of known speed with two paper disks on it; the bullet was fired through the disks, parallel to the shaft, and the angular difference in the points of impact provided an elapsed time over the distance between the disks. A direct electromechanical clockwork measure appeared in 1840, with a spring-driven clock started and stopped by electromagnets, whose current was interrupted by the bullet passing through two meshes of fine wires, again providing the time to traverse the given distance.[2]

Thanks for beating me to it but one simple correction. I do not consider the Ballistic Pendulum a chronograph because it did not measure Time directly. It did allow the user to calculate velocity so the result would be similar to a modern chronograph.

Tim

[Squeeze]

Do all you "traditionalists" have a modern vehicle in your driveway? Do you store your food in an electric refrigerator? Its pretty obvious a computer is OK. Why then is it you feel superior because you shoot a "traditional" gun? how many states really have separate seasons for styles of muzzleloader? Mine, and all around me call it muzzleloader season. All those traditional forums love to bicker amongst themselves.. your getup doesnt have period correct thread count. That knife on your belt, Isnt made with the correct era technology. Is that a TC hawken?? haha THATS not a hawken at all!. Seems to me, the modern forums just welcome all types and say, however you have your fun. But for some reason, "Traditionalist" have to scrutinize every microscopic detail of everyone else's garb/gun/camp/style. Is it envy? why exactly all the animosity toward fellow sportsmen. Why do you feel the need for more imposed restriction on the "traditional" sport we all love. We are under attack quite enough from outside our ranks, And creating exactly this type of turmoil within Is just what the opposition hopes for. When you see your in a fight, Dont supply the enemy with munitions.



Edit: AW heck, screw it. Dont know why I ever posted on this thread in the first place.

[Ajax]

i agree do away with all except regular and allow full auto and rpg's. We shouldn't fight among ourselves. I say if you want to use a Buick who am i to argue.. seriously though i don't care what you use i was trying to initiate some conversation seems i did.


Andy