Something I found very interesting!

[Fly]

My friends here please read this & chime in on your thoughts.

http://www.monstermuleys.com/cgi-bin/stories/site99.pl?page=art-tobybridges51707&tem=art1

Well I'm one of the old guy's he is talking about.It is up to us to teach the youth of this nation the ole ways
that make it more fun.I'm working with a GPR now to see what I can get from it.No it will never be able to shoot with a inline.That,s not what I'm trying to do.

I just want to see what could have been done in the day.That's what I call fun. Fly:D

[bubba.50]

he makes a few good points. but he basically seems to be in the inline camp himself with his 200yd nonsense. seems he basically wants manufacturers to make inlines with a hammer on the side.

my opinion & yer welcome to it.

and by the way, go over to any traditional muzzleloading forum and espouse the opinion that a roundball is only good for 60yds. but fireproof yer ears first.

[Fly]

No I hear what you say & agree.But my thinking on this is the youth being exsposed
to traditional muzzleloading.The point he makes about the decline is my concern.

We ole timers had no inlines & we were introduced to the traditional muzzleloader &
fell in love with those.That was the jest of his writing & I must agree.It is up to us
to introduce it to the kids.

I was in Tuson AZ at a traditional muzzleloading shop.We talked about this very same
thing.The guy that owned the shop told me that a Boy Scout group was in & bought
traditional muzzleloading stuff to teach these young boys.I thought (how great)!

I'm teaching my grand childern the same.I think it's our duty to do the same.

JMOHOP Fly

[bubba.50]

i guess you have a point. if ya can get'em shootin' their hi-speed condom bullets from a traditional lookin' gun then later on they'll start wonderin' about the historical way of doin' it. then they can get a drop-in with a traditional twist for their guns. that is if green mountain or anybody ever gets back to makin' the drop-in barrels.

I might be a bit biased as I lost a lot of respect for ol' toby years ago when he put that ugly pistol grip stock on his hawken and started tryin' to shoot it at 200yds or so and usin' all those new-fangled wonder bullets in it.

[wgr]

60 yards. then i guess that fat doe i shot at 105 did,nt die

[waksupi]

I lost all respect for him after hearing about a stunt he pulled on a hunt down in Wyoming.

[FLINTNFIRE]

If I want to shoot a modern rifle I do so , just have never really cared for the stainless inline saboted idea of a muzzle loader , I do agree with the need to get younger people interested in traditional muzzle loaders , and in shooting , reloading, and casting . Pass on what we have learned and enjoyed . At the same time I got the impression he thinks hunting is all about longer shots , where I feel that stalking , camping , spending time in the woods and enjoying the outdoors with a less cluttered and more primitive style is what I am after .

[Mike.44]

It sounds like he needs some more range time with the PRB. Seems he is selling it a little short.

[SamTexas49]

Reading the "article" was just truly insulting ! Seems that all those who used Front stuffers back in the 1700's, 1800's and into the 1900's were totally unsuccessful and had to live with"the lackluster performance of patched round ball loads that make the majority of older guns unappealing to the modern muzzleloader hunter."
I didn't realize I was enduring "lackluster performance" If Im NOT having to shoot over 100yds with funny boolits and powder pellets. I thought I was "hunting" by getting as close as I can to the game and placing a very deadly PRB in the "lights" ! I never had any deer, antelope ever get away from me.

Honestly , his comments just really rangled my hocks!

[pietro]

My thoughts/experiences:

The article said (in part):

"Simply put, it is the modern in-line rifles (and loads) that attract new participants to muzzleloader hunting, and very few of them are making the cross over to tradtional rifles."

and

"More than anything, it is the lackluster performance of patched round ball loads that make the majority of older guns unappealing to the modern muzzleloader hunter."


Unfortunately, the first statement is very true, and it lies upon older/experienced shooters to educate newer shooters - I started with sidehammers 45 years ago because that's about all there was, but jumped into inlines as soon as they became available, upgrading every few years.......... UNTIL I matured enough to slow down & smell the roses, going back to side & under hammer guns - and even unto rocklocks.

Having lived it, AND raising "kids" that are now 40-something adults, I am of the opinion that the 2nd statement isn't the real/true cause - IMHO, the real cause is a form of laziness, aka: looking for the easy way.

I don't believe the "lackluster performance" of RB's is what turns folks away - I believe they simply don't know about the preformance, never having experienced same.

I DO believe the PRB, and figuring out ball diameter/patch thickness, etc is "too complicated" for them to consider, and that (to them) dumping an easy-to-load saboted slug downbore is akin to getting a fast food burger. Virtual instant gratification.

While we, as shooters, can try to educate other shooters, one-on-one - IMO, we're shoveling sand against the tide.

What's needed is for a National magazine/author to step up & promote the PRB process, for two reasons:
1) a much wider audience can be reached, and
2) The un-informed just won't believe it, until they can see an "expert" espouse it in print.


.

[Texantothecore]

There is a belief that velocity determines accuracy and it is hard to convince people otherwise. <rolls eyes>

One of the oddities I see is shooters who refuse to adjust their scopes for distance (clue for sale: sights are adjustable! Really!). My peep sights are running back and forth all the time and I no longer have to count the detents, it just looks right.