muzzleloader "purists "

[cbashooter]

Why in this dicipline do guys try to portray themselves better than others because they are "purists" and only shoot..real black,flintlock, smoothebore,all American hand made guns? Yet I doubt all the parts on these guns were in any way made in the traditional manner.when a subject about substitute powder comes up they always seem to tell all the horrors and why they use only the "holy black".If a new guy has a cva with synthetic stock caplock and some triple seven,more power to him.fun will be had don't
Put the guy down.your fun with what you decide is the only "real way" to enjoy the sport has nothing to do with others persuit of fun with muzzleloaders.

[Lonegun1894]

I understand both sides of this one, so I guess I am somewhere in between. Now before I ruffle too many feathers, I am glad to see new shooters get into this hobby of ours, regardless of what weapon they choose. My problem comes in when people try to blow a bunch of smoke. Here is what I mean, I started with a CVA caplock St. Louis Hawken .50, which we all know isn't a historically correct copy of anything that has ever been found that was actually made by the Hawken brothers. What it was, was a affordable way to try this side of the shooting sports, and not gamble a months or more pay on something I didn't know if I would like. Since then, I have acquired several other more historically correct muzzleloaders, and yes, I use "holy black" in all of them, and most are flint, and a couple are smoothbore. With one exception, none are "correct", and even that one isn't an exact copy of any museum piece. No matter what, none of us, regardless of how obsessed we get with this, are truly purists. In my case, regardless of if I am shooting my flintlock smoothbore or my AR, I drove my truck to the range, I did not walk or ride a horse. If there is someone there with a ML, I will help if asked, but will usually try to stay out of the way unless asked. Having said that, it does get under my skin when someone shows up with an inline, or even a plastic stocked side-lock, and starts pronouncing that their weapon is identical to what was used during the American Revolution, or the War of Northern Aggression. Use your equipment to the best of your ability, and above all else enjoy it (safely), but be honest about what it is or isn't. There isn't any one right way, so teach or educate when asked/needed, but encourage others. Maybe I'm just odd, but to me, I have little interest in sitting with a book and memorizing dates, but just can't get enough or learning how and why things were done, and the weapons involved are just another of the tools that keep my interest going and keep me learning. And the more I learn, the more I want to learn.

[triggerhappy243]

HERE IS A THOUGHT. I have 3 renegades. two are 54's and one is a 50. they are not authentic. I dont care. If I cared that much............ I would have a lathe, a rifling machine and all the tools to build a genuine authentic Hawken. and horses to power the machinery.

[Tar Heel]

I believe it's because the "spirit" of the primitive season (with its associated equipment) has been corrupted with "modern" equipment so some can hunt for another two weeks with scoped rifles and cross bows.

I don't care for the modern in-line stuff. I prefer the more primitive and historical stuff. If you want modern, buy a Remington 700 .30-06 and be done with it. Harvest (slay) your food more efficiently if that's the game.

There is purity of purpose with the use of the historical tools like a flintlock and caplock. I don't think anyone is trying to "portray themselves better than others". They may be attempting to enlighten users of more modern equipment to try the older equipment and enjoy the discipline in its pure form.

[Lonegun1894]

Triggerhappy,
I think you just hit the nail on the head! You are happy with your equipment, I am happy with mine, and hopefully cbashooter is happy with his. I could care less if you approve of my gear or I approve of yours, because frankly, I have no responsibility to keep you happy and you have no responsibility to make me happy. And if the purists have an issue, well, there was slight variation even in military "standard issue" weapons, which were supposed to be as close to identical as possible. This gets even more blurred when we get into civilian guns, cause there was variation in the guns made by a single gunsmith, and they were different from the ones made by the gunsmith a county over, or a state over, etc. So the only way to have something that is perfectly historically correct is to make an exact copy of a museum piece, and then you are limited to the exact location and time of manufacture of said weapon, which may have been repaired (changed) at some point in time, and things just get worse from there. So use whatever you like.

As to what you just said, Tar Heel, perfect example. I personally don't like inlines, because I consider them to be just another single shot rifle when you use modern ignition and a scope. If someone wants to use one in a general firearms season, by all means, but not in a primitive weapons season. Having said that, if the hunter in question is using a weapon that is legal as per the regs as written, well, change the regs if it is that much of a problem, but leave the hunter alone, because we all try to get some form of advantage when we can. If the regs change and the hunter breaks the law, then they are a poacher and I have nothing for them, but will support them as long as they are playing by the rules--even if they don't do things the way I do.

[swathdiver]

What's the point of getting into black powder if one's going to use plastic stocks, inlines, and fake black powder? To extend one's hunting opportunities/season? That's the reason I figure why most folks buy inlines.

Why buy fake BP when the real stuff is available but might take a little more effort to acquire? I figure they're too lazy and or ignorant and just buy what's in front of them at the store, same with a plastic stocked traditional style ML; at first anyways.

I only power my hand made soft lead round balls with real black powder. Some guns were made in the USA, most in Europe and if I live long enough, will supplant the Spanish and Italian guns with more authentic arms made by Americans or, God willing, by my own hands.

To each his own.

[Dryball]

So, what would you all say to the person that has both a historically accurate flinter and a modern smokeless inline? I say to each their own. I own both and use both legally. I also rondezvous. I don't personally use substitute BP but know others that do because they are too far away from places that have "real black". Who cares what people think. After all, this isn't grade school anymore....quit being snobs. This isn't the pit

[NC_JEFF]

Guys a lot of us buy our first ML because we want to either try muzzle loading, expand our shooting options or, it was a great deal when we bought it. I personally have a traditions Kentucky rifle built from a kit and i think it is more fun to shoot than anything else I own and don't want to spend 5 times the money for the same experience. I use Pyrodex because its easily available. I don't even know where to find real black powder but I enjoy the rifle just the same. Should the exact powder we use really be judged by others. I don't judge anyone using powders other than Bullseye in their 45ACP loads. Most of us just truly enjoy shooting our weapons regardless of historical correctness. I appreciate those who take the extra time and effort to be historically correct or more pure to their particular weapon but we can't all do that. Let's just enjoy muzzleloading in whatever way is best for each of us individually.
I do agree that modern inline ML rifles do not belong in the primitive weapons category either. A few pellets of Pyrodex, a saboted 44 mag XTP all touched off with a primer........is that really primitive?

That's my 2¢ worth, to you all, thanks for your being on the forum

[dondiego]

If you have to ask.........

[aspangler]

I see both sides of the picture too. Having said that I have both an inline and 3 side lock .50's. The inline is for sale. I also have a .32 that has a barrel made by hand in the 1800's. The stock I made myself from maple. The lock is a reproduction of one that is of the same period as the barrel. The open sights are hand made by me. It has only had real black shot in it because that is the only fine powder I have. I bought 10 pounds at one time to water down the haz mat fee. Half was fffg and half was ffg. I also get better groups with real stuff. Just my 2 cents worth.

[fouronesix]

Why in this dicipline do guys try to portray themselves better than others because they are "purists" and only shoot..real black,flintlock, smoothebore,all American hand made guns? Yet I doubt all the parts on these guns were in any way made in the traditional manner.when a subject about substitute powder comes up they always seem to tell all the horrors and why they use only the "holy black".If a new guy has a cva with synthetic stock caplock and some triple seven,more power to him.fun will be had don't
Put the guy down.your fun with what you decide is the only "real way" to enjoy the sport has nothing to do with others persuit of fun with muzzleloaders.

Just petition your state wildlife commission to open whatever big game season for single shots, call it a "primitive weapons" season, get a Ruger #1 in 7 mag, scope it and be done with all the pretense. Or rig the same type gun to load from the muzzle with smokeless powder and modern bullets, call it a muzzleloader to weasel into a legal loop hole and go for it. It's little wonder why many have quite hunting and those who have never hunted look at all this from the outside and shake their heads in silence. The post about…. "If you have to ask". certainly seems to apply.

[rodwha]

On a traditional muzzleloader forum some of the older gents were discussing how the traditional ways were dying out, that new and younger faces weren't showing up to replace the older guys on their way out. But then these same guys talked about lambasting the younger guys at the range because they were using an inline or using substitute powders, or even projectiles other than a patched ball with gadgets they bought at a big box store. And of course the fellow's on the forum get it even worse.

It seemed fairly unintelligent to me that they needed it explained to them that their attitudes and snobbery were one reason the traditional would die off. Seriously? Who's going to listen to some stranger berating them?

It was explained to them that people are more likely to listen and become interested if instead they'd simply allow it to be what it is and that with time and better yet opportunity to shoot and try more traditional means would get more people interested and involved.

My Lyman Deerstalker has a recoil pad and fiber optic sights, and I put a modern sling on it with loops that can hold precharged powder containers. Ilike it. But I mostly shoot patched balls I cast or the Lee REALs I cast using either Triple 7 or Olde Eynsford.

I dont care care much for the I lines and also don't believe they should be allowed in the muzzleloader season. But as lon as its legal...

On that forum is a fellow whom I've been gettin into heated discussions with for about 2 years now. He's one of those who lambast people for their non traditional ways or for doing it any other way but his. Yet he shoots in matches using mouse fart loads with cereal grains to top it off. He says anyone who doesn't shoot their pistols in a manner that's the most accurate, such as his load, doesn't deserve to own or use those guns. He hates the fact I load mine with 30 or 35 grns and home cast bullets because it's what I found to be the most accurate in a useful load as I use mine for sidearms durin hunting and require enough power to feel confident that they'll do their job. These guns shouldn't even be allowed for hunting according to him, yet with these loads I'm getting no less than .45 ACP performance (likely around 500 ft/lbs with my Ruger) and I'm able to keep all shots in the black (3-3.5") at 15 yds offhand.

In all that time I've not noticed more than maybe one post in which he was helpful or constructive in his replies/comments, and it just seems a shame he's still a participating member there as he adds nothing of value. It is the people that behave like that that will cause traditional ways to die out or be lorded over the rest.

[cbashooter]

My original post had nothing to do with hunting.I was Talking about the "fly fisherman"
attitude. Personally I dont shoot In lines but I do shoot substitute powder and real black powder. My flintlocks use bp.I don't prefer one type over the other in caplocks. I find some of the more modern substitutes to be quite good. But then again I shoot three to four days a week most often, I don't just sit there and admire the looks of my "superior" guns. I find the elitist attitude tends to be with the guys in the forums that are averaging from 3 to 7 posts a day. How much Shooting can they really be doing?

Well put rodwha.

[Boaz]

It's all about history . If you don't know the history associated with the old firearms (the many) and it is meaningless to you to appreciate the older style guns . Modern technology and black powder had to meet and inlines are the result .

I enjoy history and like the older firearms because of it . I never put down what someone on prefers though .

[Hannibal]

I understand both sides of this one, so I guess I am somewhere in between. Now before I ruffle too many feathers, I am glad to see new shooters get into this hobby of ours, regardless of what weapon they choose. My problem comes in when people try to blow a bunch of smoke. Here is what I mean, I started with a CVA caplock St. Louis Hawken .50, which we all know isn't a historically correct copy of anything that has ever been found that was actually made by the Hawken brothers. What it was, was a affordable way to try this side of the shooting sports, and not gamble a months or more pay on something I didn't know if I would like. Since then, I have acquired several other more historically correct muzzleloaders, and yes, I use "holy black" in all of them, and most are flint, and a couple are smoothbore. With one exception, none are "correct", and even that one isn't an exact copy of any museum piece. No matter what, none of us, regardless of how obsessed we get with this, are truly purists. In my case, regardless of if I am shooting my flintlock smoothbore or my AR, I drove my truck to the range, I did not walk or ride a horse. If there is someone there with a ML, I will help if asked, but will usually try to stay out of the way unless asked. Having said that, it does get under my skin when someone shows up with an inline, or even a plastic stocked side-lock, and starts pronouncing that their weapon is identical to what was used during the American Revolution, or the War of Northern Aggression. Use your equipment to the best of your ability, and above all else enjoy it (safely), but be honest about what it is or isn't. There isn't any one right way, so teach or educate when asked/needed, but encourage others. Maybe I'm just odd, but to me, I have little interest in sitting with a book and memorizing dates, but just can't get enough or learning how and why things were done, and the weapons involved are just another of the tools that keep my interest going and keep me learning. And the more I learn, the more I want to learn.

I recently became interested in side lock muzzleloaders myself, flintlocks in particular. I have been contemplating building a rendition of an American Long Rifle to be exact. But the biggest thing that has caused me to rethink the project is the 'authenticity' debates.
Unless, as has been observed and stated above, one takes multiple pictures and builds an exact replica of a display piece, then the rifle is apparently destined for as much scorn as costume jewelry at a political fundraiser?
Or am I wrong about that?
And how does someone build an 'authentic' rifle without a coal forge and period tools? And aside from copying the display pieces, how does the builder know his rifle will be accepted once finished?

I apologize if my questions start a dispute. I truely am interested in building a rifle. But I'm not going to attempt such a project until I understand the 'rules'. If anyone can explain them or where to look for them, I would appreciate your insight.

Upon the recommendation of another, I have a copy of The Gunsmith Of Grenville County. At the moment, this is my sole muzzleloader reference. Thanks, and I hope this doesn't hijack the thread.

[Lonegun1894]

Try these two places. Lots of info, and lots of guys willing to help, but also a few that you will just have to ignore (like any other forum). Read and ask questions, and these people will have most if not all the answers you need. I have the same book you do, and it is a great resource.

http://www.americanlongrifles.com/

http://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/fusionbb/fusionbb.php

[M-Tecs]

It never cease to amaze me on the lack of tolerance or understanding that some express on this issue. None of us shoot muzzleloaders because we have to. We do it as a sport. We can judge others on legality and safety but beyond that it really isn't anyone else's business on how THEY enjoy to pursue THEIR sport.

Personally I enjoy most types of hunting, shooting and firearms but since OP asked about "muzzleloader purists" I will keep my comments limited to that. Some have very real attitudes towards others that do not share their vision of when a proper point in history is acceptable. I can understand some of it from the history buff's point of view but beyond that most of it is just hypocrisy.

I have been lucky enough to shoot a hand canon, a matchlock, a wheel lock, flint locks, percussion riles & handguns, a muzzle loading canon and variety of 209 inlines including smokeless. All except the 209 inlines have historical significance but they all have their place. For muzzle loading powders I am currently shooting real black, Buckhorn 209 and smokeless. Only one is historically accurate but again they all have their place.

Whether it's a rendezvous, BP competition or hunting as long as someone is operating safely and within the rules/laws I do not understand the outright snobbery expressed by some.

I am aware that some of the attitude is a carry over from"primitive hunting season" verses a muzzle loading season. Most states no longer have a "primitive hunting season". I wished it had stayed that way. I worked to keep the "primitive hunting season" limited to sidelocks with loose powder and lead bullets but we lost that battle. That seems to be the trend with some states even switching to single shot rifles. Again I think this is a mistake but if the state allows it it's not my place to look down on those that do.

[Fishman]

The range of muzzleloader designs are no different than the range of modern gun designs. Semi-auto, bolt, pump, lever, single shot. Same goes for handguns. Those that choose to explore one design exclusively are welcome to it. I like to try many different designs and have been fairly successful in that endeavor. Accordingly, I have inline and sidelock black powder guns and like them both very much. New shooters with one gun should be welcomed as Rodwha pointed out so well. Sometimes gun owners are our own worst enemies.

Taken to its logical conclusion, a wheel lock is too modern for some and if you don't make your own black powder including the raw ingredients, you are a poser.

[Squeeze]

For years i used sidelocks. I never cared much about playing dress up or reenacting anything, now I have many inlines, and several custom (smokeless capable) inlines. I rarely use the sidelocks anymore, and even gave away or sold most. About the only ones I kept were .36 and smaller caliber. They are hard to find inline. I laugh at the guys who spew the "purist" attitude over their modern computer. It the loudest of that bunch that keeps the new recruits out of their "camp"

[rfd]

lots of dependencies, starting with one's brain/mindset.

some folks, like me, are into the history of the muzzleloader and prefer to start at its "modern" beginning, the flintlock of the 18th century and all its associated aesthetics and accoutrements.

some folks just wanna hunt, bring home the meat, could care less what they hunt with and get into those inline zip guns to be legal for their muzzleloader hunt season.

and though not to appear a purist, there are instances where technically the holy black is the better performer over subs. and there are other contingencies to observe which may dictate the better way of doing things and what materials to use.

it's all good as long as it's fun, n'est pas?