Traditional Muzzleloader Shooters timid?

[EdP]

What prevents a person from ordering a faster twist barrel for a "traditional" muzzle loader build?

Maybe nothing but I am not sure the mfg of traditional barrels will do a fast twist. In any case, It's not truly traditional if it doesn't have a traditional design, including twist.

Inline are readily available with primitive sights and multiple states require them to be that way. If anyone has an issue with scopes that has nothing to do with inlines and everything to do with state regulations.

I don't think you understand what I mean by "primitive sights" because you don't shoot traditional ML and I didn't specify. A "primitive sight" is what would have been found on a flintlock from the flintlock period, or an original Hawken from the percussion period. Not a micrometer iron sight like what is on a T/C Hawken. On the early rifles (18th century and early 19th) they tend to be very small.

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

I agree with @Macintosh that those features are just what make those particular guns. If enough western states were limited to sidelocks and open sights, you'd see a bunch of new tech that meets the regs giving people that edge back. I was just stating what the current difference/benefits are of an inline vs something like a TC Hawken.

Except you have a user in this very thread showing 300-400 shots with a Hawken and peep sight. How is there any difference vs an inline with peeps?

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

I don't think you understand what I mean by "primitive sights" because you don't shoot traditional ML and I didn't specify. A "primitive sight" is what would have been found on a flintlock from the flintlock period, or an original Hawken from the percussion period. Not a micrometer iron sight like what is on a T/C Hawken. On the early rifles (18th century and early 19th) they tend to be very small.

Sounds like you mean specifically a notch rear and front blade sight? Do any states have that specific requirement currently out of curiosity? I'm just aware of no scopes/magnification so front globes and rear peeps give decent resolution.

 

[HighUintas]

Except you have a user in this very thread showing 300-400 shots with a Hawken and peep sight. How is there any difference vs an inline with peeps?

Yes, it CAN be done, but the vast majority would not and could not. And .... What's the first round kill shot capability at 300+ with that setup in the mountains in the wind with up/down shooting angles? I bet it's pretty low.

The difference of that gun and an inline is still exactly what I stated. I could be wrong, but I bet the twist on his gun is 1:48. There are faster twist drop in barrels available for those though.

 

[HighUintas]

Sounds like you mean specifically a notch rear and front blade sight? Do any states have that specific requirement currently out of curiosity? I'm just aware of no scopes/magnification so front globes and rear peeps give decent resolution.

I dont think any states in the west do. Possibly Pennsylvania with their flintlock only season.

There are some primitive types peeps that can be used with a front post and work very well, but still wouldn't allow the same accuracy as using a front globe with it.

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

Okay so that is a rear peep with zero functional difference to what folks use on open sight muzzle loaders often. Does this all come down to griping about a front globe sight vs a blade?

 

[pods8 (Rugged Stitching)]

Yes, it CAN be done, but the vast majority would not and could not. And .... What's the first round kill shot capability at 300+ with that setup in the mountains in the wind with up/down shooting angles? I bet it's pretty low.

But we're talking about differences between a traditional ignition system gun and an inline with open sights. Both face the same exact challenges in the above scenario when everything is apple to apples, sight type, projectile type, powder types, etc. There isn't really anything inherent other than a more consistent ignition that makes an inline different in places that have the above restrictions.

 

[2Stamp]

What prevents a person from ordering a faster twist barrel for a "traditional" muzzle loader build?

Totally depends on the traditional rifle. You can (and I did) get a fast twist for a Lyman Great Plains rifle. I can shoot some heavy long bullets out of it. Trying to find a fast twist for a custom flintlock, for example, would be very difficult.

 

[EdP]

Sounds like you mean specifically a notch rear and front blade sight? Do any states have that specific requirement currently out of curiosity? I'm just aware of no scopes/magnification so front globes and rear peeps give decent resolution.

Not that I am aware and I am no proponent of slicing the deer season up into tiny segments for multiple special interest groups.

 

[long hunter]

I shoot and hunt traditional muzzle loading rifles and smooth bores they are flint lock long guns, there is also a percussion mountain rifle that on occasion will see day light, the problem as I see it began with the so called muzzle loading seasons which was brought about bye the various states game commissions under the guise of more hunting time for the hunters, and more tag sells and revenue for the states as things progressed in came the business ventures this is where you see the sub powders, scopes, in-lines and all the other so called muzzle loading advancements, game laws are politically driven based on money Mr.in-line manufacturer comes along greases some palms and presto you now have the bastardization of what originally was a good thing any so called muzzleloader that does not use black powder and shoots a patched round ball and is either flint lock or percussion need to be regulated to the use of paper targets, dont show me pictures of a good kill on a decent animal with a in-line propped on it and call it a muzzle loader kill, they load from the muzzle but that’s about it.

 

[BRTreedogs]

Big difference between sitting motionless with a cocked cross bow using a scope and simply pulling the trigger, vs having to draw and hold a compound.