Hi All,

A while back I posted a question about the Omega vs the Encore. At the time I was obviously thinking that I would go with a modern action muzzleloader. I understand the advantages of the modern muzzleloaders in terms of accuracy and velocity potential.

That said, there is something appealing about hunting with an old style rifle like great great great grandpa might have used. Is there any advantage to these besides nostalgia? Is there anything else I should factor into the modern vs traditional decision, or is it mostly personal preference if the performance of each style is sufficient for my needs? BTW in the traditional category I am looking hard at the Lyman Great plains hunter, percussion cap.

TIA,
Bob

Bob, I hunted with the T/C Renagade starting back in the late 70's. That rifle was as much fun to shoot back then as it still is today. In fact I still have it in the gun safe. My personal opinion is that the new inlines have all the advantages going there way. The accuracy and velocity is only a few of the advantages that they have. Bullet selection has grown now that you have the sabots and powerbelt available. The ease of mounting scopes as well as the different stocks that are available. Not to mention the use of 209 primers for a hotter ignition. I am sure that others will add to the list of advantages of the inlines. However, there is a lot to be said for the old style ML's. I still enjoy taking the old Renagade out to the range from time to time. The good thing is that I have both. So I don't have to make the decision you are talking about.

[ 03-26-2003, 05:12: Message edited by: Fisher ]

I've been using traditional muzzleloaders since 1972 and even though I've used the modern ones I still feel a sense of history when I carry a traditional rifle into the field. I've never felt that I was giving up much to the modern rifles as I've never had to take a shot at deer,elk or javelina at over 100 yards and I've never lost an animal that I've hit and that includes 4 elk.
Your choice of a Great Plains Rifle would be a good choice especially if you can get it in 54 cal. We used the 50 cal when I was a muzzleloading director at a Boy Scout camp. We fired 5,000 plus rounds through 5 rifles for 3 straight years and only had to replace the nipples. They and the Thompson Center Renegade and the Hawken are well built and should last through several lifetimes if taken care of.

Bob,
The Lyman's GP is a great gun. I recommend it. It comes in roundball twist and conical twist. The roundball is cheap and easy to shoot and much more fun in my book. In a .54, they work well out to 100 yds and that is what muzzleloading is all about for most folks. There are specialized guns if you really get into it, but the LGP is a heck of a rifle at a good price.

Brent

Bob,

The only real advantage to a modern ML over a traditional one is the ability to mount a scope for easier low-light shooting and easier shot placement at longer distances. The traditional rifle can push a bullet to the same velocity and with the same accuracy as a modern in-line. The GPR is certainly capable of handling charges up to 150 grains of powder if you can handle the recoil. I shoot all my guns at there most accurate load and hunt according to the limits I feel that load is capable at. Several years ago a gentleman did a test of muzzleloader ignition types. He had three barrels custom built so he could shoot the same projectile with the same twist rate in an inline, flinter, and caplock. What he found out was that the inline and the caplock would push the bullet to the same velocity with equal powder loads. THe flinter was slower but and additional 5 or 10 grains of powder made up for the difference in velocity due to the open vent. Each rifle was proven to be capable of exceptional accuracy when loaded with its pet load. Any accuracy differences were statistically irrelevant. All shots were with iron sights.

Modern and traditional types all load the same though the specific bullet may be different and they clean up the same. Actually two of my traditional rifles clean up easier than my inline does. Cleaning time seems to vary based on quality of metarials and usage more so than modern -vs- trasditional styling.

As to accuracy ... that is more a function of time spent in load development and bore lapping. A well lapped bore will typically shoot better than a rough bore. But the time you spend tweeking your load is time well spent. Consistancy in powder measuring, patch thickness, ball weight, lube amount and type, seating pressure, etc are the keys to accuracy.

Well my picture hosting site seems to be down once again or I would show a group fired from a traditiona rifle with primative sites.

It really boils down to personnal preferance and what you want out the the muzzleloading hunting experience.

bobvthunter:

Man we must have similar tastes! You have mentioned three muzzleloaders that you are considering and you have chosen the three that I own! I have an Encore, Omega, and a Lyman GPR. I have the GPR and you mentioned the GPH.

Don't let all the hype fool you. It is all a matter of personal preference when it comes to choosing a muzzleloader, whether you like the traditional appearance or the modern feel. The Lyman will shoot all day long with just a round ball and patch very competetively with my Encore or my Omega shooting Powerbelts and Sabots.

I love all three of my muzzleloaders and would hate to decide between any one of them.

Go with whatever style you like. They are both reliable and accurate. HTH 8point

From 54JNoll,

quote:

---

Modern and traditional types all load the same though the specific bullet may be different and they clean up the same.

---

Cleaning my Encore is ALOT different than a Pennsylvania flintlock. I can clean my bbl in 35 seconds.

The inlines have about as much appeal as hairy legs on a French gal.

Another plus with a traditional, you can enter black powder shoots. Most places don't allow the inlines in the competition. Not because of any better accuracy, strickly asthetics.

Looking like Davy Crockett with an outdated firearm appeals to some folks I would imagine. I just can't see them typing on a computer and then grabbing an antique firearm,only to downgrade modern marvels such as the inline muzzleloader. Go figure.

If I were going to get a true muzzleloader,it would have to be a matchlock or wheellock. Flintlocks are WAY too modern.

Small Fish,

Granted with the Pensylvania flintock you do not pull the breach plug as you do with inlines but they all clean up with soap and water no matter what type of muzzleloading prpellant you use. The speed with which a barrel cleans up is relative to the smoothness of that barrel and there are variations within and between manufactures.

What I was getting at is I at least hear a lot of hype about how difficult it is to clean a traditiona rifle as opposed to an inline. THe procedures are the same. THe materials used are the same. What varies is the disassembly os each individual weapon.

Takes me longer than 35 seconds just to remove the breach plug on any muzzleloader. Glad you can do it so quick.

I practice and have timed the process.

Takes me a minuet to just put the anti-seize on the breech plug!

With my Disc Extreme it takes me about a half hour to do it right. That's cleaning and oiling. I'd rather spend plenty of time and do it right, than to rush through and possibly ruin my rifle because of carelessness. Other rifles I have do take me a little longer due to more parts that need cleaning. Carelessness cleaning is usually a sign of a careless hunter/shooter. Most people I know who neglect their firearms are the most reckless hunters I know. I won't hunt or shoot with anyone who doesn't take care of their firearms properly.

I have a traditional style cap lock, and have used it for the last 13 years. I have filled my deer tag every year except the last, my choice. I cast and shoot my own bullets and round balls for added enjoyment. If I want modern, I will pull out my 8mm or my .22-250. I may try a black powder cartrige rifle some day, but never an inline muzzleloader. That is how I feel.

Small fish
You are one fast fellow. 35 seconds come on now I have a Encore it takes me longer than that to remove the breach plug. If it only takes 35 seconds to clean your Encore slow down a little bit and give it some TLC.

I have (acquired in this order) a TC Seneca .36 (traditional caplock), a Lyman Remington "M1858" New Model Army, a TC New Englander .54 (traditional caplock), a .45 barrel for the Seneca, and a Pedersoli Brown Bess "Carbine" .75 cal. flintlock. In use in the western Virginia hunting conditions, I see no advantage to telescopic sights or in-line ignition at the ranges at which I will use these guns.

Obviously, I expect to have reduced "firepower" and perhaps range. I do not expect less accuracy from the rifled arms. The Bess is a smoothbore and with ball it simply will not be as accurate at ranges past 50 yards as rifled arms. If you hunt with a bow, you've already learned that your range will be limited. This is much the same thing but with a firearm.

In most cases, those buying the in-lines and scoping them are correctly perceived by the industry as wanting to hunt during the muzzleloader seasons without giving up range or power. In short, they are not interested in history, self-limitation, new hunting challenges, etc.

You need to determine the why of your muzzleloading hunting and choose accordingly. Good luck!

Traditional for me. Just my opinion but I think the inlines are to traditional quality muzzle loaders as McDonalds is to food. They are rule beaters pure and simple. I applaud the states that have primitive weapons seasons that have banned their use in that context. Scopes/plastic/stainless/pellets/sabots/CF primers...it may work but it sure as hell isn't primitive. End of rant.

This discourse reminds me of the ones archers have about the pros and cons of shooting a compound bow versus a recurve (or longbow.) I went with the Encore because I can also turn it into a real rifle whenever I want to. Ok, ok, before y'all get out the flamethrowers--I was just kidding.....

I have a Lyman Trade Rifle, an Encore, and a CVA
Hawken. None are for sale. The Lyman and the Encore
are great shooters. And I don't hate anyone bad
enough to sell the CVA to.

The only thing I would change about the Lyman
would be to get a 1:28 .50 barrel for it. Even
though it is not usually required, I like the
option of making dependable long shots with
whatever rifle I am using.

I might add that PR Bullets (especially the Dead
Centers) are a very good option to the heavy
conicals.

I was told that there is a company out there making traditional-looking sidelock guns with some of the improvements of the inline incorperated. Something about the nipple and flash hole being at an angle straight into the bore instead of going around the bend and twists better suited to launch the conicals/sabots. Anyone know who that is?
I'm a novice to muzzle loading, got a Knight Bighorn .50 I have shot Goex, Pyrodex pellets and just picked up a can of FFG 777. It sounds more like the crack of my '06 shooting that stuff than the Bwhoom of BP but it does shoot much cleaner and the fouling is totally water soluble unlike the Pyrodex. I bought some XTP sabots when I got the rifle but have started casting 360gr hollowbase Maxis and have decided to hunt with them instead. They have a very pleasing thump when they impact <grin>. The sabots are collecting dust on the shelf.

good shooting,
Ruger#1

Bob-As you might have noticed, us black powder shooters can be a bit passionate regarding trad-vs-inline questions!! Of course, as you will note, I am above this sort of thing (although you will never be allowed to step into my house with one of those ugly black guns and/or any BP substitute!!!).Ah, I mean...The real truth in all this is that the most important component is the barrel and the inherent quality of the same. It makes no measurable difference in mechanical accuracy whether it lights from behind or from the side. Green Mountain Barrels makes premium quality barrels (there are several others)--Now I find that Knight (a manufacturer of In-lines) owns Green mountain barrels--And interestingly enough, I can't say that my Hawkin with a Green Mountain Barrel is any more accurate than my brother-in-laws knight--They actually shoot about the same. Now-I am going to say that there is more BS used to sell Inlines than there is to sell women perfume! I am a muzzleloader coach to a YHEC Team, and shoot and clean 13 rifles once a week. Several brandnames are included, with inlines, sidelocks, and underhammers too. Some guns shoot better within same brand/type. Some dont. I find, without exception, that none are very hard to clean, but inlines take me longer... What has more to do with cleaning ease is rifling depth--The deeper, the slower. But rough bores take even longer. Wayyy longer than 35 seconds!!! Now, I have a Great Plains, by Lyman--and it is a fine rifle, and I have finished quite well with it a few times in trailwalks--it does shoot better than I do. The bore, when new, was a little rough. Shooting it a lot, keeping out soap and petroleum-based oils--and a couple of JB treatments took care of the problem. I have both the slow twist and fast twist barrels--both quite good. If you have a little skill with your hands, it is a lot more satisfying to buy the kit and build your own--and you can make much closer to original design. Mine is much better looking--because I had the time to do it right, without worrying about a pricepoint. You sound like the kind of guy who just might like this kind of rifle...by the way, I have hunted with mine for 15 years--buck every year, and 4 elk with it. Old fashioned? YES!!! That is the point. Finally, I would pay a lot of attention to what 54JNoll said--he clearly KNOWS what he's talking about.Regards, Chuck (And its okay to use traditional muzzleloaders and computors--really!)

I finally figured out what modern ML's are good for! We should arm the follow-on military forces of Iraq with them.

Sabots suck!

Woodeye--Alright, alright---I would talk to you as long as nobody was looking--you could even come into my house (through the back door at night)!!!!!Of course, most of what you say is absolutely true. I would argue (for arguements sake) that your hotter flame is not necessary for real black powder. I would also argue that if one can get a complete burn of 150 grains of bp or substitute, with a more aerodynamic projectile and sights capable of shooting well at 200 yds, you probably have extended the range of your rifle to nearly 200 yds, with sufficient power to kill game effectivly. This sort of goes beyond the parameters of the original design of most states' hunts. Obviously, this does not relate to you--it sounds like you hunt more like I do--getting close is most of the fun! None-the-less, it is the back door for you, buddy!!!!! Take care, Chuck.......... By the way, didn't you know that scents and camo can actually make a hunter and his SUV disappear..............!!!

OK - OK..... I'll wear my camo with face paint when I come by so no one recognizes me I'm still looking for a long enough barrel to burn a full load of pyro without spitting out quite a bit on the ground unburned but maybe someday Ever shoot over snow to see how much unburned and partial burned powder really gets blown out the end of a 24" barrel?HeHe liked your post and humor,its all about the end result isn't it?I'll wait till its dark and when I come by I'll use a secret knock I'd have been there sooner but I keep tripping over the @^$$#^% camo'd SUV's. Your post reminded me that none of this is that serious in the overall grand scheme of things,I'd sure never get mad at someone over how they ML hunted, Geesch!

woods

[ 06-10-2003, 15:59: Message edited by: woodseye ]

woodseye,

I guess you didn't do so well in school. Remember to listen to the teacher. Yeah, they hadn't developed in-lines, didn't you see where I wrote exactly that. The THEN current circumstances were a contributing factor to how the various regs were written. I guess they're still using the million monkey method as each state has different regs while "shooting" for the same result. Over the years things have developed differently to what we have today. That's NOT to say that the ORIGINAL intent wasn't PRIMITIVE only that it hasn't turned out that way. So you don't disagree with me, you're just too, well too something to figure that out.

Good hunting to you as well.

How many times can you fire a ML before you have to clean it to maintain accuracy? I have heard every 8-10 shots.

Doublegun: How many times should you wash your car to keep it generally looking good? Right, it depends...I have a very shallow grooved muzzleloader target pistol (traditional, of course) that after 2 fouling shots can shoot a full course of fire on a pistol trail without cleaning--in fact can do 50 shots that way. I have a deep grooved cut-rifled Great Plains Rifle that must be cleaned by the 4th shot or you will not be able to seat the ball properly, etc...In serious target shooting I clean between every shot-a pass down and back up the barrel with a damp patch, no more-no less. What this does is keeps the fouling from building up, which raises breech pressure, and the point of impact--vertical stringing. It works, and as you might have guessed, is the traditional way....Chuck

Omega VS Encore. If you want an inline the Encore would be my choice because of barrel interchangeability. For nostalgia I would go with the Lyman Great plains rifle. I have seen the Lyman fired with consistency and accuracy. I have owned several inline and traditional rifles none of which are scoped and can see no difference in accuracy if both have a quality barrel.