Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
Scopes and muzzleloader recoil
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dr. Vette" data-source="post: 890265" data-attributes="member: 22335"><p>Just my thought - </p><p></p><p>Muzzleloader scopes appear to be made to a price point, and that point is low. It's difficult to find one for a muzzleloader that costs over $300, and many are under $150 if not $100. That's not to say that you couldn't use a Nightforce on a muzzleloader, and maybe if I had a McWhorter muzzleloader it would make sense - but I doubt it. I find the same issue with shotgun slug scopes - they're cheap.</p><p></p><p>I do not find muzzleloader recoil to be at all objectionable compared to any of the centerfire rifles I shoot. Based on the projectile weight and the amount of BH 209 I load, I'd suspect it's similar to my 270 Win. I've never seen any comments on the recoil dynamics to show that it's much different than a centerfire or a slug shotgun. I'd put some slug guns at higher recoil than my muzzleloader any day.</p><p></p><p>You don't comment on bases or rings, but I also see some really cheap bases and rings ending up on muzzleloaders. Use an aluminum base on a TC where the 4 screws are heavily biased toward one end of the base, and I'm not surprised that the scopes are likely flexing and breaking. That rifle really deserves a steel base - and better spaced screw holes, but I doubt that TC will change.</p><p></p><p>Cheap scopes + cheap bases + cheap rings = breakage.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dr. Vette, post: 890265, member: 22335"] Just my thought - Muzzleloader scopes appear to be made to a price point, and that point is low. It's difficult to find one for a muzzleloader that costs over $300, and many are under $150 if not $100. That's not to say that you couldn't use a Nightforce on a muzzleloader, and maybe if I had a McWhorter muzzleloader it would make sense - but I doubt it. I find the same issue with shotgun slug scopes - they're cheap. I do not find muzzleloader recoil to be at all objectionable compared to any of the centerfire rifles I shoot. Based on the projectile weight and the amount of BH 209 I load, I'd suspect it's similar to my 270 Win. I've never seen any comments on the recoil dynamics to show that it's much different than a centerfire or a slug shotgun. I'd put some slug guns at higher recoil than my muzzleloader any day. You don't comment on bases or rings, but I also see some really cheap bases and rings ending up on muzzleloaders. Use an aluminum base on a TC where the 4 screws are heavily biased toward one end of the base, and I'm not surprised that the scopes are likely flexing and breaking. That rifle really deserves a steel base - and better spaced screw holes, but I doubt that TC will change. Cheap scopes + cheap bases + cheap rings = breakage. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rifles, Reloading, Optics, Equipment
Long Range Scopes and Other Optics
Scopes and muzzleloader recoil
Top