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
Chatting and General Stuff
General Discussion
Which Muzzleloader is best for the money??
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="Guest" data-source="post: 94718"><p><a href="http://www.hpmuzzleloading.com/WorkPage.html" target="_blank">http://www.hpmuzzleloading.com/WorkPage.html</a></p><p></p><p>Toby Bridges article about the savage Blow-up.</p><p></p><p>With such detonation, amazing that no-one was injured! Yea, right.</p><p></p><p>He says in the artice that the savage is not safe for smokeless or even triple 7 :</p><p></p><p>"Savage Arms has lied to ALL Model 10ML II owners. This rifle is no where as smokeless powder compatible as the company would have all of us believe. Quite honestly, it is not even Triple Seven compatible. The lack of an adequate seal at the front of the breech plug allows Triple Seven fouling to seep into the airspace surrounding the breech plug snout, where it quickly builds and hardens, siezing the breech plug."</p><p></p><p>So apparantly he is complaining that the rifle is GENERALLY unsafe and not simply a smokeless issue.</p><p></p><p>Toby also says that is would be ok with the original Henry Ball designed breech plug.</p><p></p><p>"Back in July of 1999, I accompanied muzzleloading rifle patent holder Henry Ball, of Greensboro, North Carolina to present his design for a "smokeless powder muzzleloader" to Ron Coburn, C.E.O. of Savage Arms (Westfield, Massachusetts). For nearly two years, I had been shooting and testing several rifles built on Ball's patented design, and found the system fully capable of safely containing the much higher pressures of smokeless powders, which back then amounted to loads of Alliant 2400 and IMR-4227."</p><p></p><p>Well Ian? Is he saying that smokeless is not safe or the Savage is not safe?</p><p></p><p>He tested a smokeless for TWO YEARS!!!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Guest, post: 94718"] [url="http://www.hpmuzzleloading.com/WorkPage.html"]http://www.hpmuzzleloading.com/WorkPage.html[/url] Toby Bridges article about the savage Blow-up. With such detonation, amazing that no-one was injured! Yea, right. He says in the artice that the savage is not safe for smokeless or even triple 7 : "Savage Arms has lied to ALL Model 10ML II owners. This rifle is no where as smokeless powder compatible as the company would have all of us believe. Quite honestly, it is not even Triple Seven compatible. The lack of an adequate seal at the front of the breech plug allows Triple Seven fouling to seep into the airspace surrounding the breech plug snout, where it quickly builds and hardens, siezing the breech plug." So apparantly he is complaining that the rifle is GENERALLY unsafe and not simply a smokeless issue. Toby also says that is would be ok with the original Henry Ball designed breech plug. "Back in July of 1999, I accompanied muzzleloading rifle patent holder Henry Ball, of Greensboro, North Carolina to present his design for a "smokeless powder muzzleloader" to Ron Coburn, C.E.O. of Savage Arms (Westfield, Massachusetts). For nearly two years, I had been shooting and testing several rifles built on Ball's patented design, and found the system fully capable of safely containing the much higher pressures of smokeless powders, which back then amounted to loads of Alliant 2400 and IMR-4227." Well Ian? Is he saying that smokeless is not safe or the Savage is not safe? He tested a smokeless for TWO YEARS!!! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Chatting and General Stuff
General Discussion
Which Muzzleloader is best for the money??
Top