More to BP blowups than smokeless?


November 20, 2012, 10:02 AM
Just found this article this morning, i know ppl have different opinions of this site but the author seems to make some good points.
Really a troubling bit of info, Id like to think you could fallow the manufactures instructions that come with the gun and be safe!
whats you guys take on this?

If you enjoyed reading about "More to BP blowups than smokeless?" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
November 20, 2012, 10:24 AM
This was very interesting.

Am I correct in my understanding that this article is from 1996 or 1997?

Edit: Sorry, I see it was 2005.


Fingers McGee
November 20, 2012, 12:01 PM
It's old news. Too bad we don't have a dead horse smiley.

November 20, 2012, 12:13 PM
Old news to some, new news to some. It's a good reminder during and before deer season that just because it says it in the instruction manual it ain't necessarily true.
I was always suspicious about that "magnum" craze that hit some years back. I can't remember who started it but it seems it was a quality company followed by everyone else.
Market pressure overriding integrity.

November 20, 2012, 04:52 PM
While is is always wise to excercise caution. This article was written by Randy Wakeman who, after being insulted on a CVA message board, set out on a one man vendetta to cast as many aspersions as possible on the company. For a year or two he was pretty prolific at posting on various message boards and billing himself as an expert and a legal consultant on all things having to do with muzzleloading. He eventually lost what little credability he had and was banned from most forums.

November 20, 2012, 05:19 PM
the biggest loser to ever enter the world of muzzle loader. He and his ambulance chasing lawyer buddy who wakeman advertises for,

November 20, 2012, 06:38 PM
the biggest loser to ever enter the world of muzzle loader. He and his ambulance chasing lawyer buddy who wakeman advertises for,
And yet there are those who feverishly attempt to steal that title... :rolleyes:

November 20, 2012, 07:10 PM
toby bridges is gaining

November 20, 2012, 10:22 PM
well good, I guess, that sets my mind at rest about the cheap inlines, thanks guys
Ps: I didnt realize that was like 7 year old news when i read it :rolleyes:

November 20, 2012, 11:00 PM
For me, the idea of buying a 209 Tracker for $95.00 at a store like Wally world and shoving three Triple Seven pellets in there with a sabot on top doesn't really do it for me. I mean, the chances of something going wrong aren't too great. And I know they proof the barrels. I just don't like em' that much, I don't care if they are all safe and modern. Spending $95 on a brand new muzzleloading rifle just doesn't seem right to me.

November 21, 2012, 02:32 AM
Hawken rifles when new cost $35.

Why do TC's cost so much? You ever watch the hunting shows? All that advertisement costs them money, they got to be able to pay for those show sponsorships some how.

A corvette costs GM roughly $15,000 to build yet they sell it for 75k.

Cost doesn't mean its any better and it dang sure doesnt mean a higher priced gun will shoot the best.

November 21, 2012, 05:42 AM
There were some lawsuits filed about the cva's blowing up. Never saw any evidence that they weren't misloaded, improperly seated charges, etc... There were a few where the bolt let go, but we still dont know if it was a problem with the gun or the loader. CVA DID recall guns from 95-96. People were still blowing themselves up 5 years later with those same guns. They also changed barrel makers since.

old thread covering the same topic..

November 21, 2012, 09:33 AM
what about $125 for a traditions?

November 21, 2012, 02:35 PM
How about $160 for a CVA Wolf? Best little low cost rifle ive ever shot.

November 23, 2012, 07:36 AM
both the traditions and the wolf are nice rifles. I've sold off my optima elite that started the last thread I linked to, but it was also a nice little rifle.

I'm actually looking at replacing it with a sxs shotgun and a dedicated BP rifle.. and both of those rifles are on the short list.

November 23, 2012, 09:26 AM
thanks for the input guys, I think the Wolf is what my brother bought last year and he likes it so I think I can spare the extra 50

November 23, 2012, 10:35 PM
Isn't one of the basic rules of reloading anything to start low and work your way up? Some people don't respect the potential of what they are doing and should take up bowling or golf.

November 24, 2012, 09:30 AM
I would have to add to this. Starting in muzzleloading many years ago and reading much on the subject I came to the opinion/conclusion that Spainish muzzleloader barrels were inferior to US made barrels. If a muzzleloader is selling cheap then there are cost cutting factors that have to be considered.
My opinion about Spainish barrels was developed long ago so including newer inlines in with my repitour of knowledge/opinion isn't really fair. My personal standard is to stay away from Spainish muzzleloader barrels.
Still when it comes to safety I opt for what I believe is the better guns with good proofed barrels.
When using the new high energy powders like 777 which is,as I read in a gun magazine article, actually smokeless powder of some rendition there should be some concern with loading 150gr. loads in the muzzleloaders.
I thunk it a good idea to research the info on the proof standards of the barrel you would be containing an explosion in right in front of your face and know what pressures are considered maximum for it. Then use a margin of error.
There really ought to be a SAMMI spec. concerning the muzzle loader barrels sold in the US. With the new high energy blackpowder subs the steel in the barrels should be an ordanance grade steel like 41-40 or 41-50 gun barrel steel.
When a muzzleloader sabet with bullet can be propelled at 2,000fps it becomes akin to a 458 Winchester magnum. That is some real pressure.
Not only barrels but barrels with breech plugs installed should be proof tested to a rather high pressure standard.
It would be interesting to see info on pressure tests or proof tests of the assorted muzzleloader barrels from the assorted companies selling in the US.
Back in time around the mid eighties I saw a compilation of burst or bulged barrels and the loads and loading faults and manufactures. At that time in that info the Spainish barrels were the most that failed. The loads that most failed at were with FFFg blackpowder and heavy conical bullets. Failures included some of all the muzzleloader barrels out there at the time. Loading mistakes were included like short started bullets not on the powder but stuck somewhere midway in the barrels but most were supposedly loaded correctly. Some in really dirty barrels with bullets forced down on the powder.
It would be interesting to know what the proof standards are for the barrels on the market but getting that info as well as the steel type used is not easy to do.
I know the 12L14 steel was used alot in the past. Some were of the opinion that that steel was not the best to use. I've never had trouble with it but never loaded 150gr. charges in anything that didn't shoot a "ball" out of a big diameter bore where the pressures are less from a big hole. The smaller the bore the higher the pressures at least with like charges compared.
Anywhooo.....I think the 12L14 steel may still be being used today in some muzzleloader barrels but maybe not in the inlines.
In the old days if more power was needed for knock down a bigger bore and projectile was used. Still works today with lower pressures. Might shoot with a trajectory like a rainbow but......can get the job done.

November 24, 2012, 01:04 PM
Pedersoli and Lyman [Investarms] use chrome moly for their barrels.

November 24, 2012, 01:21 PM
cva had Ed Shilen help them build their new barrels and get advice. Inferior? No way.

If you enjoyed reading about "More to BP blowups than smokeless?" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!