Pedersoli drops support of Toby Bridges

[oneshooter]

This is from the Goex BP site. Anybody heard of this guy before?

http://www.goexpowder.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1536


Oneshooter
Livin in Texas

 

[Dave Markowitz]

Toby Bridges has written about muzzleloading since the 1970s, but apparently has come out against the use of traditional MLs in favor of inlines. Goex has also withdrawn their sponsorship of him.

There's pretty good coverage of this over at muzzleloadingforum.com.

 

[.38 Special]

Huh. Interesting stuff. Good for Mr. Pedersoli, I sez. I don't have anything against the "modern muzzleloader" or the people who use them, but using them for black powder hunting has always struck me as "cheating", a little bit. When you can hit with it at 250 yards, what's the point of the special season?

 

[4v50 Gary]

Perdesoli can do what Perdesoli wants to do. Big deal if they drop their support of someone. Now, if they want someone to sponsor, May I offer myself as a viable candidate? I can use a lot of ducats so I can quit my day job and go into full time researching about black powder shooters of the past.

 

[Jim Watson]

I understand Pedersoli's position, but the fact is that muzzleloading seasons these days are not to challenge hunters with "primitive weapons" they are game management scheduling to kill off some of the surplus does. The game wardens don't give a hoot about tradition. I have read that it is easier for them to tinker with muzzleloading and archery special hunts than it is to change the regular season rifle hunts which are fixed by law in some states.

 

[Gewehr98]

I see it going both ways...

Muzzleloaders are muzzleloaders, period.

Ask the Confederates with their scoped Whitworths if shots out there at 250 yards and beyond weren't viable, then one can bitch about range and accuracy of the inline ignition muzzleloading rifles.

Take an elitist stance, and watch newcomers to the shooting sport fade away. The modern inline ignition muzzleloaders have probably done more to boost the muzzleloading game than anything else. The current bickering is reminiscent of matchlock shooters disparaging flintlocks, or flintlock shooters getting peeved at the newfangled percussion rifles.

I would've figured a more accurate and reliable means of delivering a patched ball, minie, or sabot would be a bonus for clean humane kills on game animals, especially since you have one shot that counts before stuffing a new load in at the muzzle end. And that's the true common denominator that separates muzzleloaders from cartridge firearms. As Jim stated, herd management is the overriding factor in deer season these days, regardless. Keep the herd size down, especially with the threat of CWD, and the DNR/wardens could really care less how they were harvested, once the licenses were sold.

Why is an Italian firm like Pedersoli involved in U.S. muzzleloading season rules, anyway? They're not in any danger of selling fewer guns, muzzleloading or cartridge.

 

[Plink]

When you can hit with it at 250 yards, what's the point of the special season?

I'd assume one could use a max charge and sabot in a traditional gun (twist allowing) and get similar performance. My question on this issue has always been is it the inline or the sabot that's the "offending" device. Define that and strategize accordingly. Seems the attack is strictly against the inline guns and not the true cause of the distance advantage.

 

[Car Knocker]

Why is an Italian firm like Pedersoli involved in U.S. muzzleloading season rules, anyway? They're not in any danger of selling fewer guns, muzzleloading or cartridge.

Pedersoli manufactures and sells many more traditional muzzleloaders than inlines. If one of the people they sponsor takes a position contrary to Pedersoli philosophy, they have every right to cancel the sponsorship - doesn't make any difference what country they're located in.

 

[Dave Markowitz]

I understand Pedersoli's position, but the fact is that muzzleloading seasons these days are not to challenge hunters with "primitive weapons" they are game management scheduling to kill off some of the surplus does. The game wardens don't give a hoot about tradition. I have read that it is easier for them to tinker with muzzleloading and archery special hunts than it is to change the regular season rifle hunts which are fixed by law in some states.

Come to Pennsylvania, home of the flintlock only ML season.

Muzzleloaders are muzzleloaders, period.

I disagree. If that were true, why would've there been the move from flintlock to percussion in the 19th Century?

<soapbox>

The whole point of having a separate season for muzzleloaders is to keep the users of less efficient arms from having to compete with guys toting modern rifles. Inlines were developed so that guys who didn't want to deal with the limitations of traditional MLs could take advantage of the extra hunting time set aside for primitive weapon users. IOW, inlines were a way to be technically in compliance with the law, while violating the spirit of the law.

If someone wants to shoot an inline, that's fine, but to claim that a scoped inline is on par with an iron sighted flinter isn't realistic. The use of inlines should not be allowed during primitive season. Let the inline shooters use their rifles during regular rifle season or in shotgun-only areas, and keep the special muzzleloading season for the guys who are willing to limit themselves to traditional arms.

</soapbox>

 

[4v50 Gary]

Kudos to Penn! What if I build a flintlock but with an .577 Enfield barrel? Better yet, what if I built one with a Whitworth barrel? Not playing devil's advocate. Rather, I'm likely to build a minie-ball flintlock someday. Imagine a Brown Bess that hits at 500 yards.

 

[dwave]

A flinter with a Whitworth barrel? Interesting idea.

In Ohio a lot of people use inlines because we are not allowed to use high powered rifles. The inline allows people to shoot long ranges that otherwise we can't have. A muzzleloader is a muzzleloader, period imo, but that doesn't mean that they were all built equal. Saying anything else would be like saying a Pit Bull isn't a dog because it is stronger and better suited to fighting than say a Poodle.

 

[Steve499]

I think Colorado has a length to diameter restriction on the bullet you can use during muzzleloading season there. Other states may have similar laws, which would make your flintlock Whitworth a no-no. Real cool idea, though. I wonder how long a vent would last with those pressures. Maybe have a screw in one and carry spares, huh? Hitting a deer with a Whitworth or Volunteer rifle at 250 yards would be childs play for those 1000 yard guys.

Steve

 

[Gewehr98]

You actually made my point, Dave.

I disagree. If that were true, why would've there been the move from flintlock to percussion in the 19th Century?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the move from matchlock to wheellock to flintlock to percussion to inline still relied on one characteristic - they all load from the muzzle end. Ignition systems are not relevant to that one attribute, and I'll even go as far as state it's the primitive technique inherent in frontstuffing that sets it apart from the breechloaders, especially for the purposes of separate hunting seasons. Gary makes a very valid point with his concept of Whitworth-barreled flintlock. My latest edition of The Blackpowder Annual has articles about muzzleloading Schuetzen rifles, and their accuracy is nothing to sneeze at. Just like the Whitworth, Mortimer, and Gibbs rifles, long range accuracy out of a frontstuffer isn't relegated to those with inline ignition and optics.

"Primitive" means, when hunting with a frontstuffer, you get one shot (maybe two with a double barrel variant or six with a Colt-Root revolving rifle), then you get to take a time-out while you go through the ritual of putting powder, projectile, and ignition source into the equation, be it a lit slow match, a flash pan full of FFFg, a No. 11 Musket Cap on the nipple, or a Federal 209 Shotgun primer in the breech. All variants are primitive compared to even the Martini-Henry or Trapdoor Springfield.

Again, it sounds like the bickering that took place at USPSA/IPSC, resulting in IDPA springing forth from the chaos. To my way of thinking, more people in the woods this fall, including our younger generation of hunters, is not a bad thing, considering that hunting itself has tapered off considerably over the last several decades, let alone the concept of taking new shooters under wing and introducing them to the sport. I've got a .54 caliber percussion Hawken that at one time purists considered to be an abomination in the woods. I'm glad to see prejudices still survive to this day, albeit shifted to a new scapegoat. Instead of welcoming them into the fraternity, we're snubbing them for their choice of muzzleloader. Great.

 

[nico]

My question on this issue has always been is it the inline or the sabot that's the "offending" device. Define that and strategize accordingly. Seems the attack is strictly against the inline guns and not the true cause of the distance advantage.

I agree. From the info I've been able to gather on the issue, the only inherent difference between an inline and a "traditional" muzzleloader seems to be that the inline's ignition system is more weatherproof than a flintlock or caplock.

None of the other supposed differences are truly unique to inlines. There's nothing inherent in the design of a "traditional" ML that prevents someone from using sabots and triple 7 pellets (especially with the 1:28 barrels on the market). A "no inlines" law wouldn't keep someone from mounting a scope on their Hawken. The idea that an inline is as accurate as a centerfire fails to take wind drift into account. In a 10mph wind, the previously mentioned 250 shot would have over a foot of wind drift. It would take a great deal of skill or luck to make such a shot.

For the record, this weekend I'll be hunting with a CVA Optima Pro with a 3-9x40 scope, Hornady SST sabots, and Triple 7 pellets.

 

[Low Key]

I got started in muzzle loading with an inline rifle. I know that in some circles that there is a lot of prejudice against inlines, but they are good for getting younger shooters involved in the black powder sports. The faster barrel twist is geared more for sabots and conicals, which are appealing to new shooters because they don’t have to know how to load a patched ball. The pre-formed pellets are also good for starters that may be a little afraid of dealing with loose powder for whatever reason. The manufacturers can hype them up easily for accuracy and ease of loading and cleaning and these aspects also appeal to those that are new to BP.

In my opinion, they are good for starter rifles. They can be used to ease you into the more traditional and more complicated aspects of BP shooting if you want to go in that direction. The traditional aspects of BP shooting appeal to a lot of us, but some people just don’t see the appeal of the traditional. Mostly younger shooters from what I’ve seen personally. Even though I started with an inline, I’m now looking seriously at a Hawken rifle and I would love to acquire a two band Enfield because I do have an appreciation for the more traditional aspects of BP shooting.

I guess that my point is that you can use an inline as a quick, cheap way to get someone started in BP and then guide them toward the more involved stuff after they get hooked on the frontstuffers!

 

[sundance44s]

Sundance44s

I`m a active member of 2 different muzzle loading clubs .. one club says in big bold letters NO INLINES ... the other says INLINES WELCOME .. odd right . well anyway the club that allows the inlines has converted more inline shooters than ya can shake a stick at ..these inline guys after all are somewhat interested in shooting blackpowder or sorts ..and when they see that the old side lock guys can shoot as well or better than the inlines .. they always ask where to by a nice wooden stocked side lock and we teach them the way . cutting pillow ticking patches and casting our own balls and we shoot for pennies a shot . Gets their attion every time ...