Are there Washington State legal muzzleloaders that will consistently group under 6" at 200 yards?

[luv2safari]

Model 700 Ultimate | Remington

Not legal for ML seasons in some states, but they're shooters!

 

[silicosys4]

There is a guy on Youtube "Idaho Lewis" who gets that kind of accuracy out of the TC barrels, using a rifle bullet. However, I am a purest when it comes to hunting with a ML, and my super bias opinion is that shooting much over 100 yards (I have taken deer at 110 yards with my round-ball rifle) misses the entire point of muzzle loading hunting. If one really, truly wants 200 yard plus shots at living animals, use a modern rifle during the modern rifle seasons.

People don't hunt ML here "for the spirit" of hunting ML. They hunt muzzle loader because the seasons and access are better, and the seasons go Archery goes first, then ML, then MR goes last.
So MR's have to deal with scattered and picked over herds, post Archery and ML seasons.
ML's only have to deal with Archery season before they get their whack at them.
The "spirit" has literally nothing to do with the majority of ML'ers here. They are head/meat hunters and every new gizmo and better tool is snapped up.
nobody uses anything but inlines and Shotgun primers now that they are legal. Its very competitive.

 

[silicosys4]

For my money, the point of muzzleloading season is to allow special access for people using low-percentage methods. If an inline is as effective as a scoped centerfire, then there really is no reason to offer a special season for it.

What is keeping you from using the tools you prefer?
If game management and population control can absorb the higher percentage of success ML'ers
What is your complaint if you yourself are not hindered from using the traditional methods you prefer?

 

[.38 Special]

What is keeping you from using the tools you prefer?
If game management and population control can absorb the higher percentage of success ML'ers
What is your complaint if you yourself are not hindered from using the traditional methods you prefer?

Why offer special seasons at all?

 

[LoonWulf]

Why offer special seasons at all?

Besides possible bullets being lobbed into housing areas, ive very much wondered that myself.....at least locally.
I see guys hunting muzzleloader and bow in rifle zones, as well as their own zones....bugs me a bit as archers dont usually wear orange, still tho hasn't caused an issue.....hikers dont usually wear any bright colors either.....
I carried my compound a few years ago during muzzleloader, when i was completely fed up with black power.
Course again local rules being what they are, we arnt crammed into limited seasons for the most part.

 

[silicosys4]

Why offer special seasons at all?

To restrict harvest in certain areas or during certain times. From a harvest management standpoint, thats the biggest reason.
Secondary is restricting high density or "sensitive" areas to safer/shorter range methods i.e. archery or shotgun only.
By mandating methods of lower success you drop harvest numbers while still retaining public access.
Once game populations and management strategies are at a sustainable level for high success harvest methods,
There literally is no reason whatsoever from a harvest managers chair.
I've been in that chair.

 

[.38 Special]

Besides possible bullets being lobbed into housing areas, ive very much wondered that myself.....at least locally.
I see guys hunting muzzleloader and bow in rifle zones, as well as their own zones....bugs me a bit as archers dont usually wear orange, still tho hasn't caused an issue.....hikers dont usually wear any bright colors either.....
I carried my compound a few years ago during muzzleloader, when i was completely fed up with black power.
Course again local rules being what they are, we arnt crammed into limited seasons for the most part.

I'm not really against special seasons, and as @silicosys4 points out, it doesn't really affect me one way or another.

But at the same time, I'm reminded of our state laws regarding "high occupancy vehicle" lanes: originally, these special lanes were designed for cars with three or more people on board, to encourage ridesharing etc. Then it became two or more people, and then motorcycles were allowed, then electric cars with solo occupants, then any vehicle with a "clean air" sticker, and "blood transport" vehicles, "paratransport" vehicles, and now there is even talk of allowing exceptions for the handicapped, pregnant women, and so on and so forth. None of it technically affects me, but again, at some point you start asking what we're actually accomplishing here, and why we don't just stop pretending and just open it up to everyone.

 

[silicosys4]

I'm not really against special seasons, and as @silicosys4 points out, it doesn't really affect me one way or another.

But at the same time, I'm reminded of our state laws regarding "high occupancy vehicle" lanes: originally, these special lanes were designed for cars with three or more people on board, to encourage ridesharing etc. Then it became two or more people, and then motorcycles were allowed, then electric cars with solo occupants, then any vehicle with a "clean air" sticker, and "blood transport" vehicles, "paratransport" vehicles, and now there is even talk of allowing exceptions for the handicapped, pregnant women, and so on and so forth. None of it technically affects me, but again, at some point you start asking what we're actually accomplishing here, and why we don't just stop pretending and just open it up to everyone.

Population management. Once the population is sustainable for the level of hunting and rates of harvest per effort, restrictions tend to be much less pervasive.
There have been spear seasons in my area in the past. Literally hand held, stabbed or thrown spears, when populations were extremely high.
These restrictions tend to go in waves. Less hunters overall, more game populations, restrictions will tend to go down. More success, more hunting effort, less game population, more regulatory action.
Seasons and equipment restrictions are just a balancing act, tools to help regulate game populations through harvest management.
Voting populations will affect regulatory pressure a lot as well, regardless of the logic of the regulations proposed. Urban development. etc.

 

[.38 Special]

To restrict harvest in certain areas or during certain times. From a harvest management standpoint, thats literally it.
By mandating methods of lower success you drop harvest numbers while still retaining public access.
Once game populations and management strategies are at a sustainable level for high success harvest methods,
There literally is no reason whatsoever from a harvest managers chair.
I've been in that chair.

Bolding is mine, and is to illustrate my argument: if modern inlines are just as effective as scoped centerfires...?

As for spears, I'm fine with that too. Now imagine Cold Steel coming up with a $3000 spear that works out to 500 yards.

 

[silicosys4]

Bolding is mine, and is to illustrate my argument: if modern inlines are just as effective as scoped centerfires...?

Then the calculation has been made by resource management that animal populations can sustain the higher harvest numbers resulting from more effective, higher success means of harvest.
Either there are less hunters enjoying who are individually more successful,
Or there are more animals available for sustainable harvest.

For the time being.

 

[.38 Special]

Then the calculation has been made by resource management that animal populations can sustain the higher harvest numbers resulting from more effective, higher success means of harvest.
Either there are less hunters enjoying who are individually more successful,
Or there are more animals available for sustainable harvest.

For the time being.

Then why have the special season?

 

[Ugly Sauce]

People don't hunt ML here "for the spirit" of hunting ML. They hunt muzzle loader because the seasons and access are better, and the seasons go Archery goes first, then ML, then MR goes last.
So MR's have to deal with scattered and picked over herds, post Archery and ML seasons.
ML's only have to deal with Archery season before they get their whack at them.
The "spirit" has literally nothing to do with the majority of ML'ers here. They are head/meat hunters and every new gizmo and better tool is snapped up.
nobody uses anything but inlines and Shotgun primers now that they are legal. Its very competitive.

Truth, I've encountered no other hunter in the woods, in the last five years, or more, with a traditional ML rifle. They look at my Jeager like it's from outer space, but don't say a word. Only one other hunter has ever taken note of it, showed any interest, and asked me what it was.

 

[silicosys4]

Then why have the special season?

As you said. Hence you have ML's with centerfire ballistics because there is no reason to restrict them from a harvest management perspective.
Regulatory agencies keep a separate season around so you can still use it as a means to control harvest management in the future if harvest numbers/animal populations warrant lowering effort/success to ease pressure on populations of concern.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

As you said. Hence you have ML's with centerfire ballistics because there is no reason to restrict them from a harvest management perspective.
Regulatory agencies keep a separate season around so you can still use it as a means to control harvest management in the future if harvest numbers/animal populations warrant lowering effort/success to ease pressure on populations of concern.

I believe the bottom line is $$$$, how many extra tags can be sold. And, those who manufacture modern muzzle loaders, the scopes, the red dots, etc. will lobby (bribery) to keep them going/open.

 

[silicosys4]

I believe the bottom line is $$$$, how many extra tags can be sold. And, those who manufacture modern muzzle loaders, the scopes, the red dots, etc. will lobby (bribery) to keep them going/open.

I always encourage people to become more involved in their local/regional wildlife management process. I think a weekend just watching a few of the open caucuses would open your eyes as to how these decisions are made.
There are far too many lawsuits flying back and forth between various interest groups, with more drafted and ready for immediate release should the opportunity arise, for those kinds of shenanigans.
Public, Private, Tribal, Regulatory bodies, Industry, everybody has their eye on the ball waiting for any hint of foul play or favoritism.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

I always encourage people to become more involved in their local/regional wildlife management process. I think a weekend just watching a few of the open caucuses would open your eyes as to how these decisions are made.
There are far too many lawsuits flying back and forth between various interest groups, with more drafted and ready for immediate release should the opportunity arise, for those kinds of shenanigans.
Public, Private, Tribal, Regulatory bodies, Industry, everybody has their eye on the ball waiting for any hint of foul play or favoritism.

I sincerely hope you are right. And I think the people "on the ground", the front line forestry, fish and game department workers and managers are honest and have the best interests in mind. The appointees in Olympia...not a lot of faith in them. I hope I am wrong.

 

[Buck13]

Bolding is mine, and is to illustrate my argument: if modern inlines are just as effective as scoped centerfires...?

But are they really "just as effective?" Even if you allow unlimited scopes, smokeless at 3000 FPS and a bullet BC of 0.45 is going to be easier than a muzzleloader that lookss from the data I'm seeing to be a little over 2000 FPS and BC not much over 0.2

And in Washington with optics limited to 1x, definitely not the same. As I said in another comment, I'd like to think I'd avoid the temptation to actually shoot at an animal at anywhere close to 200 yards under our state rules.

 

[.38 Special]

But are they really "just as effective?" Even if you allow unlimited scopes, smokeless at 3000 FPS and a bullet BC of 0.45 is going to be easier than a muzzleloader that lookss from the data I'm seeing to be a little over 2000 FPS and BC not much over 0.2

And in Washington with optics limited to 1x, definitely not the same. As I said in another comment, I'd like to think I'd avoid the temptation to actually shoot at an animal at anywhere close to 200 yards under our state rules.

I don't believe they are. Just a theoretical argument with someone who apparently believes otherwise.

 

[Bill M.]

The question the OP is asking........allows scopes for the testing and benched at 200 yards known range,. So my answer is yes, I think there are many muzzloaders and bullets and shooters that can shoot to that level of accuracy and probably much better. Not sure 10 shot group is the way to check it,. But that accuracy level...yes

I am not real sure that I can not do it with one of my Hawkens, I am not going to find out for lack of interest and range time and I am not going to put a scope on it. It sure shoots a nice tight group at 75 yards with the Red Dot on it. Using sabots, Washington state seems to allow both the sight and the bullets. It shoots to about the limit of sighting with a Red Dot and I think it will shoot better with a scope which the OP allowed in his question,

I am not very good with a PRB but it shoots lights out with a sabot.

 

[hawg]

Once you get the trajectory worked out my P53 Enfield is accurate to minute of 5 gallon bucket at 300 yards.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

The question the OP is asking........allows scopes for the testing and benched at 200 yards known range,

Now that you mention it, did the question pertain to hunting, or target shooting? Two very different animals. He does say: "scopes are illegal in Washington", which is true for hunting during a ML season, but not during a MR hunt, or any kind of target/recreational shooting. So I kind of assumed hunting...but I don't think that 200 yards is an ethical shot, at a living animal, under field and possibly adverse conditions, no matter how well you can shoot groups off the bench, at the range and with a scope. ? And very very very few people can judge whether what they think is 200 yards in the field is, is actually 150, or 250 yards. Or 300. Now matter how much of a super range guesser they think they are. A human's ability to judge range accurately is not good. That six inch group at 200 won't be any good on an animal, if it's two or three foot high or low.

Dang, I am so pessimistic.

 

[hawg]

Now that you mention it, did the question pertain to hunting, or target shooting? Two very different animals. He does say: "scopes are illegal in Washington", which is true for hunting during a ML season, but not during a MR hunt, or any kind of target/recreational shooting. So I kind of assumed hunting...but I don't think that 200 yards is an ethical shot, at a living animal, under field and possibly adverse conditions, no matter how well you can shoot groups off the bench, at the range and with a scope. ? And very very very few people can judge whether what they think is 200 yards in the field is, is actually 150, or 250 yards. Or 300. Now matter how much of a super range guesser they think they are. A human's ability to judge range accurately is not good. That six inch group at 200 won't be any good on an animal, if it's two or three foot high or low.

Dang, I am so pessimistic.

You're not pessimistic, you're right.

 

[Buck13]

And very very very few people can judge whether what they think is 200 yards in the field is, is actually 150, or 250 yards. Or 300

Thanks to electronic technology and cheap Chinese production, we have laser rangefinders now that work well enough for only a few hundred dollars.

Either a laser-flat centerfire or a laser rangefinder, for sure.

 

[silicosys4]

I don't believe they are. Just a theoretical argument with someone who apparently believes otherwise.

You are arguing from emotion. I am arguing from a boots-on-the-ground perspective.
The reality of harvest management by the use special seasons and equipment regulations is,
That at its roots a numbers game, not an emotional appeal to tradition.
Success %'s vs
unit effort vs
encounter % vs
excess mortality.
Thats how regulatory agencies work. The equipment allowed is just a tool used to tweak any of those aforementioned numbers.

 

[.38 Special]

You are arguing from emotion. I am arguing from a boots-on-the-ground perspective.
The reality of harvest management by the use special seasons and equipment regulations is,
That at its roots a numbers game, not an emotional appeal to tradition.
Success %'s vs
unit effort vs
encounter % vs
excess mortality.
Thats how regulatory agencies work. The equipment allowed is just a tool used to tweak any of those aforementioned numbers.

You keep trying to make this personal and I don't know why.

Mine is a simple argument: either modern muzzleloaders are not the equivalent of scoped centerfires, or there is no reason for muzzleloading season to exist. You can't have it both ways.