Knight Vision 50 cal Muzzleloader
#1
Spike
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location:
Posts: 48
Knight Vision 50 cal Muzzleloader
Wondering if anybody has or knows anything good or bad about the 50 cal. Knight Vision muzzleloader? I own a Thompson Scout now, but have had problems with it lately mis-firing and am currently looking for a new muzzleloader. I seen at the sportsmansguide website that they have a 50 cal. Knight Vision syn./stainless for $350.97. Just wondering what anybody knows about the gun?
#2
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,922
RE: Knight Vision 50 cal Muzzleloader
Should you happen to buy it, please be sure to give us a field report on it. We need any/more info on that model.
By-the-way.... I sent you an email. You must have your incoming private messaging option turned off.
By-the-way.... I sent you an email. You must have your incoming private messaging option turned off.
#3
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location:
Posts: 20
RE: Knight Vision 50 cal Muzzleloader
http://www.chuckhawks.com/knight_vision_muzzleloader.htm
Here is a review of the Knight Vision. Take it with a grain of salt.
Here is a review of the Knight Vision. Take it with a grain of salt.
#4
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location:
Posts: 20
RE: Knight Vision 50 cal Muzzleloader
http://www.modernmuzzleloader.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=4105&highlight=knight+vision
Here's another review.
Here's another review.
#5
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,922
RE: Knight Vision 50 cal Muzzleloader
I guess we are not supposed to take the 2nd review with a grain of salt.
How about pepper?? [8D]
Actually... how about no 2nd link review - since one must be a forum board member at modermuzzleloader.com to view it.
To the best of my knowledge, neither of the two Randys at chuckhawks.com is accepting endorsement priviledges from Knight. I think Toby Bridges may have something going on tthere -- ever since Shockey darted for greener things at Thompson Center.
So I wouldbrand that Knight Vision review at Chuck Hawks as salt-free... versus one from Toby who does work for Knight ( I think so anyways).
How about pepper?? [8D]
Actually... how about no 2nd link review - since one must be a forum board member at modermuzzleloader.com to view it.
To the best of my knowledge, neither of the two Randys at chuckhawks.com is accepting endorsement priviledges from Knight. I think Toby Bridges may have something going on tthere -- ever since Shockey darted for greener things at Thompson Center.
So I wouldbrand that Knight Vision review at Chuck Hawks as salt-free... versus one from Toby who does work for Knight ( I think so anyways).
#9
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location:
Posts: 714
RE: Knight Vision 50 cal Muzzleloader
ORIGINAL: Triple Se7en
I guess we are not supposed to take the 2nd review with a grain of salt.
How about pepper?? [8D]
Actually... how about no 2nd link review - since one must be a forum board member at modermuzzleloader.com to view it.
To the best of my knowledge, neither of the two Randys at chuckhawks.com is accepting endorsement priviledges from Knight. I think Toby Bridges may have something going on tthere -- ever since Shockey darted for greener things at Thompson Center.
So I wouldbrand that Knight Vision review at Chuck Hawks as salt-free... versus one from Toby who does work for Knight ( I think so anyways).
I guess we are not supposed to take the 2nd review with a grain of salt.
How about pepper?? [8D]
Actually... how about no 2nd link review - since one must be a forum board member at modermuzzleloader.com to view it.
To the best of my knowledge, neither of the two Randys at chuckhawks.com is accepting endorsement priviledges from Knight. I think Toby Bridges may have something going on tthere -- ever since Shockey darted for greener things at Thompson Center.
So I wouldbrand that Knight Vision review at Chuck Hawks as salt-free... versus one from Toby who does work for Knight ( I think so anyways).
#10
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,922
RE: Knight Vision 50 cal Muzzleloader
Numnutz
My very last post there at modermuzzleloadingexclaimed "I'm leaving this messageboard" after arguing with Wolfie over his crowning of Randy as Muzzleloading Guruunder his screen name ... when instead I told him"ML Inline Guru" was the correct term for Randy.There were disagreements on other things prior to this... this one created the boiling point.
Thanks for the update on that. Some administrators don't accept resignations & use the banning mode to get the last laugh. So be it!
Offering improper name-tag perks to folks who make at least a partial living off this industry - just to draw them in to your newmessageboard is done all the time. When it happened there, I was sure to remind Wolfie how little knowledge Randyhad expressedover the yearsontraditional MLs... thus he was not a guru on sidelocks at-all
If that's the kind of site you wish to partake in, then you fit perfectly.
Let me remind you of this.....
........you are the one that calls yourself (numnutz). Why?...cuz' it fits.
You are the one that implied to take both Randy's reviews (Smith/Wakeman) with a grain of salt -- when no reason to think/say that even exists. Then you leave out the "grain of salt' verse when you offer a link to a modernmuzzleloader administrator's review of the rifle.
Oh how convenient! Really - how stupid of you. Your"byte me" reply shows your intelligence.
I'm done here. Like talking to a hollow cavity.No sense in continuing this!
My very last post there at modermuzzleloadingexclaimed "I'm leaving this messageboard" after arguing with Wolfie over his crowning of Randy as Muzzleloading Guruunder his screen name ... when instead I told him"ML Inline Guru" was the correct term for Randy.There were disagreements on other things prior to this... this one created the boiling point.
Thanks for the update on that. Some administrators don't accept resignations & use the banning mode to get the last laugh. So be it!
Offering improper name-tag perks to folks who make at least a partial living off this industry - just to draw them in to your newmessageboard is done all the time. When it happened there, I was sure to remind Wolfie how little knowledge Randyhad expressedover the yearsontraditional MLs... thus he was not a guru on sidelocks at-all
If that's the kind of site you wish to partake in, then you fit perfectly.
Let me remind you of this.....
........you are the one that calls yourself (numnutz). Why?...cuz' it fits.
You are the one that implied to take both Randy's reviews (Smith/Wakeman) with a grain of salt -- when no reason to think/say that even exists. Then you leave out the "grain of salt' verse when you offer a link to a modernmuzzleloader administrator's review of the rifle.
Oh how convenient! Really - how stupid of you. Your"byte me" reply shows your intelligence.
I'm done here. Like talking to a hollow cavity.No sense in continuing this!