cayugad

I am sorry but I have to disagree with you. And believe me I respect your opinion as the opinion of countless others on these forums. First off I need to qualify myself before I comment. I do not own a Savage muzzleloader or CVA Electra. So there is no bias in my comments.

My argument is,if we start drawing lines at smokeless VS black powder, why not black powder VS substitute powders. Some of the new powders such as BlackHorn 209 and IMR White Hots sound pretty impressive. What about the Triple Seven magnum pellets? Again, some impressive ballistics are able to be achieved there. So perhaps we need to move that line a little more?

The only differences to me that smokeless powder gives to me as a user is;

1. more power. (people claim) But in reality, compared to some of the hot loaded Triumphs and Knights we are talking a couple hundred feet per second. Does this mean we should classify rifles because of their ballistic capabilities? Of course not.

2. extend the range. But isn't the correlation of range more closely tied in to the design of the rifle and the way the rifle functions? Look at some of the Triumph shooters with their 200 grain SST's shooting 250 yards. On a different forum they were discussing the ethics of a 300 yard shot or the capability of it. How many of you get to use and practice to,the full extent of the range on your muzzleloaders?

3. cleaner to burn and cheaper to shoot. Isn't that what all the substitute powders are really trying to achieve as well? Well maybe not the cheaper to shoot. But think about it. Savage tells you don't have to clean the rifle at the end of the day. Some of the other powders and members of the forum can attest to the same thing with some of the substitute powders.

Well this is a great question. First off it was partly answered. The cartridge.One has a cartridge. A pre made mode of shooting. It takes the more common human error to some extent out of theequation.

Also if the muzzleloader shooter makes one small mistake as not enough loading pressure, etc.. this can change their shot. A .45/70 as long as I have well made cartridges and can slide them in the back end, I can expect very consistent results. Not that the Savage can not do the same, but one had a greater margin of error then the other.

Speed of loading is a second factor.Give me a hand full of cartridges and you a Savage muzzleloader, and lets shoot five shots in a row. Time us. Guess who will win every time. The Savage is a MUZZLELOADER. Hence it has to be loaded through the muzzle. Just like your Omega, Triumph, or grandpa's old hawkin rifle.

What disadvantages does the Savage have.. well the vent liner. Someone told me it had to be replaced every hundred or so shots. I can not claim this as fact, but if that were the case, I would need a case of them around the house as well. Another disadvantage of the savage is the fact it can not throw large clouds of stinky white smoke. That it me is a absolute necessity.What funis it?I went to the muzzleloaders because I was tired of sitting upin a tree on the edge of the field with a7mm mag Ruger.The Savage cost wise is reasonable compared to some rifles. So really it sounds like a pretty good rifle.

Also from what I understand, you must be very careful in the fit of the sabot. Does a Savage shoot a conical? I really do not know. We all know they shoot sabots with extreme accuracy, but then so does my Black Diamond. The last disadvantage of the smokeless rifle is in the kind of powder it burns. And I am not talking about the beautiful smoke here. I am talking about the attitude of people.

When many people hear smokeless, they start to feel like this thing has a real edge out there in the field. How many of you could have used an extra 50 yards out of the rifle's range? How many of you practice to the full capabilities of the current rifle you shoot? If I shot a deer at 100 yards with a hawkin rifle or a Savage rifle, which should I be more proud of? Well I should be proud of the fact I was able to hunt and get to 100 yards. But lets stretch that to 200 yards. Your first thought is, the hawkin was a better harvest because after all the other person had a smokeless... smokeless muzzleloader carry that bad attitude because modern center fire rifles are smokeless. They are not the same other then the powder they burn, but they are both smokeless, hence not in a black powder league.

And the Electra.. its a nice muzzleloader that did away with the 209 primer and put in a battery. Does your 209 fail to fire.. once in a while perhaps. Do you carry extra batteries in your pocket? For my flashlight I do. Not my rifle. I really did not get excited about the Electra. Its a battery operated muzzleloader. It uses an electrical spark instead of a #11, musket cap, 209 primer, pan of powder, or small caliber rifle brass.. its an idea that just never made it. Should it be banned.. why not!! Its different. So it must be better. Hog wash. Its not better. Its different is all.

There is nothing wrong with making a stand on key points of a muzzleloader and how it is fired. But the important thing is even though it is different, it needs the support of the entire muzzleloading community. If I wanted to damage this sport, I would agree with all the Savage and Electra haters and cheer them on in their efforts to do away with them. Make the legislator aware that these different rifles are bad, and need to be outlawed. And after that was done, hey.. these Triumphs that shoot 250 yards.. that's all wrong to. And these Knights, and so on. Instead I support the Savage and the Electra. I will not own one (unless there is a heck of a deal on them). But I would not chase one off my range for being different. To each their own.


When you start pointing afinger at one flaw as my Dad used to say, there's more fingers pointing back at you.