About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

[blockquote]
What EVERYONE Needs to Know About Smokeless Muzzleloading

There has been an unprecedented amount of supposition and speculation surrounding smokeless muzzleloading, though it has been a well-proven system for nearly a decade by now-- far more time-tested and game-tested then the use of sulfurless synthetic propellants such as Triple 7 that remain corrosive, and obscure visibility. It is time to put these rumors to rest, based on empirical evidence alone-- not preexisting attitudes or lack of understanding. In this brief article, I believe I'll attempt to do just that.

I. SMOKELESS MEANS HIGH VELOCITY
No. This is easily disproved. Smokeless no more means "high velocity" than a 12 ga. shotgun means high velocity, or a .22 rimfire. In fact, those who think still that muzzle velocity alone is the component that defines smokeless can take a look at Knight Rifles and Thompson Center Arms catalogues and owners manuals. Both have published factory loads that well exceed those published by Savage Arms.

II. SMOKELESS MEANS HIGH PRESSURE
This again is clearly wrong. Today's 2000 fps shotshell whitetail loads do not exceed 12,000 PSI MAP: that is the SAAMI limit. They do use smokeless powder, of course. Three pellet loads with a 250 gr. bullet have been proved to exceed 25,000 PSI by Lyman Ballistic Labs and other independent sources. 50 grains of Vihtavouri N120 gets a 250 gr. Barnes MZ-Expander out the muzzle of a Savage 10ML-II at around 1960 fps. MAP= Approx. 18,832 PSI.

III. SMOKELESS MEANS SIGNIFICANTLY GREATER RANGE
No, this is hardly the case. No .45 caliber bullet can fly very flat. We are shooting the same saboted bullets, at similar velocities to any other inline muzzleloader. None compare with the flight characteristics of a 7mm class cartridge, or a .30 caliber projectile. They never will due to the "load from the muzzle" sabot limitations.

IV. SMOKELESS MEANS LESS RECOIL
True! Powder weight is a component of recoil, and we can get similar performance by using half as much powder. Less abuse to your scope, your shoulder, and it is every bit as lethal. That makes the Savage 10ML-II the top choice for recoil sensitive, older, or smaller. There is no glory in self-abuse. A dedicated article on this website discusses this in detail.

V. ONLY SMOKELESS IS LOADED IN MODERN CARTRIDGES
This is obviously incorrect. Triple Se7en, marketed by Hodgdon Powder as a "blackpowder substitute" has PUBLISHED load data by Hodgdon Powder for use in "223 REM 25 ACP 7MM TCU 7MM BR REM 7MM-08 REM 30-30 WIN 308 WIN 32 ACP 32 S&W LONG 32 H&R MAG 32-20 WIN 380 AUTO 9MM LUGER 38 SUPER AUTO 38 SPECIAL 38 SPECIAL +P 357 SIG 357 MAGNUM 357 REM MAX 35 REM 9X18 MAKAROV 375 JDJ 38-40 WIN 40 S&W 10MM AUTO 41 REM MAG 44 RUSSIAN 44 COLT 44 S&W SPECIAL 44-40 WIN 44 REM MAG 44 AUTO MAG 45 GLOCK AUTO 45 ACP 45 COLT 45 COLT (Ruger, Freedom Arms & TC Only) 45 WIN MAG 454 CASULL 460 ROWLAND 475 LINEBAUGH 480 RUGER 50 AE 500 LINEBAUGH 500 S & W MAGNUM" all from Hodgdon Powder.

Triple Se7en was not sold before 2002; to say it is not an ultra modern high-energy propellant is taking severe liberties with the truth. It can hardly be considered "just a blackpowder substitute," when it is recommended and sold for use in cartridges and firearms specifically designed for smokeless powder only. Triple Se7en is also CLEARLY a smokeless powder substitute in most of the above applications. How could anyone miss this?

VI. SMOKELESS MEANS LESS OPERATING COST
It sure does, astonishing so. This is also defined in detail in a dedicated article. You are using expensive, "fake blackpowder" propellants that can cost $25 a pound, and you are using a lot MORE of it by weight.

VII. SMOKELESS IS A SAFER WAY TO MUZZLELOAD
It certainly is: the U.S. Military and Department of Transportation have long proved that smokeless powder is safer to handle, use, and store than blackpowder and easily ignitable so-called substitutes. The 100% barrel proofing of the Savage 10ML-II proves it is manufactured to a higher standard, see the dedicated article on proofing on this site for further information. Additionally, the Accu-Trigger is obviously the safest trigger ever to be placed on a muzzleloader.

VIII. SMOKELESS MUZZLELOADERS LAST LONGER THAN OTHER MUZZLELOADERS
There is no disputing that-with the removal of caustic, corrosive propellants, your gun simply is not being constantly attacked by them. A Savage 10ML-II is a lifetime gun and will not rot itself to pieces.

IX. SMOKELESS MUZZLELOADERS ARE MORE ACCURATE THAN REGULAR MUZZLELOADERS
Generally, they clearly are. The lack of heavy fouling and caking residue from shot-to-shot means a more a consistent bore condition from shot to shot, and consistency and accuracy are one and the same.

X. SMOKELESS MUZZLELOADING IS A QUICKER, MORE HUMANE WAY TO HARVEST GAME
It sure is, by design. The Savage has a 1:24 twist barrel that can stabilize and accurately shoot 300 grain projectiles where other muzzleloaders cannot-it was designed around a 300 grain bullet. That means more terminal energy, greater wounding, more shock-down power, more striking energy, and a more humane harvest. The lack of noxious smoke obscuring the hunter's vision means more quickly recovered game, and less lost game.

Muzzleloading legend, Gary B. "Doc" White, poses this question in his book:
"Why would any intelligent man stoop to using a gun that is slow to load, has a trajectory like a rainbow, requires constant management, is dirty, smelly and otherwise loathsome to use?" :eek:
[/blockquote]
[blockquote][/blockquote]

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

Nice, now we can get spammed on forums with propaganda for somebody elses gain. Wow, wasn't this a nice page when it was regular guys just talking ML and thier experiences..

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

Let's see,

I. SMOKELESS MEANSHIGH VELOCITY
II. SMOKELESS MEANS HIGH PRESSURE
III. SMOKELESS MEANS SIGNIFICANTLY GREATER RANGE
IV. SMOKELESS MEANS LESS RECOIL
V. ONLY SMOKELESS IS LOADED IN MODERN CARTRIDGES
VI. SMOKELESS MEANS LESS OPERATING COST
VII. SMOKELESS IS A SAFER WAY TO MUZZLELOAD
VIII. SMOKELESS MUZZLELOADERS LAST LONGER THAN OTHER MUZZLELOADERS
IX. SMOKELESS MUZZLELOADERS ARE MORE ACCURATE THAN REGULAR MUZZLELOADERS
X. SMOKELESS MUZZLELOADING IS A QUICKER, MORE HUMANE WAY TO HARVEST GAME

Hope you don't twist your elbow patting yourself on the back so hard. If "smokeless" is so perfect (and Savage along with ya) then why not just go buy a bolt action .270 and be done with it?

I personally wouldn't mind talking about the benefits and issues that come w/ the Savage rifles, and shooting smokeless, if you weren't so flippin holier than thou. Lots of people LIKE the smoke and soot, some of the people on this site consider themselves MANLY and don't have a problem with the recoil, many of us are quite proud of our marksmanship and do not consider cost as one of the factors driving our shooting decisions (by the way, the extra two or three hundred bucks a Savage costs would buy a whole lot of bullets and powder), and lastly, but certainly not least, to "kinda"question folks hunting ethics by implying that if you hunt w/ your gun a person is more ethical than a person shooting a flintlock is total rubbish.

Thanks so much for informing me on all these issues- not.
Hank

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

Let's see,

I. SMOKELESS MEANSHIGH VELOCITY
II. SMOKELESS MEANS HIGH PRESSURE
III. SMOKELESS MEANS SIGNIFICANTLY GREATER RANGE
IV. SMOKELESS MEANS LESS RECOIL
V. ONLY SMOKELESS IS LOADED IN MODERN CARTRIDGES
VI. SMOKELESS MEANS LESS OPERATING COST
VII. SMOKELESS IS A SAFER WAY TO MUZZLELOAD
VIII. SMOKELESS MUZZLELOADERS LAST LONGER THAN OTHER MUZZLELOADERS
IX. SMOKELESS MUZZLELOADERS ARE MORE ACCURATE THAN REGULAR MUZZLELOADERS
X. SMOKELESS MUZZLELOADING IS A QUICKER, MORE HUMANE WAY TO HARVEST GAME

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

Ill stay with my smokepole.

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

Wow! Apparently not a lot of fans of smokeless muzzleloading here, at least so far! I for one believe the Savage 10ML-II is an awesome muzzleloader and am all for the use of it if you are interested in cutting edge technology in muzzleloading. BUT, I wouldn't get rid of my smokepoles either, as they are a lot of fun to shoot also. Smokeless is just another option in this great sport of muzzleloading! It's a shame to see hunters vs. hunters just because of the weapon they choose touse!

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

We may as well learn to live with the fact that Smokeless Muzzle-loaders are here to stay. Technology is on the move. Some people are never happy unless they have something bigger and better (in their opinion) then the next guy. The State you hunt in will determine if this rifle shooting smokeless powder will be allowed to be used in their muzzle-loading season. Just as Traditional Black Powder shooters take offence at the modern in-line muzzle-loading shooters, some in-line shooters take offence of the smokeless muzzle-loader.

My view on this is, a propellant is put down the bore of a rifle. A similar projectile is them seated onto the powder charge. An independent ignition system is used to set the powder charge off. Same as every other muzzle-loader out there. There are Omega, Knight Disc, and many other rifles andshooters that use three pellets that can get some of the same speeds as the smokeless. So I guess the whole thing objected to is smokeless powder. I just look at it as another form of a muzzle-loader because of the propellant.

I have no desire to own a Savage because I have no desire to shoot smokeless powder.If they wanted to give me one, I would be more then glad to take it because it is my understanding they shoot black powder, Pyrodex, APP, and triple se7en powder equally well. Correct me if I am wrong on this point.

That's easy Doc.. I get a big kick out of being different and I like the dirt and stink... what can I say. :D

I wonder about the actual basis of this quote. I would venture to guess that Doc White was making a point of describingthe enjoyment we black powder shooter have, shooting a black powder rifle. I do not think he was advocating the use of smokeless powder muzzleloaders, although I admit I have not read his book. It would be interesting to see if this quote was perhaps taken out of contex for the use of something else.

The Savage Smokeless Powder rifle in my opinion is nothing to get concerned about. If people want to own and hunt with one, fine... their money. I personally will stick with my Goex burning, rotten smelling, fowling, smoke belching, rainbow arching rifle I have now and not worry about someone else.

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

"SMOKELESS MEANS HIGH PRESSURE. This is clearly wrong."

If smokeless doesn't mean high pressure, then why can't we safely shootit in any muzzleloader? Why is the Savage ML-II the only MZ rifle that is safe to use smokeless powder?

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

Before I start the rant - let it be know that I am a muzzleloading hunter with the latest and greatest firearms, gadgets, gimmicks, and projectiles....

The only sure thing about the current trend in muzzleloader manufacturing (scopes, inline, 209, smokeless..whatever) is that moremanufactures strive to duplicate the qualities and convienience of a typical centerfire fire, the more likely that legislators will re-evaluate the terms "primative" and "blackpowder". These are key terms -especially when determining thelength of special seasons, & eligible game management zones unique to muzzleloading. Eventually these same legislators may dictate that they are only used in a general rifle season. At that point, your scoped modern muzzleloader w/209 ign, saboted boat tails propelled by a 50 gr charge of the mighty "V"will be nothing more than a really expensive & slow reloading single shot.

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

Good point.

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

I don't have anything against smokeless muzzle loading or the Savage rifle. From what I have seen this is an outstanding, well made firearm. I personally do not care if someone shoots smokeless, blackpowder, flintlock, sabots, round balls or jumps out of a flippin tree with a spear. That, is a personal choice and as long as a person uses his firearm in an ethical and proper way I don't think one method is any "better" than another. Each has built in limitations, that when respected make for a great way to enjoy our sport and have success.

My issue is the "way" this was presented. An "in your face" commercial post that while not totally innacurate was loaded with statements that were either slanted or spun to heavily favor their product. My choices on how to spend money on products is not completely dependant upon the quality and price of a particular product but is also dependant upon the way I percieve that company does business. "Advertisement" like this really turns me off and I suspect it is not well received by others as well.
R
Hank

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

Exactly akhank. Thats my problem too. Looked way too commercial like. You want to debate smokeless as a regular guy, thats one thing. Coming on here with an infomercial. Please.

I will say it once and say it again. Boy, I hope the Ball's don't stop too quick.

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

Yes, the advancements in muzzleloading are exponential, and far from over.25 years ago there was a similiar debate regardingthe compound bow. This too, will subside w/time. Kudo's to pioneers likeTony Knight, HenryBall, Doc White et al, However, all Wakeman was missing in his blatant endorsement was a quick link to Savage.com.

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

I personally dont see anything wrong w/ the smokeless. its a small advantage in some areas, but the real "leap" of performance is w/ the inline ignition. The game & fish depts. are quick to jump on the 209 primers, the smokeless m.l. ect...when, as usual they miss the real point. I totally understand the issue of inlines being primitive or not, I would say they are not, but allowing inlines, just no 209's....come on. Just like the smokeless, the real advantage to it just the cleanness of the burn. ...more shooting less cleaning.

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

That's exactly what the good doctor used during his African Safari:

http://www.whitemuzzleloading.com/Docs%20Latest%20Adventure.htm

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

Government exists to serve the people, not the other way around. Scant few primitive seasons exist. Pellets, sabots, and 209 primers were all claimed to "destroy" muzzleloading seasons. They haven't. If we are afraid of our own government agencies, it is hard to think that there is freedom. No deer can live on the difference between 3 pellets and Accurate Arms 5744.

I like choices. It hardly matters what others choose to shoot, for those are their choices. Smokeless is not the only way, and not all muzzleloading game taken is by smokeless in my case. It likely never will be, I happen to like variety and use it.

http://members.aol.com/randymagic2/ah420carib.wmv

That caribou from last September was from an Austin & Halleck frontloader-- there is no "caribou muzzleloading season."

Very few muzzleloaders shoot blackpowder at all, some never have. Nothing is primitive about a GPS or a laser rangefinder-- should they be banned? Here, you pay your tag money, and you get the opportunity for a couple of deer. That's all just all there is.[:o]

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

Randy..

I realize that Doc White used smokeless powder on his African hunt. My question reference the quote concerned his sudden decision that smokeless powder was better. Or was he referring to in his book you mentioned the enjoyment the Black Powder Muzzleloader shooters get when hunting with this style rifle.

I went to the link you posted, that being Doc Gary White's personal web site. I read again about their African Adventure which sounded fantastic to say the least. I also make note of some of his comments reference the hunt.. In the conclusion of his African Hunt comments Doc states,.


In the beginning of his tale of adventure Doc states this, This to me would indicate that although Doc White, being a pioneer somewhat himself in the field of muzzleloading rifles still thinks muzzleloading rifles are a fantastic way to hunt anywhere for anything. I could not agree more with the doctor. From his statements concerning smokeless powder he indicates to me, that he is not convinced it is safe for the average hunter (such as myself). or general use in the field. Also in his conclusion, although he applauds the way smokeless powder performed in Africa, he seems to express that it made him very nervous to be hunting with smokeless powder. Or perhaps I am misreading his comments from his site. And as I said before, I never read his book.

So if a black powder expert such as Doc White still gets nervous by the use of smokeless powder and also does not endorse the use of it for the average hunter yet. I will stick with the conventional methods shooting Goex or Pyrodex P, even Triple Se7en with it's sometimes nasty crud ring.. and leave the smokeless powder shooting to the experts.

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

http://www.chuckhawks.com/muzzleloader_index_interviews.htm

Have you ever met Doc White?

You can read his words, and decide for yourself. Doc used a gun designed for Pyrodex, with smokeless, in South
Africa. As he says in the interview, it should be obvious that he designed his Alpha for use with smokeless-- at least eventually. He's been shooting smokeless for some time; that much is quite old news.

The points in the original posting complained of no rifle, or no method of hunting, of no individual. It is generic recital of fact. If one wishes to shoot a Savage or other smokeless rated ML'er with BP / Pyro / T7 / BM3 / Shockey Gold-- have at it. The choice is anyone's to make.

Nothing to knock until you have at least tried it.:eek:

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

First off... no, I've never met Doc White. Lets face it, I don't hang around in the same circles as he does, or you do. I also don't get to the same rendezvous that he attends so the opportunity to meet Doc White never presented itself. Personally I would really enjoy sitting down and chatting with him. I am sure he is a wealth of information on black powder shooting and has lots of good stories to tell which I would find most interesting.

The next point I want to address is, I am not knocking the Savage Smokeless Powder Rifle. If people want to shoot them.. fine with me. Why should I even care what you or anyone else shoot. I am more then satisfied with the Black Powder rifle collection I own and shoot.

The original discussion centered around my asking in regard to your original quote, was Doc White now advocating the use of smokeless powder for muzzleloading rifles. I can't read his words becauseI do not own his book. And to be real honest I have no intention of buying it at this time.I also have not readthe interviewwhich you conducted with him. So again, I have no idea whether you discussed smokeless muzzleloaders or what. Whether or not he endorses smokeless powder is no concern to me in all honesty. I personally don't care if he does, you do, or the neighbornext door does. Everyone has their own opinion and can shoot what they want with what propellant they want. I guess we agree on that point.

Your reply to my inquiry about your quoted commentwas to tell me that smokeless powder was what he used to hunt with in Africa and then your link directed me to his web site. I went to the sight and read the adventures about Randy Smith and Doc White's hunt in Africa. I also noted Doc's comments about the use of smokeless powder Would you not agree that reading those comments at the sight you directed me to, would tend to make a person believe that he might not feel the use of smokeless powder was the right choice for the average hunter?

Those comments suggest to me that Doc White, a recognized pioneer and expert in the field according to you and others, might not be advocating the use of smokeless powder for the average hunter at this point. I am sure the Savage Muzzleloader which you recommend to all is a great rifle. It's just not the rifle for me.There are some things about the Savage that makes them less interesting to me, were I to purchase another inline rifle.I am satisfied with what rifles I have and the kind of powder I shoot. I am not knocking the one you endorse. Although if I were to buy a new inline it would be a White Super 91 or a T/C Omega. Although I have a few reservations about the White Super 91. Not based on the quality of the rifle but the quality of the parent company.

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

I think that white was against the use of smokeless based on a LIABILITY issue. I certainly would NOT use it with a rifle that wasnt SPECIFICALLY designed for it ,Although I'm sure the enginers coulddo it safely as they know their exact specs for their rifle.But the idea of the savage sure is appealing. At least then you could tell where the shot hit because of the lack of smoke:Despecially on the short shots.

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

If you are interested in a Super 91, there is only one way to go-- and that is to get one from Doc White himself. The Super 91 II is quite reasonable, Doc has them readily available, and beds / accurizes them for you as well.

Just give Doc a call-- he's a great guy, and that's the place to get a Super 91 . . . direct from the originator himself.[8D]

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

Randy love your posts when you talk to us as an informed shooter but hate it when you run commercials as well. I go to all the mfg sites as most people who care enough about the sport to post here probabally do. We know about the rifle we all know about your fight with Toby we are here for sharing information starting the thread for your own enrichment is tacky and below a good company like Savage Arms. I almost wonder if Savage themselves are behind you posting like this?

Doesn't matter keep helping other posters.

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

" I almost wonder if Savage themselves are behind you posting like this?"

Randy, please just answer yes or no,....are you getting paid to participate on these forums?

Wondering folks want to know.

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

I tend to bet, he may not being paid directly, but indirectly with firearms to test, or interviews with people so he can get some bucks with an article. Either way it goes, I dont' think it belongs on here.

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

Hey, I love modern centerfire rifles and hunt with them.
I love to shoot blackpowder rifles, and I hunt with them. I personally like my "smokepoles" to look like the guns did before the technology of the centerfire cartridge came about, and to do otherwise is pointless IMO.

But, and it was stated earlier, this is a country of choices and I too like choices. Some people choose to listen to Rap (so called) music, and I would fight for their right to do so. But, I still think they are stupid.
Some people are trying to make a muzzle loaderbecome more and more like my bolt action .270. Why? Are they trying to impress somebody? They don't impress me, I'll just go grab my .270, and remind them that their (centerfire wannabe) aint one, and then I'll pull out the old sidelock and show them thattheir (boring out of place in practical firearm history) gunperforms closer to my Hawken then it does to the Weatherby.

I guess the sport of muzzleloadingis a very complex topic.

C. Davis

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

No. It is no one's business, I certainly don't ask others what they do to earn a living-- but the answer is no.

I also don't get paid to answer 200 tech support e-mails and phone calls a day on a variety of muzzleloaders. Good idea, though.[&:]

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

You just picked my favorite rifle caliber. Shotgun, pistol, rifle, air rifle-- if it does what I want it to do, I tend to like it.:)

No muzzleloader is in the same league with a .270, and they won't be-- no load from the muzzle sabot can tolerate the velocity or rate of twist necessary tostabilize the bullet. Not even close, polyethylene has finite limits.

Choices isall they are, and I enjoy variety. There is obvious interest in smokeless muzzleloading, or there would be no activity on this thread. That clearlyis, shows that there is.

RE: About Smokeless Muzzleloading
 

As long as you are reading Doc's site, you might as well read all of it:

http://www.whitemuzzleloading.com/pr02.htm


I'd not call Doc an "advocate," nor is he opposed either. He is a man with an inquisitive mind, and enjoys smokeless muzzleloading, inlines, sabots, conicals, and flinters. He advocates none; he embraces all.