RE: Randy Wakemans Statement
 

Also the double charge, double ball, shot with a long string usually from behind a building after sand baging into a car tire was the sop for some of us that built our own in the 50's and 60' era. We did not consider it as proof testing ,simply a safty precaution in case of flawed barrel or breach plug.Lee

RE: Randy Wakemans Statement
 

So then, don't you think that Randy has an "interest" in that(those) lawsuit(s)?

T7 claimed we was "paid" to overcharge muzzleloading rifles and supports Randy in publicly announcing that he overcharges muzzleloading rifles.

So I guess, its just the lawyers paying him. He, He, He. Are they going to defend him to? Wolfhound? Do you really think Randy is proving anything in favor of the lawyer's case(s) when he overcharges muzzleloaders and "tests" them?

Happy Hunting, Phil

RE: Randy Wakemans Statement
 

I didn't realize they were laws. If they should not have to follow the manufactures recommendations, who should T7? Are you now "advocating" exceeding the manufactures' maximum allowed loads?

Be a little more specific T7. Toby used to work for Savage in Savage's Laboratory? Or. Savage farmed out the responsibility to a single independent person who is, apparently, very irresponsible with his Savage muzzleloader.

And Savage, devoid of its own laboratory testing, couldn't defend itself without asking Randy to put on full body protection and attempt to blow up his Savage? You are a piece of work T7.

You are the weasel. I stand by what I said. I think it is totally irresponsible for Randy to publicly announce how he has abused his Savage by deliberately overcharging it. That will not change, T7, its my opinion and it will not change.

Happy Hunting, Phil

RE: Randy Wakemans Statement
 

They pay him on a case by case basis. He sees the rifle, pictures of the injuries, andshooter statements for his opinion on whether or not it's user negligence. He also signs a confidentiality agreement so he can't talk about the specific cases. If they go to court then there's more involved.

And no Randy does not overcharge rifles.

RE: Randy Wakemans Statement
 

Must be a cash cow. I wonder why the lawyers didn't hire an engineering firm to test random samples of the rifles for defects? Seems like they are going out of their way to use someone like Randy instead.

Don't you think that the Law firm wouldwant, need, and expect analysis in favor of the plaintiff? I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to figure out that if its always the shooter's fault, there will be no more money for Randy from the Law firm.

Talk about weaseling.

Here is the timeline.

Bdeather says Randy made the statement that he has often exceeded Savage's safe loads.

T7 says that Randy was wearing "full body protection", making it OK.

I voice my dissapproval of Randy making a public announcement,as a leader, a person people look to for example, that he has deliberately loaded prohibited loads.

T7 claims its OK because Randy is "paid" to protect us.

I erringly assume Rifle Manufactures are paying Randy to overcharge their guns. Then say I don't buy it. I say if they (manufactures) pay him, it is more plausible that he is paid to promote product.

Wolfhound then says its just the lawyers paying him. Of course, I can only assume that the lawyers are paying Randyto overcharge muzzleloaders, because well, that is actually the topic I am discussing with T7 (Randy overcharging muzzleloaders and whether its OK).

Now Wolfhound claims that Randy doesn't overcharge muzzleloaders. Who has their story wrong? Is it Bdeather and T7? Or is it Wolfhound? I would like to know.

Happy Hunting, Phil

RE: Randy Wakemans Statement
 

================================================== =

You are some kind of"reaching character"Phil!

Please copy & paste where I said Randy is being "paid" to test any rifle with a higher-than-recommended charge? Answering - even testing a Savage rifle does not have to be served via a paycheck. It's quite possible that Randy wants to keep that Savage job window" open -- thus offering them information on their behalf - or (not likely).... Toby's behalf.

I said Randy has been asked to contribute his findings -- serving as a gun tech/authority himself.

I also said gun techs use protective measures when testing.

Get your sentences straight Phil! Don't read between the lines on this issue. Take the gray area out & keep it back & white.

RE: Randy Wakemans Statement
 

I'll be happy to T7.

In response to:

Honestly, I don't see, and i think you would agree, any useful purpose in Randy orToby, deliberately loading any of their muzzleloaders, Savage or otherwise, with loads which are prohibited by the manufacturer. It is a terrible example and a complete abandonment of the responsibility both bear as respected, knowledgeable, individuals in the sport of muzzleloading.

You replied:

No I'm not suddenly "sucking-up" to Randy. But until/if he arrives here to defend himself -- Toby included, then I will defend the folks who are paid to make sure that safety/testing measures should not be confused with your range/hunting experiences.

Now, Im sorry. But I can only take this to mean that Randy was "paid" to overcharge his muzzleloader in order to make me safe. Later, I find out it has nothing to do with my safety, but that the people doing the paying are lawyers who need his corroboration to win lawsuit(s) against BPI.

Happy Hunting, Phil

RE: Randy Wakemans Statement
 

You are reading far more into this than there is.

Randy gets paid for his time and expenses. There have been instances he's felt it was shooter's error. And as for testing by an engineering firm, you really are reaching. So if you were a lawyer you'd buy a bunch of rifles (CVA won't just give them to you) for testing by an engineering company (yet another costly option). They're not suing for a recall. They are suing for personal injuries. The gun itself is sufficent for that. These cases aren't multi-million dollar cases. I think They go in the neighborhood of 2-4 hundred thousand.

And to my knowledge Randy has never overcharged a rifle.If he did he wouldn't be bragging about it. He's always preaching safety. I think the original poster has got their facts messed up.That sounds like something Toby's done.

RE: Randy Wakemans Statement
 

No I'm not suddenly "sucking-up" to Randy. But until/if he arrives here to defend himself -- Toby included, then I will defend the folks who are paid to make sure that safety/testing measures should not be confused with your range/hunting experiences.



Those twosentences of mine only means Randy was thereto provide information on his prior testings - not necessarily for money in this instance. This is all about guntesting that's done nowhere near your hunting woods or gun range. What Toby & Randy do as advisors and/or techsfor gun companies gives you no right to duplicate those loads with your rifle. That frame of mind could lead to abarrel burst -playing around with loads not recommended by the manufacturer or powder company.

Good grief man! Nowhere doeseither sentence state that Randy was paid by Savage to testany rifle. All it says was he was there to provide them with answers. Soin the meantime, I will defend his right to do so - because he tests MLs.Randy's own gun testings of various weaponsdoes not give you the right to assume he's been paid by all who seek him for information -also doesn'tgive you the rightto include any brand you want - orsay otherwise atany posting times like this thread here.

I gave you ageneralized statementof some work Randy does/done. I never said what brands are included in his gun tests & that he was paid for firing a Savage rifle in tests. Yes... I'm sure someone has paid Randy in the past for testing info. But where did I say "Savage'?????

What else are you going to twist around in this thread?

Remember what I said about black & white? Well... you ain't listening!!!

RE: Randy Wakemans Statement
 

5th page of replies with only the one post from the original poster.

I will guarantee you thatWolfhound is telling it exactly like it is, to the best of his knowledge to do so. If he is wrong,many people are wrong including myself. I have NO firsthand knowledge of the incidents involving BPI products that have resulted in serious injuries. Do I believe those events have happened? Absolutely.

RE: Randy Wakemans Statement
 

I've had 4 hurt parties - two lawyers and oneprivate investigatorcontact me for either information/knowledge -- even wanting me to testify. I will not participate in any court proceedings -- will not give statements to the associates of those hurt (or) their attorneys - or their private investigators. I have interacted with some that were hurt on threads like this one. I believe half were at fault - half were not.

All of em' involved Randy's not-so-favorite ML rifle producer.

I am done on this thread. I think the thread-starter here is not fond of Randy - so a thread like this is his way of throwing stones at Wakeman. Some here are not fond of me either-- but I really don't care what they think / how they feel.
==========

BTW Rich.... beautiful new rifle. Nice aftermarket components with it.... ie... trigger, barrel.... etc.

RE: Randy Wakemans Statement
 

My complaint had nothing to do with Savage but rather I complained, and I fully expected your agreement, that it is not best for Randy to go spouting off about exceeding allowed loads in his Savage. Your answer left me with the impression, which I think you want to leave everyone with the impression of, that Randy is a "professional", earning a living, and being "paid" to putrifles, all kinds of rifles, not just the Savage,through their paces. Did you or did you not want me to have this impression?

I asked, as sincerely as anyone could, and sincerely wanting an unobfuscated answer, where the revenues were coming from. I asked you point blank. "Paid by whom?"

As I said. I erringly assumed it was the rifle companies themselves, which Wolfhound, in short order corrected. Freely giving the information that Randy is compensated only by his business of retailing ML rifles and supplies and by a Law firm which is either in litigation or has the potential of being in litigation with BPI.

Evidently, it is you which mislead everyone, giving us the impression that Randy is being paid, as professional muzzleloading test pilot, for the sake of safety and testing,toput on full body protection, in his home laboratory range,where hetests muzzleloaders with loads which are prohibited by the manufacturer. Is this what happened? If so, then I am willing to agree that, according to you, Randy is not paid to overcharge Muzzleloaders.

Happy Hunting, Phil

RE: Randy Wakemans Statement
 

This is just my opinion and my opinion only, but the fact that Randy has a "favorite" (and also sells his favorite)nullifieshis objectivityfor "testing" other "not so favorite" brands. Asfar as the thread starter not being fond of Wakeman, heck, I can't stand the arrogant SOBand that goes for most of his"followers" (and that does includeWolfhound).

As far as T7,from what I have read here and on other forums, he has at least as much muzzleloading knowledge as Wakeman and can share it without being an ass.

I'm out!

RE: Randy Wakemans Statement
 

T7, its not that I am not fond of you. I don't agree with much of what you have said recently.

For all I know, none were at fault. I think BPI must settle these cases. What I see happening though is this. We have come by the knowledge that in the initial firing, pressures can be highly elevated with 3 pellet loads, causing the rupture of the barrel. Randy has the opportunity to make note that such problem could occur in any new rough barrel and make recommendations, at the very least,to break in a rifle on lighter loads and, at the most, to never exceed the powder manufactures approved loads.

The problem with this recommendation is that it leaves one with the impression that, while delivering to market a barrel or four which could and did explode on the initial firing with a maximum load, BPI was not blatantly negligent or intentionally negigent. I am sure that Randy's buddies at the law firm are wanting to build a case that BPI was flooding, intentionally, knowingly,the market with woefully inferior rifles incapable withstanding the manuals maximum allowed charges. If Randy ever discussed this with the Lawyer's, it would be in the Law firms interest to prohibit Randy from stating this knowledge.

This whole BPI conspiracy scenario to intentionally put at risk the lives of American muzzleloading enthusiasts is, in a word, hogwash. Now that Wolfhound has clearly and unambigiously given us the knowledge that Randy has a shared monetary interest in an action against BPI, I am beginning to understand why Randy has handled his role of leadership, regarding this matter,in the way that he has.

Happy Hunting, Phil

RE: Randy Wakemans Statement
 

Phil

Most times, the barrel ruptures because it cannot withstand commonerrors associated with today's inlines -- today's inexperienced shooters.However, that does not give an escape clause to the manufacturer when accidents happen. With a sealed unit that's loaded from the muzzle, no-fault insurances kick-in to protect the companies affected -- but after several years of paying lawsuit-after-lawsuit, the company can no longer afford the insurance.

That company which Randy dislikesneeds to do a better job allowing for mistakes in bullet-seatment --- allowing for mistakes when pellets crack & air gaps form. Parts should not go flying when these mistakes occur with three pellet loads. The barrel should only balloon....ie... like stronger T/C, Knights....not come apart/rupture due to soft, extruded steel that's pressure-tested only to proper specswhen the shooter/gun techdoes everything correctly in loading//seating the bullet/powder.

That's why this company that Randy dislikes is in deep-deep trouble... I think anyways.

No I do not believe you dislike me yet. You appear to be very rational while going too much gray-area on me...lol :D

BTW... I own soft, extruded equipment...lol:D
I am super-careful in every step of this fine sport while using Randy's not-so-favorite barrels. I am happy to report that no actions are present to blow out -- no breechplugs to come unglued -- all are sidelocks & yes... I was once forced to get a stitch or two after profusely bleeding when a nipple came flying outonce.... ever see several red-colored 3" square patches on a shooting table?...lol:D.

RE: Randy Wakemans Statement
 

T7,

I'm going to give you last word on this whole thing. If I could ask you for something, this is what it would be. Use your experience to help people enjoytheir muzzleloader, even if it happens to be a BPI product. I think you also are rational, and that you know, as well as I, that there is an acceptable range of loads which can be used in them safely, which can also effectively and humanely take game.

Happy Hunting, Phil

RE: Randy Wakemans Statement
 

I personally think this dead horse has been beaten
far to many times. Yes I remember the days in the
early 60's when I built my first ML a Kentucky
long rifle kit from Dixie Gun Works. What makes
this country the greatest place on EARTH!!!!!!
We can disagree without the fear of imprisonment,
or worse even death. But with that being said,
we must be able to discern truth from that fodder
that raises MUSHROOMS you know keep-em in the
dark & feed-em lots of manure. I think we should
all, from time to time, step back; takea deep breath
And just be greatful to our maker we live & love
in the good old USA. sound you hear next is me
removing myself from the soapbox:)

RE: Randy Wakemans Statement
 

Sorry you guys I just barely got back to a computer. I work for the Department of Corrections and I work 12 hour days with 4 days on and 3 off and then vica-versa. I dont own a computer at home sorry Triple7. dmurphy317 I would be really interested on the outcome of your testing please keep us posted. The information I provided was from a statement that RW made himself from huntamerica.com. I have nothing personal against RW, like I said before I own an omega and a black diamond but I would never bash them or TC even though my favorite is the winchester apex. My posts are always late at night because I work graveyards.

RE: Randy Wakemans Statement
 

bdeather, I can understand your work schedule, I work nights on basically the same 3/4 schedule you do. I do have a computer at home and at work so i do get online a little more than you apparently do but I certainly understand.

RE: Randy Wakemans Statement
 

Link?

RE: Randy Wakemans Statement
 

Bdeather,

Wolfhound is correct. I went to huntamerica and its no easy task to find the statement you have claimed that Randy made. Don't get me wrong. I believe he made the statement. But in fairness, you need to post the link so everyone can know the complete context of the . . .interview, did you say? Its not like paraphrasing something already posted here in HuntingNet.

If you need help pasting the link, request in this thread for the help, I will give you instructions.

Happy Hunting, Phil