Pedersoli Co. drops support of Toby Bridges due to his extreme views on Muzzleloading
10-14-2006, 03:44 PM
#41
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location:
Posts: 5,180
RE: Pedersoli Co. drops support of Toby Bridges due to his extreme views on Muzzleloading
Round balls kill fine. They need to out law those guys shooting deer with .22 caliber rifles. Now the thing about letting hunters use a scope on their ML'er... Im against that. It takes to much tradition away. The inline ML already has taken some tradition away but come on, alot of the states that allow you to use a scope are back east where if you miss, your bullet could end up in someones house or in someone. Keep it open sights
10-14-2006, 05:44 PM
#42
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location:
Posts: 87
RE: Pedersoli Co. drops support of Toby Bridges due to his extreme views on Muzzleloading
ORIGINAL: Triple Se7en
Pedersoli is WAY-OUT-OF-TOUCH-with the American ML-Buying public. Their reference to the integration of inlines & conical-bonding is a perfect exampleshowing this Italian ML company has no clue what the American consumer wants - or is using these days.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with Toby's stance that's asking for the lifting of discriminatory practicesthat many state wildlife governing bodies currently practices. These states failto match their traditional-only ML hunting seasonwith a Modern ML-only hunting season.
Why should only one style of ML or component be allowed -- yet the other be entirely shunned? Separating seasons is fine with me. Butstates like Pennsylvania should have a ML season that prohibts traditional flintlocks. Colorado should have a season that prohibits #11 caps and conicals. Now that would erase the present discriminatory practice in Pennsylvania & Colorado.... just to name two states out of several who are not serving it's ML-purchaser requests fairly,
A poster here earlier commented thathefeels the games laws which effecteach state should be determinedby that state. Well..... all 50 Wildlife/DNR governing bodies EXIST TO SERVE IT'S CITIZENS.... so let the American ML hunter decide -- not the other way around!
If a governmental hunting body is going to stay the present course and not show equal rights to what a vast number of ML purchasers in the past decade are buying - in terms of modern components/accessories -then choose to discriminate against such, well that's an indication that the Wildlife/DNR governmental bodies are NOT SERVING IT'S ML-BUYING CITIZENS with a fair shake. Forcing it's citizens to only purchase traditional MLs is like telling their citizens that color TVs will no longer be allowed -- everyone must buy a black & white.
BTW..... Toby Bridges NEVER STATED he wanted a ban on roundball/patch hunting involving what more than 95% of us hunt on this messageboard.... deer or smaller-sized game. Please show me his "ban roundball" quote poster Paco????????
Nothing worse than typing words at this messageboard that are totally incorrect -- without evidence -- without facts -- without quotations.
Thompson Center Arms -- Triple Se7en Powder -- Buffalo Bullet Co.
Pedersoli is WAY-OUT-OF-TOUCH-with the American ML-Buying public. Their reference to the integration of inlines & conical-bonding is a perfect exampleshowing this Italian ML company has no clue what the American consumer wants - or is using these days.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with Toby's stance that's asking for the lifting of discriminatory practicesthat many state wildlife governing bodies currently practices. These states failto match their traditional-only ML hunting seasonwith a Modern ML-only hunting season.
Why should only one style of ML or component be allowed -- yet the other be entirely shunned? Separating seasons is fine with me. Butstates like Pennsylvania should have a ML season that prohibts traditional flintlocks. Colorado should have a season that prohibits #11 caps and conicals. Now that would erase the present discriminatory practice in Pennsylvania & Colorado.... just to name two states out of several who are not serving it's ML-purchaser requests fairly,
A poster here earlier commented thathefeels the games laws which effecteach state should be determinedby that state. Well..... all 50 Wildlife/DNR governing bodies EXIST TO SERVE IT'S CITIZENS.... so let the American ML hunter decide -- not the other way around!
If a governmental hunting body is going to stay the present course and not show equal rights to what a vast number of ML purchasers in the past decade are buying - in terms of modern components/accessories -then choose to discriminate against such, well that's an indication that the Wildlife/DNR governmental bodies are NOT SERVING IT'S ML-BUYING CITIZENS with a fair shake. Forcing it's citizens to only purchase traditional MLs is like telling their citizens that color TVs will no longer be allowed -- everyone must buy a black & white.
BTW..... Toby Bridges NEVER STATED he wanted a ban on roundball/patch hunting involving what more than 95% of us hunt on this messageboard.... deer or smaller-sized game. Please show me his "ban roundball" quote poster Paco????????
Nothing worse than typing words at this messageboard that are totally incorrect -- without evidence -- without facts -- without quotations.
Thompson Center Arms -- Triple Se7en Powder -- Buffalo Bullet Co.
"That requirement states that, in order to be legal for big game, a modern center-fire rifle MUST retain a minimum of 1,000 foot-pounds of energy at 100 yards. Now, if the questionable professional game managers within this department were to impose the same restriction on muzzleloaders, it would basically eliminate the use of patched round ball rifles...and take the Colorado State Muzzleloading Association purists out of the regulation making equation."
Email him and ask him and he'll tell you this:
"Hey, soon as this scope thing is behind us...and it
will be soon...it'll be time to begin working on
getting game departments to establish "Legal Minimum
Energy Levels" for ANY muzzleloader to be used for
hunting big game. And even if we accept just 700 ft.
lbs. at 100 yards...none of the .50 or .54 caliber
round ball rifles and loads would make the cut."
and this:
"I've just been pointing out that when push comes to
shove, the round ball is something the traditional
hunters stand a good chance of losing."
Toby
10-14-2006, 06:00 PM
#43
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location:
Posts: 87
RE: Pedersoli Co. drops support of Toby Bridges due to his extreme views on Muzzleloading
I really don't care what weapon you choose to hunt with but I choose to hunt with a Patched Round ball in .54 caliber, and I don't want to lose that privilege. Besides, anyone who thinks the Patched Round Ball is incapable of ethically and humanely harvesting big game and still bowhunts is living a life full of contradictions and only has one agenda.
There is a difference between a bow hunter and a 3-D target shooter. The 3D shooter wants to see how far away he can go and still hit the target, but a bow hunters wants to see how close he can get to the target and still harvest it.
Its the same way between Traditional and a Modern ML hunter. Traditionalists want to see how close they can get. While a Modern ML'er want to see how far away he can get and still hit the target.
I would bet that more deer are wounded and lost during Bow season, than with hunters using a Patched Round Ball. both pure numbers head to head and per capita.
The most important thing to remember is that we are ALL HUNTERS and we need to agree to disagree and stay united. Anti's have been trying to divide us for years, lets not eat our own and lose the overall war. Personally I want to see my state move to this type of season:
Bow Season (any compound or stick bow allowed)
Crossbow Season (other bows allowed)
Muzzleloader Season (any ML allowed)
Primitive Season (only sidelocks & stickbows allowed)
Rifle Season (any centerfire or ML allowed)
This is a win-win-win solution for everyone. Hunters get more hunting opportunities with a more variety of weapons. States revenues will increase due to more stamps being sold, and Retailers and Manufactureres sales and revenues increase due to more types of weapons are being sold and used to hunt.
I am against my state allowing crossbows in the general archery season, but if they were to have a separate Crossbow season, then I would go out and by a crossbow immediately. Likewise, I refuse to buy or hunt with an inline, but if I had a primitive only season, then I might be compelled to buy an inline and try it in a general ML season.
I have emailed Mr. Bridges to complain to him that his attitude and beliefs are very divisive, and he should try to unite all hunters instead of alienating the traditionalists.
I think we need to stay united, so we don't get divided and conquerored by anti's.
There is a difference between a bow hunter and a 3-D target shooter. The 3D shooter wants to see how far away he can go and still hit the target, but a bow hunters wants to see how close he can get to the target and still harvest it.
Its the same way between Traditional and a Modern ML hunter. Traditionalists want to see how close they can get. While a Modern ML'er want to see how far away he can get and still hit the target.
I would bet that more deer are wounded and lost during Bow season, than with hunters using a Patched Round Ball. both pure numbers head to head and per capita.
The most important thing to remember is that we are ALL HUNTERS and we need to agree to disagree and stay united. Anti's have been trying to divide us for years, lets not eat our own and lose the overall war. Personally I want to see my state move to this type of season:
Bow Season (any compound or stick bow allowed)
Crossbow Season (other bows allowed)
Muzzleloader Season (any ML allowed)
Primitive Season (only sidelocks & stickbows allowed)
Rifle Season (any centerfire or ML allowed)
This is a win-win-win solution for everyone. Hunters get more hunting opportunities with a more variety of weapons. States revenues will increase due to more stamps being sold, and Retailers and Manufactureres sales and revenues increase due to more types of weapons are being sold and used to hunt.
I am against my state allowing crossbows in the general archery season, but if they were to have a separate Crossbow season, then I would go out and by a crossbow immediately. Likewise, I refuse to buy or hunt with an inline, but if I had a primitive only season, then I might be compelled to buy an inline and try it in a general ML season.
I have emailed Mr. Bridges to complain to him that his attitude and beliefs are very divisive, and he should try to unite all hunters instead of alienating the traditionalists.
I think we need to stay united, so we don't get divided and conquerored by anti's.
10-14-2006, 07:08 PM
#44
Typical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 601
RE: Pedersoli Co. drops support of Toby Bridges due to his extreme views on Muzzleloading
I hunt with a 45 cal Knight Disc Elite--InLine.
If you want to limit InLine hunters to "Get Close and Pick a Spot" like Cap and Baller's, Then just limit the scope option to 1x power. Like they do here in Nebraskaand in Wisconsin.
That's all it takes to get back to 50-100 yards max. This effectively levels the playing field. End of story, no more crying and whining. Then Everybody can wear the Coonskin hats and fringed buckskins and spread Peace and Love (But No Drugs)
And any poster on this forum that is also a bow hunter knows quite well that an arrow or a round ball thru the lungs = Meat in the Freezer!
When I became a bow hunter 5 years ago, I really learned what hunting was all about. And now I have yet to shoot a deer withML past 60 yards, withmost ML deer at 30-40 yards. And yes, the Powerbelt makes a real mess that close up
I started out with a 54cal capper in upstate NY with PRB and I shot 3inch groups at 70 yards with open sights. This was Plenty of medicine for deer and still is These days in Nebraska, and being a young 47 year old, I would welcome the scope limit to be raised to 2x power. That's only to get just a touch of light gathering ability to help my old eyes.
But the last 14 or so deer fell to the 1x and I'mprayingfor 4 or 5 more this season, Lord willing
If you want to limit InLine hunters to "Get Close and Pick a Spot" like Cap and Baller's, Then just limit the scope option to 1x power. Like they do here in Nebraskaand in Wisconsin.
That's all it takes to get back to 50-100 yards max. This effectively levels the playing field. End of story, no more crying and whining. Then Everybody can wear the Coonskin hats and fringed buckskins and spread Peace and Love (But No Drugs)
And any poster on this forum that is also a bow hunter knows quite well that an arrow or a round ball thru the lungs = Meat in the Freezer!
When I became a bow hunter 5 years ago, I really learned what hunting was all about. And now I have yet to shoot a deer withML past 60 yards, withmost ML deer at 30-40 yards. And yes, the Powerbelt makes a real mess that close up
I started out with a 54cal capper in upstate NY with PRB and I shot 3inch groups at 70 yards with open sights. This was Plenty of medicine for deer and still is
These days in Nebraska, and being a young 47 year old, I would welcome the scope limit to be raised to 2x power. That's only to get just a touch of light gathering ability to help my old eyes. But the last 14 or so deer fell to the 1x and I'mprayingfor 4 or 5 more this season, Lord willing
10-15-2006, 02:31 PM
#46
Guest
Posts: n/a
RE: Pedersoli Co. drops support of Toby Bridges due to his extreme views on Muzzleloading
ORIGINAL: Underclocked
The motivation for Pedersoli's positioning is obvious, isn't it? Their bread and butter has been the traditional style rifles for a very long time, only recently had they introduced the more "modern" inlines and without much success in that endeavor as best I can tell (my own specimen of one of their inlines was pathetic at best). They are simply protecting their own financial interests in a cloud of righteousness.
As to their removing sponsorship of Bridges, can't say I blame them.
The motivation for Pedersoli's positioning is obvious, isn't it? Their bread and butter has been the traditional style rifles for a very long time, only recently had they introduced the more "modern" inlines and without much success in that endeavor as best I can tell (my own specimen of one of their inlines was pathetic at best). They are simply protecting their own financial interests in a cloud of righteousness.
As to their removing sponsorship of Bridges, can't say I blame them.
10-16-2006, 11:29 AM
#47
Fork Horn
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location:
Posts: 492
RE: Pedersoli Co. drops support of Toby Bridges due to his extreme views on Muzzleloading
This thread has taken quite a few interesting turns - makes for good reading on my lunch hour.
I might as well add a couple of thoughts to the mix:
That may be true for some, but I think for many (including me), getting close or getting far away isn'treally the issue; it'sgetting the deer down.
It's just that certain weapons allow that goal to be accomplished at a longer range. Personally, I like to bow hunt (close range), ML hunt (moderate range), and centerfire hunt (medium to long range). My goal in each season is to enjoy the outdoor experience, and hopefully, harvest a deer - or 2.
The only problem with this statement is that the bottom line for the state is also money - just like it is for the manufacturers. The state is going to provide - read, "dictate" the seasons that will bring in the most revenue for its coffers. It may diffeer from state to state, but I really think that in most states, trying to balance the budget has become much more important than trying to balance the herd. And it's WAY more important thantrying to make a certain group of hunters (or even any of them) happy! I'm thinking that if a state sees the opportunity to actually INCREASE revenues through the implementation of a certain type of weapon or season, or whatever - that's what they're going to do regardless of what the hunters want.
BTW - paco97 - I ain't picking on your ideas to the exclusion of any others, it's just that yours are the closest ones to the end of this thread - - No offense meant.
I might as well add a couple of thoughts to the mix:
Its the same way between Traditional and a Modern ML hunter. Traditionalists want to see how close they can get. While a Modern ML'er want to see how far away he can get and still hit the target.
It's just that certain weapons allow that goal to be accomplished at a longer range. Personally, I like to bow hunt (close range), ML hunt (moderate range), and centerfire hunt (medium to long range). My goal in each season is to enjoy the outdoor experience, and hopefully, harvest a deer - or 2.
This is a win-win-win solution for everyone. Hunters get more hunting opportunities with a more variety of weapons. States revenues will increase due to more stamps being sold, and Retailers and Manufactureres sales and revenues increase due to more types of weapons are being sold and used to hunt.
BTW - paco97 - I ain't picking on your ideas to the exclusion of any others, it's just that yours are the closest ones to the end of this thread - - No offense meant.
02-18-2008, 04:12 PM
#49
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1
RE: Pedersoli Co. drops support of Toby Bridges due to his extreme views on Muzzleloading
I don’t normally get involved with blogs it’s not like what we say even matters to our government, they will base there decision on what will make them the most money.
I own many flint locks and a Thompson center Encore 45 muzzle loader. They don’t even compare I spend a lot more time and energy hunting with my flints trying to get the deer in close, now I am more then accurate out to 100 yards with a PRB, but as any experienced muzzle loader knows only shots with in 50 yards are responsible. Now my inline on the other hand I can shoot out to 180 yards. How can anyone say there the same thing THERE NOT. One is next to water proof the other is not. One might go off the other will go off but there the same thing. Traditional seasons are just that traditional if you want to hunt longer every year step up and be a master hunter and by a flint. Other wise stick with your modern weapons where you’re almost guaranteed to make a kill. I don’t want to offend anyone but exercise a little common sense here.
I own many flint locks and a Thompson center Encore 45 muzzle loader. They don’t even compare I spend a lot more time and energy hunting with my flints trying to get the deer in close, now I am more then accurate out to 100 yards with a PRB, but as any experienced muzzle loader knows only shots with in 50 yards are responsible. Now my inline on the other hand I can shoot out to 180 yards. How can anyone say there the same thing THERE NOT. One is next to water proof the other is not. One might go off the other will go off but there the same thing. Traditional seasons are just that traditional if you want to hunt longer every year step up and be a master hunter and by a flint. Other wise stick with your modern weapons where you’re almost guaranteed to make a kill. I don’t want to offend anyone but exercise a little common sense here.
02-18-2008, 05:29 PM
#50
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Comance county, OK
Posts: 11,408
RE: Pedersoli Co. drops support of Toby Bridges due to his extreme views on Muzzleloading
Gotinto this forum late and have not read all the posts in detail. Toby Bridges is nothing if not controversial.
Found this on the web the other day. According to this guy, Bridges is trying to get states to outlaw round ball due to a lack of kinetic energy.
http://www.nodakoutdoors.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=49411
"Toby Bridges has advocated that States should adopt energy limits on MLs that would preclude legal use of most roundball guns for deer hunting. I took him to task for this and he has taken this commentary history down off his site, but I have a copy of the quotes I refer to. In response to his advocacy, and during the course of a back and forth discussion at his website blog I claimed that roundballs are consistent killers within their reasonable range, and that 90yds was about the maximum for a .50cal. Toby described this as “irresponsible.” I also claimed that roundballs at their maximum range will create wounds comparable to modern ML bullets at the extreme of their range (which is much further….maybe 2 to 2.5 times as far, depending). Tony decried this claim as well, using defamatory and derogatory language. He finally disabled the feedback/comment on his site, and has also written a new article where he inflates and misquotes my claim to become something different than what I said"
Found this on the web the other day. According to this guy, Bridges is trying to get states to outlaw round ball due to a lack of kinetic energy.
http://www.nodakoutdoors.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=49411
"Toby Bridges has advocated that States should adopt energy limits on MLs that would preclude legal use of most roundball guns for deer hunting. I took him to task for this and he has taken this commentary history down off his site, but I have a copy of the quotes I refer to. In response to his advocacy, and during the course of a back and forth discussion at his website blog I claimed that roundballs are consistent killers within their reasonable range, and that 90yds was about the maximum for a .50cal. Toby described this as “irresponsible.” I also claimed that roundballs at their maximum range will create wounds comparable to modern ML bullets at the extreme of their range (which is much further….maybe 2 to 2.5 times as far, depending). Tony decried this claim as well, using defamatory and derogatory language. He finally disabled the feedback/comment on his site, and has also written a new article where he inflates and misquotes my claim to become something different than what I said"