About those CVA muzzleloaders
08-03-2015 | 12:50 PM
#21
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 6,585
Likes: 0
The biggest problem is no quality control. If they inspected all products as a good quality control inspection dept. would they would not get sued so often.
I have a Bergara barrel for one of my Encores I had it magnafluxed and I measure myself and checked hardness I did this type of inspection for 30 years. The steel used is not up to the strength of my TC barrels but is sufficient for 120 grains of BH if you go higher than that you better get a TC or a Knight or you do not have any safety factor and that's is with their premium barrel.
I have a Bergara barrel for one of my Encores I had it magnafluxed and I measure myself and checked hardness I did this type of inspection for 30 years. The steel used is not up to the strength of my TC barrels but is sufficient for 120 grains of BH if you go higher than that you better get a TC or a Knight or you do not have any safety factor and that's is with their premium barrel.
08-03-2015 | 01:01 PM
#22
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,557
Likes: 0
From: Colorado
BH says that 120gr is a max magnum charge. I don't see a problem?
08-03-2015 | 01:04 PM
#23
Thread Starter
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,415
Likes: 0
From: VA.
Oh please! Should CVA lose potential customers from exaggerated lies?
This is normal. Every once in a while someone brings this up again. It doesn't affect those who know what's going on. Of course the Knight bigots will jump on it again. They're just upset CVA out sells every other company.
As do Powerbelts.
This is normal. Every once in a while someone brings this up again. It doesn't affect those who know what's going on. Of course the Knight bigots will jump on it again. They're just upset CVA out sells every other company.
As do Powerbelts.
08-03-2015 | 01:28 PM
#24
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,557
Likes: 0
From: Colorado
Since when has a mature post been a requirement in threads like this?
You all think CVA is the only company that has law suits. Wrong!
Thompson / Center Arms Found at Fault in Catastrophic Gun Failure
On September 1, 2005, I was severely injured by a catastrophic gun failure. My face was permanently disfigured and sight in my right eye was lost forever. I was shooting with the Thompson/Center Encore Rifle. It blew apart because of a defect in its design. That horrendous day propelled me down a path I never planned on or wanted in my life. I’m not speaking out for personal gain or to be vindictive toward Smith & Wesson or Thompson/Center Arms (Thompson/Center Arms has apparently been sold to Smith & Wesson). I merely want the truth about this rifle to be known. I don’t want anyone to go through the pain and suffering I’ve endured. In my opinion, this rifle defect is something that was known about and has been covered up for years.
After almost 10 years of battling over the Encore, I received the final judgment order from the 46th Circuit Court for the County of Otsego, Michigan. I sued Thompson Center Arms (TCA), and the jury found TCA at fault. The jury found TCA to have a defect in its design and found their manual to be defective.
Throughout this entire process, from the day that my rifle had failed, until being given the green light to speak freely about this rifle, I have felt as though I’m involved in a David and Goliath scenario. In the end, no matter how much money they threw at this problem, with their team of lawyers and paid experts, the truth could not be veiled from the jury. At many points over the nearly 10 years since my injury, I have experienced hopelessness about the outcome of the case. One of these moments occurred during the trial. My attorney had in his possession letters, obtained from Thompson/Center through discovery, from other individuals who had incurred similar injuries from the same type of failure. Although the letters were discussed in open court, they were not allowed to be shown to the jury as evidence, based on a technicality concerning Thompson / Center’s claims as to when they had actually received the letters in relation to the date of my injury. A representative of the company did admit that he saw failures of this kind during testing. He also admitted that TCA destroys customer complaints every six months.
Because of the pending suit, I have not been able to share these details until recently. I cannot adequately express what a tremendous relief it is to be able to finally share the truth about the dangers of this rifle.
Most gun owners I know - including myself - thought suing a gun company was practically blasphemy. My suit was never about anything more than seeking truth. I believe wholeheartedly in the Constitution and stand for our Second Amendment rights. I love freedom. I was an NRA member when my injury occurred and I’m an NRA member now.
This is the first lawsuit brought against TCA regarding this rifle that has been successfully litigated. In my opinion, TCA is fighting me so hard because the Encore Rifle has been wildly popular. A recall would cost potentially a lot of money. Still, I am now finally allowed to spread the truth about this gun. Please notify anyone you know who owns this rifle that it could catastrophically fail!
The judgment is attached. I have blacked out the award amounts because the money is not important in this regard. No amount of money can compensate me for the loss of my sight and the years spent in recovery. Additionally, I truly believe this company will continue to fight this judgment, and as a result I will never see any monetary compensation. The court documents are now a matter of public record, and if you wish to seek out more details they can be obtained.
Thank you for your time, and if you would like any additional information please let me know.
Sincerely,
Brian Ward
You all think CVA is the only company that has law suits. Wrong!
Thompson / Center Arms Found at Fault in Catastrophic Gun Failure
On September 1, 2005, I was severely injured by a catastrophic gun failure. My face was permanently disfigured and sight in my right eye was lost forever. I was shooting with the Thompson/Center Encore Rifle. It blew apart because of a defect in its design. That horrendous day propelled me down a path I never planned on or wanted in my life. I’m not speaking out for personal gain or to be vindictive toward Smith & Wesson or Thompson/Center Arms (Thompson/Center Arms has apparently been sold to Smith & Wesson). I merely want the truth about this rifle to be known. I don’t want anyone to go through the pain and suffering I’ve endured. In my opinion, this rifle defect is something that was known about and has been covered up for years.
After almost 10 years of battling over the Encore, I received the final judgment order from the 46th Circuit Court for the County of Otsego, Michigan. I sued Thompson Center Arms (TCA), and the jury found TCA at fault. The jury found TCA to have a defect in its design and found their manual to be defective.
Throughout this entire process, from the day that my rifle had failed, until being given the green light to speak freely about this rifle, I have felt as though I’m involved in a David and Goliath scenario. In the end, no matter how much money they threw at this problem, with their team of lawyers and paid experts, the truth could not be veiled from the jury. At many points over the nearly 10 years since my injury, I have experienced hopelessness about the outcome of the case. One of these moments occurred during the trial. My attorney had in his possession letters, obtained from Thompson/Center through discovery, from other individuals who had incurred similar injuries from the same type of failure. Although the letters were discussed in open court, they were not allowed to be shown to the jury as evidence, based on a technicality concerning Thompson / Center’s claims as to when they had actually received the letters in relation to the date of my injury. A representative of the company did admit that he saw failures of this kind during testing. He also admitted that TCA destroys customer complaints every six months.
Because of the pending suit, I have not been able to share these details until recently. I cannot adequately express what a tremendous relief it is to be able to finally share the truth about the dangers of this rifle.
Most gun owners I know - including myself - thought suing a gun company was practically blasphemy. My suit was never about anything more than seeking truth. I believe wholeheartedly in the Constitution and stand for our Second Amendment rights. I love freedom. I was an NRA member when my injury occurred and I’m an NRA member now.
This is the first lawsuit brought against TCA regarding this rifle that has been successfully litigated. In my opinion, TCA is fighting me so hard because the Encore Rifle has been wildly popular. A recall would cost potentially a lot of money. Still, I am now finally allowed to spread the truth about this gun. Please notify anyone you know who owns this rifle that it could catastrophically fail!
The judgment is attached. I have blacked out the award amounts because the money is not important in this regard. No amount of money can compensate me for the loss of my sight and the years spent in recovery. Additionally, I truly believe this company will continue to fight this judgment, and as a result I will never see any monetary compensation. The court documents are now a matter of public record, and if you wish to seek out more details they can be obtained.
Thank you for your time, and if you would like any additional information please let me know.
Sincerely,
Brian Ward
08-03-2015 | 01:43 PM
#25
Thread Starter
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,415
Likes: 0
From: VA.
You can do much better than that, can't you? Where is the track record of lawsuits against TCA? I just did a quick google search and didn't find anything. I know, maybe I should go back and search harder. No need. Unlike what Randy posted, TC simply has a higher reputation. Any gun can fail, but you're ignoring a company with a proven history of damage . That's the difference.
08-03-2015 | 01:49 PM
#26
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 5,612
Likes: 0
Whenever this topic comes up the first thing that comes to mind is...
How popular is the product in its country of origin. Is it easily purchased there. Is the product only made for export to countries with different or more relaxed regulations.
We had a member join another forum. He was from Spain and looking at Traditions. We asked him to look for a CVA/Dikar/Bergara made MLs. He linked a website for a large distributor in Spain.
Oddly there were none listed. Only Traditions and Pedersoli. Last i heard he is still looking for a place that sells the Dikar inlines. Even the ML barrel for the APEX is not listed on Bergara's website.
It is very strange that Traditions is so easily found for sale yet Dikar inlines seem to be non existent according to this member in Spain.
How popular is the product in its country of origin. Is it easily purchased there. Is the product only made for export to countries with different or more relaxed regulations.
We had a member join another forum. He was from Spain and looking at Traditions. We asked him to look for a CVA/Dikar/Bergara made MLs. He linked a website for a large distributor in Spain.
Oddly there were none listed. Only Traditions and Pedersoli. Last i heard he is still looking for a place that sells the Dikar inlines. Even the ML barrel for the APEX is not listed on Bergara's website.
It is very strange that Traditions is so easily found for sale yet Dikar inlines seem to be non existent according to this member in Spain.
08-03-2015 | 01:50 PM
#27
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,557
Likes: 0
From: Colorado
You can do much better than that, can't you? Where is the track record of lawsuits against TCA? I just did a quick google search and didn't find anything. I know, maybe I should go back and search harder. No need. Unlike what Randy posted, TC simply has a higher reputation. Any gun can fail, but you're ignoring a company with a proven history of damage . That's the difference.
"He also admitted that TCA destroys customer complaints every six months."
You want to see more? Hire Randy to find them.
08-03-2015 | 01:53 PM
#28
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 9,557
Likes: 0
From: Colorado
Whenever this topic comes up the first thing that comes to mind is...
How popular is the product in its country of origin. Is it easily purchased there. Is the product only made for export to countries with different or more relaxed regulations.
We had a member join another forum. He was from Spain and looking at Traditions. We asked him to look for a CVA/Dikar/Bergara made MLs. He linked a website for a large distributor in Spain.
Oddly there were none listed. Only Traditions and Pedersoli. Last i heard he is still looking for a place that sells the Dikar inlines. Even the ML barrel for the APEX is not listed on Bergara's website.
It is very strange that Traditions is so easily found for sale yet Dikar inlines seem to be non existent according to this member in Spain.
How popular is the product in its country of origin. Is it easily purchased there. Is the product only made for export to countries with different or more relaxed regulations.
We had a member join another forum. He was from Spain and looking at Traditions. We asked him to look for a CVA/Dikar/Bergara made MLs. He linked a website for a large distributor in Spain.
Oddly there were none listed. Only Traditions and Pedersoli. Last i heard he is still looking for a place that sells the Dikar inlines. Even the ML barrel for the APEX is not listed on Bergara's website.
It is very strange that Traditions is so easily found for sale yet Dikar inlines seem to be non existent according to this member in Spain.
08-03-2015 | 01:57 PM
#29
Giant Nontypical
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 5,612
Likes: 0
And Bergara (the company) is in Spain. They make the CVA MLs correct? Dikar owns both brands correct? Their ML are all made in Spain correct?
Maybe you can find one on this website, They list the Apex in centerfire under Bergara.
http://www.armeriatrelles.com/website/
Traditions aka Ardesa is also made in Spain. They are also in the USA but they sell MLs in Spain too. Rather perplexing isnt it?
Maybe you can find one on this website, They list the Apex in centerfire under Bergara.
http://www.armeriatrelles.com/website/
Traditions aka Ardesa is also made in Spain. They are also in the USA but they sell MLs in Spain too. Rather perplexing isnt it?
Last edited by Gm54-120; 08-03-2015 at 02:02 PM.
08-03-2015 | 02:02 PM
#30
Nontypical Buck
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,077
Likes: 0
From: Near a lake with no fish
Nice try Muley.................
That case with Brian Ward, wasn't even a muzzleloader case, it was a centerfire rifle. It also appears that "someone" may have actually used handloaded ammunition.
From Brian Ward's expert witness:
"Once it was shown through testimony the locking assembly on the rifle was not proper for the cartridge and could cause the gun to unlock itself and eject the case, then reclose when it fell, AND the cheap plastic stock was likely to break from recoil from normal use, the further facts of sloppy headspacing and the tested stretching of the headspace dimension in as few as five rounds just showed more exacerbating circumstances due to faulty designs in more than one place. The jury saw the gun was defective in design and materials and awarded the majority of the verdict to the plaintiffs. They retained part of the award because the handload was an unknown that the company contended could have been causation. (Common in civil courts in states where 'proportional liability' is the law.)"
Brian Ward: ...... "that should be brought in because TC knows how shooters are. (Don't we all.) Just because the TC-E "will hold" a .300 Mag does not mean it will still hold one with excess resizing lube left on it, or an oversized flashhole, or a weld-crimped bullet or a round grabbed off the dashboard with hot and degraded powder. (don't ask me how I know THAT one!)"
That case with Brian Ward, wasn't even a muzzleloader case, it was a centerfire rifle. It also appears that "someone" may have actually used handloaded ammunition.
From Brian Ward's expert witness:
"Once it was shown through testimony the locking assembly on the rifle was not proper for the cartridge and could cause the gun to unlock itself and eject the case, then reclose when it fell, AND the cheap plastic stock was likely to break from recoil from normal use, the further facts of sloppy headspacing and the tested stretching of the headspace dimension in as few as five rounds just showed more exacerbating circumstances due to faulty designs in more than one place. The jury saw the gun was defective in design and materials and awarded the majority of the verdict to the plaintiffs. They retained part of the award because the handload was an unknown that the company contended could have been causation. (Common in civil courts in states where 'proportional liability' is the law.)"
Brian Ward: ...... "that should be brought in because TC knows how shooters are. (Don't we all.) Just because the TC-E "will hold" a .300 Mag does not mean it will still hold one with excess resizing lube left on it, or an oversized flashhole, or a weld-crimped bullet or a round grabbed off the dashboard with hot and degraded powder. (don't ask me how I know THAT one!)"