I'm not going to get into a pi$$ing contest here but I love my CVA Accura V2. Its accurate, reliable and good looking to boot. In fact, I've had 3 CVAs - An Optima Pro, Optima V2 (that I sold to my cousin unfired) and my Accura V2. Every one of them was/is more than accurate enough for my purposes. And shot everything I put down the muzzle well until I found the perfect load/projectile combo it really liked. And the price didn't break the wallet either.
If you want to call them junk go ahead and be my guest - it won't bother me any.

Junk junk junk total absolute junk 😀 😀

Now MD, you of all people should know better than to bring up companies buying designs and slapping their name on it. TC bought ONE design. Period. CVA has YET to have an original design! EVER! Every single one of their rifles and handguns are either reproductions or flat out STOLEN from TC and you know it! They are cheap knockoffs and the company has been sued more times than one can count!


And yes Pete I have not only seen the results of shoddy barrels from CVA but have actually seen a bulge out firing from a NORMAL load. Not even a heavy magnum load but 90gr Goex 2f and a 300 gr connie. Chamber had a 3 inch long and almost half the barrel width bulge and no it wasn't double loaded or anything done wrong. Buddy was shooting right beside me at the range and I saw him load right after a shot. Was a CVA optima if I remember correctly. Of course the company replaced it and as soon as he got the new one in he sold it! So no I am NOT just spouting off BS from Randy Wakeman or any of the other nay BS artists. But I do see many many many many negative reviews of CVA products. Is their BS a thing of the past? Could be but more than likely not. And as far as testing, whoever said TC doesn't test their barrels is full of crap. Every barrel from TC is pressure tested and magnafluxed period! CVA barrels are the ones that skip the testing procedure MD and have been busted for it many times.

There has to be a reason that you can get a CVA for $169.00! And it is not all in the fact there is cheap labor in Spain! No-one wonders about the quality of materials?

And really it doesn't matter if you want to buy a CVA - then you should do so.

I personally wonder how many CVA owners would really rather have something else but economics will not let it happen.

I have to admit my first inline ML was a CVA because it was on sale at Wal-Mart at a really good price so I could afford it. I could not afford a White - TC or a Knight at that time.

And yes I believe the quality of the CVA has improved over time - yes improved!

I had 5 CVAs at one time. 2 Optimas. 1 Optima pro, 1 Kodiak Pro and 1 Accura .
Best part of the whole thing is the little word "had" .

You could buy a Knight DE last month for $254 shipped.

It's called a sale. Everybody does it.


Most everybody's arguments are weak on CVA's. I'm no CVA fanboy. I just hate to see a product bashed so bad when it's undeserved.

Especially, when it's against the rules here.

Why don't you just shoot the gun you like, and cut out the bashing. You're like a bunch of butt hurt kids.

I can buy a T/C Impact for $199. Is $30 all that separates junk from top quality products?

Apparently, so get the TC impact 😀

Or maybe a new Cooper. Those are rather nice.

Coopers look nice . I wont buy one though for the simple fact that they crawled in bed with Toby . I personally think they will live to regret it .

Nearly every company ever associated with Toby has lived to regret it.

As much as ive shot my cvas i have full faith in them. Including the old models like my hawken.

Your upcoming vacation should do some good.

I don't think Toby is involved in research and development.

Na, he just did a really nice writeup for them. Toby still has a lot of "followers" so it was purely advertisement. I love Cooper rifles and that new MLer they just came out with is a thing of beauty I have to admit. Not a bad price for a made in house receiver custom rifle. But if I was going to spend that kind of money on a front stuffer you can bet it would be smokeless rated and something I wouldn't be afraid to stretch out to 300-400 yards with. Still trying to wrap the boss's head around the price for a Swinglock next year :D Something in the .45 family and a little like this




Dat is a ting of beauty! Something fast twist that I could pound out the nice longer rifle bullets.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

To me that gun is butt ugly.

This is beautiful to me.

That is purdy too!

Don't make me feel bad about calling your gun ugly.

Someone at the dance for everyone. Don't think either of those 2 will go lonely.

I like old style as well as new. I'm far from a "snob" for either style. Quality craftsmanship always catches my eye in EITHER category.

Sticks and stones gentlemen. Ain't no deer ever complained because I shot it with my CVA!

Good looking rifle Muley. ;)

I believe it to be an original Hawken, so obviously I don't own it.

Sure wish I did, but i'd have to win the lottery. I think most of them are in museums.

I doubt it's an original Hawk. Damn fine repro by one hell of an artist though.

You sure? Here's a close up of the other side. It's Kit Carson's gun.

I can show you where to go to build a good solid fast twist 45 or even a 40 for a heck of a lot less. I love the Swinglocks but those are in the $4000 range now.

You can build a very fine SML on a Savage target action or one of the new Rem Ultimates for around half that price including a top shelf stock. Both will have full locking lugs just like a CF. Those new Rems are basically a Rem 40X action too.

LOL Pete, first pic and this one aint the same rifle. Totally different wear pattern. You aint going to find one worn completely down to the wood on one side and little to no wear on the other. That first pic is from a Kit Carson replica kit from WB Seleb Customs probably. The second pic is from the actual Kit Carson rifle with the worn DARK wood.

This here is Kits original last Hawk

https://www.flickr.com/photos/tsjcro...7623758126706/

Couldn't snag the pic without downloading then uploading to PB so just linked the site.

What caliber is that gun??? .52??

Well, where I found the pictures was misleading. They went back and forth between the real and kit gun. The guns are so close that it was hard to tell which was which.

It's not hard to make a new gun look like an original if you have the talent for it. A few guys do. Let's just say that kit gun is so close that it could be what an original could look like. Except for wear marks I can't tell the difference. Maybe an original is still in somebodies basement lost in rubble.

I'd have a heart attack if I ever found one.

The idea that TC barrels won't shoot conical is wrong any old timer that remembers all we did to make them shoot can. The exception would be the few that had off center QLA's and they did not shoot anything else well either.
I have shot them out of two Knights and an Omega, a Triumph and an Endeavor. I do have a Pro-Hunter in 45 that I have not shot them out of but I am confident I could if I found a need too.

I've read more than a few that had the QLA off center that wouldn't shoot conicals, but shot sabots fine.

What we see on forums is a very small amount of guns sold. How many had the problem that don't even know what a forum is?

There's 2 million muzzleloader hunters in the US. Don't ever take what you read on forums as the gospel.

I didn't wanna say it but since you did. All my Encores and Triumphs shot Bore size bullets excellent. I think the norm is people load and shoot and if its not accurate they complain about it. You still need to work up a load on bore size bullets just like sabots. That's why I always say, I wish all muzzleloaders had QLA'S

Yes, it may be part of it, but when I called TC to ask them about this they told me that the guns were made for sabots. I told them I live in a state that sabots can't be used, and he sounded like he didn't know any state was like that. Duh?

Some of the reports that I read were from guys who sounded like they put a good effort into trying to get a load to work. We know the QLA is off center on some guns. that's been shown in pictures. Do your guns have that? If yours are straight you aren't going to have a problem.

Funny that the junk Bergaras are always straight, and the high quality TC's aren't. Oops!

Funny how when they cut the QLA off they shot the conicals well with the same load. Must be magic.

Exactly.




........

How many T/C Muzzleloaders have you owned with a QLA?

I have owned three of them, two black diamonds and one Omega. That was more enough to know they are made to be sabot shooters (which hey did quite well actually), but not conical shooters.

I will buy one of those from you right now. First I will do a video on how well it shoots sabots. Then I will do a video on how it shoots connicals. Send me your full name and address and check will go out today. Ill buy the worst shooting one of the three.

Arrogant to say the least.

I sold them all to buy rifles I wanted. Maybe you remember the last time I sent you something to test along with promised payment you never did your part of the bargain.

Then after I get the gun shooting accurately, I'm going to give it away on this forum to someone who needs a conical shooter. Your Buddy Muley is the first that comes to mind.