http://www.huntamerica.com/wwwthread...t=1#Post578371

Wow, this is shocking. I guess Toby has lost all credibility now. I even question his old results. Seems he didn't care about safety at all. I am shocked that he thinks he is such a force in the ML community to kill smokless ML. What a ego.

After reading the e-mail, all I can deduct without the full nature of the conversation is there is a disagreement between Mr. Bridges and Henry (I am guessing this is Henry Ball a gun designer I have seen notes about). What the actual disagreement is about is hard to say.

If you read all 4 pages of the post, Toby chimes in and tells what its about. He's wanting money he said he never got.

You're correct BigCountry I did not read all of the five pages of the post. I did read the e-mail which was brought to the attention of that forum by Mr. Wakeman. In that e-mail I find it hard to determine what the disagreement was about. I too would suspect it is a matter of money which Mr. Bridges feels is owned him. That is a civil matter concerning the interested parties. My true interest is in why the rifle blew in the first place. I have read a number of different views on this issue as well concerning people's speculations which might have caused this incident. I still believe that a Savage is a fine rifle and safe when used according to the manufacture's recommendations.

The posts by other forum members are their interpetation of what the meaning of Mr. Bridge's e-mail relates to, concerning Henry and Savage. As all members are entitled to their views, they still produce no facts concerning the interpetation of what I read in the e-mail. I can only make my own guesses as to the real problems concerning the e-mail and as I stated, they are my guesses...

Well, later in the other pages, it appears Toby is claiming he wants his 15% royalties for the patent for marketing and pushing the Smokeless ML. William Ball then makes a surprising post also. I am just shocked that too people in litigation would air such dirty laundry.

I agree... If I were going to or possibly considering civil preceedings against someone or a company, the last thing I would do is get the information pasted over the internet. Again, this difference in who feels entitled to what is a civil matter. I also believe that the parties involved have not even started getting this settled.

I still hate to see the name and reputation of the Savage muzzleloader tarnished. I do not own one. I have no intention of owning one because I personally feel smokeless powders do not have a place in this sport. Also I am more then satisfied with the inlines I do own. Savage owners have their reasons for wanting a smokeless rifle, and I respect them for it. Just as I feel strongly the other way. I also do not distrust Savage rifles, just as I do not distrust BPI rifles do to some barrel pressure issues.

If there is indeed a design flaw, then it needs to be corrected. If there is not, then the involved parties need to settle their differences and get on with making smoke. Or smokeless in some cases....

Why do they do this before a trial?!! Don't be naive. Because they feel compelled to weigh each other's nuts. One superego against another.

Have NO involvement in this and never want any - but Bill Ball is not involved in any lawsuits directly. His Dad is.

Underclocked, not sure if anyone said you did. Kinda like me coming on here and proclaiming I have no involvement in the hurricane down in Florda. I think alot of people realize William "doesn't have a dog in this fight", but if North Carolina is anything like Ky and Tennessee, you mess with my family, you are messing with me directly. From the folks, I know down in that neck of the woods, that still stands.

Man, I called it right on the money, pardon the pun! It's all about money and Bridges has stooped to blackmail and libel to get his way.

This really blows Bridges feigned intentions of just wanting to get the word out about what he perceived to be a safety issue when he sends Bill Ball an email saying basically pay up or I'll ruin you. It's all a load of crap, and unfortnately in Bridges vendetta to get back at Savage and Ball for his percieved slight, he's going to try to drag down a good, safe product to do it.

It also makes me wonder if that rifle was blown up intentionally and Bridges is lying about the circumstances of the supposed mishap. I now don't think that it's too much of a stretch to consider that maybe he blew it up purposefully in an effort to have some dirt to save for a rainy day. That would explain why there was a 5 month delay in revealing the blown up gun to the public, despite Bridges claimed severe emotional trauma and his so-called concern for the safety of others. If he really thought there was a severe design issue that compromises the safety of the rifle and he had such tremendous concern for the safety of others that he claims to have now, he would have revealed this information 5 months ago.

I personally feel that Toby Bridges is motivated entirely by money, and is using the "Smokeless Safety Warning" as a weapon to get Savage to pay him off for his silence, or as revenge for not paying him off. Bridges is just trying to hit Savage where it hurts the most by using his real or imaginary clout to cast doubt on the safety of the gun. I just hope that Savage sticks to their guns (another bad pun...I'm on a roll!) and sues Bridges for libel. This would allow Savage to prove that their product is safe when used as intended, and expose Bridges for the backstabbing blackmailer that I believe him to be.

Mike