Greg Ritz said
09-08-2008, 08:20 AM
#1
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Millboro, Va
Posts: 1,134
Greg Ritz said
I either heard on a tv show or read in a magazine that Greg Ritz said that "muzzleloading was a mixture of bowhunting and rifle hunting... " something like that I think.
Do you agree?
When I first heard this I thought no way, but after I gave it some thought they are vaguely similar yet drastically different. One shot? Yes. "Primitave" weapon? Yes. Attention to detail? Sure. Equipment upkeep? Deffinitely.
Thoughts on this?
Do you agree?
When I first heard this I thought no way, but after I gave it some thought they are vaguely similar yet drastically different. One shot? Yes. "Primitave" weapon? Yes. Attention to detail? Sure. Equipment upkeep? Deffinitely.
Thoughts on this?
09-08-2008, 08:28 AM
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Portage WI/Racine WI
Posts: 2,320
RE: Greg Ritz said
Apples and Oranges
Two different beasts. I have a hard time calling anything "primitive" that has the ability to shoot out to 250yds as many of these new muzzies have. I'm a bit of a traditionalist as well that says if you have a muzzleloader there shouldn't be a scope, JMHO.
Not to mention there is a HUGE difference between getting within 80-100yds of a deer and closing the distance to 35 yds or under. Like I said, Apples to Oranges
Two different beasts. I have a hard time calling anything "primitive" that has the ability to shoot out to 250yds as many of these new muzzies have. I'm a bit of a traditionalist as well that says if you have a muzzleloader there shouldn't be a scope, JMHO.
Not to mention there is a HUGE difference between getting within 80-100yds of a deer and closing the distance to 35 yds or under. Like I said, Apples to Oranges
09-08-2008, 08:34 AM
#3
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Millboro, Va
Posts: 1,134
RE: Greg Ritz said
I agree with your reference to primitive.. thats why I put it in quotes. I also agree with the difference between effective ranges. You're right it IS apples and oranges.. but are apples and oranges both not ffruit? I believe the same can be applied here, they are drastically different like I said, but once you give it some thought they pose some acute similarites as well.
09-08-2008, 08:35 AM
#4
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Cenral Illinois
Posts: 3,180
RE: Greg Ritz said
Muzzleloading USED TO BE. Now, with his muzzes, you can get to 200 yards easily, sorry dude, no longer even close. With a flintlock and round ball, the ranges between archery and muzz are not much different, but witha TC Pro-Hunter, you basically have a rifle with no cartridge.
09-08-2008, 08:37 AM
#5
Dominant Buck
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location:
Posts: 21,043
RE: Greg Ritz said
Take away the instant firing loads the modernML now uses.....and the scopes....and we're getting "closer" to being "comparable". I hear people talk about iron sights and flintlocks and a 60yd shot being the top end.....and I can somewhat relate to them.
The modern ML "comparable" to bowhunting, though? No way.
The modern ML "comparable" to bowhunting, though? No way.
09-08-2008, 08:38 AM
#6
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Millboro, Va
Posts: 1,134
RE: Greg Ritz said
ORIGINAL: GMMAT
Take away the instant firing loads the modernML now uses.....and the scopes....and we're getting "closer" to being "comparable". I hear people talk about iron sights and flintlocks and a 60yd shot being the top end.....and I can somewhat relate to them.
The modern ML "comparable" to bowhunting, though? No way.
Take away the instant firing loads the modernML now uses.....and the scopes....and we're getting "closer" to being "comparable". I hear people talk about iron sights and flintlocks and a 60yd shot being the top end.....and I can somewhat relate to them.
The modern ML "comparable" to bowhunting, though? No way.
09-08-2008, 08:44 AM
#8
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Cenral Illinois
Posts: 3,180
RE: Greg Ritz said
ORIGINAL: RockinChair
Ah yes, but is the modern bow equivalent in its own right to the modern muzzleloader? I think so.
ORIGINAL: GMMAT
Take away the instant firing loads the modernML now uses.....and the scopes....and we're getting "closer" to being "comparable". I hear people talk about iron sights and flintlocks and a 60yd shot being the top end.....and I can somewhat relate to them.
The modern ML "comparable" to bowhunting, though? No way.
Take away the instant firing loads the modernML now uses.....and the scopes....and we're getting "closer" to being "comparable". I hear people talk about iron sights and flintlocks and a 60yd shot being the top end.....and I can somewhat relate to them.
The modern ML "comparable" to bowhunting, though? No way.
09-08-2008, 08:51 AM
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Portage WI/Racine WI
Posts: 2,320
RE: Greg Ritz said
ORIGINAL: YooperMike
Definitely not even close IMO. The modern bow is certainly a marvel in technology, but the effective range has not really increased that much over "old" bows.
ORIGINAL: RockinChair
Ah yes, but is the modern bow equivalent in its own right to the modern muzzleloader? I think so.
ORIGINAL: GMMAT
Take away the instant firing loads the modernML now uses.....and the scopes....and we're getting "closer" to being "comparable". I hear people talk about iron sights and flintlocks and a 60yd shot being the top end.....and I can somewhat relate to them.
The modern ML "comparable" to bowhunting, though? No way.
Take away the instant firing loads the modernML now uses.....and the scopes....and we're getting "closer" to being "comparable". I hear people talk about iron sights and flintlocks and a 60yd shot being the top end.....and I can somewhat relate to them.
The modern ML "comparable" to bowhunting, though? No way.
)
09-08-2008, 08:58 AM
#10
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 5,425
RE: Greg Ritz said
He works for T/C, he's just pushing product...
When I put down my bow, I pick up a hand made .54 caliber flintlock, shooting .530 patched balls...I can put them in an inch and a half group at
50 yards and have killed deer out to 125 yards...A properly tuned flintlock is light years ahead of a bow...
With an inline there is even more difference...
When I put down my bow, I pick up a hand made .54 caliber flintlock, shooting .530 patched balls...I can put them in an inch and a half group at
50 yards and have killed deer out to 125 yards...A properly tuned flintlock is light years ahead of a bow...
With an inline there is even more difference...