Slowburn

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slowburn
So, after reading the debates on here of what constitutes a traditional muzzle loader I decided to play the devils advocate just as a reminder. "The original inline design was conceptualized as far back as 1808. Jean Samuel Pauley patented a system in which the cock of the sidelock was replaced by a cylindrical hammer driven by a coil spring. His system was then expanded upon by Johann Nicolaus von Dreyse who developed the Dreyse Needle gun that was adopted by the German military in 1871." Traditional firearms is merely interpreted as to which time period one wishes to use or reenact. Now I am not knit picking fellers I totally understand what is meant by traditional muzzleloaders and I believe Ron's hot rod should be acceptable or the only ones discussed should specific time period correct in which they represent. So we could eventually eliminate everyone from this forum. Now the useless rhetoric I have written isn't really worth discussing. It surely would not encourage or support anyone in my personal opinion. Hope y'all enjoyed my devils advocate performance.
Copied and pasted from above in case you may not have noticed it...

Traditional Muzzleloading Forum Firearm Types open for discussion: Pre-Flintlock, Flintlock, & Side-lock Percussion. Smoothbores, Muskets, Rifles, Shotguns, Pistols & BP Revolvers, only

Leonardo DaVinci developed a tank much prior to their inception as we know it if that's where you're going with this... just a comparison.

BPS
__________________
Happiness is... never having to take a follow up shot!!
Last edited by Blackpowdersmoke; Today at 12:19 AM.

I copied and posted too...

BPS, thank you and I did read the rules and I am not going anywhere with this. As stated merely pointing out that the inline rifle was around long ago. I do wonder why the discussion of cowboy action pistols fits in this category cause technically they are inline ignition. However, I am not trying to pick a fight. I look forward to sharing information on this forum.

SB

MountainDevil54

If you have an original or replica of that inline design(1808), please be sure to stop by and use it.

IMO this is exactly why we need these rules set.

You wouldnt like my traditional forum. I have it set up strictly as round ball shooters and everyone gets along fine.

If you want to shoot sabots and other metal projectiles that fine, just keep it in the regular black powder section.

Semisane

Just got back from the hunting lease and read these five pages of debate. Don't know whether to laugh or cry.

Herein lies the downside of breaking the forum into different segments. We all understood that the somewhat misnamed "Blackpowder" forum was intended to refer to muzzleloaders, without limit as to ignition type, powder type, type of projectile, or sighting method. Are you shooting a flintlock smoothbore with ball and/or shot? Come on in. Are you shooting an inline with a carbon fiber thumbhole stock, a $1,000 scope and one-of-a-kind lathe turned titanium bullets over smokeless powder? Come on in. All were welcome - any inline, any sidelock, any underhammer, any matchlock. If it loaded from the muzzle you were welcome (even cap and ball revolvers were welcome, not to mention an occasional fishing trip. )

So now we have two forums and five pages of debate as to what should be included in the breakout forum. And for what? Aren't all of us going to be viewing both forums anyway?

If we must have separate forums, at least make them an Inline forum and a Sidelock forum and welcome any and all variations and incantations of those two general categories. Why quibble about all that other stuff?

Slowburn

It appears the current members on this forum has gotten their panties in a wad over the info that I shared. If you would have bothered to read and comphrend what my post actually stated there would not be this confusion about me NOT trying to pick a fight or argue; however, it seems a couple of you fellers want to pick a fight with your sarcasm and opinions. Sorry, but I am not going to argue over your rules for the forum. Honestly I don't care what your rules are. I said I WOULD abide by the rules. MD I am on your traditional forum and I enjoy the discussions. I would venture to say I prolly have more PRB rifles than most and I even own a few BP revolvers and I don't consider those traditional but on this forum the rules state otherwise. So, I guess opinions can be wrong but then again you were a little condescending weren't you? I am done with this thread. I only tried to share info...LOL...

Slowburn

I am with y'all on that semi.

MountainDevil54

I dont understand the point of this area either if we are allowing sabots, scopes, etc in the traditional muzzle loading section of the forum lol.

i figured i'd come up with some type of guideline but if we allow sabots, scopes, pellets, 209 primers. I won't even bother with this forum and stick to the regular black powder forum to be honest.

Blackpowdersmoke

SB...

I may have misunderstood you and you I. I'm thinking you read BP revolvers and thought black powder cartridge revolvers, not percussion revolvers although both are used in the Cowboy action shooting sports. Maybe the MODS will have to change that to read "percussion revolvers" to avoid any further confusion. And yes you're correct, they are an "inline" ignition. No one is going to argue that. But they were widely used from the late 1830's through the Civil war and the expansion westward up until the cartridge revolvers began to dominate the scene around 1870-ish or so. I'm sure I haven't told you anything you don't already know.

That said, if I offended you with my earlier reply, I apologize and welcome aboard.

BPS

Blackpowdersmoke

Semi,

I respect your thoughts, you're a wise man. I suggested some time ago that we have separate forums only I may have worded it differently, I can't remember and I'm not gonna search the archives looking for my thread. What I do remember is you being quick to oppose it. That's fine you have a right to your opinion(s) as do the rest of us.

Five pages of debate... hmmmm. I mentioned earlier that this forum was infantile and there would be rough edges for awhile so what's five pages, ten, or more for that matter? How many pages of "debate" as you call it (nice word for argument) were there over breech plugs or RB vs saboted bullets, etc.? A LOT! And some of it got ugly... do you want to go back to that? I honestly feel that the MODS gave us this forum because they were tired of seeing that kind of thing going on as much as many of the rest of us were.

But as with anything else, the majority rules so if there are a number of you out there who are dissatisfied or feel that splitting the forum was a mistake or a waste of time, contact the MODS! Let them know how you feel. Give them legitimate reason(s) why you don't feel this is necessary, MAN UP NOW or hold your peace.

Maybe they'll deem this move unnecessary and drop it like it's hot, then we can all go back to what we had before if that's what you want.

BPS

Blackpowdersmoke

MD...

Who said we we're? So far most are in agreement with what you put forth earlier and you're right, if were gonna allow all the colors of the rainbow so to speak, we may as well go back where we were.

I'm sending you a PM... again!

BPS

Champlain Islander

OK just checking in before I leave for the day. I was afraid it would come down to this...anytime there is potential for difference of opinion there can be conflict. Keeping it civil so far and that is progress. Lets for the time being give the forum some time before jumping in and making changes. Sometimes slow change is better than jumping all over the map. I think having a traditional forum is good simply because there are so many who specialize in that and don't want to bother to sift through more modern equipment. Looking at it from the web site's perspective those people who don't like the modern could just go elsewhere. So far I think the interest is good and both forums are getting lots of posts probably the most in all the site. Lets keep it going and post where you want...modern, traditional or both.