Front Stuffer Debate on KOMO

[wadu1]

Well I'm one of the front stuffer that still uses a sidelock. Yes my eyes are not what they were when I was young but with the correct glasses I can still see my sights just fine. I made the big mistake this past year an used my trifocals and shot over a spike elk in the early season. Now I have a new set of shooting glasses without the extra garbage, yes I need to take them off and put on my trifocals to read a map or GPS but in the long run I love it. Hope the link works!

http://www.komonews.com/outdoors/featured/37036224.html

[bobcat]

Interesting article.

What did the author mean by this: 

In Washington, one of those policies has been not to allow scopes on muzzle-loading guns, which can fire a bullet faster and farther than a traditional gun.

 

[stumprat]

It probably would, and with scopes and higher-tech ignition systems, their rate of success could also expected to go up, too. That could have an undesirable consequence.

"The agency would be duty-bound to look at whether the seasons should be adjusted accordingly. And adjusted means shortened. And that's not what people are looking for," says Mik Mikitik, the state Wildlife Department's head of hunter education.

"Be careful what you wish for."



Be careful to wish for success? ....................LIMITED SUCCESS IN SO FEW GMU'S 

[CP]

That is an interesting article, thanks for posting that.  I’m not sure which of the two camps I belong to. 

My eyes not being what they once were, I really wanted to scope my muzzleloader when I decided to hunt ML last year.  Rules being what they are, I had to teach myself to shoot all over again.  Now I’m glad that I did and I shoot pretty well with open sights.  My next goal is to master the peep sight.

[Gobble]

I personally like that we can't use scopes on a ML. Thats why its called a primitave weapon  . I have a Lyman .54 cal Trade Rifle that I have killed ELK with and had no problem doing so. Technology is advancing to the point where these new ML are not much different than shooting a modern rifle. I'm usually for letting the hunter decide whats best for them but in the case for scopes I'm against it.

[DBake]

No scopes, no 209, yes to copper and jacketed bullets.

[C-Money]

    I use a side lock when I Muzzleload. Pennsylvania makes you use a Flintlock! Untill reciently, you had to use a patched round ball too. Flint and roundballs are very deadly! Lets keep the scopes off the Mloaders, and no 209's.

[HawkenBob]

Im with Gobble. Also, the early ML elk season is set at a time when you can get close. Thats why I chose to hunt ML. I would hunt with a bow if my bad wrist could handle it.

Also, I enjoy just shooting my Hawken 50. I spend a great deal of time shooting it even in the off season. I bought it to hunt with years ago, then really liked shooting it. Its a challenge. Working up loads and learning to shoot out to 100 yards or so with open sights.

I think a 100 yard shot for most is way too far. Most guys I know that hunt inlines spend absolutely no time learning the weapon. They take it out once a year, stuff 150 grns down it and go hunt. They might shoot it 3 to 10 times a year.

IMO, 95% of the guys out during ML shouldent be shooting that far. There is already enough animals not recovered. Most guys couldent hold a 6 inch group at 100 yards, how can they expect a clean kill if there 6 inches low, or rearward? If your eyes are getting bad, get closer!

[HawkenBob]

Interesting article.

What did the author mean by this: 

In Washington, one of those policies has been not to allow scopes on muzzle-loading guns, which can fire a bullet faster and farther than a traditional gun.

 

It's a true general statement in the fact that a ML can and does shoot faster and farther than say a down loaded 45 or somthing. He should have said "some" traditional guns.
Or better yet, just left the statement out.

[Sagedawg]

Thats a good article to consider. I have sidelock and inline, so I guess Im a fence rider.I started hunting the muzzy season to escape the crowds, and like has been said ALOT of the guys you see out there now are carrying inlines.  Im glad our state didnt allow the 209's, but I do wish they had given some thought for the older hunters to use some sort of scope,holosight or red dot. I dont belive this would be an advantage, and it would allow for better sighting.


Sage

[CP]

Interesting article.

What did the author mean by this: 

In Washington, one of those policies has been not to allow scopes on muzzle-loading guns, which can fire a bullet faster and farther than a traditional gun.

 

I think what they meant is in-lines fire a bullet faster and farther than a traditional ML. 

I’ve spent a considerable amount of time lately on the range with my Knight .50 cal shooting .44 & .45 jacketed bullets with various loads including 209 primers and I can tell you that it doesn’t come close to the performance of a modern centerfire rifle.  The best point blank distance (+/- 3”) that I can get is about 130 yards. 

While that does beat a .45 colt (hardly a modern round) it is well below a 45/70, .444 marlin even below the .44 mag. 

In-lines don’t make a ML equivalent to a modern CF rifle, either do 209 primers, or jacketed bullets.

[HawkenBob]

I think I read it wrong and the author wanted to say "in line, muzzle loading guns". I missed "traditional".

[longstevo]

Interesting article.

What did the author mean by this: 

In Washington, one of those policies has been not to allow scopes on muzzle-loading guns, which can fire a bullet faster and farther than a traditional gun.

 

It's a true general statement in the fact that a ML can and does shoot faster and farther than say a down loaded 45 or somthing. He should have said "some" traditional guns.
Or better yet, just left the statement out.

I bet a Jim Shokey muzzleloader could rival the performance of many modern rifles... 

[Curly]

For you guys that want scopes because their eyesight isn't what it used to be.................have you tried a peep sight?

As far as this quote:

In Washington, one of those policies has been not to allow scopes on muzzle-loading guns, which can fire a bullet faster and farther than a traditional gun.

.....he probably did mean inline vs. traditional muzzle loader.  Some inlines can handle larger powder charges than traditional ML's, thus they can get better velocity.  However, that really isn't relevant to the scope issue.  If scopes were allowed, and all I had were a traditional ML, I might consider placing a scope on it.

[Curly]

It probably would, and with scopes and higher-tech ignition systems, their rate of success could also expected to go up, too. That could have an undesirable consequence.

"The agency would be duty-bound to look at whether the seasons should be adjusted accordingly. And adjusted means shortened. And that's not what people are looking for," says Mik Mikitik, the state Wildlife Department's head of hunter education.

"Be careful what you wish for."



Be careful to wish for success? ....................LIMITED SUCCESS IN SO FEW GMU'S 

I agree with Mik.  If WDFW allows scopes and other modernizing things, success rates could go up and they will shorten the seasons.  I have no problem with the way the rules currently are.  The problem I have is the lack of hunting units available and the short seasons.