Post by: captbly on April 02, 2009, 07:46:46 PM
"The Department polled hunters extensively on these
topics and the result is what you see in the proposed
rules. The majority of hunters did not want to allow a
change in ignition systems."
http://wdfw.wa.gov/wlm/game/seasonsetting/2009-2011_recommendations/comments_232-12-051_muzzleloading_firearms.pdf
Is that true with most here? If so why? not sure what I'm missing (I dont have a muzzleloader yet), but seems like the 209 primer would be the way to go?
Post by: robodad on April 02, 2009, 08:31:10 PM
Post by: Moose Eyes on April 02, 2009, 08:50:55 PM
Post by: dontgetcrabs on April 02, 2009, 09:00:07 PM
Post by: WDFW Hates ME!!! on April 02, 2009, 09:27:17 PM
We hunt with a primative weapon and want seasons different than a modern firearm but then ask questions like why can't i use a scope??? Why can't i use jacketed bullets (now we can) but before this year we couldn't. Why can't i use a fool proof ignition system?
Why should Fish and wildlife let us primative weapon users different seasons to hunt when the weapon we hunt with is as modern as a high power rifle now??? Only thing different is the range and power. But at 200 yards a ML is still effective, i will not take that shot but some will...
Post by: bobcat on April 02, 2009, 09:37:59 PM
Post by: WDFW Hates ME!!! on April 03, 2009, 10:15:05 AM
Post by: ThePascoKid on April 03, 2009, 10:25:48 AM
Post by: videoman on April 03, 2009, 04:22:12 PM
Post by: fishunt247 on April 14, 2009, 08:20:46 AM
Post by: bobcat on April 14, 2009, 09:42:27 PM
Can't wait for one of the gun makers to come out with one that shoots these new, foolproof bullet/powder combinations concealed inside a brass casing with the primer attatched.
:chuckle: That's funny because it's true. I've often wondered the same thing...
Post by: billythekidrock on April 15, 2009, 06:18:28 AM
Is that true with most here? If so why? not sure what I'm missing (I dont have a muzzleloader yet), but seems like the 209 primer would be the way to go?
Quote from F&W commissioners on this issue and primitive weapons hunts.
"unique hunting ability, not unique technical ability"
Post by: lamar_hunter on April 15, 2009, 02:15:33 PM
[/quote]
Quote from F&W commissioners on this issue and primitive weapons hunts.
"unique hunting ability, not unique technical ability"
[/quote]
yep if muzzleloader guys were allowed to use every new product that comes out they would just be getting an earlier rifle season.
Post by: muzzleman on April 16, 2009, 07:52:51 AM
I would be okay with it too if they made us go back to traditional muzzleloaders. It would knock out a lot of guys. Basically, with all of these fancy additions, they are reinventing the single shot rifle. Can't wait for one of the gun makers to come out with one that shoots these new, foolproof bullet/powder combinations concealed inside a brass casing with the primer attached.Quote from F&W commissioners on this issue and primitive weapons hunts.
"unique hunting ability, not unique technical ability"
[/quote]
:yeah:
Post by: M_ray on April 16, 2009, 08:15:06 AM
I'm fine with 209 primers not being allowed, and would be fine with jacketed bullets being illegal. Even better would be if inlines were not legal. Muzzleloader season originated to give people the option of hunting with a primitive weapon for a more challenging hunt. It's too bad it's gotten away from that. And I do hunt with an inline now but also have a sidelock. I had to get an inline to see what all the fuss was about. So far I haven't seen much of an advantage and may switch back to using only the traditional sidelock.
To answer your question Bly I'm fine without 209 in fact I have a system I'm sure I will not change to jacketed just for the sake of changing because as bobcat say's here I don't see much of an advantage uless you have a scope.
Bobcat I'm a little unclear with your thoughts though ... first you say
"Even better would be if inlines were not legal."
Then you say
"So far I haven't seen much of an advantage and may switch back to using only the traditional sidelock."
So if you have tried both and don't see any advantage why would you be in favor of making an inline illegal? I have had this debate with some rifle Hunter's in the past and this was the same argument I made with them. It doesn't become a big difference until you start adding 209, a scope and max 150 grn loads IMO. until then you are still shooting a limited range weapon (130 yards max) that is open to the elements and prone to missfires. I know of plenty who have had missfires with an inline, Just because you are using a inline it doesn't automatically make it capable to shoot 200 yards reliably ... you need to add the 209 a scope and jacketed bullets with a max load to achive those results. People also forget the reason for these advancements in the first place, It all came about because many counties in the midwest have Modern firearm or high power rifle restrictions. This allowed them to shoot farther across a field than with thier shotgun and slug but still keeping within the limited range boundries.
Post by: bobcat on April 16, 2009, 08:21:13 PM
So if you have tried both and don't see any advantage why would you be in favor of making an inline illegal?
Only because I feel it would be more of a primitive weapon hunt, and there would be a lot less people doing it. Since the inlines became popular it seems everybody is wanting to switch to muzzleloader season, just because of the theoretical advantage that the inline rifles provide.
Post by: M_ray on April 16, 2009, 09:54:35 PM
Post by: Ray on April 16, 2009, 09:57:38 PM
Post by: bobcat on April 16, 2009, 10:07:02 PM
Post by: M_ray on April 17, 2009, 08:45:01 AM
Where's the popcorn. I am not a front stuffer but exactly how is an inline the same as a flint lock? Just asking. I don't like debating with bobcat because he's always got pretty good points that I almost always end up agreeing with.
But you said yourself you didn't see an advantage and you would switch back! Wich is my point exactly!!! if you don't have the aide of 209,scope,jacketed bullets and max loads ther is no advantage and an inline is just the same as a flinlock with the ignition in a different spot!
Read my post again Ray and you'll get your answer! The point is that allthough not exactly the same ... without 209 primers a scope, jacketed bullets and max 150 grn loads you have essentially the same weapon with the ignition in a different spot. With the types of powder these days the inline would fire a bit faster without the delay but as far as down range goes an inline is still a limited range weapon with a max range of 120-130 yards if you are good and 100 for the average person. Now I do agree with points that Bobcat makes
Quote
Right but most people think inlines are superior to sidelocks, so in the last few years tons of people have decided to go out and purchase one and switch to muzzleloader hunting.Which is the point I've made to you above and
Quote
I think people get caught up in all the hype on tv and hunting magazines about the inline muzzleloaders.
Which also makes the same point above! People see what these guys back east are achiving with their muzzleloaders and what the componies are adverstising with guy's like Micheal Waddel in pouring down rain like he has a modern rifle and the uneducated Washington hunter that has never muzzleloaded runs out and thinks he is going to do the same thing, until he learns that more than half of what makes up the midwestern muzzloader is not leagal here in WA!!! I worked with a guy that went out a few years ago and bought a Remington disc muzzy when they first came out :rolleyes: He had no clue that disc's were illeagal in WA. So he wasted his money and never hunted the muzzy season. I agree with most of what bobcat is saying it was just a question if there is not much of an advantage why go back to the sidelock? The powders you can use in your inline are way easier to clean for sure so I would'nt personally go back!
on this point -
Quote
Now it seems everybody wants to switch over, for the longer season and supposedly less people in the woods.Again if people are doing this they are uneducated because the season was only extended by a couple of days on the previous 6 day Deer and Elk season. That's right guy's Deer and Elk were together for a 6 day season then it was all over with a few token late hunt units thrown in that were either 99% private land or wich held no animals. Then you could hunt Western WA and get a late hunt where again by the time the late hunt comes around most animals have their bullet proof undies on and are on private lands and the others that are not are just a needle in the haystack and sooo thick it's difficult to get a shot. Do your homework before getting into muzzy hunting the season is short, now having said that Bobcat one thing to keep in mind is that the increase you are seeing during the muzzy season may be multi-season tag holders!!!
Post by: Ray on April 17, 2009, 08:47:18 AM
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2Fthumb%2F2%2F2a%2FFlintlock.jpg%2F800px-Flintlock.jpg&hash=8b480ec30d19610bde1d36df778e525d818056a7)
Post by: Gobble on April 17, 2009, 08:58:58 AM
Right but most people think inlines are superior to sidelocks, so in the last few years tons of people have decided to go out and purchase one and switch to muzzleloader hunting. I think people get caught up in all the hype on tv and hunting magazines about the inline muzzleloaders. When I started muzzleloader hunting 25 years ago, very few people were into it. Now it seems everybody wants to switch over, for the longer season and supposedly less people in the woods. So not only have I been contemplating selling my inline and going back to the sidelock, I'm also seriously considering quitting muzzleloader hunting altogether, and hunting rifle season instead, because muzzleloader seasons are no longer providing a less crowded hunting experience.
Exactly why I ended up switching to Bow back in the mid Ninties. Now that I have the Multi season deer tag the Lyman .54 cal. sidelock is going to get the dust knocked off of it. I'm stoked to be able to use it again.
Post by: bobcat on April 17, 2009, 09:14:14 AM
Quote
I agree with most of what bobcat is saying it was just a question if there is not much of an advantage why go back to the sidelock? The powders you can use in your inline are way easier to clean for sure so I would'nt personally go back!
I'm curious about this statement. What are the powders that can be used in an inline that can't be used in a sidelock ??? I've never heard of such a thing. Other than the Savage inline that can use smokeless powder, but they aren't legal in this state.
Post by: CP on April 17, 2009, 09:21:25 AM
Post by: M_ray on April 17, 2009, 09:32:49 AM
QuoteI agree with most of what bobcat is saying it was just a question if there is not much of an advantage why go back to the sidelock? The powders you can use in your inline are way easier to clean for sure so I would'nt personally go back!
I'm curious about this statement. What are the powders that can be used in an inline that can't be used in a sidelock ??? I've never heard of such a thing. Other than the Savage inline that can use smokeless powder, but they aren't legal in this state.
Sorry for that confusion I was reffering mostly to the fact that the old traditional guys won't use the more modern powders once they have a seasoned barrel with the same old powder that they have been using for 20 years ... most have not switched. For sure you can and I know some have but I guess I meant personally if I have the same range with a inline I like the fact that my cap is somewhat protected from falling off in the brush and not on the side of my gun.
Post by: bobcat on April 17, 2009, 09:35:09 AM
Post by: M_ray on April 17, 2009, 09:39:15 AM
I like my sidelock because it doesn't take any tools to take it apart to clean it, like my Black Diamond. I've found the sidelock is much simpler to clean. Only nice thing about the inline is that you can see down the bore and see when it really is clean.
Good point I didn't think about not needing tools I hate having to carry extra tools in my pack in case I have to take it apart and clean out!
Post by: M_ray on April 17, 2009, 09:43:29 AM
Quote
I thought flint lock was ignited by flint. Not by a primer.
Yes Ray you are right, I was under the impression and focused on Bobcats refence to a sidelock that uses a #11 cap and not a Flintlockas you stated! My compareasin would be to a sidlock say similar to this one
http://www.bghi.us/index.php?x=gpr
not a flintlock as in the pic you posted sorry for that.
Post by: MagKarl on April 17, 2009, 10:01:53 AM
Post by: Ray on April 17, 2009, 10:26:44 AM
QuoteI thought flint lock was ignited by flint. Not by a primer.
Yes Ray you are right, I was under the impression and focused on Bobcats refence to a sidelock that uses a #11 cap and not a Flintlockas you stated! My compareasin would be to a sidlock say similar to this one
http://www.bghi.us/index.php?x=gpr
not a flintlock as in the pic you posted sorry for that.
Ok. I don't really know the big differences between the primers. Is the 209 a great advantage over the #11? If so can someone explain to an ignoramus why?
Post by: CP on April 17, 2009, 10:38:29 AM
QuoteI thought flint lock was ignited by flint. Not by a primer.
Yes Ray you are right, I was under the impression and focused on Bobcats refence to a sidelock that uses a #11 cap and not a Flintlockas you stated! My compareasin would be to a sidlock say similar to this one
http://www.bghi.us/index.php?x=gpr
not a flintlock as in the pic you posted sorry for that.
Ok. I don't really know the big differences between the primers. Is the 209 a great advantage over the #11? If so can someone explain to an ignoramus why?
A 209 is hotter and can effectively ignite a larger powder charge (similar to a magnum pistol primer). Without the hotter primer a large load of powder is incompletely burned until it exits the barrel. Cold and damp conditions exacerbate the relative ineffectiveness of percussion and musket caps.
Post by: Ray on April 17, 2009, 10:40:53 AM
Post by: Gobble on April 17, 2009, 10:49:13 AM
Post by: HoofsandWings on April 17, 2009, 09:07:00 PM
not as many as rifle, but muzzleloaders can't hunt all of the units modern riflle hunters can.
they are much more concentrated.
IMO.
Post by: bobcat on April 17, 2009, 09:39:51 PM
Post by: HoofsandWings on April 18, 2009, 05:55:47 PM
I was thinking about it while baking bread. If you are young and crazy you can go way into the tall uncut and get your elk, but once you have it down, what next. I shot an elk a few years back and each quarter took 8 hours to get back to the truck. Now if you are a little smarter than I, you bring a support group. So for every hard core way out in the tall uncut hunter, there is a support group that probably hunts the roads or close to them. Depending on the distance you are traveling into the tall uncut, the more support group members you will need. The brother with a pacemaker is not going to help you pack out but can road hunt and attend to camp.
This fall I am going to be in fairly tall uncut, but I am going to make arrangements with nearby camps to help pack out for a piece of the action. It just is facing the reality of getting older. Having said that I am sure there will be hunters that will still go down into that ravine with vertical walls, find an elk and say to themselves 'now what?'
Post by: TopOfTheFoodChain on April 19, 2009, 01:19:17 PM
Most of us know you certainly don't need a 209 to kill an animal. But if you allow it and some other incremental changes that moves muzzleloader hunting closer to modern hunting then perhaps too many people will want to jump ship, making the woods a little too crowded during black powder seasons. ;)
The woods have been too crowded since inline muzzleloaders came out. It gets worse every year. I personally wish we could outlaw inline's completely. I killed plenty of animals with the old side hammer, patch and ball. Those were the good days....
Just my two bits :)
Post by: callonetta on April 19, 2009, 02:44:29 PM
Human ingenuity is limitless.
Post by: Pat/Rick on May 06, 2009, 11:53:40 PM
Post by: Moose Eyes on May 09, 2009, 08:58:03 PM
Side hammers and original caps or flint.If ya want a primer hunt modern.Outlaw inlines,outlaw compound bows too.
Maybe we should outlaw rifled barrels too. :dunno:
Ray makes some good points. With the current muzzleloader regulations in Washington, how different are legal inlines compared to caplocks? Let's start a list of perceived advantages of legal inlines over caplocks. Feel free to post them so we can look a little closer at the subject.
Post by: Ghost Hunter on May 10, 2009, 06:45:01 AM
Post by: Pat/Rick on May 11, 2009, 10:01:45 PM
Post by: Moose Eyes on May 12, 2009, 08:39:24 PM
I've got a nice smoothbore flinter I can use or a slug gun if I want multiple shots.Lack of rifling wouldn't really bother me at all.
What is it about inlines that makes you think they should be outlawed? Do you think they are inherently more lethal, making them an unfair choice over a more primative weapon? Or do you think the general hunting public thinks they offer an advantage, which has lead to more hunters switching to muzzleloader seasons? Or ???
FYI - not trying to get on your case here. I'm just trying to see what specifically people dislike about inlines. Dialogue is good! :)
Post by: CP on May 12, 2009, 09:01:41 PM
Post by: ratherhunt on May 12, 2009, 10:52:25 PM
Post by: Pat/Rick on May 13, 2009, 02:48:45 PM
Post by: Moose Eyes on May 13, 2009, 08:37:09 PM
Primative should be just that Primative but that coming from someone who shots a Knight Bighorn inline
Just curious how you define "primative"? Is it looks? Lack of certain features? If so, which ones?
Post by: sss5358 on May 14, 2009, 12:04:17 PM
Per WDFW
"The Department polled hunters extensively on these
topics and the result is what you see in the proposed
rules. The majority of hunters did not want to allow a
change in ignition systems."
http://wdfw.wa.gov/wlm/game/seasonsetting/2009-2011_recommendations/comments_232-12-051_muzzleloading_firearms.pdf
Is that true with most here? If so why? not sure what I'm missing (I dont have a muzzleloader yet), but seems like the 209 primer would be the way to go?
The so called poles used by Washington Fish and Wildlife are notoriously skewed. The way they word questions can skew the answer the way they want it to come out. Had a big questionare last year about why people seemed to be getting out of muzzleload hunting. They made a big deal out of it and the results. Found it was because they had raped us 3 years ago and used the reason that we were 3% higher on the Elk take than other weapons. Then they made a big deal about correcting that situation Well, take a look at the regs this year. Do you see any corrections? Perhaps a few minor changes and and added weekend of deer here and there, but deer and elk seasons still lie atop each other and dual bag area's are very infrequent. So go figure.
Post by: Pat/Rick on May 14, 2009, 04:50:33 PM
Post by: sss5358 on May 15, 2009, 07:06:24 AM
Per WDFW
"The Department polled hunters extensively on these
topics and the result is what you see in the proposed
rules. The majority of hunters did not want to allow a
change in ignition systems."
http://wdfw.wa.gov/wlm/game/seasonsetting/2009-2011_recommendations/comments_232-12-051_muzzleloading_firearms.pdf
Is that true with most here? If so why? not sure what I'm missing (I dont have a muzzleloader yet), but seems like the 209 primer would be the way to go?
209 primers. Why? If you are careful and within the present law, you can prevent most if not all misfires. I used regular caps for years. Had one misfire and that was because I hunted in bad weather and did take care of my rifle when I got back for the night. I now use musket caps instead and have not had a misfire in 8 years. So why go to the next whizz bang gadget when what we have works.
Post by: Intruder on May 15, 2009, 07:37:48 AM
The whole basis for all the laws surrounding muzzleloaders should focus on limitting range and obviously repeatable fire. I completely support no scopes and would support other measures to limit effective range(poweder charges maybe???). That being said, improving reliability, and killing ability doesn't bother me at all. At some point I want to insure that the animals are being humanely killed.
I do see the points people are making about making it too easy and thus increasing the # of dudes roaming around with smoke poles.