Posted on 03/21/2018 9:23:23 AM PDT by w1n1
That is the problem, and these are a smokeless powder muzzle loader. It has generally been established that most were blown up in the following manner. They were hunting, had it loaded, forgot whether it was loaded or not, so poured another charge and seated a bullet, not following the normal muzzle loader policy of having a mark on the ramrod that lets you know if it’s loaded or not. Double charge of smokeless along with a pair of 250 sabots makes a nice mess of a rifle!
.. Then driving them into liberal areas under the cover of night and letting them all go.
I’m all for killing coyotes, but that’s just mean.
—
I agree. I wouldn’t want the coyotes to get sick eating liberals.
These were designed as a high performance smokeless powder muzzle loading rifle.
As an example of extreme firearms ignorance, here is a good one. When I was in college at MU, the KA fraternity (which was a southern based sons of Lee) had a cannon in the front yard, which got fired off occasionally when they were intoxicated sufficiently. Their brothers at UMR (an engineering school no less) couldn’t find black powder, so charged theirs with two pounds of Red Dot (fast burning shotgun powder) They only killed two or three people when it exploded.
Very, very SICK individuals—I’m sure all from the caring left.
You do know they care for all sorts? Homeless, illegal immigrants, dogs, cats, trees, climate change, diverse people...Just not unborn children, people who work for a living, conservatives,cars, coal, American born citizens,.. You get the picture.
God’s speed to that guy. What a mess, regardless of cause!
AFAIK, every rifle is "right handed". Left handed people make do with the world as it exists. This was almost certainly a left handed shooter.
I have been smacked in the face with brass ejecting from semi-automatic rifles thousands of times. When I was in the army, the M-203 grenade launcher sights were mounted on the left side of the M-16. This forced me to shoot the M-203 right-handed. I always thought the M-203 kicked unbelievably hard. It occurred to me many years later that this was because I wasn't holding it properly due to my lack of ambidexterity when shooting.
Thanks. Learned something today.
No. Just ban go-cart steering wheels in real cars.
Looks like a synthetic stock to me.
Damn! I’ve never done something THAT stupid!.......................yet.......................
https://www.remington.com/rifles/muzzle-loading/model-700-ultimate/model-700-ultimate-muzzleloader
Most likely cause of the Kaboom is either a double charge of powder, the projectile wasn't fully seated, or during the course of the hunt the rifle was bumped around a bit, letting the projectile to move forward in the barrel.
A projectile not firmly seated against the powder charge makes the rifle a pipe bomb.
Yes, I just ‘blew up the pic’ and it certainly is.....................
Or a variety of Elmer Fudd shots.
There are left handed rifles I believe, but yes not uncommon to use a right handed rifle. Still the article was a little odd.
Sick puppies. The internet brings out all the crazies.
The coyotes would just eat dogs and cats. They know better than to eat poisonous leftoids.
*****SAFETY WARNING*****
Please don’t load smokeless powder (nitro propellant) into any muzzle-loading arm. Firing it would be a huge safety risk.
As many posters noted, there are “modern” muzzle-loaders. Several major gunmakers have introduced them, including Remington, Savage, and Ruger. These companies based their muzzle-loaders on their bolt-action cartridge rifles chambered for modern ammunition, but they are not made as strong as cartridge guns. Heat treatment and tempering of barrels, breech plugs, bolts, receivers, and other key parts is different.
Other companies make modern muzzle-loaders: Knight, CVA, Thompson/Center, Traditions are some. Stick to real black powder or replica powders like Pyrodex, Triple Se7en (both made by Hodgdon) and Blackhorn 209.
Black powder and nitro propellant are very different: black powder is chiefly potassium nitrate, with charcoal and sulfur added. Smokeless powder is mostly nitrocellulose; sometimes nitroglycerin is added, and nitroguanidine (the last material has been used as a flash suppressant in artillery ammunition and is rarely found in cartridges for small arms).
Nitro propellants contain far more heat energy per pound, and thus generate much higher peak pressures on firing than does black powder. Replica propellants - sometimes called “black powder substitutes” - are formulated differently from either, but are engineered specifically to generate pressures comparable to real black powder.
The pressure curve (pressure increase versus time) of nitro propellants is also different from real black powder. No cartridge gun made before the invention of smokeless powder (1880s) should be fired with cartridges loaded with anything except real black powder or replica propellants. Each gunmaker followed their own timetable in developing and introducing metals capable of handling the higher peak pressures and differing pressure curves of smokeless powder; go carefully. Old guns can harbor hidden corrosion and other flaws that render them unsafe.
The same warnings apply to modern-made cap-and-ball revolvers. Cartridge conversions are now available for many models, but the firing of cartridges loaded with nitro propellants should be avoided. Many shooters assume “cowboy action” loads will be completely safe; go very cautiously. Heed gunmaker warnings & cautions.
Modern gunmakers apply different heat-treatments and tempering to muzzle-loading guns because they want to save money. Different - more costly - alloys and treatments are needed to handle smokeless powder. And applying them takes more time, which means more money.
Manufacturing processes typically cannot be reversed nor re-done: a part in need of heating-treating or specialized surface modification (carburizing or “case hardening” is one) is first fashioned to final shape, then the treatment is accomplished, then final finish as required.
The practical import of this is that no “modern” muzzle-loader can be reworked to make it stronger, to withstand smokeless powder. Alloys won’t take it.
As many other posters noted, determining just what happened to the rifle in the original article will be problematic. Such mishaps usually occur in the field, far from any laboratory or firing range. Much evidence disappears when the arm fails. Figuring out the real sequence of events demands subtle forensic work; sometimes, causes remain unknown. Many theories exist as to why a gun occasionally blows, but remain theories.
(Been reloading for almost 49 years - mostly modern metallic cartridge, some shotgun, and many muzzle-loaders, including flintlocks. Also spent over a dozen years in gun repair ... the chief objective is to keep all of you safe. Blowups aren’t good PR.)
Everybody shoot safe.
“... why would a muzzle-loader have a bolt? ...” [dsc, post 24]
The photo shows a Savage in-line muzzle-loader (bolt details are the key to ID ... Remington is similar).
In-line muzzle-loaders appeared in the 1980s, to allow hunters to take advantage of dedicated muzzle-loader seasons. Chiefest advantage: they can mount a scope.
Some states schedule a “primitive arms” hunting season, during which muzzle-loaders and archery can be used. Some muzzle-loaders, that is: in certain locales, “primitive” means a muzzle-loader of traditional pattern (usually side-lock, external hammer) - modern muzzle-loaders are not allowed. Pennsylvania used to specify flintlock-only, and may still. Optical sighting devices usually aren’t allowed either.
Modern, in-line muzzle-loading designs typically display greater ignition reliability, and are easier to clean. They often handle a wider selection of projectiles, including sleeved (saboted) and jacketed bullets. Longer range and better terminal effectiveness than a traditional round ball.
Regulatory burdens on any muzzle-loader (even the in-line modern types) are lighter than for modern cartridge guns. Some anti-gun groups have announced their displeasure over this situation, and periodically call for BATFE rule changes to require tighter control.
Wait, so they now market true Muzzleloaders designed to take smokeless rifle powders? Bad idea, I believe.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.