• This community needs YOUR help today. We rely 100% on Supporting Memberships to fund our efforts. With the ever increasing fees of everything, we need help. We need more Supporting Members, today. Please invest back into this community. I will ship a few decals too in addition to all the account perks you get.



    Sign up here: https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/account/upgrades

Muzzle Loader Quality

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Well, as much as it hurts to say it, in my opinion roundball has it right.

Frankly, Richard, I don't understand your position. You've extrapolated from some complaints to a position that the quality of all, or most, mass produced guns is universally lacking. I think there are a lot more mass produced guns sold to very satisfied customers that you don't hear about. I suppose it's natural that if all you hear is complaints then you'd think that the complaints are the norm.

But my experience is the opposite - a few complaints doesnt' begin to account for all the guns sold.

By the way, I haven't drilled out the touch hole on my GPR. Don't need to.
 
Richard: You make it sound like all of the new center fire guns have no problems.
I beg to differ.

There are some real pieces of manure out there on the market and the buyers are faced with no warranty to fix them.

Also one must realize that many of these modern guns are not shot over 3 or 4 times a year. That's the total number of rounds fired, not trips to the gun range.

While I know that there are thousands of muzzleloaders that are never fired even once, and just spend their time hanging on a wall, many of the members of this forum are the kind of people who fire hundreds, if not thousands of shots every year.
It only follows that some problems will surface with these heavily used guns as it does with any mechanical device if it is used often.

Then there is the "user error" factor.
I would guess that 98 percent of the modern guns are shot using only factory made ammunition.
This ammunition will not over stress the gun that was designed to shoot it.

Muzzleloaders on the other hand are subject to the loads that their owners use and many of these owners use far heavier powder loads than the gun is actually designed for.
I'm not saying the loads are unsafe but I am saying that these heavy loads really stress out parts like the stock, resulting in cracks.

We muzzleloaders are also the sort of people who like to improve things.
There is not much a person can do with a modern center fire rifle beyond changing the sights or mounting a scope on it.
These guns are very specialized and even changing the triggers is not possible on most of them.

With a muzzleloader on the other hand, sights are fairly easy to change, factory made barrels are fairly easy to install, new lock replacements take a little work but nothing that someone can't do with a little effort.
Changing nipples to custom designs and materials, drilling out touch holes, totally replacing flintlock vents, polishing the sear nose and tumbler notches, readjusting set triggers, replacing set triggers, replacing ramrods...
The list of what can be done by a muzzleloader to his gun is limited only by the owners imagination, money and skills.

I think that this is the reason you have arrived at the opinion that modern muzzleloading rifles and pistols are not up to the quality of modern guns.

Of course, I could be wrong. :hmm:
 
Having starting out in muzzleloaders with T/C percusion hawkens in the last 10 years have only had 1 problem. That was the old style ball on the end of the coil spring break off. In the 10 years I have been shooting at the same club I have seen the same problem 1 other time. after that it seems the all of the other problems have been use error or lack of good cleaning technecs. Thats with T/C with pedersoli the only 2 problems that I know of are broken main spring on a flint lock musket (charlivoy) ( no I cant spell) and a frizen that needed to be rehardened. So all in all not bad for the production guns in 10 years.

If you go to the semi- custom and custom side of the coin I have only seen 1 fail and that was the main spring of the lock broke in half after at least 10-15 years of use and I think that was a davis lock.

For the money I think you would be best served by any of the choices you have out there now. 20 years ago that might not have beed the case with the production guns but now I think you should get what you can afford or inspire to get in the future.
 
Richard Eames said:
It seems production guns are lacking, how come?

You get what you pay for? (see CowboyCS's post to me above)

Richard Eames said:
If they are lacking, how come people are still recommending them here?

Because people want [strike]cheap[/strike] inexpensive guns, so you recommend a good inexpensive gun.
 
There's another twist that I haven't seen surface here yet. Many times I've heard somebody say that "Joe Schmo went & bought him one of them new ML zip guns for 200 & the thing shoots good" So lets back up in time & have every state ML season mean that you would have to use a flinter with a round ball. By this point in time you'd be able to drop by Cabelas & pick up a flinter that run like swiss watch for the same few hundred bucks. The manufactures are simply feeding the market where the most money is at. If the lucrative market was what we view as traditional they would be focusing on it as upposed to the ML zip gun market.
 
Mark Lewis said:
Most problems are operator error.
Examining these rifles, it's hard to believe anything ever goes wrong with them. Such a simple design, all of them that I've seen. I tend to agree w/ Mark's comment, it certainly applies to me. I've not had any trouble w/ the TCs and the only problem I've had with any rifle can be traced back to an alteration made by it's previous owner along with my own ignorance. That rifle, by the way, is a very nicely built custom.
 
myshootinstinks said:
"...alteration made by...previous owners..."

I think that happens a lot...we just recently had someone right here on the MLF convince a newcomer he needed to "harden the frizzen" on his T/C lock. Definitely the first time I've ever heard of anyone having to harden a modern T/C frizzen on the over half million T/C locks out there...voiding the lock warranty in the process of course.

Posting a question to the general MLF where the overall trend of multiple answers becomes apparent and the correct solution gets identified is the real way to go...the strength of the collective actual hands on experience from multiple members beats individual theory and speculation every time.
 
MSW said:
Mike makes a good point ... one of the fellows at the mill where i worked asked me what it would cost if i were to make him a flintlock, and when i told him he was shocked. his take on it was that since you could buy an El-Cheap-O brank 12 guage pump at WalMart, why does it cost three time that for just the parts of a flintlock rifle?

Absent a lengthy discussion of economies of scale, i told him that if i could get the parts for less, i'd be up to my neck in gunbuilding and happier than a pig in swill, but i couldn't dictate what the retail price of much of anything was, and i couldn't give away parts just to compete with a whole different system. I even offered to lend him a ML for the primitive season, but i think he got one of those zipgun inline thingies ... too bad.

make good smoke!

To expand somewhat...
The difference between a sidelock type 18th-19th century gun, one made traditionally with flat springs etc etc. And a modern made firearm is that the modern made firearm is designed to have all the parts machine made and then assembled by anyone off the street (or from the union hall) that can be trained in a short time and then the gun is done. The run of the mill modern rifle can be assembled and then function checked and its done. It needs no "tuning" in most cases. If it does its done by someone with the skills to do this. The stock is invariably full shaped or nearly so and only needs sanding.
Prior to about 1850 this was not the case. The firearms, even after "interchangeable parts", still required someone with long training (as opposed to 5-15 minutes spent telling the new employee "put this part in this slot") to make them work.
The side hammer Sharps is a case in point. If made to the original pattern there is "tuning" done on every one made.
Now if you design a sidelock ML with coil springs a lot of this goes away. If you make a Sharps as Sile did, with a coil lever spring, some tuning goes away and "put this part there" will work. If you simply screw in breeches torquing them till they are "timed" with the top flat rather than fitting them you can cut costs.
If you actually pull the breech (if its not too tight to move) from most factory made MLs you will find what I would call "no workmanship" installation. But they can't afford to spend 1-2 or more hours fitting a breech right.
The locks on many of the factory made flintguns look like they were designed to look like a "Picasso" flintlock by some one who only knew it had to have certain parts but had little idea of how they were really supposed to work.

But this is not really new.
Here is a "Connestoga Rifle Works" rifle, apparently unfired, from 1840.
Lock1.jpg

Its made to sell cheap.

The lock below was made by a friend of mine back about 1975-1980. Mostly shop made. Its a much better lock.
Hawkentangsight2LR.jpg



These are better still being circa 1800 high quality English locks on a Manton.
P1010957.jpg

These rank with the best flintlocks ever made. Very fast (by actual electronic testing), reliable and easy on flints.
So sloppily made firearms are not new. The Connestoga (low end Leman) rifle was pretty sloppily assembled and the lock was very poorly designed. Like many modern design factory locks the parts are all there but the shape and location are a little "off". I would not trust it.
I did not have the level of access that would allow pulling the breech so I have no idea how this was done.
No matter what anyone says it is impossible to make a "good" ML rifle (by *MY* standards) for 500-600 bucks. The stock shaping is 20th century factory, in other words poor for a "traditional" ML, the stock design is 20th century "model 70"). The inletting is 20th century "state of the art" (as opposed to 1860 when machine inletting was MUCH, MUCH better, the breeching virtually always has fouling traps.
THEY CANNOT AFFORD TO MAKE THEM "RIGHT" and sell them for (239 or 349 or 425 and now 5-600+) and put any actual work into them.
So "good" and "quality" are RELATIVE terms.
"Good" to someone who considers ALL parts of the firearm. The lines, the inletting, the internal fit and finish, the angles of the cock and frizzen, the speed of the FORGED leaf springs etc etc. Is different than the average consumer who wants a entry level, mass produced
MSW said:
Mike makes a good point ... one of the fellows at the mill where i worked asked me what it would cost if i were to make him a flintlock, and when i told him he was shocked. his take on it was that since you could buy an El-Cheap-O brank 12 guage pump at WalMart, why does it cost three time that for just the parts of a flintlock rifle?

Absent a lengthy discussion of economies of scale, i told him that if i could get the parts for less, i'd be up to my neck in gunbuilding and happier than a pig in swill, but i couldn't dictate what the retail price of much of anything was, and i couldn't give away parts just to compete with a whole different system. I even offered to lend him a ML for the primitive season, but i think he got one of those zipgun inline thingies ... too bad.

make good smoke!

To expand somewhat...
The difference between a sidelock type 18th-19th century gun, one made traditionally with flat springs etc etc. And a modern made firearm is that the modern made firearm is designed to have all the parts machine made and then assembled by anyone off the street (or from the union hall) that can be trained in a short time and then the gun is done. The run of the mill modern rifle can be assembled and then function checked and its done. It needs no "tuning" in most cases. If it does its done by someone with the skills to do this. The stock is invariably full shaped or nearly so and only needs sanding.
Prior to about 1850 this was not the case. The firearms, even after "interchangeable parts", still required someone with long training (as opposed to 5-15 minutes spent telling the new employee "put this part in this slot") to make them work.
The side hammer Sharps is a case in point. If made to the original pattern there is "tuning" done on every one made.
Now if you design a sidelock ML with coil springs a lot of this goes away. If you make a Sharps as Sile did, with a coil lever spring, some tuning goes away and "put this part there" will work. If you simply screw in breeches torquing them till they are "timed" with the top flat rather than fitting them you can cut costs.
If you actually pull the breech (if its not too tight to move) from most factory made MLs you will find what I would call "no workmanship" installation. But they can't afford to spend 1-2 or more hours fitting a breech right.
The locks on many of the factory made flintguns look like they were designed to look like a "Picasso" flintlock by some one who only knew it had to have certain parts but had little idea of how they were really supposed to work.

But this is not really new.
Here is a "Connestoga Rifle Works" rifle, apparently unfired, from 1840.
Lock1.jpg

Its made to sell cheap.

The lock below was made by a friend of mine back about 1975-1980. Mostly shop made. Its a much better lock.
Hawkentangsight2LR.jpg



These are better still being circa 1800 high quality English locks on a Manton.
P1010957.jpg

These rank with the best flintlocks ever made. Very fast (by actual electronic testing), reliable and easy on flints.
So sloppily made firearms are not new. The Connestoga (low end Leman) rifle was pretty sloppily assembled and the lock was very poorly designed. Like many modern design factory locks the parts are all there but the shape and location are a little "off". I would not trust it.
I did not have the level of access that would allow pulling the breech so I have no idea how this was done.
No matter what anyone says it is impossible to make a "good" ML rifle (by *MY* standards) for 500-600 bucks. The stock shaping is 20th century factory, in other words poor for a "traditional" ML, the stock design is 20th century "model 70". The inletting is 20th century "state of the art" (as opposed to 1860 when machine inletting was MUCH, MUCH better) the breeching virtually always has fouling traps.
THEY CANNOT AFFORD TO MAKE THEM "RIGHT" and sell them for (239 or 349 or 425 and now 5-600+).
So "good" and "quality" are RELATIVE terms.
"Good" to someone who considers ALL parts of the firearm. The lines/shaping, the inletting, the internal/external fit and finish, the angles of the cock and frizzen, the speed of the leaf springs etc etc. Is different than the average consumer who wants a entry level, mass produced ML to shoot.

This is NOT intended as an insult to ANYONE.

I am attempting to explain why Mr Brooks and others have a different view of factory mades than others here. My only factory made ML was a Belgium made DGW Squirrel Rifle in 40 caliber. I hunted with and shot it a lot. It was similar to the Connestoga rifle, a little better perhaps and a caplock. But I had a 32 caliber custom that was my first rifle circa 1966. It ranked as a decent custom by the standards of the day. The DGW, once the bore was shot smooth in about 50 shots, shot VERY well. But it did convert me to flintlock when a nipple blew out. I have shot flint almost exclusively since about 1969.
So reader YOUR OPINION will likely differ from mine. My perspective on ML guns is far different. I have had drums break off at firing, I have had a nipple blow out. I have had vent liners leak around the threads. I have had a vine catch a cock on a fairly good quality flintlock pull the cock to near full cock and then drop it firing the rifle before I could stop walking. POORLY TUNED LOCK. Was standing about 10 feet behind a guy (he was at the firing line) when his TC or copy (copy IIRC) went off while he had it butt on the ground. The cheap lock either fell out of 1/2 cock or did not properly enter 1/2 cock. I was amazed it did not put a hole in his hat brim.
So when I say certain things it is not something I dreamed up the night before.
I have made mistakes in my ignorance, I have had them thrust on me again due to my ignorance/innocence not allowing me to know what I was looking at. But I learned from these mistakes and took corrective action.
I don't make drum and nipple guns, I make darned sure nipples fit right. I only use flys if really needed and they ARE properly shaped. I fit any threaded part exposed to powder gases carefully to seal the threads if at all possible. I eliminate any fouling/solvent/oil traps. I don't cut deep dovetails. There are a HOST of things that the factory does "wham-bam thank you mam" that the custom builder takes a lot more time with or does differently because it makes a BETTER, more DURABLE and SAFER firearm in the long term.
Most custom makers make the gun to a quality standard not a standard of how much the gun must retail for and THIS is really the bottom line of this discussion. Custom makers do not make firearms based on some bean counters estimation of how much it *must* cost at retail to get buyers at Wal Mart to write a check.
Sorry this is long but I am trying to give some background for statements made by myself and some others that get people up in arms.
I get a little bent when people make statements to the effect that a factory made is as good as a custom when I spend more time just breeching a barrel and putting in a vent than it takes to assemble the whole factory made.
The factory mades fill a need. I consider them "entry level" MLs. They are a place to start. They have brought a lot of people into the sport.
They have done all these things.
I am sure this is going to ruffle someone's feathers. It is not intended to do so.
It is a simple explanation of why people who custom make firearms sometimes respond in the way they do.
I made some comments recently about collecting TCs. It makes no sense to *ME*. But thats *ME*. I have a right to my opinion and it should be accepted as such. In many cases its a "your mileage may vary" thing. Its America, you wanna collect TCs go for it.
Comparing a mass produced ML to a custom is apples and oranges. The only common ground in many cases is that they load from the muzzle.

Regards

Dan
 
Carl Davis said:
Richard Eames said:
For the guy who wants a sports car, me might consider the Mazda Miata a good car, 4 cylinder and fabric seats. Another might consider the Nissan 370Z a good car, over 300 HP and leather seats. Then, there is the guy who considers the Ferrari as a minimum for a good car, over 200 MPH.
They all go down the road, some with a bit more style.

Doesn't this sum it up for "custom" muzzleloaders too? When you buy a custom gun, aren't you paying extra for the maker to put together the parts, that anyone can buy? So, really, the quality of the parts themselves is the same in a custom, it's just the "workmanship", or non-functional aspects of the gun that you are paying extra for.

So the quality of "function" may be no better, but the "artwork" aspect is better. Anyone can put the parts together, but the professional gun maker can put them together "better". Isn't that it? Unless, of course, the maker is forging all the metal parts himself, then that would be another aspect of quality, but I assume most custom makers are buying the parts ready made.

I tend to discard and remake parts that are not what I want. Percussion lock plates. Of the last percussion guns I have made, 4 I think, I have made lock plates for all of them. I have 3 "discarded" percussion plates out in a drawer right now.
I tend to make springs and other internal lock parts if I don't like the way they work or if the quality it not what I need/expect. Or if I don't like the dimensions.
Cast mainsprings are my main "gripe" and what I most often replace.
I can make better parts than I can buy in most cases but generally choose not too *depending on the project*.
I make all patchboxes and silver or brass inlays inlays. Most all stuff made from sheet silver, brass, steel I make. It depends a lot on the project.
Remember the makers in Colonial America often bought most of the parts. Locks (usually imported) and barrels. The TG and buttplate castings were available and in some cases apparently fully finished and engraved it would seem. But this also depends on location etc etc.

Dan
 
Dan Phariss said:
"...I get a little bent when people make statements to the effect that a factory made is as good as a custom..."
Dan, I doubt anyone disagrees with most of the points in your post as those are pretty basic attributes of modern assembly line mass production vs. a one-at-a-time built/assembled/fitted/adjusted product.

But I also don't see where the post's author...or any post contributor...even hinted at such a thing as your quoted statement above :confused:
 
roundball said:
Dan Phariss said:
"...I get a little bent when people make statements to the effect that a factory made is as good as a custom..."
Dan, I doubt anyone disagrees with most of the points in your post as those are pretty basic attributes of modern assembly line mass production vs. a one-at-a-time built/assembled/fitted/adjusted product.

But I also don't see where the post's author...or any post contributor...even hinted at such a thing as your quoted statement above :confused:

You are doing it right now in a certain fashion.
Agreeing with me then nit picking.
How about the "the only difference is in the care in assembly there is no difference in function" (paraphrased) basically saying the custom gun only looks better. True the author probably does not know any better but its still not true in the vast majority of cases and it is a slight at the custom makers for reasons already enumerated.
Most here don't understand "fouling traps" or lack there of and how it effects the gun short and long term, why drum and nipples are a poor idea, lock tuning or much of anything else that goes into making a good gun, a good gun.

Dan
 
roundball, i guess you are talking about me.

paul has helped me and how can you hate that because he does things different than you.

his idea with LEAD stops the chatter marks on frizzen and now i get shower of white hot sparks with kasenit.

is that bad thing, i dont think so.

will gun go off with your red sparks with fuller flint and leather, yes.

been going off for 38 years for me .

but i feel pauls ideas are improvement on frizzen as well as your idea on the fuller flints ,3f powder and your knowledge of t/c hawkins parts /repair.

when i am hunting at 10 below, wind blowing or raining , i want most sparks and hottest sparks i can get from that frizzen.

any way to get that ,i feel is IMPROVEMENT even tho it may go off with a couple of red sparks by chance hitting pan .

but i FEEL better with shower of white hot sparks and no chatter marks while hunting.

confidence, as you know is a big plus while hunting and something you dont have to worry about.

learning all time,SPROULMAN :v
 
As a relatively new ML shooter, I've gleaned a lot of info from the seasoned builders / shooters on this site. :hatsoff:
I can see obvious difference in a TC / Lyman, etc compared to a custom, even from a distance. I appreciate the look, feel, and function of a fine custom rifle whether it be MLer or centerfire.
It is quite natural for us to seek improvement in design and workmanship but I've learned to limit the amount of money I put into guns or other hobbies, not because I can't afford it, but because I'm no longer able to justify the expense in my mind. I've been down that road with other types of shooting over the past 30 years and have found it to be an issue of diminishing return. The next statement is not directed toward any individual but is an observation from several decades of shooting, hunting, fly fishing, and applies to just about any hobby or interest. There are always those that will become obsessed with perfection in their hobbies and there is practically no limit to the effort and expense they will put forth to achieve perfection. I'm not being critical of anyone, that's okay for them if that's what trips their trigger. This type of thinking is why we have available to us the highest levels of quality and performance in everything from rifles to sports cars.
While in the future I may build a rifle or two from quality kits, I could not justify paying $3000+ for a rifle,...it just ain't me. In my limited and humble experience, I have yet to have a failure in any way with a factory rifle. When I examine these rifles, speaking of the TC percussion as it's currently the only factory rifle I have, they are so simple that aside from user error, I don't see what could go wrong.
This may be ML rookie statement but I'll have to experience otherwise to be convinced.
 
getting off a little but same point looked at another way.

i have 39 guns.

lets talk shotguns.

cheaper mossbergs will kill grouse.

the parts are not real good but work and hard to get..

guns are heavy.

they dont balance real good but will kill grouse.

now, lets move up to berettas uricka field.

it weights 7 lbs but because of QUALITY ,it feels like 5 pds.

it balances better which means more grouse shot/skeet.

it functions real smooth and will handle 10,000 rds easy,mossberg will not.

it cost about 400 more than the mossberg.

which gun will most buy?MOSSBERG

even tho the beretta is MUCH better and VALUE will go up 400 dollars in 4 years easy on beretta.

most feel MOSSBERG kills grouse.

me, i would buy the BERETTA in heartbeat.

ps, those same people buy a 35,000 dollar chevy truck and after 5 years its worth 14,000.

hard to figure how we all think but we do think different on guns etc.
 
Dan Phariss said:
roundball said:
Dan Phariss said:
"...I get a little bent when people make statements to the effect that a factory made is as good as a custom..."
Dan, I doubt anyone disagrees with most of the points in your post as those are pretty basic attributes of modern assembly line mass production vs. a one-at-a-time built/assembled/fitted/adjusted product.

But I also don't see where the post's author...or any post contributor...even hinted at such a thing as your quoted statement above :confused:

You are doing it right now in a certain fashion.
Agreeing with me then nit picking.

No, actually I am not...I addressed a single allegation of yours that no one on this thread has made and I repeat, or "even hinted at"...
 
sproulman said:
getting off a little but same point looked at another way.

i have 39 guns.

lets talk shotguns.

cheaper mossbergs will kill grouse.

the parts are not real good but work and hard to get..

guns are heavy.

they dont balance real good but will kill grouse.

now, lets move up to berettas uricka field.

it weights 7 lbs but because of QUALITY ,it feels like 5 pds.

it balances better which means more grouse shot/skeet.

it functions real smooth and will handle 10,000 rds easy,mossberg will not.

it cost about 400 more than the mossberg.

which gun will most buy?MOSSBERG

even tho the beretta is MUCH better and VALUE will go up 400 dollars in 4 years easy on beretta.

most feel MOSSBERG kills grouse.

me, i would buy the BERETTA in heartbeat.

ps, those same people buy a 35,000 dollar chevy truck and after 5 years its worth 14,000.

hard to figure how we all think but we do think different on guns etc.

I'm sorry, but - THREE WORD PARAGRAPHS? Why one-sentence paragraphs?

God, I hope you don't talk like you write. :haha:
 
sproulman said:
roundball, i guess you are talking about me.
To be precise I actually wasn't talking about you...you are not the point. The technical issues are the point.

Way back when all this started you said you were not having any ignition problems...that you just happened to notice some chatter marks on the frizzen.
Yet you let someone talk you into taking the unnecessary step of using a lead flint wrap which the half century old T/C Arms company never saw a need to use...or has any other Flintlock manfacturer that I'm aware of.

YOUR OPERATIVE STATEMENT:
YOU SAID YOU WERE NOT HAVING IGNITION PROBLEMS

Now you've further taken the unnecessary step of having a T/C Frizzen rehardened.
And when you keep making statements like "I have more sparks" it misses the point completely:
You didn't NEED more sparks because you weren't having ignition problems...T/C Frizzens don't NEED to be rehardened...and voiding their waranty in the process.

ANALOGY
I can douse the flame of a lighted match with one drop of water from an eye dropper.
Or I can douse that flame by pouring a gallon of water on it.
A gallon of water is not NEEDED to douse the flame.

It's unfortunate that you're being led into doing unconventional things and what's worse, being led to believe that they are necessary. At least promise us this...if the next suggestion is for you to make another unconventional modification which involves installing one of those zippo lighter attachments on your T/C lock, PLEASE stand your ground and refuse to do that one.
:v
 
"PLEASE stand your ground and refuse to do that one.'

Not much chance of that, when those two Gurus of MLing out there make a statement, it be a fact, (knee boots optional but recommended)
 
Bakeoven Bill said:
Don't really think there is a difference between modern guns, muzzleloaders or even &(*&-lines. Go over to another board (especially one that's a competitive shooting sport like SASS) and you'll hear the same complaint. I paid $XXX bucks for my new revolver, how come the damn thing needs extra gunsmithing to make it work right? Competitive shooting puts more stress on the gun in one week than most people put their guns thru in a lifetime.

Its probably a price point issue. You can make a bullet proof gun, but at what cost and will people shell out discretionary income on it? Priced a Kreighoff lately?

That is a point well taken, to sight in a rifle, work up a load, and shoot a match with it every month a ML rifle gets fired more in one year than a modern deer rifle will in the lifetime of the owner.
 
Back
Top