Dangerous Muzzleloaders

BrotherRockeye

CGN Ultra frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
286   0   1
Did a review search after seeing an EE add...
Though a bit dated, a worthy read.


Dangerous Muzzleloaders

By Randy Wakeman

In my opinion, far too many people have had their lives destroyed by reportedly using cheap imported muzzleloaders as directed by manufacturer's printed instructions. There are no muzzleloading standards and there is no governing body on the American muzzleloading scene to effect any semblance of quality control or reasonable safety testing.

According to one attorney, his client is an ex-marine who has been trained for about 13 years on how to clean, load and fire a muzzle loading rifle. The accident occurred three days after he received the rifle as a gift from his daughter. It was a new Traditions .50 caliber inline. The attorney believes he was using the gun as directed by the manufacturer on the date of the accident. The man has lost his right hand as a result of the explosion.

Another attorney's report details how a man purchased a new CVA .50 caliber inline, a package of .50 caliber / 50 grain Hodgdon brand Triple Seven propellant pellets, a package of Winchester brand W209 Primers and a CVA brand .50 caliber Complete Muzzleloading Accessory Outfit at a chain store, according to the receipt. A short while later, one primer was fired per the instructions and then, to sight in the muzzleloader, loaded 3 of the 50 grain pellets, a .50 caliber "PowerBelt" 295 grain hollow point bullet with plastic "sabot" snap-on base and a W209 primer.

He fired the muzzleloader and the barrel exploded. His wife was present at the scene of the accident. She transported him to the hospital ER. This man was in the emergency room within about two hours of his new purchase. Two surgeries have already been performed in an attempt to repair the damage to his hand as a result of the explosion. More are indicated.

In another incident, a different man, with approximately 20-25 years of experience hunting with muzzleloaders / black powder guns, was target shooting on a Saturday with a friend, using his CVA inline. The hospital reports that after being stabilized x-rays were taken which revealed a "large metallic FB with spring located at the angle of the mandible."

In yet another CVA incident, a man with ten years of muzzleloading under his belt was sighting in a new scope on his CVA inline. His brother and nephew were present. After a catastrophic failure, his injuries reportedly consisted of a torn right nostril from the base of the nostril to just below the right eye socket. It took 40-45 stitches to close this wound. His nose and his right cheek bone were broken.

A concerned consumer recently wrote to Mark Hendricks, Technical Manager, Connecticut Valley Arms (CVA), 5988 Peachtree Corners East Norcross, GA 30071. The letter describes how a design defect nearly caused the death of this man's son-in-law. It reads, in part:

"My opinion as a graduate engineer is that CVA has a critical design defect, which should be corrected immediately, and should require a product recall. In addition to this problem, we discussed the rationale for specifying barrel strength, and I asked you what the strength of CVA muzzleloader barrels was. You would only tell me that the "minimum specification" was 700 kp/cm2. In other words, you would not tell me at what load pressure the barrel would burst. Is this the same attitude that I heard your customer service technician express when he said that the problem I reported had never occurred, therefore it was not possible?"

Jim Bruno, VP of Traditions Firearms, e-mailed me a while back, stating in part:

"Randy, Do you think that we would make a firearm that would not support charges that we advertise and market to the public of the United States of America? I know that you are evaluating and comparing muzzleloaders of different companies in the black powder industry and have done a pretty thorough job, but understand that every time you write or speak any negative comments about our industry you provide ammunition for the people who do not believe that the 2nd amendment exists."

Well, Jim, I'll answer you here and now. First of all, you are apparently unaware of what you are selling. You manufacture no muzzleloaders; you merely import them from a company in Spain. You have no known testing facilities of your own. You have been unable to show that your imported frontloaders are tested with the charges you recommend--charges that are not recommended by powder manufacturers.

It is a "red herring" argument to attempt to turn your lack of knowledge about your own product into a 2nd Amendment issue. The 2nd Amendment is not an entitlement for you to foist substandard product, built to unknown or non-existent standards, on the American consumer.

Terry L. Eby, BPI National Sales Manager / Retail, e-mails in part:

"Randy: I don't consider my language careless and I absolutely stand by my opinion that your position has no basis in fact--but much in conjecture and assumption. If your implication that we would knowingly put our customers at risk is not defamatory, I don't know what is."

Unfortuantely, Terry, the "basis in fact" will be presented to you in court, as your injured consumers have no other recourse. Your company, "BPI," is Spanish owned and operated. The brands you peddle, CVA, Beartooth and Winchester Muzzleloading still come from the same factory that the defective CVA Apollo came from, with the same steel, don't they?

This is the CVA Apollo gun that had so many personal injury claims filed against it, is that not true? I have seen nothing to indicate that your sub-standard proofs and poor quality control is any better now than it was then.

If you don't believe the printed results from Lyman Ballistic Laboratories showing 25,000 PSI peak pressures in three pellet loads that you recommend in your manuals for use in your guns that bear a 10,000 PSI area House of Eibar definitive proof mark, you are welcome to take it up with them.

Hodgdon Powder Co. recommends that only two 50 grain equivalent Pyrodex or Triple Seven pellets MAXIMUM be used in .50 caliber inlines. You recommend three. By whose authority is this done? (NEVER exceed a powder manufacturers maximum recommended charge and always approach maximum loads with caution. -Editor.)

The pity of all this is that proven safe, quality muzzleloaders have never been more plentiful, or more affordable. Knight Rifles, NEF/H&R and Thompson/Center Arms offer or have offered exemplary inline muzzleloading rifles that you won't be betting your life on. The Savage 10ML-II is the best built frontloader of them all, using the Savage magnum centerfire barrel as a starting point.

I've heard and seen enough of this nonsense to last me several lifetimes. Cheap, extruded barreled rifles should give anyone pause. This isn't just my opinion: you won't find muzzleloading legends like Doc White, Henry Ball, or Del Ramsey dissenting. It is my considered opinion that muzzleloading rifles proofed to only 10,000 PSI are not fit to be used.

There is a body of evidence that shows the CVA branded guns recalled in 1997 can be dangerous with factory recommended loads. Firearms use, in general, is a very safe sport, with firearms related injuries falling year after year. In fact, a new report from the National Safety Council shows that accidental firearm related fatalities remained at record lows in 2004. Statistics in the council’s “Injury Facts 2005-2006” show a 48 percent decrease over a 10-year period ending in 2004 (the latest year for which data is available at the time of this writing). There are, fortunately rare, exceptions. CVA's recalled guns, deficient in design, materials and quality control (in my opinion) gave the great sport of muzzleloading a bad name.


CVA VOLUNTARY RECALL NOTICE:

In August 1997 CVA implemented a Voluntary Recall of In-Line rifle models with serial numbers ending in -95 and -96. If you have a CVA In-Line model with such a serial number, DO NOT USE OR ALLOW ANYONE ELSE TO USE THE GUN. If you have one of these rifles, please call CVA immediately at 770-449-4687 for complete details and a free replacement gun. Example serial numbers: 61-13-######-95 or 61-13-######-96.

In May 1999 Blackpowder Products, Inc. purchased the assets of Connecticut Valley Arms, Inc. and now operates under the trade name of Connecticut Valley Arms and/or CVA. Any claims relating to the above described Voluntary Recall should be addressed to Connecticut Valley Arms, Inc., not Blackpowder Products, Inc. Blackpowder Products, Inc. assumes no liability for any products manufactured prior to January 1, 1998.
 
It would be interesting to know why these firearms failed.

I believe I bought one lol..I have not and will not ever fire it.

But from a quick google search I believe they may be just a touch hot

The BUCKHORN 209 Magnum is an ultra-modern conventional in-line, and the heart of this high-tech smoke-pole is the precision rifled 24” barrel with a 1:28” twist. It’s powered by an extremely hot 209 ignition system and will handle 150 grain magnum charges with ease. And in statewhere 209 primers are not allowed, the Buck-horn can be easily converted to a #11 or musket cap ignition by simply changing the breech plug and adding the correct nipple. Plus, the BUCKHORNcomes standard with a thumb-actuated safety, DuraSight All Metal fiber optic sights, dual-barrel retention points and a Bullet Guiding Muzzle. Another feature that really sets this gun apart from the competition is its radical new stock design. The BUCKHORN’s unique stock features dotgrip panels to ensure a comfortable, non-slip grip. Not bad for a rifle that retails for less than two Ben Franklins!


• 24” Barrel Length/42” Overall Length

• 1:28” Rifling Twist Rate

• 209 Ignition• Bullet Guiding Muzzle

• DuraSight All Metal Fiber Optic Sights

• Solid Composite Stock with Molded-In Grip Panels and Sling Swivel Studs

• CrushZone Recoil Pad

• Thumb-Actuated Safety

• Drilled and Tapped for Scope Mounts

• 14.25” Length of Pull• 6.3 lbs. Total Weight

• Lifetime Warranty
 
Did a quick look into some load data

Not trying to point fingers so don't flame me ---->BTY I have a muzzle loader but have used prodex powder not the pellets

if a max load calls for 3 pellets and you load it up and you use 3 50g pellets in stead of the 30g pellets you have a over charge

3x30= 90g max charge

if you use the wrong pellet size 3x50g = 150g
over charged by 60g

I have used 60g as a start load with a round ball

if you use 150g with the heavest bullet you are going to have problems

Also if you have a air gap you are going to have problems

in the old days when a gunsmith made a new gun they tested it with a proof load
 
The instructions state to use 3 50gr pellets, safe pressure for those barrels is with 2 pellets according to Hodgdon, the manufacturer.


Hodgdon Powder Co. recommends that only two 50 grain equivalent Pyrodex or Triple Seven pellets MAXIMUM be used in .50 caliber inlines. You recommend three. By whose authority is this done? (NEVER exceed a powder manufacturers maximum recommended charge and always approach maximum loads with caution. -Editor.)


Another attorney's report details how a man purchased a new CVA .50 caliber inline, a package of .50 caliber / 50 grain Hodgdon brand Triple Seven propellant pellets, a package of Winchester brand W209 Primers and a CVA brand .50 caliber Complete Muzzleloading Accessory Outfit at a chain store, according to the receipt. A short while later, one primer was fired per the instructions and then, to sight in the muzzleloader, loaded 3 of the 50 grain pellets, a .50 caliber "PowerBelt" 295 grain hollow point bullet with plastic "sabot" snap-on base and a W209 primer.
 
one thing that struck me was that the trained engineer did not convert the published strength of the material into psi that the barrel would withstand. He complains that the manufacturer did not specify what pressure the gun would withstand but the engineer should have followed that up with a calculation of what pressure the strength of material represented.
I also felt that there are things that a person can do in terms of incorrect loading which will cause a barrel to burst. Also the first person was described as having had 13 years of training; seems far more likely had 13 years of experience and one has to question just how many shots he had fired in 13 years. Because it was an inline I suspect not very many.

cheers mooncoon
 
Tis very interesting indeed. I surly won't be buying a CVA anytime soon. Hell I won't be buying any inline muzzle load anytime soon.

I agree completely. Thankfully when I was in Saskatchewan, my "primitive hunting tool" of choice was a compound bow.
And I've never felt the need or desire to own/buy any modern inline. No offence intended to any fellow hunters that uses them though!
They are just not my thing.
 
one thing that struck me was that the trained engineer did not convert the published strength of the material into psi that the barrel would withstand. He complains that the manufacturer did not specify what pressure the gun would withstand but the engineer should have followed that up with a calculation of what pressure the strength of material represented.
I also felt that there are things that a person can do in terms of incorrect loading which will cause a barrel to burst. Also the first person was described as having had 13 years of training; seems far more likely had 13 years of experience and one has to question just how many shots he had fired in 13 years. Because it was an inline I suspect not very many.

cheers mooncoon

Your technical approach is very well respected on here.

Cheers
 
CVA Opollo, I once owned and shot an earlier model using real black powder, no problems. However as stated above letter, if serial # ends in 95 or 96, do not use-mail it to CVA-get a refund.
There are more injuries that occurred and this is a bad reflection on Spain and it's CVA owned arms factories!
Once test fired;Your safer with a British Pattern 53 Enfield!
 
Some confusion here in yUK, where inlines of any kind are so unusual that I've never seen one - ever.

Spain is one of the signaturees to the CIP, and its firearms-related products are required to be subject to proof, just like those of any other CIP member state. This is not an 'advisory' this is the Law. That law states that the firearm tested must comply with the safety requirements of the set standards, using the propellant type for which it was designed.

However, if this is a true statement of fact, and not a lawyer blowing smoke, then that makes an interesting read - If you don't believe the printed results from Lyman Ballistic Laboratories showing 25,000 PSI peak pressures in three pellet loads that you recommend in your manuals for use in your guns that bear a 10,000 PSI area House of Eibar definitive proof mark, you are welcome to take it up with them.

I'll be looking into the Spanish BP test requirements, if only for my own interest.

tac
 
Last edited:
Starters, shame that anybody gets hurt.
I'm a traditionalist ( some would say Fudd...but they would probably be wearing too tight tactical pants, so...meh) and I enjoy hunting and shooting traditional styled front stuffers. I veiwed the in-lines with distain as it's been said they were the reasoning behind the AB BP seasons cancelation.
That and they are such an obvious departure from the original concept; reason being to take advantage of a loophole in hunting reg's.
Had to have a high performance, bolt action, 209 fired, (BP sub) pellet fed, sabot firing (usually scoped too, but that is a departure from cause and effect)rifle that is effective far further than the old front stuffer...with no hassle! What an improvement!
If you take 150year old tech, and supe it up to 21st century performance levels...sometimes bad things happen.
You can race up a Model 'T' engine in a cut down 'T' to levels that will beat a Duesenberg...but the components have a habit of grenading on a semi-regular basis. They were not meant to do what you ask of them.
I'm guessing that the engineers ( and Bean Counters) who designed the offending guns calculated that they could get away with less redundancies; safety wise ( e.i. over engineering...like a Mauser. Safety x 3) because of the expected lower performance.
Darn shame that anyone got hurt though. Hope someone figures out the root cause and brings it to an end.
 
Yea! What he said^! FUDDS OF THE WORLD UNITE! {joke} Of course its a shame anyone was hurt, Tokguy (as usual) is right on the money with that statement. As a fellow FUDD, I just don't understand the attraction of in line substitute rifles, hunting loop holes inclusive.

Anyhoo, stay safe guys, load to the regs and don't try to reach out beyond the rifle or shooters proficiency by just adding more powder to the equation. (or pellet thingy whatever :p)
 
RANDY WAKEMAN, Posts a lot on SHOTGUN WORLD !!!! Read some of his posts to get a FLAVOR for his biased Expertise......
that info has been floating around for years
wakeman was an employee of SAVAGE FIREARMS and touted their B.P.firearms as THE BEST,AMERICAN MADE.....
he suggested that Spanish made barrels are PIPE BOMBS and ITALIAN BARRELS are slightly ,mabe better.
thousands upon thousands of TRADITIONS,CVA,LYMAN(yes lyman plains & trade rifles) SAFARI ,NAVY,BELL,and a few others have Spanish or Italian (INVESTARMS) barrels......
My t/c new Englander is the only ALL AMERICAN made... I have a traditions flinter-Spanish, CVA 50 pistol-Spanish, LYMAN and a SAFARI-Italian barrelled. SHOOTING 50-70 gr 3f(HAVE a supply) they work without problems and are accurate..... lyman and safari/same gun except for the brass trim,are listed as 110x2F and 100X3F max.charges........WHY????? at 80 grains,accurcy really drops off........loaded with 150 grains, well I may be old and a little ODD but I'm not stupid!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! if I bought a used corvette and then bought some CANADIAN TIREtires,rated for 110 m.p.h,, would I push it to its top end of 130-160 mph + of course not ,. nor would anyone else with an ounce (GRAM????) of grey matter
Stateside ,guys like wakeman seem to thrive on this kind of nonsence!!!!!! I bet he was involved with the lawyers of a drug induced thief who robbed a 7-11 type store in Pennsylvania....stealing money,booze and HERSHEY chocolate bars, then proceded to climb a tree,drink the booze,eat all the chocolate,then fell from tree hurting his back and sued HERSHEY Chocolate company........ Anyone needing advise on B.P. ask someone here like MOONCOON......you will get a straight answer.
 
This article has been around forever. Hashed and rehashed (and twisted) to brand slam anything offshore. It's based on the Apollo line of the early 90's.

Yeah...CVA and TRADITIONS are $hit when compared to the likes of TC and Knight but whatever. The same as Savage Axis pales next to a Sako. They go boom and get you into the woods.
 
Using black powder it is pretty much impossible to blow up a barrel.
In my rigby sporting rifle my standard load is 110 grains of FFF. I wouldnt feel unsafe going up to 150 grains or higher.

The only time i have EVER heard of muzzle loaders exploding is when they are used improperly, using improper smokeless loads, using hot substitutes. Blackhorn 209 is one that comes yo mi d for that. Pyrodex of tripple F i cant see causing a problem.

I read these stupid news articles and all i hear is my brain screaming bull####. They are lieing they werent using blackpowder or a substitute, they throught they were being clever and used smokeless in a blackpowder only gun. And it turns out they werent so god damn smart, and then they lie about it making a perfectly safe firearm into a evil deadly bomb.
 
Back
Top Bottom