Tommy gunn
New member
Modern inlines are for people with no class.
honest question- not intended to inflame
- Thread starter RevNate
- Start date
I have a replica Ferguson so I guess I shouldn't take that hunting. Darn it (as if I could afford to use that as a hunting rifle). Now, if someone were to make a Lazeroni that would be something else.
The Lazeroni flintlock had two internal magazines - one for powder and the other for ball. You turned that handle on the side of the rifle (where the sideplate normally is) and you chambered a ball and picked up a charge of powder. It has to be in absolute perfect working order less the rifle goes kaboom. Considering that the powder was stored in the stock, a kaboom might result in dental work, if you're lucky.
Being a complicated and expensive to make gun, only a few were made (for the aristocracy of course) and the most advanced flintlock of its time never reached the troops (thankfully so as they probably couldn't give it proper care).
The Lazeroni flintlock had two internal magazines - one for powder and the other for ball. You turned that handle on the side of the rifle (where the sideplate normally is) and you chambered a ball and picked up a charge of powder. It has to be in absolute perfect working order less the rifle goes kaboom. Considering that the powder was stored in the stock, a kaboom might result in dental work, if you're lucky.
Being a complicated and expensive to make gun, only a few were made (for the aristocracy of course) and the most advanced flintlock of its time never reached the troops (thankfully so as they probably couldn't give it proper care).Inlines, as noted due provide an extension of the numbers hunting with frontloaders. Maybe a good system insofar as that is a little more forgiving (safety related), for those who aren't inclined to be shooting this type of weapon with regularity. Side hammers, specific handling 'rules', often of real interest to those who know the history. Those who don't check on these, could be very troublesome to be around.
There were inlines, as already noted, back in the time when muzzle loading was the norm. But of limited use due to the slower rate of fire, and replacement time for a failed cap. At least compared to the military high water mark of this system, things such as the Enfield and Springfield rifled muskets.
Excepting the rapture of having to carry these 'wagon guns', they do make good hunting rifles. Especially when set up for the old waxed paper catridges, very useful excepting the black teeth.
There were inlines, as already noted, back in the time when muzzle loading was the norm. But of limited use due to the slower rate of fire, and replacement time for a failed cap. At least compared to the military high water mark of this system, things such as the Enfield and Springfield rifled muskets.
Excepting the rapture of having to carry these 'wagon guns', they do make good hunting rifles. Especially when set up for the old waxed paper catridges, very useful excepting the black teeth.
Mike Weber
New member
Ya know I run across sort of the same reaction when discussing my "Nipple Guns" Percussion guns with die hard Flintlock shooters at Rendevous events. I do shoot traditional guns in the sence that I shoot sidehammer Percussion and Flintlock guns with real wood stocks, iron sites, and I burn real black powder in them. In terms of accuracy it would take one heck of a shooter to match the performance of my Whitworth with a scoped inline. Not bragging just stating a fact. That rifle is more accurate than the vast majority of shooters out there. I supose that if you wanted to get technical about it you could call my Cap & Ball revolvers Inlines of a sort, in which case then I do own a bunch of inlines. I shoot traditional style guns because I enjoy the sence of history in them.
I am not angry with in-line shooters. the gun makers
are of course progressing in technology. I personnely
feel that when a muzzleloader is more reliable and more
accurate than a 30-30. well seems like something is
wrong. I hear the arguement that newer is better, and
that it is more humane to the animal. and all that stuff.
I feel that the modern in lines. have a place in
hunting. During the modern firearm season. I used
to hunt with a muzzle loader. when the state I hunt
in puts in better restrictions on modern muzzle loaders,
I may go back. But to take out a "primative weapon"
that can take a deer out at 200 plus yards. scoped, and
all. well its wrong. just go buy a damn .308 and go
after your deer.
are of course progressing in technology. I personnely
feel that when a muzzleloader is more reliable and more
accurate than a 30-30. well seems like something is
wrong. I hear the arguement that newer is better, and
that it is more humane to the animal. and all that stuff.
I feel that the modern in lines. have a place in
hunting. During the modern firearm season. I used
to hunt with a muzzle loader. when the state I hunt
in puts in better restrictions on modern muzzle loaders,
I may go back. But to take out a "primative weapon"
that can take a deer out at 200 plus yards. scoped, and
all. well its wrong. just go buy a damn .308 and go
after your deer.
rwilson452
New member
primitive arms
Here in PA we have two muzzle loader seasons for whitetail. the first season you can use an inline. the later season is strictly flintlock/ matchlock.
Here in PA we have two muzzle loader seasons for whitetail. the first season you can use an inline. the later season is strictly flintlock/ matchlock.
You're missing something important in your analogy, Bytor...
As my big mutt nicknamed "Snow Dog" sits at my feet, I thought this was kind of odd:
See this gun?
Here's another view:
A modern reproduction:
It's a Whitworth muzzleloader, as used by the Confederacy in the Civil War to great effect against Union troops. It's famous for it's almost unbelievable accuracy at long ranges, often out to 1000 yards. Primitive? Sure, and that includes the primitive Davidson brass-tubed scope. But let's not pretend that scoped blackpowder rifles capable of excellent accuracy are a recent invention.
As my big mutt nicknamed "Snow Dog" sits at my feet, I thought this was kind of odd:
See this gun?
Here's another view:
A modern reproduction:
It's a Whitworth muzzleloader, as used by the Confederacy in the Civil War to great effect against Union troops. It's famous for it's almost unbelievable accuracy at long ranges, often out to 1000 yards. Primitive? Sure, and that includes the primitive Davidson brass-tubed scope. But let's not pretend that scoped blackpowder rifles capable of excellent accuracy are a recent invention.
If you're around Seymour, IN, go to the Cracker Barrel there and check out the gun over the fireplace (all Cracker Barrels have guns over the fireplace 
). It's an antique inline with the hammer and nipple placed direcly in line with the barrel. I didn't remove it from the wall to examine it (should have asked).
BTW, Frederick the Great records shooting with a telescope equipped rifle in his diary. Artist turned militia lieutenant Charles Wilson Peale had instrument maker David Rittenhouse make a telescope rifle for him in the American Revolution. At least five Union sharpshooter companies had (some) telescope rifles with them when they served at the Siege of Yorktown during the Peninsula Campaign (1862).
). It's an antique inline with the hammer and nipple placed direcly in line with the barrel. I didn't remove it from the wall to examine it (should have asked).BTW, Frederick the Great records shooting with a telescope equipped rifle in his diary. Artist turned militia lieutenant Charles Wilson Peale had instrument maker David Rittenhouse make a telescope rifle for him in the American Revolution. At least five Union sharpshooter companies had (some) telescope rifles with them when they served at the Siege of Yorktown during the Peninsula Campaign (1862).
You mean like these? http://www.bowsofwood.com/
I'd love to get one of those for Christmas!
I've used both types of bows. I owned the first Jennings compound model ever sold and I had shot bows for several years before that came out. I very much prefer the light weight quietness and simplicity of a longbow or recurve. I stuck plenty of critters and targets with both types. Never was into sights or releases, never used a carbon arrow. Some newfangled technology ain't all it's cracked up to be as there are tradeoffs I am not willing to make.
I believe there are logical limitations to how far retrotech can be taken on a case by case basis. For instance who among us would trade their current modem for one of the first models to hit the shelves?
I'd love to get one of those for Christmas!
I've used both types of bows. I owned the first Jennings compound model ever sold and I had shot bows for several years before that came out. I very much prefer the light weight quietness and simplicity of a longbow or recurve. I stuck plenty of critters and targets with both types. Never was into sights or releases, never used a carbon arrow. Some newfangled technology ain't all it's cracked up to be as there are tradeoffs I am not willing to make.
I believe there are logical limitations to how far retrotech can be taken on a case by case basis. For instance who among us would trade their current modem for one of the first models to hit the shelves?
BluRidgDav
New member
Not Recurve, Tamara, but Longbow.
Matches up nicely with my Early Virginia Flintlock Longrifle.
BRD.
Matches up nicely with my Early Virginia Flintlock Longrifle.
BRD.
started out with smokepole
I guess I also have mixed feelings on the subject. I started out hunting with a repro. kentucky rifle, and I always felt the difference is that sidehammer guys kill to have hunted and inline guys hunt to kill. Thats not a shot by any means just what I thought. Then two years ago my little bro decided to buy a ML, and came to me to see what I thought. I told him I would not buy an IL he then asked me if I thought that if Jed Smith or John Colter had access to a IL rifle over a SH gun would they use it? He had me I think they would have. Just my two cents. By the way I like this place you folks got here. I was cut adrift when Marlin quit theirs, so its nice to be here. E
I guess I also have mixed feelings on the subject. I started out hunting with a repro. kentucky rifle, and I always felt the difference is that sidehammer guys kill to have hunted and inline guys hunt to kill. Thats not a shot by any means just what I thought. Then two years ago my little bro decided to buy a ML, and came to me to see what I thought. I told him I would not buy an IL he then asked me if I thought that if Jed Smith or John Colter had access to a IL rifle over a SH gun would they use it? He had me I think they would have. Just my two cents. By the way I like this place you folks got here. I was cut adrift when Marlin quit theirs, so its nice to be here. E
scopes
many of the new sidelocks come with predrilled holes for scopes and many are coming with scopes already installed.
The only difference with a IL and a Sidelock is that the breech on an inline is designed to be removed without voiding any warranties and enables you to get a nice shine to the barrel without having to worry if theres any residue were the bore meets the breech plug.
And the trigger on my inline is horrible. The trigger moves 1 inch before it fires the gun.. two stage trigger?
many of the new sidelocks come with predrilled holes for scopes and many are coming with scopes already installed.
The only difference with a IL and a Sidelock is that the breech on an inline is designed to be removed without voiding any warranties and enables you to get a nice shine to the barrel without having to worry if theres any residue were the bore meets the breech plug.
And the trigger on my inline is horrible. The trigger moves 1 inch before it fires the gun.. two stage trigger?
Inlines
Does anyone remember the "Harmonica"
caplocks of the 1860's to 1890's?
These were not only inlines, but repeaters, heaven forbid!
Very few new things around.
Some of us advanced age types need some help with sights, also , some of the old sights were very sorry, I have a 1900 made Win.'94 that has some of the worst sights I have ever lost sight of against a brush background, a real challenge to use and a very good chance of blowing a shot, or worse , hitting way too high or low.
Don
Does anyone remember the "Harmonica"
caplocks of the 1860's to 1890's?
These were not only inlines, but repeaters, heaven forbid!
Very few new things around.
Some of us advanced age types need some help with sights, also , some of the old sights were very sorry, I have a 1900 made Win.'94 that has some of the worst sights I have ever lost sight of against a brush background, a real challenge to use and a very good chance of blowing a shot, or worse , hitting way too high or low.
Don
Yes, the Browning family made some. And often the harmonica's, superimposed loads, Colt's revolving rifles, and such were unintentional repeaters.
Due to that problem, not likely we'll see repros of these designs.
And that's why muzzleloading often is perceived as a primitive technology...much of the advances (or tech mistakes) are either very rare, or not being reproduced.
In lines, whatever, can't see any practical advantage over a 1850's-1860's rifled musket. Excepting the Sharp's that was the most advanced the historical stuff was, at least in general use.
Gods, I wonder what a state fish&game would make of a revolving, harmonica, or superposed load muzzle loader?
Due to that problem, not likely we'll see repros of these designs.
And that's why muzzleloading often is perceived as a primitive technology...much of the advances (or tech mistakes) are either very rare, or not being reproduced.
In lines, whatever, can't see any practical advantage over a 1850's-1860's rifled musket. Excepting the Sharp's that was the most advanced the historical stuff was, at least in general use.
Gods, I wonder what a state fish&game would make of a revolving, harmonica, or superposed load muzzle loader?
Oh well, if I manage to acquire several thousand dollars, figure out how to use the thing without it flashfiring the cylinders, keep all my fingers intact...alas can't come to Texas with it. Mayhaps the law was meant to keep the Dragoon/Walker contingent off the deer?
But that still leaves the superimposed rifles...these are muzzleloaders, and often were unintentional rapid fire weapons. Scare every deer in the country, and the poor fool firing it...after the first shot.
And what about the Hall?
But that still leaves the superimposed rifles...these are muzzleloaders, and often were unintentional rapid fire weapons. Scare every deer in the country, and the poor fool firing it...after the first shot.
And what about the Hall?
The deer, probably would be looking forward to the spectacle.
That said, I wonder what the state fish& game would do, if somebody turned up with a arbaquis, hande gonne/cannon, or the like? Including the early iron, lead, or stone projectiles...
Or a church bell with a very large arrow stuck in it...
That said, I wonder what the state fish& game would do, if somebody turned up with a arbaquis, hande gonne/cannon, or the like? Including the early iron, lead, or stone projectiles...
Or a church bell with a very large arrow stuck in it...