Randy Wakeman
8 Point Buck
Posts: 296
Likes: 0
Joined: May 16, 2024 21:15:57 GMT -5
|
Post by Randy Wakeman on Mar 29, 2006 21:33:36 GMT -5
Your .490" round ball weighs 177 grains, and just isn't going to weigh much more. Lyman data:
80 gr. Goex FFFg = 6800 PSI
90 gr. Goes FFFg = 7500 PSI
The 10,000 PSI proof barrel you have is sufficient. I'd expect no problems.
Take that same barrel you have, give it three pellets pushing a 300 gr. sabot------- now, you may be over 25000 PSI right now. The opportunity for catastrophic failure sticks out like a sore thumb.
|
|
arkansasdon
Guest
Joined: May 16, 2024 21:15:57 GMT -5
|
Post by arkansasdon on Mar 29, 2006 23:18:47 GMT -5
would you say Randy that 3F would not be a choice for 50 cal. and that 3F would have a higher breech pressure for a 50 cal. or larger bores. That 2F would be more of a choice for the 50 cal not as high of breech pressure. (I'm talkin reasonable loads) I've owned 45 cals and always shoot 3F and figure the 30's cal would be the choice of powder for them (3F that is). Your post are makin since and I see where ya , are conserned for future folks that purchase this ML.
Now my In-line for change 1996 CVA Stage Horn, 95 gr. 2F Black Powder 252gr. Sabot Hollow Point Boatail by Buffalo Bullet, I am in the safe zone of your opinion or the wifes 1998 CVA Stage Horn 75 gr. 2F Black Powder with a Power Belt Bullet 245 gr. Aero Tip still in the save zone in your opinion? I guess I better serious think about some new ML's like I said in the last post Remington or Savage.
|
|
Randy Wakeman
8 Point Buck
Posts: 296
Likes: 0
Joined: May 16, 2024 21:15:57 GMT -5
|
Post by Randy Wakeman on Mar 30, 2006 0:14:58 GMT -5
would you say Randy that 3F would not be a choice for 50 cal. and that 3F would have a higher breech pressure for a 50 cal. or larger bores. That 2F would be more of a choice for the 50 cal not as high of breech pressure. (I'm talkin reasonable loads) Hard to say as a generalization, as Swiss (for example) may make more pressure than a std. Goex, etc. It all depends how much you use of it as well. Once you have a rifle tested and proven safe with 150 gr. Triple Se7en ( Knight bolt actions for example), FFg or FFFg blackpowder below that level is far less energetic than T7 and produces lower pressure. FFg or FFFg make no difference. FFFg seems to be a bit cleaner, and also has sharper recoil. One you are in the zone that is proven as safe, it really doesn't matter what you feed your gun. Most 26" .50 caliber barrels do not burn more than 120 gr. by volume efficiently, so all I've seen is more recoil-- and very, very small velocity increases. Not worth using much more than 120 grains of loose powder as far as I'm concerned-- regardless of muzzleloader. Unfortunately, the "FF" screen sizes that usedto mean something go right out the window when the synthetic BP subs come in. The largest grain size in Pyrodex is "Select," the American Pioneer "FFg" is like gravel. Yuk.
|
|
vangunsmith
6 Point Buck
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Joined: May 16, 2024 21:15:57 GMT -5
|
Post by vangunsmith on May 22, 2006 15:30:05 GMT -5
TC,Traditions,and Cva are comparable rifles.If you want to look at them go to www.possibleshop.com and look around. Its a website for muzzleloaders. vangunsmith
|
|
hunterfisher
6 Point Buck
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Joined: May 16, 2024 21:15:57 GMT -5
|
Post by hunterfisher on Jun 3, 2006 9:20:13 GMT -5
I have a C.V.A Firebolt .50 cal. I shoot Power Belt 295gr. sabots. 85gr. of Triple 777. I get 2in. groups at 75 yards. I know the rifle can do better but I'm pleased with it.'' I'm getting old and the eyes arn't what they used to be''. It puts meat in the freezer every year and never gives me a problem.
|
|
truthaboutcva
Guest
Joined: May 16, 2024 21:15:57 GMT -5
|
Post by truthaboutcva on Jul 31, 2006 0:31:30 GMT -5
I just came across this forum today and wanted to give input to the discussion. Who knows I might be way late, but if one person reads this and has a second thought about buying or shooting a CVA ML then it will be worth it.
I am 1 of the 50+ victims of the defective pro-hunter barrels that CVA used. In 2001 I was at a shooting range sighting in my CVA rifle, using appropriate quantities of powder, doing exactly what I should have been doing as it relates to how I was loading, cleaning and firing the rifle. On the 7th shot of the day I pulled the trigger...the next thing I remember was waking up laying on the ground with the taste of blood in my mouth and a group of people around me asking if I was dead or alive.
Within days of the accident I was contacted my the father of an 18 year old boy who lived about 20 miles from my home who had been injured by a pro-hunter rifle 3 months prior. After comparing notes we realized that our injuries were very similar.
To make a long story short I obtained an attorney and over the next three years we met with experts and were able to determine that the barrels that CVA imports from Spain were defective. The major factor being a manufacturing issue that allowed the barrels to split around the circumference and then blow out the back of the gun launching the bolt mechanism, spring, and breech plug out the back of the gun and into the face of the shooter.
It has been nearly 5 years since the accident. I have had 10 reconstructive surgeries on my face. I continue to have problems with my vision, my hearing and severe headaches….not to mention the paralysis and scarring of the right side of my face. Despite all that I have been through I consider myself lucky, as several of the others who were injured by a CVA rifle, lost their eyesight and/or were far more injured in the accident.
So I would just say this…..for anyone to defend CVA does so in ignorance. Simply because you have been lucky enough to not have been injured by a defective CVA rifle, in no way makes CVA rifles safe. I have heard horror story after horror story of many defects with many different models of CVA rifles. None are immune to CVA’s poor quality and workmanship. Save yourself the potential for years of physical and emotional suffering by NOT buying CVA or getting rid of your existing CVA rifles.
|
|
bigdad5
8 Point Buck
[M:0]
bigdad5
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Joined: May 16, 2024 21:15:57 GMT -5
|
Post by bigdad5 on Jul 31, 2006 13:33:27 GMT -5
I find your post interesting . I happen to own a CVA pro-hunter from that era and i am wondering many things. I too also shoot it and hunt with it every year. I never paid attention in terms of max out the pressure tolerances of the rifle. I have never gone to the max charge of 12 grain nor have i ever used a max weight projectile. My pressure limits are about 35 % under max allowable per the manufacturer's written manual. In your research, have you found any injuries that a shooter received when using such light limits like i do? I am using 100 grains of powder pellets and a 200 grain projectile. The owners manual states max charge for my rifle is 120 grains and a 240 grain projectile. So you see how much under max tolerance i am when shooting. I wish to thank you for the info. I also want to ask you, if you won your lawsuit against CVA for product liability? And if you did win, did they force you to sign a non disclosure agreement? I am going to do a little checking on this issue since i own one.
bigdad5
|
|
Randy Wakeman
8 Point Buck
Posts: 296
Likes: 0
Joined: May 16, 2024 21:15:57 GMT -5
|
Post by Randy Wakeman on Aug 1, 2006 8:00:22 GMT -5
I am 1 of the 50+ victims of the defective pro-hunter barrels that CVA used. In 2001 I was at a shooting range sighting in my CVA rifle, using appropriate quantities of powder, doing exactly what I should have been doing as it relates to how I was loading, cleaning and firing the rifle. On the 7th shot of the day I pulled the trigger...the next thing I remember was waking up laying on the ground with the taste of blood in my mouth and a group of people around me asking if I was dead or alive. Within days of the accident I was contacted my the father of an 18 year old boy who lived about 20 miles from my home who had been injured by a pro-hunter rifle 3 months prior. After comparing notes we realized that our injuries were very similar. To make a long story short I obtained an attorney and over the next three years we met with experts and were able to determine that the barrels that CVA imports from Spain were defective. The major factor being a manufacturing issue that allowed the barrels to split around the circumference and then blow out the back of the gun launching the bolt mechanism, spring, and breech plug out the back of the gun and into the face of the shooter. Injuries continue year after year, with current models as well. www.chuckhawks.com/unsafe_muzzleloaders.htmwww.chuckhawks.com/dangerous_muzzleloaders.htmFor several years now, it has been obvious that "CVA" branded product has been borderline at best-- both before they were sued out of business, and right f'ing now. But, some folks would rather not think about it. I've seen far, far too much of it.
|
|
truthaboutcva
Guest
Joined: May 16, 2024 21:15:57 GMT -5
|
Post by truthaboutcva on Aug 1, 2006 22:44:46 GMT -5
Response to your question:
I was using 100 grains when the gun malfunctioned and never used a higher quantity. The guns fail because of poor quality, not because of anything the shooter does or does not do. The young man who I mentioned in my first post had shot the gun 4 or 5 times....and I mean just 4 or 5 shots. They were also using two 50 grain pellets.
I ended up settling with CVA. They were anxious to put the case to rest, and I was tired of dealing with them. I didn't even get 1/10 of what I felt I should, but in the end learned that CVA was getting off easy on all of the cases that have been filed against them. If I could go back now I would have not settled and taken it all the way to a jury.
You can tell if your barrel is part of the recall by looking at the last two numbers on the barrel. If it ends in a 95 or 96 it is part of the recall. But if you ask me, it does not matter what the last two numbers are....none of their guns are exempt from problems and poor quality. You could not pay me enough money to ever pull the trigger of a CVA rifle again.
|
|
IndianaHunter
6 Point Buck
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Joined: May 16, 2024 21:15:57 GMT -5
|
Post by IndianaHunter on Aug 4, 2006 8:49:10 GMT -5
I'm looking at the CVA line, the Elkhorn in particular. I know very little about muzzleloaders, any help. CVA a good line of guns? mtman, the fact is you get what you pay for... a $99.00 gun at the big boxes might not be in your best interest. While Randy would like to sell you a Savage, it is true they are built, like Knight and T/C to a different standard. I’ve have owned two different Encore muzzleloaders and currently own two Savage 10-ml-II’s, one SMI custom smokeless and one Knight Disc Elite. Would I own a CVA? NO, but that’s me. Let’s face it! Anytime you jack a shell or drop a charge in a gun you are not truly familiar with you risk injury. That’s just the nature of the beast. While I’m not an industry expert, I can say this, really think hard and determine what it is you want the gun to really do! If you want 2300+++ fps with a 300gn bullet shooting flat out to 250 yards…Then buy a Savage and shoot smokeless powder… I did… If you want to shoot heavy conical bullets with maximum charges or triple-7 then buy a White, Knight, or T/C but if 1400 to 1600 fps with a 240 grain xtp is what you looking for to kill a deer out to 100 yards or so then you should be able to find a safe gun to do this as well. Know your needs, understand the guns limitations, and use good judgment. Randy is correct in saying the industry has no control of this issue and I’m a big fan of over engineered products when safety is an issue. So, if a barrel is said to be tested to 10,000psi then I’d stay well clear of that ceiling. Indianahunter
|
|