|
Post by encore50a on Feb 23, 2015 10:28:40 GMT -5
Remington has been having a few issues with the RU barrels, which I would hope they get straightened out, along with their customer service.
Cooper isn't producing their muzzleloaders yet.
IMO I wouldn't purchase the CVA rifle for the distance you're interested in, but would rather go the Knight route.
Although the Ultimate Firearms CO/UT rifle is more than you expected to pay, it certainly meets or exceeds your posted requirements.
|
|
|
Post by frontiergander on Feb 23, 2015 11:10:07 GMT -5
they'll open with an 80gr BH209 charge easily. Its all about putting that bullet into the lungs where the jelly will cause them to open rapidly. The last 2 we recovered from deer shot with frontal 1/4ing towards us shots, opened up to around .970" diameter.
|
|
|
Post by frontiergander on Feb 23, 2015 11:15:31 GMT -5
Carlos over on my forum has no problem shooting cva's at 300 yards. With a scope. Personally, I think its nuts to even consider 300 yards with open sights under hunting conditions. My brother in law took an elk at 300 yards with a scoped 270 and with my eyes being 30 years old, with open sights, thats what I'd call a desperate hailmary shot and one i'd never consider taking.
|
|
|
Post by GMB54-120 on Feb 23, 2015 11:18:47 GMT -5
Getting a 50cal to shoot sabotless long range will be somewhat of a challenge. If for no other reason the available 50cal bullet options have a rather low BC. That leaves you with mostly conicals and the fps limitation of soft lead. You might consider paper patching if you wish to pursue a 50cal conical with more fps. Recoil will also be an issue for some. Big lead and high fps comes at a price, especially in a lighter weight rifle.
Remington offers a 50cal 385gr CLHP. I shoot these in my 54-120 at about 1850fps but in sabots. The BC is not too bad and they can handle just about any fps you could tolerate to shoot them.
|
|
|
Post by encore50a on Feb 23, 2015 14:52:50 GMT -5
200 yards........... minute of elk.
|
|
|
Post by sgellis on Feb 23, 2015 15:03:18 GMT -5
Hi guys, I am looking for your opinion/input of what would be the ultimate ML to use on a CO hunt. It can be inline, open or peep sights (no scope) and you can use "up to" blackthorn 209 (no smokeless). Also, they require a 50 caliber - sabot less load. I am going to say lightweight is a must for the mountains and accuracy needs to be dialed in at least 200 yards - I don't think you want to get over that with open sights. Load recommendations would be part of the factor. I am going to start researching and let you know what I come up with as well. Lets put a cost limit of $2k. Let me know your thoughts! NMHunter The below is reference my CO elk rifle. So far, I think it is pretty darn Ultimate. But meat in the freezer will be more telling. My preference is for Blackhorn 209 and B.O.R. Lock MZ System bullets, both of which are legal per CO elk regs. I do not like fiber optic front sights because they are too course for my taste. I prefer a 1/16" bead having a crisp and defined sight picture with an appropriate sized aperture peep. If a clean brass bead is lacking in needed contrast, I prefer using a durable bright sight type contrasting paint, usually either the white base coat or the white base under a bright orange. This is also legal per CO elk regs. Normal lighting the clean brass bead works well for my eyes. I have less than around $1000 in mine as is now, but I get dealer pricing, had most of the small pieces and parts already on hand, and all of my machine and smith work is free. But, I do believe if I needed to purchase everything new at street pricing, I could manage inside $2000 to include replacing the stock with a custom unit to reduce weight. Opinions vary, but I do believe my end package is rather top shelf for such a 50 caliber sub powder CO legal rifle. With scope, I'd expect mine would hang with the best of the best out to around 400 yards. I think that pretty good for an otherwise production gun with not too many tweaks. If anything, this may give you some ideas to work with in your decision process. Best Spent the entire day at the farm shooting the rifle, thought I’d give you some sort of benchmark so you could see that the UML ignition cases can seal well. Sorry for the bad pics, was stuck with an old flip phone. Really bad pic, but you can still see my rifle, like any production rifle, has built-in head clearance. It is not much, but it is there and can be seen as the primer will always be driven back in the primer pocket within that head clearance as it parks itself against the bolt face. You don’t notice this when shooting a conventional cartridge, because the internal charge parks the case head against the bolt face as well, but the UML casing has no internal charge to drive the case head back, it is only driven forward. Yours may indeed have an excessive amount of head clearance, but mine does not as it works well. Up until today, I’ve been pushing the same lot of UML casings four re-primes for five total shots. Today, I went to five re-primes for a total of six shots. In addition, I hated spending the money being I already have a case lot, but I went ahead and purchased two individual bags from two different stores, to try different lots of casings. I was unable to notice any difference in performance between the different lots. Casing on the left is brand new out the packaging, center casing was just fired for the fifth time, casing on the right was just fired for the sixth time. You cannot tell any difference between any of them, there is no hint of any break in the seal, no blow back whatsoever. I may still push these further, but I have reached the point that they are cost effective if I stop at the Remington recommended six firings maximum. This is the nipple after firing 30 rounds of mixed bag UML casings from new to being fired as many as six times. Not one spec of leakage outside the tip of the nipple. Complete sealing with 100% of the magnum large rifle primer being fired directly into the tip of the nipple and straight down the fire channel. Zero blow back. Going one step further, I noticed some of the UML casings had the primer hole visibly a tad off apparent center. I thought these would be great candidates to find some leakage, but no, they completely sealed without fail. End results, I am convinced that having any type of crush fit with this type of ignition system would hurt, and not help. Having minimal clearance is good, but any crushing will actually damage the inner cone of the casing against the hard nipple, and would not give the casing any room to center itself. Having the built in head clearance actually appears to help, as the inner cone of the casing self centers itself over the cone of the nipple because it has this slight wiggle room. As noted before, the physics involved from the firing pin dropping against the primer, and the primer firing within the primer pocket, not only drives the primer back against the bolt, but drives the casing against the nipple. So it self centers, it seals, and the cone within cone directs all the fire of the primer directly down the fire channel. This is how they fire that fourth pellet, which to my understanding has never been accomplished by anyone in the industry when using a 209 primer, because of the inherent spatial void directly below the primer within a 209 breech plug, which causes a loss of efficiency in getting the fire from the primer into the fire channel, and directed into the charge. As a side note, this go around was working with the fixed sights. This may be of interest for someone wanting to switch between a scope and fixed sights. My friend and hunting partner is a longtime guild gunsmith with a shop second to none. I had intended to make a permanent shim to raise the factory Williams guide sight to regulate the sights, but instead, we dug up a new in the box vintage Lyman 57wjs receiver sight, machined from solid steel, AWESOME! Being the sight has a repeatable quick release feature that holds zero, I decided to install this sight so that I could use quick release scope bases below the sight. This way I could push one button and pull the sight, then I could pop on a scope. I'm leaning toward using 2-piece Mark4 Picatinny bases (8-40) on the receiver, as they should fit perfectly with the set-up. Then I can quickly switch back and forth between scope and fixed sights while holding zero. Sights worked extremely well, with the exception the factory .0750” white bead is a bit course. Will probably switch to a smaller 1/16” brass bead. The larger bead nearly fills a 16-inch aiming black on a 17" x 17" backer at 150-yards, but it still groups exceedingly well. Using a hunting peep, I was still able to hold sub-MOA at 150-yards posting the below 3-shot group, which measured ¾” wide by 1 ¼” tall. Was testing the group with the first shot fired on a clean barrel, which was the lowest shot of the three. Suspect that if I kept firing rounds, they would continue to pile up with the upper two shots. Running low on these Parker bullets, so I had to conserve. Regardless, I think that's pretty good for an old man using fixed hunting sights. When I get the new bases installed, I'll throw the Schmidt and Bender back on the rifle and see how well she shoots at longer ranges. Hope this feedback gives you some idea of how well the rifle can work. Would be interesting to see the nipple of your breech plug and inside of your UML casings. Would like to get some idea how badly yours is failing to seal in relation to how far it may be out of head space. It would also be interesting to note any gas cutting or erosion to the nipple. Best Thought I'd show some changes and modifications I made. Sorry for the bad pics. Earlier I noted my dislike for the fit of the barreled action into the factory stock inlet. In addition, the original front guard screw was short and only engaged a few threads. I made a new front screw by shortening an extra rear screw I had on hand. I also bedded the barreled action. The fit is proper now without binding. I used a vintage new in box all steel Lyman 57wjs sight that I had on hand. The sight is well made and has a repeatable quick release feature which allows use of quick release scope bases mounted underneath. Needed to drill and tap the receiver to 8-40 to install Leupold Mark 4 Picatinny bases. I used shouldered guide screws with a mounted alignment bar to bed the bases so they are straight and square. Also needed to drill and tap the sight body to relocate the elevation stop screw so that it now indexes for base zero off the valley in the Picatinny base. The angle of the picture gives the appearance that the relocated stop screw would hinder left windage adjustment, but it does not, I have a full range of adjustment. The receiver is a 40x, so it was already drilled and tapped for mounting the Lyman sight base. Stock inletting to fit the sight base required a minimal removal of wood. In addition to the rear sight, I had already noted that the factory Remington front sight was rather course. In addition, the bead is almost football shaped along the bottom. I decided to swap to a finer 1/16" brass bead, which I could either leave bare, or I could paint any color desired. I had on hand replacement beads from Marbles, Williams, and Lyman. By far the superior front sight went to Lyman. The Lyman bead stands out nicely and makes for a crisp sight picture. Using the course factory bead, I was able to hold sub-moa out to 150 yards, but much beyond that, it subtended too much to maintain such accuracy. With the new bead, I should be able to hold sub-moa out to about 200 yards or so. Overall the package turned out nicely. It should easily reach my original goal for CO elk. In addition, I believe it will also work well for most any place I'd use it, with scope, or without. I've toyed with the idea of using this S&B scope, but the jury is sill out. The rifle has a ton of room to lighten up considerably, either by slimming down the obnoxiously heavy factory M40 laminate, or by replacing the same thing with a light McMillan. I haven't lightened the factory stock at this point, because I greatly like the shape and how it manages in the hand. So, in the long run, I may just keep the same design, but go lightweight McMillan. So for the S&B, those things are heavier than I like, the scope alone runs about a pound plus. May just use a simple and light fixed Leupold. Really bad pic, but this shows the bolt side. Fairly clean setup. Cannot see from my pics, but I did reinforce the front swivel mount when bedding the stock. Not to the degree of a super duty Wichita mount, but, I can get into a tight sling if needed without worry of pulling out the factory stud. Reference the Mark 4 Picatinny bases, I'd like to try an Aimpoint Micro with a Larue quick detatch lever, mounted on the front base. When I get the rifle lightened up, I'm thinking that such a red dot would be rather handy for fast shots. Hope this will be helpful and maybe give some ideas. Later
|
|
|
Post by 10ga on Feb 23, 2015 16:49:09 GMT -5
JMHO on a CO specific ML. I would go 1 of 2 ways. 1. Get a good White Rifle (I have a Bison) in .504 and some good big bullets for it. Get some real black powder. Get rear peep sight and hooded front sight of your pleasing. Practice. Whites are very accurate rifles and those big bullets kill anything you will see. With practice and good sights a 200 yard shot should be easily doable. 2. Get a Encore in 209X50 and same process of sight application but use BH209 powder. Bullets can be the Thors or some of the nice Precision Rifle offerings in full bore bullets.
The White and Encore rifles are light and should be easy carry in the mountains. As for having a $2K rifle that is your choice but the real limiting factor in the CO draw ML hunting is the open sight restriction.
Go to your eye doctor and get a letter and then get an exemption to the open sights only reg for your CO hunt, doable if you have a doctor that will help you out. A scope is way better than open sights for us old guys. If I get a draw and the exemption to the open sights only reg I'll be using BH209 in one of my MLII. Just gotta find a good bullet and that shouldn't be hard. I've already got the letter for whenever I draw a tag and get to hunt with my brother who lives in Evergreen.
I really don't understand why CO is so tight on ML permits. Archery and gun draws are much easier than a ML draw.
JMHO. 10 ga
|
|
|
Post by frontiergander on Feb 23, 2015 17:54:19 GMT -5
And that was off hand or off shooting sticks? 200 yards........... minute of elk.
|
|
|
Post by encore50a on Feb 23, 2015 20:08:16 GMT -5
And that was off hand or off shooting sticks? 200 yards........... minute of elk.
Sticks
|
|
|
Post by encore50a on Feb 23, 2015 20:12:57 GMT -5
Sticks and open sights........ 300 METERS
|
|
|
Post by frontiergander on Feb 23, 2015 21:42:26 GMT -5
are you trying to tell me that gun out shoots your high and mighty ultimate with a scope?
|
|
|
Post by encore50a on Feb 24, 2015 9:00:06 GMT -5
are you trying to tell me that gun out shoots your high and mighty ultimate with a scope? Not even close. "High and mighty"? I'd much rather have a QUALITY RIFLE, than just something "labeled" a better GUN.
What I'm trying to explain is, open sights in the right hands are accurate to longer ranges than most would imagine. They shoot open sighted rifles to 1,000 yards. FYI......... the targets were shot by someone over twice your age.
For the OP, most production rifles are not great long range rifles, which doesn't mean that they can't shoot long range. If the choice amounted to either a CVA or a Knight, the Knight hands down and without question.
|
|
|
Post by frontiergander on Feb 24, 2015 11:51:58 GMT -5
Oh so you've never shot that rifle/target nor an elk at that range with open sights in unknown wind conditions. Pffft!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2015 12:02:55 GMT -5
Oh so you've never shot that rifle/target nor an elk at that range with open sights in unknown wind conditions. Pffft! Why are you giving encore50 a hard time, you only post groups a 25-50 yards. Anyone can shoot decent groups at those ranges, let's see your 300 yard groups and put your groups where your mouth is.
|
|
|
Post by frontiergander on Feb 24, 2015 12:14:41 GMT -5
Why? I don't like it when someone boasts about a 300 yard group and tells you that you can kill an elk with it. Then it turns out not to be even their target nor did they shoot it.
25 and 50 yards? You are full of it!
Heres a 100 yarder on camera with patched ball. 300 yards, my sight had plum wore out of adjustment. 200 yards its good for.
Now my bro in law with my .58 hawken did take a hailmary shot at a coyote at 340 yards, but we hadnt a clue on the drop. At that distance, drop was 18 feet.
|
|
|
Post by encore50a on Feb 24, 2015 13:26:34 GMT -5
Why? I don't like it when someone boasts about a 300 yard group and tells you that you can kill an elk with it. Then it turns out not to be even their target nor did they shoot it. .................................. Jon,
I would highly suggest, if you have it in you and the ability young man, to go back and read what was posted with those targets. If you have sense enough, you'll realize that no where did I say that I shot either of those targets, that I shot an elk with it or, that it was even my rifle! Should I re-type it or copy and paste so you can read that again?
You questioned the ability of shooting 200 or 300 yards with open sights. I provided photos of targets, which clearly indicated that someone can and that they were, "minute of elk". YOU....... read into it what you wanted and ASSUMED. Needless to say, you've had that trait for quite some time, which has gotten you removed from more than one muzzleloading forum.
You can have all the dislike and animosity towards me, and/or the fact that I shoot an Ultimate that you'd like, personally I could care less. However it doesn't make you a smarter person or even look like one. Quite the opposite IMO.........
|
|
|
Post by frontiergander on Feb 24, 2015 13:34:29 GMT -5
they shot targets, not elk. thats the difference. The person who shot the target likely didnt have a pack full of gear on his back, humping through the mountains at 10,000 feet and likely was not winded. Thats the difference between 300 yard TARGET shooting vs 300 yard HUNTING accuracy.
|
|
|
Post by ronlaughlin on Feb 24, 2015 16:54:15 GMT -5
All true, and if you took more time, you could probably add to the list of differences.
|
|
|
Post by trapshooterjoe7 on Nov 28, 2015 20:25:10 GMT -5
Well, I would sure like to know how the elk hunt went??? Myself, I got a real nice 5x5 with my MK 85 and 348 gr powerbelt, my knight shoots them real good. Shootem all like you mean it !!
|
|