Smokeless Powder Ban - DNR - Savage Muzzleloader

[herdog]

Last year the legislature passed this misguided and unfortunate ban on using smokeless powder in Muzzleloaders designed and built for it. I talked to Lou Coricelli about this issue this afternoon and he said they do not even really know where or why this ban was passed. Lou C. informed me that legislature will be considering a repeal of this ban as soon as Monday. Please contact your legislators, this weekend, and encourage them to support repealing this unfortunate and misguided ban. Lou C said the DNR does not care. Yes, I know, I should have got on this earlier.

Find you legislator here: http://geo.commissions.leg.state.mn.us/districts/start.html

[herdog]

This is what I sent to my Legislators. If you want to copy and paste it please feel free to do so. Thanks.

"Dear Ms. Fischbach:

Last year the legislature passed a law banning the use of Smokeless Powder in muzzleloaders, no one seems to know why or even where this came from. This only affects hunters using the Savage Muzzleloader that is designed and built for smokeless powder. This is a relatively expensive, high quality, gun that a casual muzzleloader hunter will probably not seek out and buy. On the other hand those of us who did seek it out and buy it want to be able to use the powder it was designed for and works best with.

I talked to Lou Coricelli from the DNR this afternoon and he said there is a potential bill to repeal the ban on smokeless powder in Muzzleloaders designed for it. I hope you support repealing the ban on Smokeless Powder in Muzzleloaders. If you would like to discuss it or get more information on the issue my phone # is ....."

[lawdog]

If you are going to write a legislature and drop names, at least spell them right (its Lou Cornicelli).

Also, can you explain why we should allow smokeless powder in the blackpowder season??? I see NO need for it personally.

[herdog]

Yes, you are right Lawdog. I'm sorry I was in a hurry this afternoon and did not verify the spelling. I have no interest in dropping names and how is it "dropping names"

to say that I have talked to the appropriate person. What I do have an interest in is that some of us have invested in Savage Muzzleloaders and we were told we could not use them, as intended, with no explanation and no reason given. Obviously you do not own a Savage. Do you know of any reason a certain type of Powder should be banned before any of the other modern Muzzleloader Powders. It makes no more sense than saying you can't wear Boots with Thinsulate when hunting. By the way that would be "Legislator".

[PerchJerker]

You can still use blackpowder or a substitute in your Savage. It's still muzzleloading.

I also don't see the need for smokeless powder - and I consider myself more than a "casual muzzleloader", to use your wording. There are other outdoor issues that are more of a concern to me than the few people that bought the Savage and want to use smokeless powder. But good luck to you.

[ScoutII]

I have previously posted on this subject also. Smokeless-powder has been around a lot longer than black-powder substitutes. Smokeless-powder is not corrosive like black-powder or black-powder substitutes, firearm lasts longer. Even if you thoroughly clean you firearm, corrosive powders will shorten the life of your firearm. Firearms are not CHEAP nowadays.

While using the Savage with factory recomended loads of smokeless-powder there is NO noticable advantage in performance.

So what is the problem with allowing the use of smokeless-powder? The Savage using smokeless-powder is still a single-shot, front loading, short-range firearm.

herdog, I am glad you brought this topic back, and I hope some other people will realize that the use of smokeless-powder is not a threat to the Muzzle-loader hunting season.

Also I would like to add that the DNR Public Input mail address is [email protected], more input will not hurt either.

[Jameson]

IMO no need for a smokeless powder ban. Repeal the law.

That being said. I fired two shots with my muzzy last year. Part of the rush was reloading in a cloud of smoke not knowing if my first shot was lethal. I couldn't see a darn thing in front of me through that cloud of smoke. I would like to try some smokeless powder, but think I would continue to use the smoke-filled powder.

[Whoaru99]

Actually, the question should be why not allow it in guns capable of using it?

Smokeless is much cheaper, shoots much cleaner, isn't as smelly, doesn't corrode your gun, you don't have to clean nearly as often, gives less felt recoil for a comparable load, and from what I've read generally gives better accuracy.

Given the benefits, you'd think more people would be on-board with it rather than being anti or neutral.

Things should not be banned "just because", and that sorta seems to be the case here. Nobody seems to be able to answer with facts as to precisely why it's banned.

[lawdog]

I guess I've always understood smokeless powders to be more powerful and create considerably more power. This is why they are considered dangerous in regular black powder or black powder substitute guns. If its more powerful and can make a flatter shooting more powerful shell, clearly that's an advantage you are attempting to gain over what has always been the black powder muzzleloaded season. If you can show me ballistics on this savage that its the same as my Omega with 150 grains of 777 pellets, then I'll agree its not an advantage you are trying to gain. If that's really the case, then yes I don't see why it would be banned, other than the danger factor of people thinking its OK to use because the law allows it during the muzzleloading season and sticking it in their Knight and blowing the breach up and getting severely injured...

Oh and one other thing, if you are trying to change or repeal an existing law, you bear the burden of showing why it should be changed, not vice versa. Last year it would have been a legit question to ask why should this be banned, this year its your burden to show why it shouldn't be because you are wanting the law changed.

[Whoaru99]

Tell me the facts of why it's banned and we can talk intellegently about why it should not be banned. As I said previously, all I've heard/read are merely personal opinions or speculation about it. Evidently this fellow from the DNR doesn't even know why it's banned - a bit scary and a bit pathetic, don't you think?

From what I've seen of ballistics, your 150gr of T7 pushes 2000-2100fps using a 300gr Barnes Expander sabot (2094fps according to Barnes data).

A commonly recommended hunting load for the Savage is 42gr of AA5744 that gives ~2000fps on a 300gr Barnes Expander. A max load of smokeless gives ~2200 which doesn't seem like a huge increase over ~2100 from the 150gr T7 load.

As far as safety goes, that's a red herring, IMO. Fast cars and fast motorcycles are sold all the time to people that have no business buying them and some of them pay the price of that decision. Yet I hear no bans on selling fast cars or fast motorcycles.

I don't own a Savage, but I'd like to because I perceive real and practical benefits to using smokeless powder as I've mentioned. Gaining a power/distance advantage is not at the forefront of my agenda. Read some of my other posts on hunting/shooting, you will see that I am not typically a proponent of newer/faster/harder-hitting cartridges. In fact, I don't think that scopes should be used on muzzleloaders even though I wear glasses and quite likely could benefit from one.

[PerchJerker]

Quote:

---

As far as safety goes, that's a red herring, IMO. Fast cars and fast motorcycles are sold all the time to people that have no business buying them and some of them pay the price of that decision. Yet I hear no bans on selling fast cars or fast motorcycles.

---

I don't think that's a very analogy. First, there is no ban on selling the Savage or on selling smokeless powder. Second, cars and motorcycles need to be legal to be used ---- you could buy a race car if you wanted, but you couldn't use it on public roads. Is that not pretty much the same situation as the Savage and smokeless powder?

I am neither for or against smokeless powder and have no strong feelings on it either way. I don't see the need for it but don't have anything against it. I have much stronger feelings about the debate on allowing scopes during the muzzleloading season.

[ScoutII]

http://www.remington.com/safety/10_commandments/

This set of rules should be (I Hope) observed by all users of firearms. These basic rules are stated and similar in context by all reputable firearms manufacturers.

Rule number 5 states [uSE CORRECT AMMUNITION].

When basic rules are followed, preventable accidents are not likely to occur. That said, someone trying to use smoke-less powder in a black-powder firearm has already ignored a basic rule.

Also Savage states in their ten commandments of muzzle-loader safety in LARGE print: CAUTION: DO NOT USE SMOKELESS POWDER IN ANY OTHER MUZZLELOADING FIREARM NOT SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED FOR ITS USE.

I feel muzzle-loader hunting, reloading, and custom loading cartridge ammunition fall into the same catagory of self-discipline when it comes to safety i.e. some things you just do not do.

[Whoaru99]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

As far as safety goes, that's a red herring, IMO. Fast cars and fast motorcycles are sold all the time to people that have no business buying them and some of them pay the price of that decision. Yet I hear no bans on selling fast cars or fast motorcycles.

---

I don't think that's a very analogy. First, there is no ban on selling the Savage or on selling smokeless powder. Second, cars and motorcycles need to be legal to be used ---- you could buy a race car if you wanted, but you couldn't use it on public roads. Is that not pretty much the same situation as the Savage and smokeless powder?

I am neither for or against smokeless powder and have no strong feelings on it either way. I don't see the need for it but don't have anything against it. I have much stronger feelings about the debate on allowing scopes during the muzzleloading season.

---

Yeah, probably not the best analogy. I was merely trying to come up with a creative way to point out that lots of common things can be dangerous in the wrong hands but are not (yet) banned.

[herdog]

I do believe that whoever started it and is the reason for the ban on the Savage was well-intentioned but not very well informed.

As far as Safety, who are we concerned for? The gun itself is argued to be the best built, most well tested Muzzleloader made so it is not unsafe to the shooter. The argument has been made that allowing smokeless powder in 1 gun might lead to its use in another weapon not designed for it. This is a far stretch in my mind. The process of buying powder, Measuring it, Loading it, buying sabots that will handle it, and the end result of shooting it are all different enough that you have to know you are doing something diferent. Yes someone may have been and may hurt themselves doing something they should not do, but allowing the Savage is not going to influence it. I have to think that someone unaware enough to put Smokeless Powder where it don't belong is also going to be entirely unaware of the Savage M10. I see people do questionable things all the time and as whoaru alluded to it is futile to try to protect everyone from themselves. Has there been any incidents of people using Smokeless in Muzzloaders not made for it? Was there a problem that needed to be fixed by a Ban?

Other reasons: It has been mentioned that the Savage, properly loaded, might give the shooter an advantage over other muzzleloaders. Yes it shoots well but so do all the other modern muzzleloaders and I believe its been established on this thread that most modern muzzleloaders using their max loads are substantially equal, or maybe even somewhat ballistically superior, to the savage. This would be especially true for the longer barrell guns made in the last years. However, most of us have probably backed off the Load somewhat in favor of accuracy.

[herdog]

As long as I'm ranting I may as well follow up on, and refute, the other reason I think someone may be opposed to the Savage muzzloader. That is that it is not primitive or traditional enough or too easy & convienent. Certainly, there is not much primitive about the savage, but neither is there anything primitive about any of the vast majority of muzzloaders sold in the last 5 years. Triple-7 and Goex are highly engineered modern powders. I mentioned "casual Muzzleloader hunter" in one of my first posts. By that I meant the person who goes and buys a Gun, Powder Pellets, and Bullets the week before the season starts, maybe shoots it once, and then goes hunting.

As far as ease and convienience the Savage certainly has its own Peculiarities, and needs plenty of care and feeding to keep it shooting properly. If I am shooting a Black Powder substitute that should be cleaned more often I will take my NEF, it's lighter and easier to clean. The first muzzleloader I owned is a Hand Built, Side-lock, percussion cap Kentucky Rifle that I shot for 20+ years. The Savage is just about the opposite and I suppose I chose it because it was so different and therefore interesting. And yes I certainly did want more reliability and better performance.

[Jameson]

Can the Savage with smokeless powder be used during rifle season?

[ScoutII]

Yes

[Ufatz]

A few decades back the idea of going back to the hunting rifles of early America caught on. Guys started digging out the old flintlocks, caplocks, percussion guns etc. And it was FUN. Then somebody,as always happens, decided to improve on the system. Some guys said Hey! Wait. The whole idea is nostalgia, to do it like my great-great grandpa did it! And the progressive guys said No man. We gotta make it BETTER. So now we no longer have the challenge and the charm of shooting truly retro weapons, in the old way. Now we have weapons that are one-nano notch away from being full blown modern center fire rifles. Wouldn't it be great it we could go out tomorrow and shoot a REAL flintlock...or a real percussion reproduction of a Hawken? With black powder from a powder horn? And no scope? And no special season?

Okay boys. Now you can rip and tear. But I just had to say it because I have felt for along time that the original idea of shooting retro stuff has long been buried in modern marketing. The charm has left muzzle loading for a lot of guys who started doing it a few decades back.

[ScoutII]

Ufatz:I couldn't agree with you more on the traditional asspect of muzzle-loader hunting. It seems that as you say human nature has gotten a foot hold,better and improved firearms and how can we make some money off of this trend. I guess now we should come up with a plan as to where do we draw a line in the sand?

The main point I have been trying to get to is, how is it all right to allow a person to do something for a lenght of time, and then all of a sudden without even a clue or good reason take that oppotunity away?

Even though I am not useing a flint-lock or percussion cap ignited firearm I am still experiencing the muzzle-loader style of hunting by operating a single shot, front-loading, short-range firearm. No, I do not have to be worried about my pan powder getting wet or maybe blown out of the pan by a gust of wind, but the performance of my firearm I have chosen to hunt with is still basically the same. I just haven't been able to afford or haven't had enough interest in muzzle-loaders to own a good quality Hawken, other flint-lock, or percussion type of muzzleloader. A good quality, safe to operate firearm is not a cheep date nowadays.

[Whoaru99]

Actually, I agree.

The modern ML offer so much advantage over traditional ML the added advantage of smokeless pales in comparison, IMO.

Of course, one is still of free will to use a traditional style ML if they so choose.

[herdog]

You Make good points Ufatz and I can't say I like the way the muzzleloader season has gone. I would not be surprised if we were considering a "primitive" season some time soon. Anyway I got to thinking about what powders are

traditional. I did just a little research.

Black Powder has been around for 6-7 centuries.

Smokeless (Nitrocellulose) Powder was made by the 1890's

Pyrodex was patented in 1975.

Cleanshot was made about 2002. Later became American Pioneer Powders (Goex, Shockey's, and others).

Triple 7 was introduced in 2004.

Here is a link to more info than anybody probably needs.

http://www.chuckhawks.com/smokeless_powder_muzzleloading.htm

[lawdog]

A little misleading herdog considering the first smokeless muzzleloader came out last year. You make it sound like its been the way of the pioneers with that post.

[ScoutII]

lawdog:Ihave owned mine for 2 years, and I know that it wasn't the first smokeless muzzle-loader. Quote from Randy Wakemans web site:

"I am writing regarding the proposed ban on the use of smokeless powder muzzleloaders for deer hunting here in Indiana. I am a graduate of Purdue, an honors graduate of the Indiana Law Enforcement Academy, a Lieutenant on the Madison County Sheriff's Dept., a certified firearms instructor, and a SWAT member/trainer. I am telling you this because I want you to know that I am educated and very familiar with firearms. I have also been hunting since I was 13 years old, about 22 years. I feel that I am qualified to speak about this issue because I have hunted deer with a muzzleloader for years, and a smokeless muzzleloader since 2000. I also am in a profession where I have had the opportunity to investigate hunting 'accidents'."

[Whoaru99]

The first versions of the Savage 10ML came out in 1999 with the 10ML-II out in 2000.

[lawdog]

I stand corrected. I had never heard of that thing until like a year ago.

Regardless, its not been used since forever as your post suggested.

[ScoutII]

lawdog: I think the point herdog was making is that smokeless powder has been in use for over a century. Whereas black-powder substitutes have only been on the market for 5-10 years.

Seems pretty coincidental that substitute powders come out about the same time as the Savage.

[herdog]

Lawdog, I was not trying to mislead anybody about anything. Its just interesting facts. You seem to be opposed to us using Smokeless Powder in our Savages. Would you mind saying why? From what you said you are shooting about the most advanced Muzzleloader/Powder combination possible.

ScoutII or Whoaru: Do you know much about other Muzzleloaders that shoot Smokeless?

[lawdog]

I am not extremely opposed to it, but I see no reason for allowing it either which has been the point I made since the beginning, if you want to change the law to allow it, you need to say why its needed so bad (oh and "because my gun will do it" is not really a reason either, so don't try to pursuade me with that...). For me, the big puff of smoke from the black powder or its substitutes is a big part of the muzzleloader shooting for me. I like my Omega, but I don't kill anymore or any better than I did with my old smokepole... Fact of the matter is, I haven't even shot a deer with the muzzleloader since I bought the Omega.

[herdog]

Lawdog, Thanks for the comeback. I would fully like to adress the finer points but I am off to the desert early tomorrow to learn more about terrorists and such. For you to say we need to prove why an existing law needs to be overturned when the law came from no where with no input or justification is b.s. Your muzzleloader shoots just as well and actually has advantages over my Savage. Why should mine be banned and not yours?

[herdog]

Lawdog, It's just another Muzzleloader that needs each shot handloaded in the field. Incidently, If the Omega with Triple 7 is not a big improvement over the old smokepole, the old smokepole is not very old or something.