Sheltowee
Well-known member
[Paging @Buckskins&BlackPowder, @Buckskins&BlackPowder you are needed in Aisle 3]
I picked up a gently used Remington 700 Ultimate this summer and outfitted it with a set of Williams WHRS sights for my fall pronghorn and deer hunts. It is fantastically accurate within 100 yards with 250gr. Thors and 84 grains by weight of BH209. But… it has the soul of a Tesla.
I’m a huge history buff and feel a little bit dirty toting this most modern evolution of a muzzleloader on the same plains and mountains as Carson and Bridger. To that end, the traditional muzzy bug has bitten me pretty bad. I’ll still carry the Remington on my hunts this fall but, *if* I was to pull the trigger (and then wait for the click, then wait for the boom) on a traditional rifle, these are the candidates:
-Pedersoli Missouri River Hawken: probably the most historically appropriate for the Front Range but not sure of the accuracy. Would lean toward a .54 but .50 seems to offer much more readily available commercial bullets. I think I would prefer conicals but could be convinced to shoot PRBs if they are of somewhat similar efficiency. Does the .54 bore offer that much of an advantage over a .50?
-Pedersoli Two Band Enfield: the American Civil War (or as some of the old folks still refer to it, The Late Unpleasantness) was my first love in history. The 1858 Enfield is a trim, easy handling weapon reputed to have stellar accuracy. My concern is that a .577 slug weighing 530 grains will have the trajectory of a cinder block. Would I be handicapping myself too much using this caliber?
-Pedersoli Whitworth/Volunteer: the most anachronistic in the Old West, but almost certainly the most accurate at long range. However, they would be the heaviest, least maneuverable rifles on this list and are only available in .45 caliber, so elk and moose would be out.
Leader at the turn is the Missouri River in .54 but would like to hear input from some of y’all who regularly shoot and hunt with traditional muzzleloaders. Penny for y’all’s thoughts?
I picked up a gently used Remington 700 Ultimate this summer and outfitted it with a set of Williams WHRS sights for my fall pronghorn and deer hunts. It is fantastically accurate within 100 yards with 250gr. Thors and 84 grains by weight of BH209. But… it has the soul of a Tesla.
I’m a huge history buff and feel a little bit dirty toting this most modern evolution of a muzzleloader on the same plains and mountains as Carson and Bridger. To that end, the traditional muzzy bug has bitten me pretty bad. I’ll still carry the Remington on my hunts this fall but, *if* I was to pull the trigger (and then wait for the click, then wait for the boom) on a traditional rifle, these are the candidates:
-Pedersoli Missouri River Hawken: probably the most historically appropriate for the Front Range but not sure of the accuracy. Would lean toward a .54 but .50 seems to offer much more readily available commercial bullets. I think I would prefer conicals but could be convinced to shoot PRBs if they are of somewhat similar efficiency. Does the .54 bore offer that much of an advantage over a .50?
-Pedersoli Two Band Enfield: the American Civil War (or as some of the old folks still refer to it, The Late Unpleasantness) was my first love in history. The 1858 Enfield is a trim, easy handling weapon reputed to have stellar accuracy. My concern is that a .577 slug weighing 530 grains will have the trajectory of a cinder block. Would I be handicapping myself too much using this caliber?
-Pedersoli Whitworth/Volunteer: the most anachronistic in the Old West, but almost certainly the most accurate at long range. However, they would be the heaviest, least maneuverable rifles on this list and are only available in .45 caliber, so elk and moose would be out.
Leader at the turn is the Missouri River in .54 but would like to hear input from some of y’all who regularly shoot and hunt with traditional muzzleloaders. Penny for y’all’s thoughts?
