Savage 10MLSS VS Smokeless powder

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • bfreeder00

    Active Member
    Apr 27, 2009
    395
    Delaware/ Iraq
    Hope this has not been posted here before. This was the result of someone running smokeless powder in their .50 muzzle loader. This Savage was supposed to be rated to handle smokeless, but you can see what happened.
    ATT00010.jpg

    ATT00025.jpg

    ATT00031.jpg

    ATT00037.jpg

    ATT00043.jpg

    ATT00019.jpg
     

    K31

    "Part of that Ultra MAGA Crowd"
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 15, 2006
    35,713
    AA county
    A friend owns one and the Internet is full of double and triple layer loads where people drop in so much of powder X followed by so much of Y. I'm betting it was not the rifle.
     

    HarEngSer

    Banned
    BANNED!!!
    Jun 4, 2008
    730
    Bel Air
    Mine is setfor 42 grains of smokeless. If you volume measure or mistake the BP grain weight (150 I think) i can see this being the result.
     

    clandestine

    AR-15 Savant
    Oct 13, 2008
    37,037
    Elkton, MD
    A friend owns one and the Internet is full of double and triple layer loads where people drop in so much of powder X followed by so much of Y. I'm betting it was not the rifle.

    This! Thats a triple or more charge or a 2 bullet in the barrel scenario.
     

    newmuzzleloader

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Apr 14, 2009
    4,782
    joppa
    I have 1 that I use for ML and firearms season. NO problems in the 2 yrs. I have had it. You have to be extra careful measuring the powder, by weight with a scale and not by volume.
     

    bfreeder00

    Active Member
    Apr 27, 2009
    395
    Delaware/ Iraq
    According to the information that I had the guy had his hand on top of the scope and it still did that damage to his hand. Just imagine what it would look like if he had is hand on the forearm.
     

    K31

    "Part of that Ultra MAGA Crowd"
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 15, 2006
    35,713
    AA county
    According to the information that I had the guy had his hand on top of the scope and it still did that damage to his hand. Just imagine what it would look like if he had is hand on the forearm.

    Not to doubt you but that doesn't really align with the damage.

    If he's righthanded and resting his hand on top of the scope his thumb is the furtherest part of his hand away from the explosion. Also, his forearm (that looks relatively unscathed) would be the closest thing. If he was gripping the forearm of the rifle his thumb would be closer to the explosion.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    275,978
    Messages
    7,303,281
    Members
    33,550
    Latest member
    loops12

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom