Just another Knight question(s) MK-85 LK-93 & LK-II

[waarp8nt]

I just bought my 1st inline muzzleloader after discussing things somewhat with a friend. Green Mountain barrels, Timney Triggers and B/C stock on the early Knights had me intrigued. I quick internet search and I found a Knight MK-85 in what appears to be stainless with a standard black stock and a Redfield scope in my price range. Long story short, my dealer received it Saturday...I have only held a few inline muzzleloaders and shot even less (maybe one). I done a forum search and didn't find all the answers, but did find 1173 post, so I'm thinking there are some Knight fans here on the forum. With hunting season closing in I have a few questions if the locals would be so kind...

Is the 209 Conversion on the MK-85 worth it? Should it be done right away (I have read some people went back to #11 so I'm confused)?

Does the LK series still have GM barrels, Timney Triggers and B/C stocks?

MK-85 vs LK-93 what are the differences? Will parts interchange?

LK-93 vs LK-II what are the differences? Will parts interchange?

 

[ShawnT]

so I'm thinking there are some Knight fans here on the forum.

Maybe just a few! :lol:

Is the 209 Conversion on the MK-85 worth it? Should it be done right away (I have read some people went back to #11 so I'm confused)?

No. Don't bother with it. just get some #11 mag caps (CCI or even RWS1075) and your good to go. The 209 is not worth the bother and will cause more crud ring build up, big reason lots went back to #11 cap. The rifle as originally built for the #11 cap anyway.

The first MK-85s had a couple different brand barrels, There are some more knowledgeable on that then me. All later Knights had and still have Green Mountain barrels. Later MKs also came with a copy of the Timney trigger. If yours don't say Timney on the trigger body and safety then it is a copy. They are still good triggers though. If not mistaken the LKs were all round actions and the MKs were flat on the sides. The LK was more of an entry level rifle like the LKII.

I don't know if the old MKs composite stock were made by BC, I don't think I ever really heard that. Curious to see what some of the others say there.

 

[rangerod]

I go along with ShawnT. Stick with the #11's because there's no real advantage to the 209. I have the LK 93 and it shoots pretty well with open sights. The MK85 is a better gun. You made a good choice.

 

[sabotloader]

I just bought my 1st inline muzzleloader after discussing things somewhat with a friend. Green Mountain barrels, Timney Triggers and B/C stock on the early Knights had me intrigued. I quick internet search and I found a Knight MK-85 in what appears to be stainless with a standard black stock and a Redfield scope in my price range. Long story short, my dealer received it Saturday...I have only held a few inline muzzleloaders and shot even less (maybe one). I done a forum search and didn't find all the answers, but did find 1173 post, so I'm thinking there are some Knight fans here on the forum. With hunting season closing in I have a few questions if the locals would be so kind...

Is the 209 Conversion on the MK-85 worth it? Should it be done right away (I have read some people went back to #11 so I'm confused)?

The MK is an open breech ML which can be a safety concern when shooting 209's, especially if you could find a bare prime conversion. Shooting a 209 encased in a Red Plastic Jacket (FPJ system) is much safer. Chance of flying primer parts being expelled from the breech is much less.

For myself and after a few years of shooting 209's I have converted all of my plunger guns back to #11 ignition. And I use #11 mag caps or RWS Dynamit Noble 1075+ caps.

Does the LK series still have GM barrels, Timney Triggers and B/C stocks?

I believe they do - in fact I am almost positive they have GM barrels but the later models MAY have a Timney contract trigger (function and look like a Timney but are not true Timney's) - but not all MK's come with GM barrels. The early version of the rifle has barrels made by two manufactures and they were really good barrels.

MK-85 vs LK-93 what are the differences? Will parts interchange?

For the most part yes. The MK has a flat top receiver and the LK's - Wolverines - Bighorns have a rounded receiver.

LK-93 vs LK-II what are the differences? Will parts interchange?

Again for the most yes - the main thing is a different stock option if I remember correctly.

 

[rugerbh103]

All good advice.

I have been hunting with an LK since I was 18, first gun I ever bought myself. Never had any issue at all. I have used Pyrodex and T7, both loose and pellets. Currently shooting T7 loose with a Barnes bullet. It has the conversion, but in retrospect I didn't need it.

Recently acquired an MK-85 had have been hunting with it. No issues there either. As a kid a could never afford the Mk so I bought the LK. Performance wise I see no difference. The Mk is more pleasing to my eye. I have been shooting T7 loose with a Scorpion PT Gold 300 grain bullet using #11 caps with good results.

The LK has killed a lot of deer over the years and the MK is now starting to rack them up. Either way you can't go wrong.

 

[waarp8nt]

Gentlemen, Thank you for your advise. I'm hoping to shoot some this weekend.