Rifleman said:
Randy, Do they consider anything other then a 1.5 moa group when it comes to performance?
What about :
loading ease
rate of fouling buildup
cleaning ease
Also what about the fact that guys who spend over 500 bucks on a muzzleloader expect better? Far better! Cosmetics had better be an issue with them because as you can see by how fast this thread is growing this is an issue with the customers.
And also back on that 1.5 moa standard, that might be what they go by but it is a shame when the rifle will easily outperform that with such crap barrels, why not just GET IT RIGHT and the we will see how good a SS barrel will really shoot.
Dwight,
I don't have an answer that will be totally pleasing to everyone, that's one thing I'm sure about! :wink:
The 1-1/2" accuracy promise may NOT be what a target shooter wants-- however, it is a
higher standard than any standard production muzzleloader made today. Thompson promises or guarantees nothing; Knight has a 2-1/2" accuracy promise. As a muzzleloading hunting gun, the accuracy is more than most hunters can
use on a big game animal in the field.
Compared to some centerfires, it is quite good as well. A Ruger Mini-14 .223 accuracy standard is TWO inches--
@ 50 yards.
As far as loading ease, clean-up ease, fouling-- the Savage 10ML-II is so far ahead of Pyrodex and Triple Seven guns it isn't funny.
The 10ML-II is a costly muzzleloader to make, compared to others as well. The Accu-Trigger is certainly a more costly and better trigger than a generic Bold trigger, much less the majority of muzzleloaders (Omega, Encore, Knight Vision, etc., etc.) that do not have user adjustable triggers at all.
100% proof-testing and function testing of every 10ML-II is done by hand, and also costs money. No other muzzleloading company bothers.
Most can understand that an double pillared action screw plus a recoil lug gun system is more costly than an action held together by a single screw. It is, as is the requisite head spacing. Certified GBQ 4140C and 416SS heat treated barrels are also more costly than the milder steels used in other muzzleloaders-- that sell for as much, or more. The 10ML-II is a relatively costly frontloader to make, no two ways around it.
The 10ML-II barrel is not hand-lapped or polished as you might find in a Lilja, Hart, Kreiger, Schneider match-grade barrel that sells for $400 just for the blank alone, with no machining done to it at all. It is not presented to be a match grade or bench rest barrel. That also comes at a price, a price that few are seemingly willing to pay.
A couple years ago, radial scratches were far more prominent then they are now. Yet, many of these guns shot, and continue to shoot 1 MOA groups-- so, I can't say it is a functional issue at all. Savage has devoted attention to reducing tooling marks in the 10ML-II, and they have improved quite a bit in the SS 10ML-II barrels I've seen, which is far, far more barrels than most folks have had the opportunity to inspect. Nevertheless, some barrels do have cosmetic residual tooling marks.
Suffice it to say that Savage Arms stands firmly behind their product, and will be happy to evaluate any gun that a customer might be concerned about. No way could I call a sub 1.5 MOA hunting muzzleloader "an issue."
This e-mail, sent yesterday, is more the rule than the exception:
"
Hi Randy,
I hope you are having a great new year. 2005 was a very bad year for me. On top of a lot of other things, at the beginning of October I broke my neck causing me to miss hunting season for the first time since 1964.
Needless to say, I haven't been shooting since the accident either. I had my "Henry Ball" edition all ready for hunting, having done a lot of shooting during the Summer and early Fall. I had been intending to write you to tell you about the fantastic accuracy I've been getting but did not get around to it until now.
Not only is the Savage the most accurate of any muzzle loader I have shot but it is one of the most accurate rifles I have shot regardless of type. It rivals even my .22/250 heavy varmint rifle at 100- 150 yards. Many groups have consisted of one ragged hole just a bit over 1/2 inch!
I want to thank you for putting me onto this rifle and in particular the "Henry Ball" edition. It has given me many hours of shooting pleasure.
Thanks again,
Joe Frechette
Fenton, IL
The vast majority of muzzleloading enthusiasts out there have never had a better than 1-1/2" muzzleloader out of the box, before they bought a Savage 10ML-II. It is designed and sold as a big game hunting tool, and in those parameters better than 1-1/2"is
more accuracy than most hunters can use. I don't know anyone who has claimed missing a deer by 1/4" except for perhaps Maxwell Smart who likely missed them by "
that much!
Not a target rifle, already more accurate and more maintenance free than any standard muzzleloading rifle made-- it is hard to fault what it offers compared to every other muzzleloading rifle you can get as a factory item.
But, Savage is constantly looking for ways to improve in areas that are feasible and justifiable, and I have seen the improvement in their fit and finish just over the last couple of years. It remains what Henry Ball wanted it to be all along-- the most effective mass-produced muzzleloading hunting rifle available.
Just another one for the collection... 
I was sorely tempted to grab a Knight from Randy- but cant make myself want to ML with anything but the Savage now :wink: :d'oh!: Rick
