Traditional or Not?

[Muley Hunter]

I didn't think we were talking about the forum, but in general.

 

[exMember]

Ahhhh okay, I figured we were talking about the forum LOL. I didn't want anyone to get offended due to the rules the way they are. As long as its got a side hammer, loads in the muzzle and has the traditional styling but uses different materials, its still a traditional gun IMO. Remember, a lot of the plastic guns the companies made due to the eastern laws that put hunting season in very poor winter weather and they wanted to market the Non swelling stock when it gets wet/won't rust up SS Barrel, etc.

 

[Muley Hunter]

I figured that was all part of hunting with a traditional rifle. If you're going to modernize it you might as well shoot a modern rifle.

 

[GreyHawk]

This is what I was hoping to see - an honest discussion about a topic with no easily defined answers.
I often long to add a smoothbore trade gun to the collection, purely to satisfy my love of early American history, and it'd be a real hoot to take pheasant hunting.  But, for deer hunting in the often damp conditions here in the northeast, the Greyhawk fills the bill for me, in a traditional kind o' way.  

Jeff

 

[Muley Hunter]

Enjoy it. However, in damp conditions it's not so much the stock and barrel material that's the problem. It's the cap and powder.

 

[OSR]

Interesting discussion regarding traditional vs modern (in-lines).  I lean towards FG's version.  At a certain point TC decided to make "traditional" style rifles with different materials to broaden their appeal (market).  It probably also had to do with the bottom line, $$$$.  Synthetic stocks were easier/cheaper to produce than walnut.  It was harder to find the wood stocked guns.  We actually  should be happy that TC made these guns which allowed more people get into muzzlelloading.

 

[exMember]

It also didn't help that their stock suppliers kept burning down lol. Weather conditions is another deal but in the end, the true reason is in fact $$$.