AS Bill Crane used to say, you can do anything you want unless you win 

calledflyer wrote on Jun 12^th, 2018 at 12:33pm:


Joe's gun has two features that tell me it's a late model. It has the wood Schnabel type tip on the forearm instead of the steel forearm tip. The other is the buttplate. His Hepburn has the late model buttplate that is not rounded on top or thin like the early buttplate was.
Guessing the barrel is marked "Remington Arms Co." if it's an original, vs. "E. Remington & Sons" used on pre 1889 guns..

Thanks fellas. I'm not very sharp with the Remington guns- and I proudly declare ignorance concerning the Stevens line. Some others as well

Joe,

Ran across this old post and wanted to clarify.

The year that the WSU changed the rule about loading at the bench with one case and smokeless powder didn't have anything to do with you or your shooting. It did, however, have everything to do with the guy a few benches away from you who was throwing smokeless charges at the bench and using one case. He double charged (we think), blew a primer pocket and had to have help knocking the case out of his rifle with a loading rod and hammer. Good thing that he was shooting a Sharps-Borchardt or there might have been shrapnel flying your way.

The line officer, the Schuetzenmeister and the Shooter's Jury decided that it was too easy to be distracted during a match to allow loading with smokeless at the bench. Changing a rule in the middle of a match is generally not a good idea but I think you understand why we did it immediately. 

Loading with black, one case at a time, is still allowed as double charging with black would be pretty tough. We kept this rule in place as long as I was connected with the matches at Cody and I assume that other WSU matches are doing the same, but am not absolutely sure on that. I would advise anyone participating in a WSU match and intending to load one case at a time with smokeless at the bench to call ahead and find out if it is allowed.

I'm not sure what the position of the ASSRA or the ISSA is on this loading technique.

Just wanted to clear this up in case any new shooters were confused about WSU rules and procedures.

Steve Garbe

I disagree with that smokeless rule.  It is too easy to get distracted and double charge a case.  That is especially critical shooting a Ballard. Therefore, the rule should be look at the primer every time before you charge the case.  After it is charged, put it directly into the breach. If you are interrupted, dump the powder in to the measure, look at the primer and charge the case.  If you forgot it was loaded, the powder dumps out when you look at the primer.   I do not keep loaded cases on the bench when I am shooting a Ballard.  Too risky.

Joe,
No knee jerk about it...the folks in charge of the match debated the issue and decided to err on the side of caution.

Your perspective changes when you are the one being held responsible for safety at match, which I'm sure you understand from running the matches that you have. It would have been a bit difficult to explain to club officers, let alone a jury, why it was that a problem presented itself and nothing was done by those in charge to correct it.

There are many opinions on this topic. Mine, given my limited experience, is that vintage rifles chambered for black powder cartridges should be shot with black powder. This is precisely the argument that took place in the early days of BPCR silhouette. The general consensus at a Shooters Meeting was that, given all the variables in vintage manufacturing plus the "gunsmithing" that has been done to old rifles over the years, requiring black powder to be used was the safest approach. This debate was about the practice of duplexing with smokeless and black, not using straight smokeless. Using straight smokeless in a vintage firearm requires even more care than duplexing, in my opinion. Believe me, there were a few noses badly out of joint, but cooler heads prevailed.

Modern-made firearms, made from appropriate materials give one a margin for error, but there was a very good reason why the Ballards and High Walls we made in Cody were marked "Black Powder" on the barrel. Our attorneys advised that this was a prudent precaution, although not completely fool-proof.

I was directly behind the line at the Quigley shoot a few years ago when a competitor blew apart a cast-frame Ballard with a smokeless load assembled by her husband. It wasn't a pretty sound, and what really wasn't pretty was the fact that a young shooter was sitting on the line immediately to the shooter's left. The receiver blew out the side and only chance prevented a piece of it from flying down the line. Not good to contemplate what could have happened.

In a public setting with spectators in attendance, one must be careful. At home on your own private range, you are largely responsible for your actions. At the public match, those in charge have to consider all factors and make a responsible decision, even if it is not popular with the shooters at the time.

Just my thoughts and opinions,

Steve Garbe

S.Garbe wrote on Aug 20^th, 2018 at 9:58pm:


It's very unfair to use that Ballard incident at Quigley as an example without adding details that created the incident.
The Ballard was a cast frame that should never have been rebarreled in the caliber it was. In addition the shooter's husband had loaded it with 5744 and a wad over the powder, which created an unsafe scenario regardless of whether it was a weaker action or not.
I've seen many people shoot cast frame Ballard rifles with smokeless and mild charges and done so for decades. I've seen even more forged frame Ballard rifles that have been shooting a steady diet of smokeless powder for generations of owners, and no problems.
I realize that BP is never going to be overloaded, but that doesn't mean that shooting smokeless carefully will blow up a gun built during the BP era. All the facts should be known when posting disparaging remarks about an event, and not just a couple facts.