|
Will
My CVA Muzzleloader Blow Up?
This is a question
asked over and over again by our readers; a question that many advertising-driven
publications would not dare to talk about, much less investigate. It certainly
is valid, and obviously important to muzzleloading hunters that value
their own well-being, as well as the health of their family members, neighbors,
and friends. No one expects their wives to drive them to the emergency
room a couple of hours after they buy a new CVA-- but, that is exactly
what has happened.
After numerous CVA
muzzleloader failures, and numerous life-changing personal injuries, a
representative sampling of current and recently failed CVA product has
been catalogued, and sent to several independent facilities for evaluation
at great expense and time. Their findings should trouble you, if not shock
you.
In a report from
the renowned H. P. White Laboratory, Inc., dated January 24, 2007, H.
P. White found when examining a failed recent production CVA rifle, "The
combination of relatively soft steel and tapered threads would have created
a dangerous situation. One in which the blow-out of the breech plug was
likely." This report is straight from Lester W. Roane, H.
P. White Laboratory.
Consumers need to
know how muzzleloaders compare in materials used. The metal used in CVA
guns is soft and weak, too soft and weak to be used in modern inline muzzleloaders
as far as I'm concerned. In the very same report from H. P. White, the
hardness of CVA rifles was measured. H. P. White reports, "Further,
the breechplug [Rb 99] is harder than the barrel [Rb 85] on the Black
exemplar. Both of these hardness readings are low for this application.
In standard engineering handbooks, the Rockwell "B" scale readings
are headed "Soft Steel and Non-Ferrous Alloys" or something
similar."
H. P. White continues,
"A U. S. made Thompson Center Arms Renegade rifle gave a hardness
reading on the barrel of Rc 18. This is more appropriate for the application."
Dr. William J. Bruchey,
of Port Deposit, MD, analyzed three CVA rifles memorialized in a report
dated March 24, 2007. Dr. Bruchey concluded his lengthy report by stating,
"Other anomalies, such as tapering of the breech hole, or manufacturing
or engineering design defects are a more likely cause and should be pursued
further."
This information
has been arrived at independently; it can and should be shared with the
muzzleloading hunting community. This is only a small portion of the body
of analysis collected; there are more victims on a regular basis, and
the costly process of independent analysis continues with each additional
incident. If this article saves needless pain and suffering, needless
911 calls, needless loss of body parts-- well, it has to be said. It must
be said.
The number of cases
I've evaluated grows regularly. Naturally, the more representative data
we have the more pointed my opinions become based the most credible evidence
we can gather. We have seen that CVA barrels are far softer than reputable
brands of muzzleloaders, including Knight and Thompson-muzzleloaders that
handle many of the very same loads that CVA owners are told to use in
their owner's manual, including the "3 pellet magnum load."
We are seeing not only relatively soft materials, but non-existent quality
control. It is not plausible that shooter error is a factor in several
incidents; it is not plausible that these guns were ever proof-tested
or ever fired with so much as recommended loads (much less proof loads)
before the consumer is directed to develop 25,000 PSI (or more, actually
up to 49,000 PSI with crushed Triple Se7en pellets) a few inches from
his face. Then, needless and sadly, it is too late.
As you have read
above from H. P. White Laboratories, CVA inline guns tested are made from
softer, weaker, inferior metal than even an old Thompson Center sidelock
such as the Renegade. So soft in fact, CVA materials had to be measured
on the wrong scale, the Rockwell "B" scale that is used for
soft metals, not suitable firearms materials. Note that the Thompson Renegade
is not a "magnum muzzleloader," is not recommended to
be used with 150 grain charges, yet the old T/C Renegade is a clearly
better built muzzleloader than current CVA inlines tested using stronger
materials as verified by H. P. White testing. The difference should send
chills up your spine, when H. P. White finds CVA materials hardness as
"low for the application" and a T/C sidelock's
materials as "more appropriate for the application."
H. P. White is the
most respected independent ballistics laboratory in the United States,
and has been for decades. "H.P. White Laboratory, Inc. was founded
in 1936 by Mr. Henry Packard White as a ballistic research and development
facility. Since that time, we have become acknowledged as the leading
privately owned laboratory engaged in small arms and ammunition research,
development and testing."
It is vital to consider
the sources of information. Note, as published by H. P. White: "H.P.
White Laboratory, Inc. produces no manufactured item and is in no manner
affiliated with any other research organization, manufacturer, agency
or end product user. We are, therefore, the only truly independent ballistics
laboratory in the United States. This unique independence has enabled
the Laboratory to maintain an objectivity difficult to duplicate elsewhere."
It is my clear
and steadfast opinion that yes, based on the very best evidence
we have-- a new "used as directed" CVA muzzleloader may certainly
severely injure or destroy some of your body parts that you don't care
to have damaged or destroyed. Far, far too many incidents have already
taken place to validate that; lamentably and regrettably so.

Copyright
2007 by Randy Wakeman. All Rights Reserved.
|
 |