Author Topic: CVA muzzleloaders - are they safe (Read 18940 times)

bubba · « **Reply #60 on:** March 21, 2009, 05:07:20 AM »

you are entitled to your opinion regardless how tainted it is with at the least suspect data. I am out of this one. Some people wear blinders and worship false gods. Nothing I can do about it.

Swampman · « **Reply #61 on:** March 21, 2009, 05:10:03 AM »

And most seem to bury their heads in the sand. Is it hard to breath like that?

bubba · « **Reply #62 on:** March 21, 2009, 05:25:10 AM »

Breath no Breathe maybe. I am sure that CVA is not losing business over one mans attempt to discredit them. I guess the question that keeps getting avoided still stands. If there are more documented suits against T/C than CVA at this time why isnt the great one preaching about the dangers of a T/C barrel. I am thinking because CVA didn't pay him for his umm purchased and tainted opinions. Money buys a lot of opinions. Sit in any court and listen to the paid so called experts. That is the issue here. Why dont you are your idol address that? Talk about your head buried in the sand. Documented three suits agains CVA and 4 against T/C hmmmm. I guess avoiding the issues means you are losing the debate.

Cuts Crooked · « **Reply #63 on:** March 21, 2009, 06:10:53 AM »

Quote from: Swampman on March 21, 2009, 03:21:54 AM

The question asked wasn't about other firearms companies. I don't have a dog in this fight. Personal safety is my only concern.

Well..I'm asking it. You gonna attack every one now, or continue your crusade solely against CVA while people are injured/endangered by the low quality/poorly engineered products of other gun makers? Like Remington perhaps, who has at least 8 suits pending? You don't have a dog in those fights either I suppose?

Buckskins & Black Powder · « **Reply #64 on:** March 21, 2009, 07:56:18 AM »

my response to a members question was deleted by someone and then locked. I guess a straight forward answer of ( if you like the rifle and it fits you, go for it!) was not liked by a moderator. Instead his personal attacks on traditions were the only thing on there.

montveil · « **Reply #65 on:** March 25, 2009, 11:13:25 AM »

Let's get out of this subject. If you don't like a particular firearm don't buy it.
For the rest of us who trust our CVA's we will continue to use them

mangulator · « **Reply #66 on:** March 25, 2009, 01:16:36 PM »

ditto...

Swampman · « **Reply #67 on:** March 26, 2009, 11:26:17 AM »

As long as the lowest price at any cost is the most important thing, spanish made guns will continue to sell. The novice will keep them in business, just as they always have.

Cuts Crooked · « **Reply #68 on:** March 26, 2009, 12:53:47 PM »

Quote from: Swampman on March 26, 2009, 11:26:17 AM

As long as the lowest price at any cost is the most important thing, spanish made guns will continue to sell. The novice will keep them in business, just as they always have.

So true! Buy Remington instead...you can have low quality/poorly engineered/dangerous stuff for a higher price!

(eight lawsuits pending)

Swampman · « **Reply #69 on:** March 26, 2009, 01:01:04 PM »

Remingtons are and always have been safe for everone but idiots. A company cannot stop someone from violating the first rule of firearm safety.

A company can on the other hand test their product to ensure safety & use suitable materials in their construction. That cost money....They save money by stealing T/Cs (& Knight's) designs & owners manuals but that would be consumed by proper testing and using safe material for construction. Price at any cost is what it's all about.

Spanky · « **Reply #70 on:** March 26, 2009, 01:47:55 PM »

Quote from: Cuts Crooked on March 26, 2009, 12:53:47 PM

So true! Buy Remington instead...you can have low quality/poorly engineered/dangerous stuff for a higher price!

That's just a ridiculous thing to say.

Remington makes a good product and is well respected in the industry.
Just because you have a bone to pick with Swampy you don't have to bash Remington.

Spanky

bubba · « **Reply #71 on:** March 26, 2009, 03:42:19 PM »

The novice? I have been shooting and owning muzleloaders I bet longer than you and randy wakeman together. About 40 years to be exact. I own a lot of t/c and even a cva optima elite which also has a 270 barrel. If I am willing to shoot a 270 high pressure centerfire on the same frame from the same company, I am not too worried about what a muzzleloader barrel is going to do. The sad part is everyone of your opinions is based on what someone else says. Tyr an original thought it may hurt the first couple times, but it gets better

Swampman · « **Reply #72 on:** March 26, 2009, 03:57:13 PM »

I built my first muzzleloader in 1978. It was a CVA. It wouldn't hit a 4X8 sheet of plywood at 50 yards. I've owned several since then to ensure my first impression was correct. The up side is that sometimes when a novice buys one, they continue to look for a good muzzleloader. That's what happened to me.

Cuts Crooked · « **Reply #73 on:** March 26, 2009, 04:38:43 PM »

Quote from: Spanky on March 26, 2009, 01:47:55 PM

Quote from: Cuts Crooked on March 26, 2009, 12:53:47 PM
So true! Buy Remington instead...you can have low quality/poorly engineered/dangerous stuff for a higher price!

That's just a ridiculous thing to say.
Remington makes a good product and is well respected in the industry.
Just because you have a bone to pick with Swampy you don't have to bash Remington.

Spanky

Yer right Spanky...but we don't have a "tongue firmly in cheek" smiley face available. The point being, Swamp makes much of the suits against CVA, using them as "proof" that CVA guns are unsafe, while ignoring a greater number against Remington (his apparent object of affection) In reality, Remington makes fine products...just like CVA does. I know, I own products made by both companies and I have no fear of either being substandard. I just enjoyed pointing out Swamp and Wakemans obvious bias and use of "facts" that are in reality meaningless. A failing of mine I fear, pointing out the obvious...............

Cuts Crooked · « **Reply #74 on:** March 26, 2009, 04:43:03 PM »

Quote

A company can on the other hand test their product to ensure safety & use suitable materials in their construction. That cost money....They save money by stealing T/Cs (& Knight's) designs & owners manuals

Can you prove this with a court case awarding damages for patent infringement? Or are you pulling stuff out of your @&& again?

dustyr · « **Reply #75 on:** March 26, 2009, 05:28:18 PM »

Quote from: UtahRob on March 03, 2009, 07:28:44 PM

If you look hard enough (like many are doing here) you will find almost any brand of gun has blow up at one time or another stupid is as stupid does . I have seen Encores . Marlins and i bet they all blame it on the guns . If you don't want a CVA don't buy it . It's that simple , get over it !!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRKP1OkR1fA

Been following this thread for awhile . . . Some pretty strong feelings here

(same can be said on all the other forums out there when this subject comes up). Self-proclaimed "experts" are a dime a dozen as are individual opinions.

BTW, I own two CVAs - a Bobcat 50 cal (sidelock) and a Hunterbolt 45 cal (inline). Both shoot great and I have no fear of them "blowing up". In fact, shot my first muzzleloader deer with the Hunterbolt (103 yards with fiber optic sights) and has become my rifle of choice during the season.

IRT the youtube video . . . I had to watch that thing a couple times before finally I spotted what was bothering me about it - the explosion was caused by a plugged barrel. You can actually see the obstruction going down range a few feet forward of the split barrel. Manufacturing defect? Ah, no . . . user stupidity.

In this day and age, common sense is a rare commodity - people will not take responsibility for their own stupidity and/or mistakes. Smokeless powder in a barrel not designed for it - yeah, it probably will blow up. Manufacturing defect? No . . . user stupidity. Overcharge a barrel? Probably will blow up. Manufacturing defect? No . . . user stupity. A barrell blows up because it was "double loaded". Manufacturing defect? No . . . user stupity. The list can go on and on, and is not limited to just muzzleloaders, or, for that fact, any single manufacturer. Price paid is not a factor either - just because one pays more money for something does not make them immune from stupidity. Paying more money for something does not necessarily make it a better product either.

Cuts Crooked · « **Reply #76 on:** March 26, 2009, 05:38:20 PM »

And speaking of pointing out the obvious....

Quote from: Swampman on March 21, 2009, 04:57:06 AM

I've shot and owned several CVAs. I'd probably still own one of their traditional guns. I would not own one of their inlines ever.

Quote from: Swampman on March 26, 2009, 03:57:13 PM

I built my first muzzleloader in 1978. It was a CVA. It wouldn't hit a 4X8 sheet of plywood at 50 yards. I've owned several since then to ensure my first impression was correct.

Well now......which of the above statements is true? In one sentence he claims his CVA wouldn't hit a 4X8 sheet of plywood at 50 yards, in another he claims he'd still own one. What's wrong with this picture?

You and Randy are both getting kinda strange with yer claims now......

RandyWakeman · « **Reply #77 on:** March 26, 2009, 09:06:27 PM »

Quote

However, CVA took full responsibility at that time, and BPI (the current owner of the CVA brand) is continuing the efforts to find all 80,000 of these guns. So far, about 96% have been accounted for. For those who were injured with these guns, CVA or BPI has worked with those persons in good faith and given monetary settlements in the more serious cases.

After getting it wrong, and admitting they got it wrong 80,000 times in a row... it they have been unable to show how now they've "got it right."

That's really some impressive quality control, isn't it? Only 80,000 in a row slipped through the rigid no-compromise standards. Whatever it is, it certainly is impressive. It reminds me of the Cheney-Perazzi '08 bumper stickers: "Let's Give 'Em Another Shot."

What they do (and don't do) is a matter of public record-- the informed consumer can be as informed as they want to be, or not. Celebrating the great American outdoors with soft Spanish steel (or not) is a choice the individual gets to make. Too often, it has just added injury to insult.

Swampman · « **Reply #78 on:** March 26, 2009, 10:12:17 PM »

Quote from: Cuts Crooked on March 26, 2009, 04:43:03 PM

Can you prove this with a court case awarding damages for patent infringement? Or are you pulling stuff out of your @&& again?

CVA copied the Omega right down to copying the owner's manual. They haven't produced an original design in years.

bubba · « **Reply #79 on:** March 27, 2009, 12:46:23 AM »

and my dad can beat up your dad.

Cuts Crooked · « **Reply #80 on:** March 27, 2009, 01:48:11 AM »

Quote from: Swampman on March 26, 2009, 10:12:17 PM

Quote from: Cuts Crooked on March 26, 2009, 04:43:03 PM
Can you prove this with a court case awarding damages for patent infringement? Or are you pulling stuff out of your @&& again?

CVA copied the Omega right down to copying the owner's manual. They haven't produced an original design in years.

Like I said Swamp...show me the court award fer patent infringement. Otherwise yer jist blowin smoke like Wakey.

Buckskins & Black Powder · « **Reply #81 on:** March 27, 2009, 07:37:47 AM »

Hey anyone ever hear an update on that SAVAGE MUZZLELOADER that BLEW UP in canada? I think toby bridges said they had a faulty breech plug. Or atleast thats what was wrong with his savage when she went up in smoke.

Buckskins & Black Powder · « **Reply #82 on:** March 27, 2009, 07:41:42 AM »

And Randy, You should email m ik e be llm and chat about the quality of the Bergara barrel.

If CVA was dangerous guys, you wouldnt see those Review articles on randys website. He claims that they are so DANGEROUS!! that NO ONE should shoot them, Yet hes brave enough to put his face behind it.

Sometimes people are so used to making up stories or not telling the truth, that after a while, they start to believe their own lies. Kind of like when we were all kids and got our hand caught in the cookie jar and we lied so much to get out of it, that years later we still believed we didnt put our own hand in that savage.....er..... cookie jar.

alsaqr · « **Reply #83 on:** March 27, 2009, 10:50:07 AM »

Quote

Sometimes people are so used to making up stories or not telling the truth, that after a while, they start to believe their own lies.

Yep, there are two of them on this thread.

efremtags · « **Reply #84 on:** March 27, 2009, 04:29:11 PM »

found some info regarding court cases:
http://www.lawyersweekly.com/reprints/grg37.htm

recall notice website
http://130.94.182.159/recalls.htm#CVA1

one thing is for sure, I have over the years seen issues with misfiring usually related to safety mechanisms. If the gun is never pointed at anything yu intend to kill, no one will get hurt. A gun that has a barallel come apart from normal use is another matter, not in the same league of problem. The the CVA truly has a barallel strength issue, I would consider this as bad of an issue to have as any.

From experience, european craftsmanship has traditionally been excellent. Beretta, CZ, FN, H&H all have roots there.

The main problem with cheap imports, whoever imports them is they will at some point slip up in quality. unfortunately, when guns fail, people get seriously injured. The Walmart syndrome is the consumers fault for buying into the low quality mindset. I have been guilty of it, but TV's and DVD players won't kill you. I have not stepped foot in a Walmart in over 2 years, and have stopped buying cheap imports (of any product, not just guns).

If everyone paid a little more for quality products, we would not have to discuss about the safety of cheap imported guns, or melamine in baby food or lead paint in our kids toys etc.etc.etc....

Buckskins & Black Powder · « **Reply #85 on:** March 27, 2009, 04:58:15 PM »

we already saw that case. CVA Apollo (recall gun)

CVA's barrel strengths are compairable to TC's according to Mi ke Be llm

Why the heck cant we type a name or address without the (censored) crap taking over?

Spanky · « **Reply #86 on:** March 28, 2009, 03:06:44 AM »

I have 2 CVA's... both of them are dirt cheap beginner guns (Bobcat and Wolf).
I haven't had any problems with them.
I did change the Bobcat from #11 nipple to musket nipple.

Spanky

oldfart · « **Reply #87 on:** March 28, 2009, 06:13:38 AM »

Quote from: Swampman on March 26, 2009, 10:12:17 PM

Quote from: Cuts Crooked on March 26, 2009, 04:43:03 PM
Can you prove this with a court case awarding damages for patent infringement? Or are you pulling stuff out of your @&& again?

CVA copied the Omega right down to copying the owner's manual. They haven't produced an original design in years.

i beleive the electra is only made by cva, that would make it a original design. i own two optima's now, and have owned lots of cva's in the past. some have shot badly, but most were good guns. the two i own now are very good. i've owned tc, and knight, some bad most good. what i'm trying to say, no matter what brand you buy you will get a bad one every now and then.

nomosendero · « **Reply #88 on:** March 28, 2009, 08:01:26 AM »

Quote from: bigblock455 on March 27, 2009, 07:37:47 AM

Hey anyone ever hear an update on that SAVAGE MUZZLELOADER that BLEW UP in canada? I think toby bridges said they had a faulty breech plug. Or atleast thats what was wrong with his savage when she went up in smoke.

Yes, I would like to hear about an update

billynwtf · « **Reply #89 on:** March 28, 2009, 01:14:10 PM »

There will always be jerks out there running down products they dont like. Kinda like the ford guy and the chevy guy, they will have it out over which one is the best. I have been around guns all my life and have a good friend who is a gunsmith. Most barrel failures in muzzleloaders I have seen went back to the owner. To say CVA is unsafe is a joke. There are too many of them out there shooting just fine. All 11 of mine have never had a problem. You can call them cheap if you want to, but they have put alot of meat in my freezer and that is all that matters. Remington has their line of cheap guns too. Their muzzleloader is also made in spain and they did sell russian made shotguns. They shoot and will put meat in the freezer too. I would not pay Randy any attention. He is getting paid to run down CVA and promote savage. You should always go by your owners manuel for loads on your gun. If you dont and blow your self up was the gun unsafe or was it you?