RATING THE INLINE MUZZLELOADING MANUFACTURERS

[RandyWakeman]

RATING THE INLINE MUZZLELOADING MANUFACTURERS


There are trends in customer service, uniformity of quality, and overall customer satisfaction that manifest themselves over time. It is dynamic, as a company once renowned for customer service may have taken a step backwards, and those who were not at the top of the heap a few years ago may now be. The ratings are by nature subjective, and the “one-incident” reporting has a margin of error of “totality.” Nevertheless, based on my experiences, and several informal surveys of others—these are tendencies that I’m comfortable in relating. It remains, like most things, a matter of opinion. To keep this brief overview from becoming a “drag” of sorts to read, I’ll start at the bottom of the smokepole bucket and work up. Your mileage may vary, but I’ve found that quality in customer service and attention to detail often correlate with quality products. No attempt has been made to cover all muzzleloading companies, as some inlines are so obscure and produced in such small quantities the general consumer has no reason to suspect they exist.

I.   THE BOTTOM OF THE BARREL

Traditions, White Rifles, and Remington all have achieved this dubious distinction—for different reasons. The reports of self-firing Traditions bolt guns has been reported too often to ignore, and I’ve experienced this sad phenomenon myself. Additionally, when the cyclical “new .45 craze” was touted again—several manufacturers rushed to market with poorly selected or tested twist rates in their .45 caliber barrels. The better manufacturers protected their customers with replacement barrels; with Traditions it was “too bad, so sad.” Less and less is heard of Traditions in the inline market these days—their sudden vanish from Cabela’s was no accident.

With no legible owner’s manual, apparently no inventory, and no 2004 catalogs, White Rifles, LLC, continues what some have referred to as a “controlled liquidation.” It is a sad commentary, but the “new” guns sold resplendent with rust, used barrels, or guns that will not fire reliably out of the box is bad juju—at least.

Remington apparently just does not care much anymore. Development of their sole model froze a long time ago, to the point where their 700ML’s have recently been on clearance at warehouse clubs. The Canadian made 209 ignition has always been acknowledged as better than Remington’s own weak attempt, and it is hard to spot anything but lack of improvement and a decline in quality control from this once proud company.

II.   MIDDLE OF THE PACK

CVA brand (owned by the Spanish company BPI) and the remarkably un-Spanish name of “Winchester Muzzleloading” seems to fall somewhere squarely in the middle. With independent knowledge, it has taken no less than three replacement guns to get one without a defective barrel or trigger. Yet, some of their employees do try very hard. Essentially an “import only” entity in the United States, their lack of testing shows. Their manuals are contradictory; their “lifetime warranty” is not transferable. Selling essentially 3 MOA “cheap Charlie” arms, some have found them wonderfully adequate based on the price paid. Their approach has always been more hyperbole than substance; to be fair, they are hardly alone with their baseless brags. Some like to say you get what you pay for, other feel you pay what you shop for. BPI / CVA / Winchester Muzzleloading currently embodies the former.

NEF / H & R, now a division of Marlin, has developed a very good following in the “bang for the buck” category. Their 4473 status has held them back from some market segments, but they have finally addressed that this year. While certainly no prizewinners in the looks department, the argument has been made that they are currently one of the very best values in generally well-made inlines today. From that perspective, it is hard to strongly disagree. Due to high marketing pressure in the $200 arena, they are now being squeezed a bit by the also “made in USA” T/C Black Diamonds and Knight Wolverines, but their customers seem generally satisfied based on the low cost of entry—particularly if the personal preference is a break action inline of some sort.

III.   THE “GOOD BUT I DON’T KNOW” DEPARTMENT

Savage Arms and Sturm, Ruger & Company fall in to the genre, for different reasons. I’ve had extremely positive customer service from Ruger with their entire line, and can be considered a Ruger fan. Their 77/50 muzzleloading attempt seems to be a “me too” offering, with scant attention to really addressing the market or improving the breed. I sold mine, and I wasn’t the least bit sorry to see it go. Yet, Ruger rifles and wheelguns continue to impress, and there are no specific quality issues with their muzzleloader, though integral rings on an inline shows a real lack of understanding. It has always looked more like dabbling than a focused attempt, and so it remains—with all the excitement of watching paint dry.

Savage Arms, another fine company, does offer a superior product in the 10ML-II that has drastically improved in the last year alone. I can’t comment on warranty service, as I’ve never had a warranty issue with a Savage. Their owner’s manual needs help, which I understand it is getting, and though the Savage 10ML-II is a non-4473 arm—I can’t see that it is in any way marketed as such. It is one primary action, perhaps the finest high-performance muzzleloader out there, but the distinct lack of factory accessories, stock options, lack of inventory, and a lackluster warranty coupled with the quiet marketing of this rifle appears to keep their transmission stuck in neutral. Addressing those issues could quickly pop them to the top; sometimes I’ve wondered if they really appreciate what their 10ML-II can do!

IV.   THE TOP OF THE SMOKEPOLE CITY

Three companies are at the top rung at present, in my opinion. Again, they are there for different reasons, and in different areas. They are Austin & Halleck, Knight Rifles, and Thompson Center Arms.

Austin & Halleck is a modest division of North American Arms, and prior to the NAA take-over there were vivid QC and customer service issues. I don’t believe they seek to be the largest muzzleloading entity; they probably can’t find that much curly maple. Their rejuvenated dealer network, upgraded manuals, informative website, goodly selection of accessories, and attention to quality control has resulted in almost a doubling of sales in the last year alone. Their line entails one primary inline, and one primary sidelock, but their appeal has never been broader, nor their customer service any better. Underscoring that, their inlines are pretty, and they certainly can group.

Knight Rifles has, in my opinion, the best personal customer support in the industry. Their Wolverine is a performance leader in its category, the Knight Disc Elite the most accurate out of the box inline I’ve ever fired. Uniform barrels, outstanding triggers, average “one size fits all” owner’s manuals (but enhanced by videotapes and DVD’s) give uniform, excellent customer satisfaction with these two models in particular, with Knight filling the turkey hunting niche with their TK2000. Their model variations and stock options are the broadest in the industry. Their unusual choice of marketing keynotes, and an obvious over-reliance on proprietary items is a source for nit picking—but, fundamentally they are an extremely high quality company of sportsmen and shooters with a dedication to customer service. It shows.

Thompson Arms is in the enviable position of having the two most popular (and copied) muzzleloaders today: The Omega and the Encore. Thompson has the very best owner’s manuals in the industry, and a true lifetime warranty that goes with the gun, should you ever decide to sell it. That lifetime warranty has resulted in an exceedingly high resale value compared to other brands. The new Contender G2, though not yet widely distributed, is obviously another very high quality offering. All this coupled with the only mainstream “Made in the USA” sidelocks has positioned Thompson to be the market leader for many years to come. There’s always room for improvement: their synthetic stocks do not compare favorably to those of Knight, and they do look more than a bit silly selling “Bore Butter.” They are, with little question, the quality inline muzzleloader market leader of today.



© 2004 by Randy Wakeman

[big6x6]

Good report and I agree with your findings.  I either own or have owned practically every brand you mentioned; Traditions, White, BPI(Winchester), Knight, and T/C.  

Brand image seems to revolve around two areas, product quality and customer service.  Companies that send out less than fully functional rifles can improve their image by a swift acting and knowledgeable customer service department.  BPI seems to have one of the better customer service departments.  It's a good thing.  Purchase a BPI product and chances are you'll need it.  Their brand image is improved with  polite, well-meaning cs.

CVA seems to be the only company that has a sub-par product and a good customer service department.  MOST of the companies that I have had dealings with that have a non-functional product ALSO have non-exhistant or lack-luster customer service.  

The good news for the consumer is if you purchase an Austin Halleck, Knight, or a T/C you'll have the benefit of both an excellent product AND excellent customer service.

[Wolfhound]

Nice artical Randy. Only one thing I dont agree with. The placement of Ruger in the "Good but I don't know" category. Frankly most people are probably not even aware of it's existance. Ruger has done little or nothing to promote it. 209 ignition (does Ruger even put it on current production guns?) has only recently become available, but I'm not even sure if Ruger has anything to do with it. I would have stuck them in the "Bottom of the barrel" category. They may have customer service (don't know since I've never owned a Ruger), but their ML offering is too much like Remington's for my taste. Although they do offer a few variations I believe (from an ad I read a loooooooooooooong time ago). I doubt most muzzleloader hunters even know they exist. That's a bad situation when your goal is to sell em.

[RandyWakeman]

Only one thing I dont agree with. The placement of Ruger in the "Good but I don't know" category.

Well, Wolfhound, the "I don't know part" leaves a lot of room for me, don't you think?  :roll:  :roll:  :roll:

There are certainly some parallels between Remington, Ruger, and Savage in terms of their being major rifle companies, and turning their short action rifles into muzzleloaders. The end results have been different.

My guess is that the theory with Remington and Ruger was originally throw out a muzzleloader, stick it in the catalog, and let the "Familiarity Factor" do a lot of the work. That seemed effective to some degree, at least originally, and though Remington has spent a few pesos trying to win the NMLRA World's Manufacturers Championship (with Knight beating them year after year), they are no major force in ML land at all. It is really hard not to view Remington as a company in total decay.

My Ruger 77/50 was the "Officer's Model,"-- beautifully made, nice wood, rich bluing, and a lightweight inline compared to many. It shot comfortably in the 1-1/2 MOA area, was a pain to clean though, and was a fabulous scopeburner. It is hard to completely discount Ruger, though, as they remain the only major publicly held US firearms maker-- and few companies anywhere can touch the breadth of their line. For a BP revolver, the Ruger Old Army .45 is universally lauded as one of the best, and you really have to go a long way to find an area with no 10/22's. A strong company, but they seem puzzled as to why they introduced a muzzleloader line at all.

The Savage 10ML is obviously innovative, and was a cutting edge 209-fired, sealed action, smokeless capability design from the very start-- a completely higher, better level than Rem-Rug. Throw in the Accu-Trigger for 2004, a vastly improved safety and ramrod, it is clear that the rifle itself is not standing still. What is not clear, at least to me, is how the "sell to distributors only program" thinking, not used by any successful muzzleloading company presently, and already clearly shown as either lackluster or ineffective by Remington and Ruger-- could possibly be any different for Savage Arms.

One of the definitions of insanity is trying the same thing over and over, but expecting a different outcome. I'd hope that the great minds of Savage Arms take a good hard look at their rifle as compared to the as yet unproven Knight Revolution. With Knight having already collected orders for over 17,000 units of the Revolution, if Savage does not have a backlog equal to or exceeding that-- they really might want to ask themselves, "Why not?"