Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 3/31/2006 8:14:37 AM EST
[Last Edit: 3/31/2006 8:15:35 AM EST by Rampant_Colt]
i was brousing throught the 2006 Cabelas shooting/reloading catalog and saw this Kodiak double rifle offered in .72 cal!
i must have this!

does anyone on here have one or have any experience with this beast?
Link Posted: 3/31/2006 10:13:47 AM EST
They have sold this rifle in the past but never in .72 cal. I think you should get one!
Link Posted: 4/1/2006 7:06:28 PM EST
I researched them not long ago. The owners complained of them using #11 pistol caps instead of Musket caps resulting in less than positive ignition. There were also complaints that the manufactures maximum load was no more than you get from a Kentucky rifle, in other words less than spectacular. That killed the idea of getting one. If they ever build one for heavy loads and that takes Musket caps I might change my mind.
Link Posted: 4/1/2006 8:42:14 PM EST
i think there is some lack of understanding on the loads.

adding more powder to the charge doesnt boost power, it would just blow out the barrel un flashed. only a finite amount of burning rate can be accomplished in the various barrel lengths.. correct?
i'm firmly convinced that gun manufacturers and propellant companies have pulled off the greatest scam on the shooting public with their 150 gr charges..

no one benefits...except the companies involved.

black powder is a constant energy release and the only boost you can get from shooting a black powder gun is to shoot either a heavier projectile or a larger diameter projectile.

hence jumping to a +.70 bore.
2 barrels..of .72 bore loads..good god. thats just eviiillllllll

shooting a 100gr charge of BP behind a huge ball would be devastating. pure and simple. of course its a short range firearm.. not a field shooter.

this is the reason old school shotguns..and dangerous game guns were 8 bore..and even freakin 4 bore.

4 balls=1 freakin lb..

Link Posted: 4/3/2006 8:00:18 PM EST

Originally Posted By Robert2011:
I researched them not long ago. The owners complained of them using #11 pistol caps instead of Musket caps resulting in less than positive ignition. There were also complaints that the manufactures maximum load was no more than you get from a Kentucky rifle, in other words less than spectacular. That killed the idea of getting one. If they ever build one for heavy loads and that takes Musket caps I might change my mind.



years ago i shot a .58 cal Kodiak and fell in love with it. We were loading light and heavy loads, and all went off without a hitch.
You should see how the .58 tears grass up when fired at a shallow angle . . it looks like a high speed snake crawling under the lawn - lol

i wonder why they would essentially neuter the big gun with the #11 pistol caps.
couldn't you change those out to musket cap nipples?
Link Posted: 4/3/2006 8:09:03 PM EST
[Last Edit: 4/3/2006 8:09:22 PM EST by Robert2011]
Not sure about changing the nipples since I don't own one.

I did see a thread the other day on another forum about these new musket cap nipples that fit regular revolvers, apparently with no mods. Not much info on them yet but if they work good they should be a hit.
Link Posted: 4/4/2006 5:54:58 PM EST
somewhere out there..is a company that makes the correct mucket nipple for that beast.

you just have to have the correct deminsions..and match it from a reputable smokepole company.
Link Posted: 4/8/2006 7:54:27 PM EST

Originally Posted By muddydog:
somewhere out there..is a company that makes the correct mucket nipple for that beast.

you just have to have the correct deminsions..and match it from a reputable smokepole company.



i was researching this more and Cabelas does offer a replacement musket cap nipple with the correct thread pitch.

this was quoted from the link here about the power of this .72 caliber beast:


"Bullet weight is a fine thing, but frontal diameter is also important. I do not think that having a .50 caliber bullet that is two to three diameters long is nearly as effective as having a round ball of that same weight. Figure out the Taylor knockout value for yourself, using your own ballistics. Our .72 cal rifle has been chronographed at 2,026 fps using Hodgdon Triple Seven. So, the formula goes diameter x weight x velocity divided by 7000. So .715 x 555 x 2026 = 803967.45 divided by 7000 = 114.8. This number tells you how hard the projectile hits. That is a more telling ballistic formula than merely figuring out muzzle energy. As I recall, the above scenario equates out to just short of 5,000 pounds. Pretty potent in its own right

Link Posted: 4/15/2006 4:41:30 AM EST
you can't always get away with just swapping nipples.
the hammers travel in an arc.
The hammers also usually have a lip around them to help contain pieces of cap when fired.
Often, the hammers cannot clear the new larger nipple and cap.
Also, the hammers often strike off center, which leaves even less room for the larger cap.

Good Luck

Good Shootin!!
DarryH
Link Posted: 4/16/2006 9:44:12 AM EST
[Last Edit: 4/16/2006 9:45:24 AM EST by Rampant_Colt]

Originally Posted By DarryH:
you can't always get away with just swapping nipples.
the hammers travel in an arc.
The hammers also usually have a lip around them to help contain pieces of cap when fired.
Often, the hammers cannot clear the new larger nipple and cap.
Also, the hammers often strike off center, which leaves even less room for the larger cap.

Good Luck

Good Shootin!!
DarryH



this is true.

Evidently the nipples from Cabelas have different arc patterns to pick from - a crap-shoot. lol

*edit*
supposedly the magnum #11 caps are the equal of musket caps. I forgot where i read that
Top Top