New TC Explorer....

UC

I hate to say it, but including the QLA on that rifle was dern stupid.

Click to expand...

That is your opinion and you get to have it, but there are a lot of other folks that like it.

Sorta like Randy condemming all CVA's because a barrel blew up on a few of them... So does that make them all bad?

Personally, I do not mind the QLA when they get it right. Even you Accura has a form of a QLA...

You have to remember all of the last and current Hawkens they produced came with the QLA and they shoot conicals great.

Cayugad and a couple of my friends here in Idaho Black Diamonds with QLA's and they shoot the Bull Shop just great... even Bull Shop Dan has a 54 Hawhen with a QLA.

My Omega shoots a Bull Shop with the best of them - I have never tried the Triumph - I really should do that.

TC has said along time ago that they had a run of inline barrels that the QLA was off - center in and if you have one those to send it in.

In fact my grand father tells me back in the old days there were even ml's with a form of QLA - to make it easier to load a PRB... so the QLA is not new...

If you have a bad one you have a bad one, but the majority of them function well...

[Edited on 10/6/2008 by sabotloader]

UC

[qoute]And I want to know how you edited your post above on 10/6/2008?[/quote]

I tried to fix spelling error, which I am good at making.

TC lover

Click to expand...

Not really I really prefer the Rem 700ml and the Knight DISC series better than any of the TC's - oops that not correct either I really do like TC Renegades...

The QLA had nothing to with accuracy either sabot or conical - it was to ease the loading and allow a wider range of conicals to be loaded.

And yes, I agree it did cause an accuracy problem in a limited number of barrels, when you consider the number of TC barrels produced.

My opinion is not pulled from thin air

Click to expand...

I realize that - i know you had a bad experiance but that still does not make them all bad for everyone. You also do not like the red plastic jacket and often say so, but I and several others do - that is fine for you but do not condem the whole thing.

David White makes a good part of his living doing nothing but correcting (REMOVING) the QLA section on TC barrels.

Click to expand...

Because you as a major voice of ML's and your knowledge have declared them all bad. How many things have you seen declared bad by others that really are not?

But I would still prefer that QLA section GONE.

Click to expand...

Now see that statement is exactly how it should be made - not the whole gun condemed because you do not like it. I really prefer a solid reciever to barrel gun and I prefer a bolt - but I do not condem a break open or an exposed hammer that you must kock before you can shoot it. There is a reason the you do not find a lot of break open centerfire guns and the 30-30 hammer does not exist anymore.

Putting a QLA section on a rifle intended to shoot nothing but conicals is a stupid move. My opinion stands.

Click to expand...

But it was not designed to shoot just conicals or PRB's - It is a 1/48 so that it can shoot conicals, PRB's, and sabots, even PowerBelts... Sabots are legal in Washington during ML season. And you are certainly get to have your opinion - just remeber how many people you effect when you make a statement.

And don't bring Randy into this! I've actually been around awhile

Click to expand...

And that is exactly why I brought him into the conversation your stance parrallels his or even FG's one sided mind. And see, I think you are a bigger person than that.

Sorry to tick you off if I did - but I do not think you know how big a hammer you carry.

Bronco Brian

It is an area in the muzzle that has been opened up to allow you to set the conical or sabot down in side the bore, then either use a short starter or your thumb to push the projectile down onto the lands of the bore. It suppose to help you keep the projectile centered and ease loading.

For a lot of people it does exactly that.

This is a picture of a 460 grain Bull Shop sitting in the QLA - ready to be pushed down the bore...

[file]85109[/file]

[Edited on 10/6/2008 by sabotloader]

UC

I never even noted the date - thought you meant that I went back and added something... I do not know how that happened I just checked my computer 0 it has the date correct...

Opinions are good, but I tell you right now your opinions carry far more weight than mine and a lot of others... It is like you are close to being the president of muzzleoading and a lot of these discuassion sights...

Look I edited again and it came out 10/6 - I wonder why...

Look at your last post - the posted date is 10/6

[Edited on 10/6/2008 by sabotloader]

UC

Weird - everything on my screen says 10/6/08 - except your edits - they have the correct date...

I wonder if I looged out an then logged back in it would change...

When I look at this message it will be dated 10/6/08

This what is says at the top...

posted on 10/6/2008 at 06:15 PM - the time is correct...

[Edited on 10/6/2008 by sabotloader]

When I logged out the date went to the correct date - but when I logged back in - everything went back to 10-6-08

I have no ideal.....

[Edited on 10/6/2008 by sabotloader]