AmericanLongRifles Forums
General discussion => Black Powder Shooting => Topic started by: Smokey Plainsman on April 19, 2020, 07:16:29 AM
-
Anyone shoot a .45? How do you like it? Is it enough for dear? Good for a woods walk?
-Smokey
-
They are excellent for all of the above. Great all around caliber.
-
They are excellent for all of the above. Great all around caliber.
Very cool. Trying to decide on which cal for a Kibler kit.
-
I once had a .45 Hatfield flintlock that was amazingly accurate with Hornady Great Plains bullet over 70 grains of fffg. Shooting treetop squirrels offhand accurate. Used it very successfully on deer for many years.
-
.45 is great. Low recoil to boot. I think of it in modern terms like a .243, with multiple uses. God Bless, Marc
-
New member here. First post. Same dilemma. Stuck between .40 and .45. In some ways, thinking .40 as the better alternative for a woods gun and small-medium game. Perhaps look at another and something bigger (.54+??) for deer sized and up. I’m thinking a the Kibler SMR perhaps better suited to smaller calibers...
-
Yes, it's fine for deer. As long as you don't have any plans to come to Colorado to hunt. It's not legal here.
Colorado = Dumb as a rock!
-
Best check your game laws before you decide. Here in PA a .45 is legal for big game but not for small game. A .40 is legal for small game but not for big game.
Dale H
Ok, OMM was posting the same idea at the same time.
-
New member here. First post. Same dilemma. Stuck between .40 and .45. In some ways, thinking .40 as the better alternative for a woods gun and small-medium game. Perhaps look at another and something bigger (.54+??) for deer sized and up. I’m thinking a the Kibler SMR perhaps better suited to smaller calibers...
Welcome.
.45 is the minimum I'll hunt deer with. Some folks say the same about .50. I find .40 more accurate, so better for possum, coon, coyote, IMO. Kibler SMR can be had between .32 and .45. The .45 is extremely light and handy, even though all calibers handle well and are light.
-
New member here. First post. Same dilemma. Stuck between .40 and .45. In some ways, thinking .40 as the better alternative for a woods gun and small-medium game. Perhaps look at another and something bigger (.54+??) for deer sized and up. I’m thinking a the Kibler SMR perhaps better suited to smaller calibers...
To me a .40 is a marginal compromise for an "all around" game better... On the bigger end for squirrels/rabbits and the rock bottom for deer.
A .45 is fine for whitetails yet is definitely too big for squirrels/rabbits... Body shots on small game will destroy meat. But head shots or "barking" a squirrel out of a tree are viable solutions with bigger calibers.
Now that I've said what I did about .40 being on the small end for deer, someone will post pictures of the dozen deer they've taken with their .40 and make a liar out of me... It can be done. It's even legal in my state.
Mike
-
We have to remember that in the era that these guns were originally used there were no game laws and the "sporting" aspect was low on the list if it was considered at all. Economical consumption of powder and lead were serious considerations, especially if you were poor and lived on the fringes of civilization. Property lines were few and far between and spending a day tracking a wounded animal was par for the course.
In the present we have game laws, ethics, and property lines to consider.
Mike
-
Thanks for the replies and warm welcome. Bob, love your channel BTW.
**NOT to take away from the original post, but trying to add and not duplicate...**
I initially thought “.45”. Then reading more, I’m leaning toward that choice being perhaps a poor compromise. It would seem that it lies on the “upper range” of what the SMR is “supposed” to be. “Master of none” type of thing. As a first build, and first foray into black powder rifle (I dabbled in percussion shotguns years ago) I’d like to make the best choice.
Opinions on those here much appreciated, and Smokey...please don’t take offense to my add-on’s. Hopefully we can all be “edumicated” here a bit!
Thanks.
-
Thanks for the replies and warm welcome. Bob, love your channel BTW.
Thanks E!
-
My first black powder rifle was a CVA 45 cal percussion and it shot fantastic, this was 50 years ago. Most of my guns now are 58 to 60 cal. I had a 40 cal that I just sold that was fun to shoot. I just got a 45 cal barrel and semi carved blank to build. As much as I like the 40 cal I decided to go 45 cal because I could use it for deer if I wanted to and can still go squirrel hunting with it.
-
Thanks for the replies and warm welcome. Bob, love your channel BTW.
**NOT to take away from the original post, but trying to add and not duplicate...**
I initially thought “.45”. Then reading more, I’m leaning toward that choice being perhaps a poor compromise. It would seem that it lies on the “upper range” of what the SMR is “supposed” to be. “Master of none” type of thing. As a first build, and first foray into black powder rifle (I dabbled in percussion shotguns years ago) I’d like to make the best choice.
Opinions on those here much appreciated, and Smokey...please don’t take offense to my add-on’s. Hopefully we can all be “edumicated” here a bit!
Thanks.
No by all means I enjoy it. If you are leaning towards a .40 you cannot go wrong. I love that caliber and have found it very pleasing to shoot. It’s economical to shoot, has a low recoil, shoots flat and bucks wind better than a .36 or .32, the balls aren’t quite as fumble when loading, and then gun can accept a strong 3/8” ramrod which is a plus.
For my next rifle, I’d just like to try “something different” and keep hearing about how handy the Kibler SMR is in .45. I currently live in Southern Nevada so really not much hunting here than can be done with a muzzleloader. But eventually I’ll be headed back east. I’m thinking a .45 would make a nice whitetail woods gun. In the meantime it should be nice for shooting steel in the desert.
-
I would not use a .40 for deer, even if it was legal in the area, and it is and so is a .25 or .32. I think .45 is on the light side
as I simply think a .50 is better in all regards (hunting and trail walks) as well as being better for trail walks. The smaller the
calibre the more lost targets you will get due to those 'scoring' not hearing the hit. A .50, is a big step up from a .45, which is
better than a .40, which is better than a .36- etc, etc - for trail walks.
If I wanted or had the opportunity to hunt a lot of small game, I'd get a .36 (which I have for small game and the squirrel
shoot at rendezvous.) The .40 is the upper calibre allowed for the squirrel rifle shoot at rendezvous. They can be very accurate,
& have the potential to be more accurate than the .36 but the targets on the course are small and move well with the small calibre
ball hits - so small dia. lightweight balls are not a hindrance to scoring well on THAT course of fire.
The larger the ball, the better accuracy at the longer ranges - it's all relative.
A 64 pound ball from a cannon is more accurate at 2 miles than is a 12 pounder.
A .50 cal. rifle has the potential to be more accurate at 100yards, than anything smaller. As with any muzzleloaders, accuracy comes
from the load combination. Unlocking the potential is the shooter's job, as long as the gun is up to the situation. Choose wisely.
A local guy here shot a couple whitetails with my .45 round ball load. For a test, he switched to using the REAL bullet from a Lee mould
and shot a couple more deer. The end results were identical - dead deer and identical performance from what he could see. The fact I
would not use a .45, but prefer a .50 (or .69), is simply a matter of choice. I sold my .45, never having shot a deer with it, but I know it would
have worked. It's "accuracy" load with oil lube was putting the 132gr. ball out at over 2,200fps. Within 100yards, it was not only accurate,
but would have been deadly.
-
My caliber choice is .45 - I think it will do 80% of your needs. I prefer .36 for squirrels, varmints and pests under 50 yards and .54 caliber for game bigger than the average size deer at distances greater than 75 yards. If I am going after dangerous game then I will pick a modern magnum cartridge gun ;) Accuracy is the name of the game ;D
-
Well...I got a couple days yet to decide...lol. Most likely won’t see anything bigger than an Upper Peninsula yote. Agreed on the cartridge gun...other tools for those jobs.
-
The large and/or dangerous stuff is why the .69 seemed to be the favourite calibre in India in the mid 1800's.
-
I shot my first deer with a .45 ultra-Hi cap lock kit by Miruko. I built it when I was in eight grade and you can tell that an eighth grader built it. But it was my gun, it worked and it was the only way I could afford a gun at that time. I harvested several deer with it. I still have that gun as ugly and incorrect as it is.
Deer are thin skinned game. A well placed heart shot or double lung will do the job. Just keep your shots at 50yds or less and practice with it all the time. I live in the mountainous northeastern wood lands. I don't hunt fields so my shots are usually within 50yds. I like a .45 for deer better than a .54. Bigger ball of lead typically yields greater meat damage. A .50 would be great (legal in more states) but Mr. Kibler's SMR kit's largest caliber is .45. There is nothing wrong with that and it would be very satisfying.
-
It’s fun to have lots of guns of different calibers. The .45 is versatile but a middling caliber. Unnecessarily big for small game and just enough for deer up to 75 yards or so. My first flintlock is a .45. Shoots great especially when someone else is shooting it. Kills deer. Good woodchuck gun.
-
Thanks, all. So a .45 is too big to be correct for a real Southern Mountain Rifle apparently?
-
The term Southern Mountain Rifle covers a lot of ground and time. Randal Pierce’s book has dimensions and specs. These terms are practically useless, they are so broad:
Virginia rifle
Southern Mountain Rifle
Transitional rifle
Pennsylvania rifle
Look at the Bogle rifle which is reasonably early for an iron mounted Tennessee rifle: https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=11592.0
Is this a SMR? If I recall it’s closer to .50.
(https://i.ibb.co/xXYDvdF/388-E09-D6-DE7-B-4-BFB-A7-F5-09186-C829-AE6.jpg) (https://ibb.co/9chNXSZ)
(https://i.ibb.co/PwH6xsr/9-A52-D57-F-1110-4-A3-A-AC51-C6-AC5-E80-B491.jpg) (https://ibb.co/KFvr6c5)
(https://i.ibb.co/ZYTXqpc/A7-B85111-4740-4-DD1-808-D-FDD5-E9-BE6305.jpg) (https://ibb.co/gPg9kLt)
(https://i.ibb.co/QdSzk32/61-B55-EEB-B2-B2-4-EE6-A1-F6-E74-F4-FBB7307.jpg) (https://ibb.co/vYygh67)
(https://i.ibb.co/2nCZ4rP/0-A9650-C7-EFC8-4-EB3-AC7-A-0-B195-A13-DA37.jpg) (https://ibb.co/WxMVJXF)
(https://i.ibb.co/zPw0td2/D1740571-6-EBA-4-B3-F-B432-F6-B85-A710-B94.jpg) (https://ibb.co/P18fVkW)
-
I like the .45 caliber. It is great for target shooting and is more than adequate for white tailed deer,specially at the ranges that deer are typically shot back east. 70 grains of 3f is what I use on my target .45 flinter. I find the Kibler smr in .45 a little light for my tastes. The one I shot, shot very well offhand for me, but it was more work for me to do so. I like a heavier gun for target shooting.
-
I like .40 cal for my small rifle and .54 cal for my bigger rifle. I have several of both.
No one will argue with me if a .54 is big enough to shoot most anything in NA. Nor if a .40 cal will work on smaller game or target shooting.
I shoot a .54 cal at targets much more then a .40 cal.
In Iowa a .45 is min for deer.
Fleener
-
I have a Kibler 45 SMR and really like it for trail walks and for hunting deer. Took a deer with it this year and it went right down. I also have a Kibler Colonial in 54. Took a couple deer with it previously. I like hunting with the SMR if I am going to do much walking because of the weight. It balances well and is fast handling. I like it so much, I ordered a kit in 36 cal. for small game.
-
SMR is an over-used and under-defined term (probably why it is used so much).
In Tennessee Rifles the most common calibers were mid-thirties to low forties (remember, there were no such standard calibers BITD). But there were also many smaller and some larger. In Tennessee originals there's always an exception somewhere, but mine own 54 is quite a bit "oversized" for that general type of gun. I was headstrong and certain at that time and it worked out for me, but I wouldn't do it again. 45 would be much more appropriate-just as 42 or 38 might be.
As to Daryl's admonition about it being small, he is way up north where animals tend to be larger (heat conservation) but here in the South where animals are often smaller (heat dissipation). I'm guessing a fat doe up there might be 200# and that's a real good buck in my part of the hills. I've heard of deer much larger from the Northern Plains states. The one doe I've seen shot with a 40 was killed decisively and quickly with a body shot (specified because I have another pal who takes nothing but head shots).
So where you hunt and what you hunt and how well you handle the stress of hunting and shot placement might be the best factors as to caliber selection. And please never consult ballistic or power or killing tables constructed by modern ballisticians. I used to bleed external ballistics tables, but (after much study) found them less relevant in the BP world. Roundballs simply kill better than paper can ever explain, provided they are put where the need to go.
I'd have zero problems hunting in the South with a 45, but I'd want more lead if I was in moose and bear country-as D is. Game laws notwithstanding. My state allows 36 for big game (which I think fits the notion of "hog rifle" just perfectly, but is likely has some other rationale/excuse behind it. I prefer the "hog rifle" notion).
Hog rifle: (as I interpret it) the family farm gun used to dispatch domestic hogs in hog-killing season and whatever other farm "business" and that also doubled as a hunting gun in a time when there was very little big game left around here. And folks didn't have a rack full of guns to choose from. Big game here is thicker now that ever because of modern agriculture (corn vs. acorns) and conservation efforts. They were of modest caliber. 45 would have been a "big" hog gun.
Also there are dozens upon dozens of old threads discussing calibers if one cares to look. In those threads one can learn from many great shooters who no longer make smoke and others who also passed this way before.
-
.47 calibre (45bore) was a popular size ordered by the Western gun stores, from the gun builders 'back East', when barrels of said guns were usually 3 to 4 feet. some were even ordered straight rifled.
-
Thanks, gang. I should add I have a .54 Hawken being built for me so would have that caliber covered.
-
SMR is an over-used and under-defined term (probably why it is used so much).
In Tennessee Rifles the most common calibers were mid-thirties to low forties (remember, there were no such standard calibers BITD). But there were also many smaller and some larger. In Tennessee originals there's always an exception somewhere, but mine own 54 is quite a bit "oversized" for that general type of gun. I was headstrong and certain at that time and it worked out for me, but I wouldn't do it again. 45 would be much more appropriate-just as 42 or 38 might be.
As to Daryl's admonition about it being small, he is way up north where animals tend to be larger (heat conservation) but here in the South where animals are often smaller (heat dissipation). I'm guessing a fat doe up there might be 200# and that's a real good buck in my part of the hills. I've heard of deer much larger from the Northern Plains states. The one doe I've seen shot with a 40 was killed decisively and quickly with a body shot (specified because I have another pal who takes nothing but head shots).
So where you hunt and what you hunt and how well you handle the stress of hunting and shot placement might be the best factors as to caliber selection. And please never consult ballistic or power or killing tables constructed by modern ballisticians. I used to bleed external ballistics tables, but (after much study) found them less relevant in the BP world. Roundballs simply kill better than paper can ever explain, provided they are put where the need to go.
I'd have zero problems hunting in the South with a 45, but I'd want more lead if I was in moose and bear country-as D is. Game laws notwithstanding. My state allows 36 for big game (which I think fits the notion of "hog rifle" just perfectly, but is likely has some other rationale/excuse behind it. I prefer the "hog rifle" notion).
Hog rifle: (as I interpret it) the family farm gun used to dispatch domestic hogs in hog-killing season and whatever other farm "business" and that also doubled as a hunting gun in a time when there was very little big game left around here. And folks didn't have a rack full of guns to choose from. Big game here is thicker now that ever because of modern agriculture (corn vs. acorns) and conservation efforts. They were of modest caliber. 45 would have been a "big" hog gun.
Also there are dozens upon dozens of old threads discussing calibers if one cares to look. In those threads one can learn from many great shooters who no longer make smoke and others who also passed this way before.
"Remember there were no such standard calibers BITD"
From what I understand you would commission a smith to build a gun with a bore sized by balls per pound. So the gun was built first with the bore being a close approximation to the requested size... And the ball mold was sized to the bore. I'm sure gunsmiths were pretty accurate but you still wound up being "in the neighborhood" when it came to bore size.
Or you bought a less expensive already made gun and got what was closest to preferred bore/ball size that was available on the rack.
Mike
-
Yes it was a function of forged iron barrels, not the drilled pipes we use today. Every gun came with a mould to match the bore and you cast balls if you wanted to have balls to shoot. Shooting was a far more involved process than the "hobby" many know today, even in our ranks.
I just can't make up my mind between: 38, 47, or 52. :D they can be had.
-
47 or 52, Wade! Too under-represented! I’ve got a .37. It started as a .35 but needed a ton of freshing. One of those 11 pound hog rifles.
-
In Ohio the "legal" minimum for deer is .38 but I don't know of anyone that goes that small. I have used a .40 a few times but the shots were inside of 50 yards. I feel that .45 is the smallest caliber to make humane kills and the .50 is better yet especially if the distance gets to the 75-100 yard range. Legal is one thing, humane is another.
-
In Ohio the "legal" minimum for deer is .38 but I don't know of anyone that goes that small. I have used a .40 a few times but the shots were inside of 50 yards. I feel that .45 is the smallest caliber to make humane kills and the .50 is better yet especially if the distance gets to the 75-100 yard range. Legal is one thing, humane is another.
I'd like to have a rifle bored in .38... Just because.
Mike
-
FCI barrels will make a 38 cal.
-
FCI barrels will make a 38 cal.
and the others i noted. I have a 30 by Charlie.
-
A .38 will take the ball from a Navy Colt.
-
47 or 52, Wade! Too under-represented! I’ve got a .37. It started as a .35 but needed a ton of freshing. One of those 11 pound hog rifles.
After some thought it'd likely be 47, as 52 is too close to 54 and 38 is too close to 40 and I've got those covered. I don't have a 45, so 47 makes sense in splitting the span from 40-54 -just perfectly actually. But it'll be a while yet. ;)
-
I have an original living in my house that was a 38, a rusty 38 and I had it freshed out to 45 and have taken three deer with it just so I could say I got three deer with an old original but it,s a percussion gun so rests quietly alone by it,s self these days. It wants to move out but can,t come up with the ransom money. ;D :)
-
I've taken a heck of a lot of small game with my Tennessee .45. Usually load 25-30 grains of FFG under a round ball. doesn't tear up grouse, squirrels or duck with proper head shots. If not actually hunting it's slim enough to be a favorite carry gun and load it with my favorite target load of 47 grains of FFG. I have never taken a deer with this gun, just feel more comfortable with my .54 for larger western deer. When many people ask "is this gun big enough for deer" it really depends on where you live, in some areas a 90lb. Whitetail buck might be a trophy and other parts that same buck is a fawn.
-
In Ohio the "legal" minimum for deer is .38 but I don't know of anyone that goes that small. I have used a .40 a few times but the shots were inside of 50 yards. I feel that .45 is the smallest caliber to make humane kills and the .50 is better yet especially if the distance gets to the 75-100 yard range. Legal is one thing, humane is another.
A ball in the head a ball in the heart are quite humane, even with a .25 caliber. Everything is dependent on shot placement and the range capability of the caliber used. Killed an elk one year that had its femur shattered. It was walking normal, I had stalked it for over an hour. When I skinned it is when I noticed that there was a previous entry wound on the thigh. When I processed it I found what appeared to be a .54 cal Powerbelt bullet that deflected and lodged by the knee. Humane kills are not dependent on caliber size.
-
The most common sizes ordered by the Western gun shops, from the makers "back East", 'carried' 32 bore to 150 balls to the pound. Those calibres today would be called
.32 or .33 to .53 or .54.
-
My home state of Georgia set the minimum deer caliber at .45, so that was that. Here in Maine the .40 is allowed but I still prefer the .45. I would very much like a Kibler SMR kit in .45. And as Wade mentioned the term SMR is not very specific; but this also goes for most of the types of longrifles. It's like the name "rock & roll which merges into country, folk, etc. But SMR works pretty well for most.
I've taken deer with the .45, .50, .54 and .62 and can't really say one does better than the others. Some of the most damaging hits I've made on deer were with a .45. Fact is, hit 'em where they live and they'll go down.
-
Note, if using something smaller than .45 for regular trail walks and you are shooting with old !@#$% who wear haring protection and you are being scored by them, be
aware you will lose some hits that they don't hear. Just sayin'. ???
-
A 45 will serve you well. I have them in 32 thru 62 caliber. I shoot s 40 the most now days but have won matches and killed many game animals large and small with 40 and up. Here in Tennessee 36 is legal for deer. It seems small to me. Get what you like and with good shot placement you will be happy with the results.
-
I love conversations about the attributes of one caliber over another. This always leads to me believing I need several special-purpose rifles in various calibers! Very few of us actually hunt big game enough to have a justifiable reason of one caliber over another but one friend of mine had exactly that.
He had a contract in an area that had too many whitetail deer and killed more than one hundred of them. When he was done his go-to caliber was 58 which proved to be an even better killer than a 62. For me my favorite caliber has always been 54 which I have used successfully from ground squirrels to moose.
All that said I really want to try a caliber smaller than 40 which leads me to another special purpose rifle!
-
Well, just in case you don't know if you have enough guns.
(https://i.ibb.co/H2F6dm2/Do-YOu-Own-Enough-guns.jpg) (https://ibb.co/W3xZtS3)
-
Well, just in case you don't know if you have enough guns.
(https://i.ibb.co/H2F6dm2/Do-YOu-Own-Enough-guns.jpg) (https://ibb.co/W3xZtS3)
The logic is sound.
Mike
-
Yes it is; very sound.
-
I just got a .45 Southern Mountain Rifle, and I think the caliber will be perfect for what I do. Back in the 70s when I got into BP it seemed the main choice was either .45 or .50. I got the .50 Hawkin and loved it. But I never hunted with it. I have however spent a lot of my life shooting "too weak" or "obsolete" hunting calibers. My deer hunts have been .30-06, as well as elk. I have hunted elk with .30-40 Krag, as well ast .40-65 Winchester. Honestly if you can shoot accurately I always kind of chuckle at the .33 Win Mag and 4000 fps Lazzeroni guns. On Hog rifles, my mom's family were Low Country farmers in SC for hundreds of years. The time we had a Pig Pickin my uncle brought a rifle out to kill the hog. It was a .22.
-
I just got a .45 Southern Mountain Rifle, and I think the caliber will be perfect for what I do. Back in the 70s when I got into BP it seemed the main choice was either .45 or .50. I got the .50 Hawkin and loved it. But I never hunted with it. I have however spent a lot of my life shooting "too weak" or "obsolete" hunting calibers. My deer hunts have been .30-06, as well as elk. I have hunted elk with .30-40 Krag, as well ast .40-65 Winchester. Honestly if you can shoot accurately I always kind of chuckle at the .33 Win Mag and 4000 fps Lazzeroni guns. On Hog rifles, my mom's family were Low Country farmers in SC for hundreds of years. The time we had a Pig Pickin my uncle brought a rifle out to kill the hog. It was a .22.
I mentioned "hog rifles" above. They are "smallish" caliber traditional rifles because they are for dispatching animals at very close range and shots to the head, as well as small game and such around the homestead. They are not hog hunting guns which would likely carry more lead.
AZshot I see you are new here, welcome to the forum, but the rules and mods don't allow us to "discuss" cartridge guns and while we can make passing reference to modern arms, usually a lot of cartridge naming will get our hands smacked because as soon as one guy does it, it leads to another guy replying/rebutting/mentioning his experiences or pet cartridges/loading data/ballistics with regard to such guns and then we have drifted from our purposes at ALR.
Pretty well all of us have plenty of modern guns experience, but there are dozens of better places on the web to discuss them.
So we don't, lest the penguin cracks us with the ruler again*. Carry on.
(*Blues Brothers reference if anyone is too old or young to get it)
-
I mentioned "hog rifles" above. They are "smallish" caliber traditional rifles because they are for dispatching animals at very close range and shots to the head, as well as small game and such around the homestead. They are not hog hunting guns which would likely carry more lead.
AZshot I see you are new here, welcome to the forum, but the rules and mods don't allow us to "discuss" cartridge guns and while we can make passing reference to modern arms, usually a lot of cartridge naming will get our hands smacked because as soon as one guy does it, it leads to another guy replying/rebutting/mentioning his experiences or pet cartridges/loading data/ballistics with regard to such guns and then we have drifted from our purposes at ALR.
Pretty well all of us have plenty of modern guns experience, but there are dozens of better places on the web to discuss them.
So we don't, lest the penguin cracks us with the ruler again*. Carry on.
(*Blues Brothers reference if anyone is too old or young to get it)
Hm, ok. I just checked the rules but don't see any prohibition about mentioning cartridges. I was making an analogy that medium power, like a .45 muzzleloader, works fine for me. So as not to say "it will work for you." But I'll keep all my writing to only muzzle loaders.
-
...
AZshot I see you are new here, welcome to the forum, but the rules and mods don't allow us to "discuss" cartridge guns and ...
Hm, ok. I just checked the rules but don't see any prohibition about mentioning cartridges...
I've been here twelve years and was just trying to be helpful from my experience on this forum. It's quite likely that a moderator would have said something or PM'd you (after editing your references) If I hadn't. I've seen these things happen. Do as you wish, I won't bother you again.
-
Wade is spot-on with his comments. Mentioning of modern stuff is fairly verboten here.
No harm done.
-
He is. And I love me some WP, but we should be a bit gentle with the new blood. They’re the ones who will be buying up our collections...
-
He is. And I love me some WP, but we should be a bit gentle with the new blood. They’re the ones who will be buying up our collections...
I see no harshness real or implied with my original comment on this matter. I appreciate the feedback fellows but I really tried to spell it out nicely for him. I don't aim to run anyone off, ever. I should not have replied to his return. noted.