Banking powder a myth?

[CoyoteJoe]

I use one of the spring loaded "pan primers" which drops 3 grains of prime. I drop it next to the barrel and drag the prime outward to spread more or less evenly across the pan. I find ignition at least as fast as any other method and much more reliable than when I have deliberately placed the prime to the outside of the pan. That was one myth I never did buy into because it just never did seem reasonable. I believe I CAN detect the difference of those few milliseconds. It's not just the ears that are involved but the total sensory experience of firing the shot. I believe I can detect the difference in lock time between the long striker fall of a Mauser centerfire bolt action versus the very short striker fall of a Martini cadet centerfire action. Those who compete in target shooting with modern firearms seek the fastest lock time because they know it makes a difference in their scores, even if only a point or two.

 

[Jason Lewis]

i agree with joe, i can definatly notice the differance when i'm shooting clays with my flintlock. mostly on either hits or misses. if i lead a bird the same as the previous shot and i miss or just chip the bird, i know ignition time was differant.

 

[Larry Pletcher]

Since you mention shooting birds, I am interested in you and other clay pigeon shooters doing an experiment. I wonder if a flint smooth bore shooter can tell the difference in priming methods in the amount of lead you use. Example: 10 birds shot with prime banked away and 10 birds shot prime against the barrel.

Regards,
Pletch

 

[biliff]

Example: 10 birds shot with prime banked away and 10 birds shot prime against the barrel.

The problem with this experiment is the varied methods used to obtain your lead on a flying target. Some of them rely on reaction/lock/barrel time and speed of swing to get the correct lead (swing thru, pull away) and some don't (maintained). In the first case ignition time would make a difference, in the second its irrelevant.

 

[Claude Mathis]

With Claude's permission I'd post a link to the photos.

Please do. :thumbsup:

 

[Larry Pletcher]

Here is the link to the photos through the muzzle. An explanation is included. Barrel stub length was less than 3 inches.

Photos through the muzzle

Regards,
Pletch

 

[zimmerstutzen]

Pletch, I really appreciate your effforts to scientifically test the old wives tales parts of muzzle loading.

I have to admit that It has been awhile since I read your write up. Will do so tonight again.

I meant to ask, What was the shape of the wire used to ignite the prime and what the shape of the pan.

The old timer that mentored my introduction to muzzleloaders always saide that prime burns up and away from the surface it is on in every direction. As if what counts is the directions of the sparks thrown off. If that is true, it seems inconsistent to have more fire through the touch hole when the powder is closer to the vent.

Unless that is because of the flame-pressure expanding into every available place, including the touch hole.

The other variable I was wondering about is whether a line of sparks parallel with the raising frizzen edge would make a difference from a single hot wire point of ignition. My better flint locks throw a line of sparks down into the pan so there is a likelyhood of more than a single ignition point.

Lastly, in view of your experiments, would there be a preferable shape for a pan to help concentrate the prime fire into the vent?
I have had locks with shallow egg shaped pans, locks with round pans, some deeper than others, locks with rectangular pans that had round edges, locks with oval shaped pans. Some were narrow where they met the barrel flat, some were the same width across the pan. It would seem that some shapes may channel the flash to the vent more efficiently and perhaps with more speed.

 

[gordy]

I suppose in a target match , where the weapon can be carefully controlled so the powder placement in the pan is not disturbed from loading to firing , it MIGHT make a difference . In most normal hunting situations the weapon is subjected to much jarring and movement so the prime will not maintain the same position in the pan . :hmm: I do as many others here , prime and close the pan . :thumbsup: If I don't let the crud build up in the flame channel it works well for me . :idunno:

 

[Mike Brooks]

Since you mention shooting birds, I am interested in you and other clay pigeon shooters doing an experiment. I wonder if a flint smooth bore shooter can tell the difference in priming methods in the amount of lead you use. Example: 10 birds shot with prime banked away and 10 birds shot prime against the barrel.

Regards,
Pletch

As I stated previously, if your touch hole is positioned correctly it doesn't matter where your prime is. Just dump in some prime and slam the frizzen shut and you're set to go.
I use the same leads as I do a percussion gun or a cartridge gun, the key is not to stop your swing.

 

[Steve Boyleston]

I turn the rifle on its side a little to the left- right handed lock- poor enough to fill the hole then just a little in the bottom, Fast fats fast,Sh-boooooooooooom- duck below to see if I hit the barn, TGP

 

[Larry Pletcher]

Pletch, I really appreciate your effforts to scientifically test the old wives tales parts of muzzle loading. . . .
I meant to ask, What was the shape of the wire used to ignite the prime and what the shape of the pan.

The old timer that mentored my introduction to muzzleloaders always saide that prime burns up and away from the surface it is on in every direction. As if what counts is the directions of the sparks thrown off. If that is true, it seems inconsistent to have more fire through the touch hole when the powder is closer to the vent.

Unless that is because of the flame-pressure expanding into every available place, including the touch hole.

The other variable I was wondering about is whether a line of sparks parallel with the raising frizzen edge would make a difference from a single hot wire point of ignition. My better flint locks throw a line of sparks down into the pan so there is a likelyhood of more than a single ignition point.

Lastly, in view of your experiments, would there be a preferable shape for a pan to help concentrate the prime fire into the vent?
I have had locks with shallow egg shaped pans, locks with round pans, some deeper than others, locks with rectangular pans that had round edges, locks with oval shaped pans. Some were narrow where they met the barrel flat, some were the same width across the pan. It would seem that some shapes may channel the flash to the vent more efficiently and perhaps with more speed.

Z:
The wire I used to ignite the pan was a #12 wire as in house wiring. I heated it with a propane torch until red hot and then touched the pan. Your related question was the effect of a line of sparks. I chose not to ignite by sparks because I could not control the variables that sparks introduce. I was afraid that I would not get the same quality of sparks each time.
The lock/pan was an L&R chosen simply because the pan and plate were one piece. The plate could be screwed directly to the barrel stub. The pan shape was oval with the larger end away from the barrel.

Your larger question had to do with the amount of fire entering the vent. I would explain my theory using a light bulb. Cut a 1/4" hole in a piece of paper, place it over a surface, and hold a light bulb 5 feet away. Note the amount of light passing through the hole. Now move the light bulb 6" away and note the light entering the hole. From 6", the light and heat will be more intense. I believe that fire from the pan does indeed travel all directions from the ignition point, but the closer to the vent, the more intense the fire will be.

If you follow the link earlier, check out Part 1. This was an experiment suggested by Bill Knight and my help or add to the confusion. Part 2 also looks and the increased intensity as the priming is placed close. This shows the scars left by pan ignition on an index card placed between the barrel and the pan. Again I tried banked away, level, and against the barrel. Clearly, the scaring was more intense with the priming close.

It's kind of like standing next to a fire roasting hotdogs; the closer you stand the hotter is seems. I don't know if this helps. The explanation is probably better in the article.
Regards,
Pletch

 

[Kentuckywindage]

doesnt matter where you put it. It moves around all over while you're hunting. :thumbsup:

 

[paulvallandigham]

You have made that comment several times.

While its true, smacking the side of the lock before raising the gun to your shoulder will move the powder away from the TH to speed ignition. I don't know anyone who "snap-shoots" flintlocks- either rifles or shotguns, and has much success. Shooting a blocked TH causes a delay in firing due to the 'fuse effect". Its about as good a way I know to miss a target( or game) shooting a flintlock.

I was never interested in creating a GAP at the bottom of the pan by banking the powder away from the TH; only in clearing the TH so that heat and flame could enter the TH and light multiple numbers of powder granules. Larry Pletcher has adequately explained above why he used an Electric wire to ignite the priming powder, rather than using sparks from the flint. He generated PURE data on ignition time based on precise positioning of the powder. But, because this data does Not Directly correlate to lock time with sparks igniting the powder, and he could or did not position powder in a variety of positions, or combinations, he makes no claim that his data is anything but what it is.

I also have no idea how to find machines to test speed of ignition of both priming powder and the main charge using sparks created by the hammer driving a flint into the frizzen. It is possible, with today's equipment and computers, and cameras, to put some kind of Start "button " that begins a timer when the hammer( cock) begins to fall, and stops when the ball leaves the barrel. Then, using time-lapse photography and computer timers, we could measure various components of the ignition process- Time it takes for the flint to strike the frizzen, time it takes to produce the first sparks, time it takes to throw those sparks into the priming powder in the pan, time it takes for the priming powder to ignite( testing different granule sizes again), time it takes to ignite powder in the barrel, and then time it takes for the main charge to create enough gas to push the ball out the muzzle.

The problem with even doing this is how to consistently control the amount and position of the priming powder in the pan, and how do you factor in varying numbers of sparks created by each strike of the flint? For instance, what do you do when the first spark created either hits outside of the pan, or fails to ignite powder when it hits the priming powder, and ignition is caused by some succeeding spark?

Again, these various components of ignition are measure in fractions of seconds, which, in most cases, simply cannot be seen nor heard by the human eyes and ears. So, even if you do get good data, what use can it be to the average shooter? I suppose the information might lead to the design of better and faster flintlocks, but other than target shooters, who would benefit enough to notice??? The newer lock design would be criticized( accurately ) as NON-TRADITIONAL, and flintlock target shooters would either refuse to use such a lock, or insist that guns using that lock be "branded", and placed in a different competitive category. The Arguments would not be all that different than those made against the Zip-guns we don't talk about on this forum! :hmm: :thumbsup:

 

[ebiggs1]

The test I did neither son knew how I loaded the gun. But they “guessed” (most of the time) that the powder against the touch hole “seemed” quicker. Now is this luck, the moon phase or coincidence? The gun has a #50 size hole in the touchhole. Did a powder granule or several get into the touchhole? Maybe, probably? Would it get in the touchhole while you are walking as in hunting? Maybe, probably? I am satisfied that a level pan, against the touchhole is best. Even if a granule or two gets into the touchhole.

“doesnt matter where you put it. It moves around all over while you're hunting.”

This also seems to be a true statement. I don’t have any mentor flintlock hunters here but I also am not going to smack the side of the gun before shooting at a deer. Do any of you hunters do that?

 

[Larry Pletcher]

Paul, and others,
I broke your comments to may a reply easier. First let me say that I first joined this topic simply to confirm ebiggs' conclusion.

I was never interested in creating a GAP at the bottom of the pan by banking the powder away from the TH; only in clearing the TH so that heat and flame could enter the TH and light multiple numbers of powder granules. Larry Pletcher has adequately explained above why he used an Electric wire to ignite the priming powder, rather than using sparks from the flint. He generated PURE data on ignition time based on precise positioning of the powder. But, because this data does Not Directly correlate to lock time with sparks igniting the powder, and he could or did not position powder in a variety of positions, or combinations, he makes no claim that his data is anything but what it is.

Paul has the right idea here. The lab type techniques I used are to separate and control variables. The wire eliminates spark variables. One cannot test powder placement in the pan unless you consistently place the powder. So, prime is carefully moved around to test that variable. The results are data from as close to lab conditions I as could. They are not the way I shoot a flintlock. However they show or confirm ideas that may affect the way a flintlock works.

I also have no idea how to find machines to test speed of ignition of both priming powder and the main charge using sparks created by the hammer driving a flint into the frizzen. It is possible, with today's equipment and computers, and cameras, to put some kind of Start "button " that begins a timer when the hammer( cock) begins to fall, and stops when the ball leaves the barrel. Then, using time-lapse photography and computer timers, we could measure various components of the ignition process- Time it takes for the flint to strike the frizzen, time it takes to produce the first sparks, time it takes to throw those sparks into the priming powder in the pan, time it takes for the priming powder to ignite( testing different granule sizes again), time it takes to ignite powder in the barrel, and then time it takes for the main charge to create enough gas to push the ball out the muzzle.

Paul, your paragraph pretty much outlines what I spent the last 23 years doing. I began with Gary Brumfield timing a pair of Lynton Mckanzie's locks at Bowling Green in 1987. That led to testing that broke down the phases of a flintlock: sear time, cock travel to frizzen, time on frizzen, end of mech movement, and powder igniting. All this was done before 1990.

From there I timed many locks, priming powders, vent configurations, and ignition systems.

Again, these various components of ignition are measure in fractions of seconds, which, in most cases, simply cannot be seen nor heard by the human eyes and ears. So, even if you do get good data, what use can it be to the average shooter? I suppose the information might lead to the design of better and faster flintlocks, but other than target shooters, who would benefit enough to notice??? The newer lock design would be criticized( accurately ) as NON-TRADITIONAL, and flintlock target shooters would either refuse to use such a lock, or insist that guns using that lock be "branded", and placed in a different competitive category. The Arguments would not be all that different than those made against the Zip-guns we don't talk about on this forum!

My reason for doing this has never been to develop a new, improved non traditional flintlock. My goal has been to study and understand as much as possible how and why good flintlocks work as they do. An example of this is a study I did with Jim Chamber's help. Using a typical Large Siler, Jim supplied me with two different cocks and three different tumblers. By using all combinations, we could develop data on 6 slightly different Silers. There were differences in all 6, with one particular combination being a favorite of mine. I bought a lock from Jim with that combination.

I don't know what effect this work had on Siler production, but I felt the work was worthwhile. This is what lock testing is for.

High speed photography can help in the same way. We saw things that we never expected to see. Two things come to mind here:

Frizzens rebound on even the best made locks.

Sparks don't accelerate off the flint/frizzen contact - they gently roll down in front of the flint edge. This happened in lock after lock. We just couldn't see it before.

So to finally end: does this make a difference to the shooter. I think so. I haven't met the flint shooter who says, "No, I just want to keep my lock slow." If we asked hunters if hang fires were acceptable, I know what the answer would be. As far as priming in the field, I prime like Mike Brooks who said to pour in powder slam the firzzen shut and fire. Except -- I make sure prime is against the barrel. :wink:

Regards,
Pletch

 

[paulvallandigham]

I am a hunter who smacks his lock before mounting the gun to fire. I shoot with several Flintlock hunters at our trail walk course at the club, who do the same thing before shooting these targets, even tho they load from the bag, and prime just before shooting, standing at the firing post.

That is why I mentioned this practice to you. :wink: :thumbsup:

 

[ebiggs1]

Paul if we lived closer together you just may have been able to make a good flintlock shooter/ hunter out of me! But I am still going to "test" EVERYTHING.

 

[Emet Huntsman]

yep -- seems to work just fine for me :thumbsup:

 

[Stumpkiller]

Paul if we lived closer together you just may have been able to make a good flintlock shooter/ hunter out of me! But I am still going to "test" EVERYTHING.

That's the key. What works in YOUR locks. In my flinter, and the last few, I can fill the pan and still not block the touch-hole. It's just slightly above the pan lip. I don't "smack" my flintlocks before firing, though I rap them to level the prime initially before closing the frizzen, and by the time I fire after a period of hunting have no real idea where the powder may be in the pan. It's usually about 3/4 full of FFFg.

 

[Kentuckywindage]

nope, i barely have enough time to put down my beer and pull the lock back. No time to smack the stock :blah: