Does it bad to prime first then main charge?

[zimmerstutzen]

recently saw a guy stuff 5 of what I thought were 50 grain pellets down an in-line. I mentioned to him that it was a bit dangerous and was gruffly told to mind my own. The noise and kick he experienced were increddible. I just packed up and left, didn't want to be there when it blew. I have seen guys put their chin over the muzzle of a long rifle to hold it while they fished for something their pocket with their hands. Folks do some incredibly dangerous stuff.

 

[vern faulkner]

ya can't fix stupid

 

[rabjr]

Geeessssshhhhh...

I can't imagine doin' somethin' like that, but then... I guess there's just no limit on the stupidity of some folks, eh?

You have to understand back then, in the military, you used paper cartridges. You tore the cartridge and had to prime first, other wise you had no powder to prime if you just rammed the cartridge home.

 

[paulvallandigham]

In these military situation, enemy lines of armed soldiers, firing at you, too, could be as close as 50 yards. You stood in rows of soldiers, shoulder to shoulder, loading and shooting your muskets on command. If you were hit, you fell to the ground and someone behind you stepped up, and stood over you to take your place in the line.

The risk of being injured by an accidental discharge was small compared to your chance of being wounded or killed. Common soldiers were from the " lower classes" and the officers considered all of you expendable, and easily replaced.

As a result of this "class" thinking, officers where quite willing to have YOU risk injury by using a somewhat hazardous loading practice, since as many as half the men in the row would not be standing to reload their guns after the first exchange of fire. And, the officers were always on horseback well BEHIND the front lines, where there was little risk to them personally to becoming a battlefield casualty.

THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR SUCH LOADING TECHNIQUES to be used today, SAVE in a very controlled, battlefield re-enactment with experienced shooters.

 

[Pigman]

I hear that there are ranges where they let people bring powder horns with them. Just having one around is a danger since they have been known to explode. Our ancestors knew this and discarded them from safe use 150 years ago and started using flasks and paper or brass cartridges.

Remember safety is in the eye of the beholder. Look at your own procedures before you dismiss others.

 

[paulvallandigham]

I don't understand how a powder horn is more dangerous than paper cartridges in a box, or a flask. If any of these items are left open, where an errant spark can get into them, you have a bomb of one size or another on your hands.

My club regularly allows shooters to have powder horns around their necks,( Priming) or at their hips, on the firing line, PROVIDED, of Course, that the horn's stopper be replaced in the horn immediately after powder is poured out of it into a separate measure, or into the flash pan.

The same thing is required of people using flasks or paper cartridges held in a leather box on the belt. The flask has to be closed, and the leather lid on the box has to be closed on the cartridge box, before the gun is fired. Such rules are the only prudent course of action to demand of all shooters, for the safety of the other shooters around them, and for the clubs. :hmm:

 

[CoyoteJoe]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned self-priming locks, they were quite the thing in the late flint era. Many fine English guns were intended to be loaded with the frizzen closed so that as the wads were rammed powder would be blown through the vent to fill the pan. The pan was of V shape or W shape and designed to hold just a proper prime when packed full. Some also had gravity safeties which would prevent hammer fall while the gun was vertical or inverted.
Probably some of our British friends could provide more info on this.

 

[Billnpatti]

This may, but I hope not, be a self limiting error. This person is destined to kill or injure himself if he continuse doing this. I pray someone will catch his error and corrrect it before he becomes another statistic.

 

[Pigman]

Why would priming the pan cause the gun to go off when loading?

Is there a concern that the hammer would drop and set the gun off while loading?

 

[Pigman]

By the time of the Civil War the cartridge box had evolved into a leather and tin system that was meant to protect the user from explosion. Any explosion is directed away from the body or into the heavy leather flap thus protecting the user.

Horns are mush more dangerous because they contain the explosion. If safty is the real concern then they should be left at home on the wall. I use a horn and recognise that it has a potential to explode. I also understand that it is more "correct" for some eras. We all balance saftey vs. authenticity.

 

[paulvallandigham]

The explosion may be directed away from the body, but that metal liner, and the leather box will be shoved into the body hard enough to produce severe bruising, and perhaps a broken rib, or hip bone, if there is an explosion.

Safety is always a primary concern when handling Black Powder. Horns are equally as likely to direct a blast away from the body as that metal case. It will always depend on the thickness of the horn, and how many thick and thin parts to the inside of the horn, and their location in relationship to the body, that will determine the direction of the blast force. Bruising, torn tissues, damaged organs and broken bones should be assumed to be likely.

Our range officers are very serious about plugging those horns before the gun is primed, or capped, and will call people on this in a NY Heartbeat! Only the small priming horns, or, in the event that just one horn is carried, and the same powder is used in both the barrel and for priming, is an exception made. In those cases, the shooter is expected to prove there are no embers in the barrel, by running a damp patch down the barrel to extinguish any that might remain after the last shot. The Vent is watched to see the smoke, and air come out the vent hole. This also proves the vent is clear. The Board discussed requiring single powder users to pour their priming charge into a separate measure, but decided to compromise on this procedure.

I think the use of an empty cartridge case to carry enough powder to charge your pan, as shown here several times, by our moderator, makes a lot of sense. I prefer it to exposing even a small priming horn to possible sparks or embers when loading the flash pan. That may sound like being overly concerned about safety, but accidents do happen. But, I too have sinned, as I have used a priming horn, with 4Fg priming powder, to prime my flash pans for years.

 

[jethro224]

Why would priming the pan cause the gun to go off when loading?

Is there a concern that the hammer would drop and set the gun off while loading?

If the pan is primed then the frizzen is closed to hold the prime in the pan. If the hammer were to fall with the frizzen closed and the pan primed, the gun will fire.
If the frizzen is open there would be no sparks to set off the main charge even if the hammer were to fall for whatever reason.

Horns are mush more dangerous because they contain the explosion. If safty is the real concern then they should be left at home on the wall. I use a horn and recognise that it has a potential to explode.

My horns are air tight. So long as the stopper is in the end there is no way for a spark to get in the horn and set off the powder. I feel that horns are the safest way to carry powder.
I own/have owned several flasks. All but one leaked powder. If powder can get out thru the spout, then a spark could get in. If one did explode, there would be metal shrapnel flying. I think the horns are safer.

Never used a cartridge box. Don't know the first thing about them.

 

[Chilidog]

Ever notice that most horns only have 4 or on a larger horn 5 tacks holding the rear plug on? I remember reading somewhere that the reason for this is that if a spark somehow were to ignite the powder, the few tacks would allow the butt to go before the whole horn exploded because of restriction. Don't know if that's the case or not but the theory sounds promising.

 

[Ron_T.]

Perhaps I'm being naive, but we didn't seem to have the "idiot shooters" back when I first started shooting at shooting ranges (in the late 1950s & early 1960s... and even into the 1970s) that seem to be in the majority at ranges now.

I.E., back then, 'most all the shooters knew how to SAFELY handle their guns and didn't do the goofy things I've seen newbies (and not-so-newbies) do at my club's range the past few years that just weren't done back in the "old days".

Of course, "back then" (in the 40's & 50's)... it was fairly "normal" for Dads & sons to "go shooting" on Sundays at the local gravel pit or down at the river... and our Dads & Granddads were from the "old school"... men who wouldn't tolerate unsafe gun-handling and would chew you out in a proper way if you did stupid things with a gun.

Has anyone else noticed this... or am I "dating" myself as an "old geezer" now? :grin:


Strength & Honor...

Ron T.

 

Besides a safety issue at a club or range there's something else I see from shooting these guns for over 50 years.

We all try to get the best performance we can out of our guns. Once we have a load worked up that our smokepole likes next we usually are looking for the tightest groupings.

By priming the pan then loading there's always the chance you may have blown some of the priming powder out of its original resting place. I'm referring to the pressure being released as you force the ball or patch & ball home. Does this make sense?

If you load the gun before priming the load should be more the same each time than the other way around.

I always try to practice the same method over and over that works for each gun to get those tight groups or be able to place the ball at the point I'm looking for in hunting.

 

Ever notice that most horns only have 4 or on a larger horn 5 tacks holding the rear plug on? I remember reading somewhere that the reason for this is that if a spark somehow were to ignite the powder, the few tacks would allow the butt to go before the whole horn exploded because of restriction......

I have never heard this and must have missed the article read. I contacted a friend that deals (buyer) in historical weapons - edged and shootable. John Bishop said "he had heard this "old wife's tale" a few years ago and found many horns that proved this story wrong". See his attachment of a few horns with more than 4-5 pins.

A. Corlet - Roxbury, Mass 1759 Horn, attachment - plug to horn are (7) iron forged nails.

Hessian Horn, attachment - plug to horn are (9) iron forged nails. On exhibit at Montreal Canada Museum.

"Constantinople Eagle" Horn, attachment - plug to horn are (8) iron forged nails.

"Artillery Horn", attachment - plug to horn are (6) iron forged nails.

The 1775 Horn maker unknown, attachment - plug to horn are (7) iron forged nails.

The Wimmer Horn, attachment - plug to horn are (10) iron forged nails. On exhibit "John Wimmer Collection".​

John and a few of his buddies have several websites so theres a chance you may have seen these horns before. Fun to look at some of these horns, and the prices will floor you when one is available - $2,500 and up. WOW :shocked2:

 

[Trench]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned self-priming locks, they were quite the thing in the late flint era. Many fine English guns were intended to be loaded with the frizzen closed so that as the wads were rammed powder would be blown through the vent to fill the pan. The pan was of V shape or W shape and designed to hold just a proper prime when packed full. Some also had gravity safeties which would prevent hammer fall while the gun was vertical or inverted.
Probably some of our British friends could provide more info on this.

General Anthony Wayne corresponded with President Washington to let him bore out the vent holes in his old Charleville's when he was organizing the Legion for the Northwest Campaign in 1792. He saw the benefit of eliminating the step of priming with a fluid enemy who moved around the battlefield more than a traditional enemy.
However, this is again a military application. I can't see priming my flintlock before loading unless someone is trying to load faster 40 yds in front of me to try and kill me...and that ain't never going to happen. :wink:

 

[Trench]

Perhaps I'm being naive, but we didn't seem to have the "idiot shooters" back when I first started shooting at shooting ranges (in the late 1950s & early 1960s... and even into the 1970s) that seem to be in the majority at ranges now.

I.E., back then, 'most all the shooters knew how to SAFELY handle their guns and didn't do the goofy things I've seen newbies (and not-so-newbies) do at my club's range the past few years that just weren't done back in the "old days".

Of course, "back then" (in the 40's & 50's)... it was fairly "normal" for Dads & sons to "go shooting" on Sundays at the local gravel pit or down at the river... and our Dads & Granddads were from the "old school"... men who wouldn't tolerate unsafe gun-handling and would chew you out in a proper way if you did stupid things with a gun.

Has anyone else noticed this... or am I "dating" myself as an "old geezer" now? :grin:


Strength & Honor...

Ron T.

My favorite idiot shooter was a guy who walked down range while I was shooting. I stopped shooting immediately and set my pistol down and he just said, "Don't worry about it...just keep shooting." Yeah, right.

 

[Ron_T.]

OMGGGGGGG!!!!!!!!!!! :youcrazy: :shake: :surrender:

I think you "win" the prize for having to deal with the biggest "idiot shooter"!!!

 

[Chilidog]

Ever notice that most horns only have 4 or on a larger horn 5 tacks holding the rear plug on? I remember reading somewhere that the reason for this is that if a spark somehow were to ignite the powder, the few tacks would allow the butt to go before the whole horn exploded because of restriction......

I have never heard this and must have missed the article read. I contacted a friend that deals (buyer) in historical weapons - edged and shootable. John Bishop said "he had heard this "old wife's tale" a few years ago and found many horns that proved this story wrong". See his attachment of a few horns with more than 4-5 pins.

A. Corlet - Roxbury, Mass 1759 Horn, attachment - plug to horn are (7) iron forged nails.

Hessian Horn, attachment - plug to horn are (9) iron forged nails. On exhibit at Montreal Canada Museum.

"Constantinople Eagle" Horn, attachment - plug to horn are (8) iron forged nails.

"Artillery Horn", attachment - plug to horn are (6) iron forged nails.

The 1775 Horn maker unknown, attachment - plug to horn are (7) iron forged nails.

The Wimmer Horn, attachment - plug to horn are (10) iron forged nails. On exhibit "John Wimmer Collection".​

John and a few of his buddies have several websites so theres a chance you may have seen these horns before. Fun to look at some of these horns, and the prices will floor you when one is available - $2,500 and up. WOW :shocked2:

At the risk of starting a debate, which I do not want to do, I believe you have misunderstood the statement as intended. It was not stated that there were no older horns with more tacks. Obviously there are many. Even today you see alot of them, especially the buffalo horns seem to be adorned with beau coup tacks running all around the base. Alot of folks just like tacks. Even think that if a few are good, alot is better, ya know? And even if some of the horners "way back when" thought that limiting the tacks for the above reason was a good idea, others may not have concidered that option or even poo pooed the idea. Even today many have not heard or considered this, like yourself. At any rate, I have no idea where I read that article, it's been awhile and just came to mind as I was reading this post. Whether or not it's a practical application I suppose could be debated. It seemed logical to me.

Thanks for posting the pics. I really enjoy viewing the things of yesterday.