First Chainfire

[crockett]

The heavier 44 caliber ball would offer more inertia, making it more likely to move if there was a loose fit. If there is lead on the frame then the ignition must have occurred with the ball still partially in the chamber but the overall effect having far less damage than anticipated. I agree the cyliner-only idea wouldn't test for this. Right now I am still of the opinion that chain firings can occur from more than one cause, loose caps, loose balls, no lube/wad. Of these three, the no lube/wad problem could occur at any point in firing the gun, since most are on the first shot, recoil seems to be the deciding factor, making loose caps and loose balls probably the culprits in almost all instances.
Now here is a crazy idea- just a thought. Most of us are familiar with fire pistons. It is a little stick in a tube that you hit hard. The heat generates an ember. They originated in the South Pacific. Muzzle Blasts(Bevel Brothers) had a big deal about disel effect with a ramrod igbiting a charge while loading. The conclusion- can't happen. Could a lead ball in a chamber, through friction, move enough to cause an ignition. Probably not- just a thought.
For those reading this thread who have had chain firings; on the chambers that fired- can you remember if the frame was leaded or if the cap did or did not explode.

 

[WV_Hillbilly]

i used to have a 36.always greased balls,it would chain fire sometimes

I really appreciate your input and the information.

We need as much data as we can to solve this puzzle.

May I ask some more particulars about your revolver.
What manufacturer made it/what brand was it?
Was it an open top frame?
What size balls did you shoot in it?
Did you typically shoot full power loads?
Did you ever have problems with caps not fitting the nipples or caps falling off?
Was the chain fire always on the first shot?

Thanks again for your help!

Shoot Safely!
WV_Hillbilly

 

[WRussell]

Yep, idiot. But not offended. I was a total greenhorn, and had just acquired by good fortune an old Tranter, no experienced folks around to advise, shooting at an old abandoned quarry, no range officer to check things out. The chambers are tapered, so I suppose shaving is not required, but they are also a bit rough, and the only balls I could find at our local supplier (early 70's?) were the buckshot.

Not hurt, well educated, beginners luck. (I was also shooting light loads - I wasn't THAT dumb.)

Point is, this goes to show that a chainfire can happen from the front if conditions are right/wrong.

 

[brubincam]

36 cal fie open top colt style brass frame, round balls,made from small brass bullit mold, mold lieft dimples in balls but it shaved lead all the way around when loading, 15 gr powder, remington caps had to pinch to stay on, fired balls ha strong rifling all the way arround, when using ball lube that came in a tube,dont remember the name, smelled like crayons and was thick, didnt melt when firing, didnt chain fire when using this, just when using crisco, first shot would chain fire,with a ball on either side of barrel going off 15 gr 3f powder, :results:

 

[brubincam]

:sorry: i forgot 375 balls :sorry:

 

[WV_Hillbilly]

:sorry: i forgot 375 balls :sorry:

I hate to be so tedious, but did you measure the balls?

Those pincer style, brass moulds do not generally cast balls to accurate tolerance levels. The mould may have .375 embossed directly on the side of it, but the balls might come out to some other measurement (usually on the low side). Also the cast balls are not always truely round--but oblate spheroids; OR the mould halves may not match up--creating two offset hemispheres.

If you would, please measure the balls in several directions and also note if there are any discrepancies in the quality, roundness, etc...

Thanks!
WV_Hillbilly

 

[brubincam]

sorry dont have the mold anynore,the balls were oversized because they shaved lead when inserting into the cylinder, i do not presently have any cap & ball revolvers, have had several years ago, my favorite was 1851 navy 36 cal.

 

[crockett]

Couple of thought....
1. Everyone(me included) uses Crisco when greasing the end of the chamber. Is there a better grease, does Crisco melt so fast as to not work? Since the chain firing usually is on first shot- it would seem Crisco does the job at least for one shot.
2. This is for the Scientists amongst us: if a ball moves forward in the chamber, doing so very quickly, wouldn't that create at least a slight low pressure volume behind the ball that could suck in hot gas and flame to ignite the charge?
AND...
If caps are pressed into an oval shape to stay on a nipple, could there be (the the long sides of the oval) tiny air passages to admit hot gas?
AND...
Does flame have a tendency to seek out oxygen? In other words if one fires the revolver and if everything around the revolver is devoid of oxygen, would the cooler oxygen in the ajoining chamber have a tendency to suck in the hot gas and cause a chain firing?
Up until now I always thought a flame had to be directed at and penetrate through a tiny opening inorder to cause a chain firing BUT if the above is true, it may better explain how a chain firing occurs.

 

[unspellable]

Following this chain, my opinions as to the causes of chain fires have been changing daily. Here's another thought.

When I started out with the Rogers & Spencer, I used 454 balls, supposedly the correct size for all Italian made revolvers. I put 0.109 cubic inches of Goex FFF behind them. (Somebody work that out in grains, I had a set of Lee dippers with me.) Performance was decidedly variable in terms of perceived recoil and sound. I switched to 0.132 cubic inches of powder and a .457 ball and the sound and recoil became consistent. Did the 454 balls have insufficient "pull"? Makes me wonder if there is something to the idea of the ball moving far enough forward under recoil to expose the powder.

When i had my chain fire the two extra cylinders did not produce much recoil or damage to the revolver, but they did produce an odd noise and a flame like a Roman candle. This fits with the idea of the ball having moved forward enough to expose the powder.

 

[WV_Hillbilly]

Following this chain, my opinions as to the causes of chain fires have been changing daily. Here's another thought.

When I started out with the Rogers & Spencer, I used 454 balls, supposedly the correct size for all Italian made revolvers. I put 0.109 cubic inches of Goex FFF behind them. (Somebody work that out in grains, I had a set of Lee dippers with me.) Performance was decidedly variable in terms of perceived recoil and sound. I switched to 0.132 cubic inches of powder and a .457 ball and the sound and recoil became consistent. Did the 454 balls have insufficient "pull"? Makes me wonder if there is something to the idea of the ball moving far enough forward under recoil to expose the powder.

When i had my chain fire the two extra cylinders did not produce much recoil or damage to the revolver, but they did produce an odd noise and a flame like a Roman candle. This fits with the idea of the ball having moved forward enough to expose the powder.

0.109 cubic inches is ~28.6gr of FFFg Black Powder
0.132 cubic inches is ~34.6gr of FFFg Black Powder

Sounds like the "recoil & loose fitting ball theory" is making more and more sense to me too.

Because,
IF the reason was that the caps were loose or came off; and the chambers were ignited through the nipples from the rear... then there should be considerably more damage to the gun and shooter, as those tightly loaded chambers should be the equivalent of firing heavy loads in a short barrelled derringer.

The mystery continues, but with every additional person who supplies (or replies with)chain fire event data, I think we are making some headway.

Shoot Safely!
WV_Hillbilly

 

[brubincam]

with the theary of the ball sliding forward in the cylinder, has anyone loaded a ball flush with the end of cylinder ,not tight against powder and fire it?????

 

[unspellable]

If the ball moved forward enough to expose the powder then grease over the ball would make little difference. On the other hand a wad behind the ball might stay put. If the effect were consistent one would expect fewer chain fires with wads than with out, grease or no grease.

 

[WV_Hillbilly]

with the theary of the ball sliding forward in the cylinder, has anyone loaded a ball flush with the end of cylinder ,not tight against powder and fire it?????

In a single shot muzzleloading rifle or pistol....
Loading with space between the projectile and the propellant is very dangerous. The ball (or bullet) is the same as a barrel obstruction. The powder could just detonate and cause the barrel to burst.

In a cap-n-ball cylinder...
I don't think it would be very wise to try to load it that way as it is basically duplicating the same potentially dangerous situation that occurs in a rifle or pistol barrel.

I would imagine that over the years and the countless rounds loaded and fired, that some guns' chambers and balls were loaded just as you described, but we have no records of what happened.

BUT, maybe you are on to something... Is it possible that a small volume of air left in the chamber gets super heated and causes the powder to spontaneously combust? Could the friction from the ball moving forward in the chamber be a cause?

I "assume" that many here are familiar with what "dieseling" means. Is there a possibility that somehow this is occurring and causing a chain fire?

You had a good thought...
That's what we are going to need to solve this mystery. We need to keep our brain cells "well oiled" and try to answer this. It is a very interesting problem and so far no one (that has responded) has been injured severely by a chain fire, but we don't want anyone hurt to any degree!

Thanks for your input.

Shoot Safely!
WV_Hillbilly

 

[Nightwind]

WV Hillbilly,

Here's another chainfire I distinctly remember. On the pistol line at Friendship, friend Jim was shooting a Ruger Old Army. He had a quadruple, I'm quite certain it was a first shot. I remember a slight delay between the first shot and the next three, the last three were very close together. He had cuts on his shooting hand that came from the caps, enough to bleed a little. I remember them pulling a couple scraps of copper from his hand. This was his first time shooting there. The range officers determined it was from loose caps as the fifth unshot cylinder cap was missing.

Hopes this helps the research somewhat. I'll try to contact him and see if he can add anything to this.

 

[WV_Hillbilly]

I've never heard of a Ruger Old Army having a "chain fire". But we are at least getting some more data about full frame guns having this happen to them also. Where we've already been through this about the caps, is that regardless of whether it lights from the front or rear, the caps on those chambers are going to be ignited and blow off of those nipples regardless. So you would expect to still find capped nipple(s) on the chambers that didn't fire off, AND expect to find no caps left on any fired chambers.

And remember that all those blank shots fired by the re-enactment group that someone mentioned... no multiple ignitions in all those many thouands of shots. It almost has to involve the ball in the process, but there were no projectiles in those blanks AND no "chain fires" either.

But I also was talking with a fellow shooter who brought up a good point about a possible problem that might be the cause of the phenomenon. He said that due to how the chambers are loaded, the possibility of a few granules of powder being crushed by the ball being loaded is pretty high. These would be under considerable pressure especially if trapped between the circumference of the ball and the chamber walls. When ignition occurs (and usually on the first shot) the ball tries to slide forward under recoil and these trapped powder granules are spontaneously ignited by friction. And that's why neither lubed wads or grease sealant would stop the multiple ignition in every instance...? Like I said, it makes a lot of sense.

I think I am going to start using the more proper terminology which is "multiple ignition", or "multiple discharge". I am still trying to come up with a fixture that will let the revolver freely recoil as it would in a shooter's hands.

And so, it continues...

Shoot Safely!
WV_Hillbilly

 

I'll throw more fuel on the fire... :hmm:

I have read several accounts of pepper boxes going off all at once but with these guns, the cylinder and chambers are the barrel. The similiarities to a C&B pistol are that there are percussion caps and nipples and usually some sort of recoil shield on the frame. The difference is - no forcing cone and a very long "barrel" compared to a normal revolver cylinder. I really doubt that fire from the front of the barrel made its way back down and ignited powder around a loose ball. That leaves the nipple end as a logical spot for the chain fire to originate.

I've never experienced a chain fire in over 20 years of shooting these guns but I have always used tight caps - not because I was afraid of chain fires but because I carried a C&B in the field and didn't want the caps falling off while on horseback or in similar rough traveling. I cannot say for certain what causes chain fires but I personally believe that it happens at the nipple. :grey:

 

[crockett]

The pepper box situation is really important. If there are chain firings from a pepper box, it SEEMS INCONCEIVABLE that flame out one barrel could do a 180 degree turn, travel down an ajoining barrel, and ignite a charge because a ball that didn't fully seal the chamber. While caps are the most logical culprit, what the loose ball theory says is this. 1. Black powder will ignite at about 600 degrees, (correct me if I am wrong- I am operating out of memory) Now if a loose ball is violently driven forward in recoil- does that generate enough heat to ignite the charge??? Remeber a fire piston has a wood stick only about an inch long; that, when slammed down makes an ember.
2. The ball is driven forward expanding the chamber behind the ball, creating a low pressure area that literally sucks in hot gas(over 600 degrees) that ignite the charge.
3. On a revolver cylinder: balls move forward, push out lube, there is a hair thin ring of lead around the ball protecting the powder charge- enough gap exists to invite flame that ignites powder( This obviously wouldn't occur with the pepper box)
4. Any Pepper box shooters out there??
THE LOOSE CAP THEORY
1. Recoil knocks off caps which simultaneously invites flame or hot gas to enter exposed nipple and explode charge. My problem with this is where is the flame or hot gas coming from?? Does the fired chamber under the hammer have a cap that blows off, then flame and gas comes out the nipple and over to an ajoining , exposed nipple to explode the charge? Or, does the hot gas and flame out the fired chamber surround the gun and go into the exposed nipple? Seems if that much hot gas was around the gun your hand would get burnt. Or, does the heat of the fired chamber exceed 600 degrees and that with an exposed nipple, suck in oxygen and cause the explosion( I realize this is pure speculation)
Could a piece of paper, etc be placed in the recoil shield area and ONLY one chamber loaded and fired and the paper examined. Maybe there is a lot more flame and flash than I realize. On my percussion rifle, I wanted to protect the wood stock so I wrapped the area with scotch tape. One cap blew it all apart.

 

[brubincam]

with a ball being forced out the barrel on a pepper box at the moment of firing, the pressure and flame forcing the ball to exit,,pushing against the ball faster than the ball is moving,,,,could the heat and flame bounce back to the other loaded balls,causing chain fire???? :m2c: :m2c: :m2c:

 

Crockett,

We can assume there is blowback thru the nipple - your caplock rifle experiment with the tape showed that. I also have seen residue all over the lock area of my percussion rifle. Just for fun, I was experimenting with nipple orifices several years ago, drilling out with a number size bit and refitting to the rifle to see how ignition was affected. Eventually, I got to a point where the hammer blew back to half and then later to full cock. That's obviously too much to knowingly install but what about revolvers with worn nipples? I'll bet high speed photography would show a lot of flash around the recoil shield - even on a gun with brand new nipples.

Like I said earlier, I don't know the answer - might be loose balls, but if it happened regularly, a projectile slipping forward would lock up the pistol on those occasions when chain fires don't occur. I use .457 balls all the time and I have never seen one move forward but I was not using a depth gauge and measuring the "before and after". It would be interesting to load six, measure all depths then fire one shot and remeasure what's left until the last shot is done. In addition, does a clean pistol make a difference or does fouling from one shot mean something? Lots of questions - we could certainly create a DOE to see if we could initiate a chain fire - wonder if we could get Uberti or Dixie to donate pistols... :hmm:

 

[Nightwind]

WV Hillbilly, your thoughts on 7/02/05 at 3:59 am. Regarding caps, whether the caps themselves set off the charge in the chamber, or the internal explosion in the chamber blew off the caps. You're right, the caps will be missing. But what about after the chainfire, when the caps are missing on an unfired cylinder? did the cap safely fall off after the chainfire? or did luck have a hand and an uncapped loaded chamber didn't receive enough crossflame to ignite?

The crushed powder between the ball and the cylinder wall? With that in mind, seems to me there would be a lot of danger in simply pressing the ball down the chamber. I'm amazed at the number of people that load a ball into a chamber that has powder spilled around and on top of the cylinder. No accidental discharges there?

Boy! you're making this guy do a lot of thinking!

Respectfully yours,
Nightwind