Flint vs Percussion - Old Arguement

[plmeek]

I was reading some back issues of The Museum of the Fur Trade Quarterly. In the Summer 2003 issue, James A. Hanson wrote a piece titled "Percussion Fur Trade Guns". In it he referenced some testing done by the East India Company back in the early 1840s.

He cites two tests of flintlock guns that the EIC conducted. In the first, 13,711 rounds were fired from 1,387 pistols, carbines, and muskets. The total number of misfires were 1,834 or a misfire rate of 13.37%.

In the second test, they fired 19,916 rounds with a misfire rate of 15.67%.

Subsequently, the EIC conducted some smaller scale tests with newly issued percussion arms. "Of 1,080 shots recorded, there were misfires of just 1.57%, a tenth as many with flint guns."

English military arms of the early 1840s using period powder and flints and percussion caps, were 15 times less reliable with flints than with caps.

Another positive the British military noted after the conversion to percussion was that since less gas escaped out the nipple relative to the vent hole, they realized a 13% savings in gunpowder, since they could load the percussion arms with that much less powder and still achieve the same power as they had with flintlocks.

Hanson also commented on the adoption of percussion arms in the western wilderness.

I have often been told that, in the wilderness, one could lose or run out of caps. That is true, but I have not encountered a written account of anyone having done so. Rather, I have read of flint guns being converted to percussion because the powder had been weakened by wetting, thus not being adequate to prime the pan. And, properly-shaped, quality flints are not to be found indiscriminately [emphasis added]. That's why even Indians preferred to purchase European flints rather than make their own.​

Having hunted arrowheads out here in the West, I can attest to scarcity of suitable stone for making gun flints. Also, the average mountaineer would likely not know how to flint knap, either.

From the Paleo to the Mississippian Period, Indians had to travel long distances or rely on extensive trade routes to obtain stone suitable for making their tools and weapons. And not all of the stone they used for tools and weapons would have made very good gun flints. The idea of picking up any old rock and putting it in the jaws of a cock, and it firing a gun is not realistic.

Hanson's source for the East India Company testing is David Harding, Ammunition and Performance, vol. 3 of Smallarms of the East India Company, 1600-1856 (London: Foresight Books, 1999)

 

[Rat]

As far as reliability, that depends on the operator.

Availability depends on how much you stock up on caps, or flints...and you could lose either one, as easily as the other.

Percussion ignition is a no-brainer, big advantage for a military, and a matter of personal preference to the woodsman.

 

[azmntman]

As far as reliability, that depends on the operator.

Availability depends on how much you stock up on caps, or flints...and you could lose either one, as easily as the other.

Percussion ignition is a no-brainer, big advantage for a military, and a matter of personal preference to the woodsman.

I'd say flint may have been lost easier? Runnin thru the woods with a gaggle of savages or a mad sow after ya you could more easily knock the flint out of the jaws than knock a cap of the nipple?

One would think a cap would be more reliable but the flint guru's here consistently deny this so I will reserve my opinion till I am older and have more time (and more than one flinter)

 

[Stumpkiller]

I don't hunt with flintlocks because I am looking for the most technologically superior hunting tool. I have other choices that don't even load from the muzzle for that. ;-)

The challenge is part of the passion. I seldom head out to take 13,000 shots. Just one. And I spend a lot of prep effort so that one will be 100% reliable.

 

[Carbon 6]

From the Paleo to the Mississippian Period, Indians had to travel long distances or rely on extensive trade routes to obtain stone suitable for making their tools and weapons. And not all of the stone they used for tools and weapons would have made very good gun flints. The idea of picking up any old rock and putting it in the jaws of a cock, and it firing a gun is not realistic.

I'm no flint knapper so I consider myself more like the average Joe. In my opinion it is easier to make a workable flint for a gun than it Is to make an arrow head, spear or axe.
Flint/chert in my area is not suitable for arrow heads and the like, but I can make some usable gun flints, although some chert is only good for flint and steel, and poor at that.

 

[Logcutter]

I guess if I was the commander of a colonial militia company made up of farmers, clerks, carpenters, fisherman, clergy and who knows who else I would prefer percussion every time. But as a hunter, with plenty of time to become skilled with my rifle or smooth bore, and plenty of time to keep it clean and well maintained, I figure a flint lock can work just as well. As for running out of caps, or flints, you could just as well run out of powder or ball. The real horror would be running out of spirits and tobacco. Don't even like to think of that.

 

[Straekat]

Fire treating stone to make it easier to knap was known and used by Amerindians. Chert, chalcedony, jasper with smooth or slightly granular structure were treated. These categories were the most commonly chosen however, there are known cases of quartz and basalt being treated and then flaked.

 

[Rat]

I'm still thinking that whether it be flints or caps, once you run out, you run out. If you run out of powder, doesn't matter how many caps or gun flints you have!! There's some merit to thinking you might find some flint or chert and make a flint, but again, if you lost your flints, what else have you lost? If one ran out, of flints or caps...one didn't plan very well. And again, reliability is dependent on the operator. However, to my mind, since you can easily see right into the main charge of a flinter, and not so easy with a percussion gun, I give the not to the flintlock. On the other hand, I might choose a cap-gun in a heavy downpour. Having said that, I think that in a heavy downpour I'll just stay under a cedar, tarp, tent, tepee, cabin, house, or truck.

 

[Juice Jaws]

This is a no win topic, but my little thoughts on the subject, flintlocks been around 300 years + or - a few. Cap guns been around 20 or 30 years. Flintlocks gave us our freedom, I vote for flintlocks.

 

[Gene L]

I don't see a mechanical advantage of a flintlock. Caps are an advancement in technology leading to breech loading guns. So if you're going for performance, go caps. If you're going for fun, it's up to you. Flints are fun, caps are better performers. At least, that what I think and I own both.

 

[No Deer]

Well, my observations at the many shoots I have attended is that the guys that have the most trouble with their guns are the ones shooting caplocks. Not to say that flint shooters do not have troubles, but far and away it is the cap shooters, especially if it is raining or snowing. I can only attribute this to flint shooters taking more care. They know that they are vulnerable to weather conditions, and therefore take more precautions. Strictly my observations, your observations may be different.

 

[azmntman]

The real horror would be running out of spirits and tobacco. Don't even like to think of that.[/QUOTE]

That never occurred to me! Oh my! I must restock my emergency and hunting packs to provide for an alternative. Could it happen? How would you go on? Others stories welcome, one of us could find ourselves there some day and we would be thrilled to learn how you have coped.

 

[dave_person]

Hi Phil,
British ordnance did the same testing and found the same results plus increased accuracy with percussion guns because of less and consistent gas escape. There is a reason why every army in the world converted to percussion and why most sportsmen did to, percussion ignition was more reliable both in ignition and performance. This is not a question of what someone subjectively prefers but a question of objective evidence and testing. I rarely shoot percussion guns because flintlocks are so much more enjoyable to me not more reliable or accurate. I rarely build percussion guns because they don't interest me very much.

dave

 

[Carbon 6]

A flintlock has an advantage over a percussion for the mountain man. Should he run out of flints or should his his lock break he still has a serviceable meat getter. a flintlock can be fired with a burning piece of punk wood. or a charcoal ember from the campfire. Sure you're not going to fight off natives with it but you could easily shoot a deer.

 

[sawyer04]

In the early seventy's I fumbled a few flintlock kits together and the frizzens were soft. Not producing much spark. I took it upon myself, being a budding blacksmith, to harden the frizzen. After doing so the sparks flew everywhere and so did the frizzen. I have since learned a little more on the subject of tempering metal.
I don't mean to hijack the thread, but this talk of flintlock versus cap lock refreshed my memories.

 

[brayhaven]

Fire treating stone to make it easier to knap was known and used by Amerindians. Chert, chalcedony, jasper with smooth or slightly granular structure were treated. These categories were the most commonly chosen however, there are known cases of quartz and basalt being treated and then flaked.

True, heat treating was used to make Knapping easier, but it isn’t good for gun flints. They don’t spark as well.

 

[M. De Land]

Hi Phil,
British ordnance did the same testing and found the same results plus increased accuracy with percussion guns because of less and consistent gas escape. There is a reason why every army in the world converted to percussion and why most sportsmen did to, percussion ignition was more reliable both in ignition and performance. This is not a question of what someone subjectively prefers but a question of objective evidence and testing. I rarely shoot percussion guns because flintlocks are so much more enjoyable to me not more reliable or accurate. I rarely build percussion guns because they don't interest me very much.

dave

I can think of no way to say it better! For hunting big game though I always use a powerful center fire because killing anything is serious business and if one is going to involve themselves in such and endeavor they owe it to the game animal to be as efficient as possible. That is true of any size game.
I know that it is done here in Alaska by some hearty soles but using only a muzzle loader in bear country,especially a flint gun, never has made much sense to me. If used in Kodiak or the Aleutian chain where you find yourself hunting in horizontal wind driven rain or not at all, they are practically useless and you would be better off with a , broad point spear.

 

[Lobo]

I hunt with only flintlocks. From experience I've found them more reliable.

Many years ago I hunted with a percussion gun and had problems from time to time due to moisture. I switched to a flintlock and as long as I keep my power dry, my flint sharp and the vent clear I can depend on ignition.

 

[M. De Land]

True, heat treating was used to make Knapping easier, but it isn’t good for gun flints. They don’t spark as well.[/QUOTE
All I use is home made heat treated gun flints knapped by my own hand. Keokuk chert from Oklahoma is the best I have found. Not only are they tougher than the black flints I have bought from TOTW, they spark every bit as well as far as I can detect.
I currently have several of my friends testing some (five each) to see what they think. One of them so far, is testing the chert flints and is a top handgun competitor, says he likes them better as well. Still waiting to see what the rest think.

 

[Rifleman1776]

The challenge is part of the passion.

Sez it all. There is no "vs" one or the other. These days it is a matter of personal preference. For the record, mine is flint.