How full should the pan be?

[M. De Land]

A friend from Texas says "Tighter than Dick's hat band"! :rotf: MD

 

[Dphar]

I was wondering how full a pan should be for best ignition in general. Smooth full with the frizzen flat against or should there be some space in there? MD

2/3 to 3/4. It should not be so full that the pan cover packs with when its closed or so little that its prone to flashes in the pan.
This was when I primed this pistol.

This was after I have carried it around in a shoulder holster for 4 hours or so hunting.

Dan

 

[Dphar]

I use the least amount that works. Too much prime slows ignition and slow ignition means less accuracy. I try for NEVER over 1/3 pan full. When not in a hurry I usually go with a "pinch" of prime and ignition sounds instantaneous. My guns only require a few kernels of powder for reliability and FAST ignition. I can HEAR the difference between a pinch and 1/2 or more full.

This is a very pervasive myth with many FL shooters.
Actual timing has shown the less priming is NOT faster.
In my experience its also less reliable.
Priming piled on the vent is faster than priming piled away from the vent. Lots of people "know" that covering the vent is bad. But the TESTING shows that its NOT bad. In fact its BETTER than piling it AWAY from the vent.
I know this bursts some bubbles but the timers don't care, they just record the time.
I have ALWAYS thought, based on my shootng, that the "use just as little as can be" was false and I have seen a guy who should have known better bugger up a vent on a VERY nice rifle;

That I had used pretty extensively winning matches and hunting with excellent reliability. I had to sell the rifle back to the maker, he sold it to another shooter who hogged the vent out because it would not fire every time because he would not use enough prime. The man that made it had been making flintlocks and shooting them successfully for about 25 years when he made this rifle and the vent liner used.
POWDER IS CHEAPER THAN VENT LINERS.
And vent liners much over .062 HURT accuracy. This has been tested too by other shooters.

There is a lot of info developed electronically over years concerning FL speed etc. This will get people started. http://www.blackpowdermag.com/featured-articles/flintlock-timing.php
Both timed and from high speed photography. If folks who shoot flintlock would read this they might find that there is a lot of myth associated with the FL that will not withstand scrutiny.
The "just a little prime is faster" myth is one.
1/3 is the bare minimum for matches and I would never use it for hunting.
Larry's info also blows the "my flintlock is as fast as a percussion" myth out of the saddle. Its simply impossible if we look at the high speed photography.

Dan

 

[pargent]

That's about the same as I use in my pans (3 longarms) :thumbsup:

 

[Dphar]

This should list all the timing articles, there are a number of them so look down the list to find them all and then there are some sub-menus.
http://www.blackpowdermag.com/featured-articles/index.php

Dan

 

[Rifleman1776]

Grossly overprimed, IMHO.
When hunting I constantly check the condition of my prime.

 

[okawbow]

I agree with Dan, that a full or nearly full pan works best for me. I don't notice any more delay from a full pan than from a 1/2 pan. If the vent is drilled in the proper place; a full pan should not affect ignition time.

The priming is going to burn from the top down, so a full pan should actually be quicker than a partial pan. I think there may be more of a physical reaction by the shooter to a pan full of priming flashing in his eye, compared to a few grains of primer going off. That big flash could make some people flinch and take more notice of the normal delay that all flintlocks have. The cure for that is more practice. I want to see both the pan flash and the muzzle flash every shot without blinking.

When hunting, I want the pan full of powder so there is no chance it will all flow over to the side farthest from the vent. I am usually on my feet and moving when hunting. I also use a sling most of the time. I don't want to have to check my priming as I'm raising my rifle for a shot.

 

[ebiggs1]

But on the matter of prime the larger the “footprint” it has the greater chance the spark will hit a good spot for “reliable” ignition.
Covering the touch does not slow ignition. Even some trickling in is a good thing.
Use enough and don't skimp om it. It's cheap!

Here we go again.
Completely disagree. A good lock will give all the spark contact with powder you need.
Less primer powder the quicker the ignition. Too much powder will require time for it to burn down before the heat reaches the touchhole.
The actual barrel ignition is not causes so much by the primer burning into the barrel as a sort of venturi effect bringing the heat to the main charge.

Unfortunately for you, this time anyway, is modern testing, cameras and computers prove you are mistaken. As are all the rest that think less is more and against the touch hole is bad.
Also the position of the touch hole has a best placement spot for sure, but it is not a deal breaker if it is not exactly located. Another old wives tale blow away with modern testing equipment.
Mr. Phariss is absolutely correct and I agree totally with him on this subject. :thumbsup:

Now you guys are free to use whatever you like but the facts are what they are. :shake:

 

[Dean2]

Dan

For hunting I use a 3/4 full pan because it means I don't have to check the prime before I fire but for target shooting I have found 1/2 to a 1/3 worked well, and far less pan flash. That said, I have a lot of time for your advice, and the science doesn't lie. I am going to try adding more powder and check my groups as I go up when I am target shooting. Will see if the faster ignition offsets the much bigger pan flash.

 

[Billnpatti]

I don't think there is an ideal amount of powder to put in your pan but I usually put no more than enough to fill it about 1/2 full. As to whether you should have it level in your pan, banked to the outside of your pan or banked up against the inside of your pan, I just tap my rifle gently to sort of level the powder in my pan and it works just fine with instantaneous ignitions. One of our members did a study and he found that, according to his experiments, it was best to bank your powder to the inside of your pan without blocking the touch hole. I never worry about the inside or outside or level in my pan because I know that unless I am going to fire immediately after charging my pan, the powder will move all around as I carry my rifle and won't be in any particular position when I fire. This is what works for me. I don't claim to be an expert in this area so take it for whatever it's worth.

 

[Rifleman1776]

But on the matter of prime the larger the “footprint” it has the greater chance the spark will hit a good spot for “reliable” ignition.
Covering the touch does not slow ignition. Even some trickling in is a good thing.
Use enough and don't skimp om it. It's cheap!

Here we go again.
Completely disagree. A good lock will give all the spark contact with powder you need.
Less primer powder the quicker the ignition. Too much powder will require time for it to burn down before the heat reaches the touchhole.
The actual barrel ignition is not causes so much by the primer burning into the barrel as a sort of venturi effect bringing the heat to the main charge.

Unfortunately for you, this time anyway, is modern testing, cameras and computers prove you are mistaken. As are all the rest that think less is more and against the touch hole is bad.
Also the position of the touch hole has a best placement spot for sure, but it is not a deal breaker if it is not exactly located. Another old wives tale blow away with modern testing equipment.
Mr. Phariss is absolutely correct and I agree totally with him on this subject. :thumbsup:

Now you guys are free to use whatever you like but the facts are what they are. :shake:

I guess this could go on forever. I respect Dan's testing.
But, I also recognize a "Ph-s-s-s-s-s-s-s-boom" and an instant "boom".
My favorite rifle (the one that likes sawn flints) is as quick (by my ears) as my bolt action 30-06 with a tiny trickly of prime along the bottom of the pan and not near the touch hole.
Piled up there is a noticable burn/lag time, not quick at all.

 

[George]

This discussion comes around periodically, and there is always a wide range of opinions as to what is best. One thing I've never seen discussed, though, is overfilling the pan to the point the prime is compressed. The old boys thought that was a no-no, as described in Markland's poem from 1727:

"Nor Prime too full, else you will surely blame
The hanging fire and lose the pointed Aim.
Should I of This the obvious Reason tell:
The caking Pressure does the Flame repel
And Vulcan's lamed again by his own Steel."

I wonder if Pletch has ever tested this theory.

Spence

 

[MacRob46]

3 grs for a small lock, 6 for a large one. For muskets something on the order of 9 - 10 grains. I once saw an antique arms expert fire an original Harpers Ferry 1816 flintlock. He filled the pan full of powder. There was a perceptible delay caused by the flame having to burn through the powder to get to the touch hole. The expert stated that these muskets were not very accurate and I guess they were not when primed in that manner. Experiment and use just enough to get the job done.

 

[Tinker2]

Interesting, modern testing, cameras and computers prove I am mistaken.

But I guess that I will stick with what has work best for me.
I prime more like Rifleman 1776

A 2/3 to ¾ prime would a lot of wasted prime and I would fix it if it required that much.

But then all of my guns aren’t all perfect. :shocked2:

They tell me that I should not prime my .32 with 2F :slap:


William Alexander

 

[hanshi]

I certainly don't have any ignition issues with any of my flinters and I use (average 2 grns) in the pan. Sometimes it's more and on occasion it is less. Mine have even fired from five (5) 3F kernels that trickled into the pan. I am a firm believer in banking toward the vent; though this is uncontrollable in a woods situation. I keep all the vents holes at 1/16" which is about perfect for me. I've also noticed that a full pan takes longer to burn through all that powder than does a 1/4 pan full. It shows on slo-mo but I can hear and see the difference and I am unable to normally detect the difference between 3F and 4F.

 

[jdkerstetter]

Not to anybody in particular, but I seem to recall Pletch writing once that it was about the surface area of the prime, not so much as the amount of powder. The theory being that the larger the surface area caught the sparks much better.

So, how much prime would depend on the lock and the size and shape of the pan and not so much on the amount of powder by measure.

So, all else being equal, it goes to reason that a shallow that was wide would require less prime than a deep narrow one to achieve the same surface area. Different locks are going to have different ideal amounts of prime. Does this seem logical???

Enjoy, J.D.

 

[Number19]

It depends on what type of shooting you're doing. I shoot at a firing line, where we prime in front of the loading bench and then immediately fire. You'll also notice that today I experimented with using blue jean denim as a flint pad.

 

[M. De Land]

That makes sense to me! MD

 

[buzz]

Few things i have noticed is size location and style of vent are all factors in how the pan should be filled
I only fill a pan over 1/2 full is doing a demo shoots

 

[Larry Pletcher]

As I read this thread I see a couple of things I'd like to reply to. First to Spence10: I have not timed a compressed pan of priming powder. I guess I never thought about it. I tend to agree with you about the result.

Refering to the amount of prime. I use plenty of prime. I also slap the side of the gun to level the prime, but always making sure that the some prime lies next to the barrel. A really good lock will work well with small amounts. In the following link I primed the lock with .5 gr of Swiss. The fire produced in the muzzle photo shows shows what a small amount of prime can do. There must be good contact the full length of a sharp flint edge to do this. (In these photos, however, no flints were used.)

Link

However, in priming my gun for target of hunting, I want the whole pan covered. I want a large area for the sparks to land. One of my favorite Silers has the pan widened front to back to make a larger area for sparks. If a lock makes 10 sparks but 5 land on a pan area with no prime, that would not be the locks fault.

To No19: Be very careful using clothe to retain your flint. Once I found myself with no leather and tried cloth patch in an emergency. After a few shots I noticed the cloth smoking. I quit shooting immediately. I'll never try that again. Can you imagine priming a lock with a smoldering cloth holding the flint?

I like really fast locks. I use fast priming powder, mind my flint edge, cover the pan with prime, and make sure there is prime next to the barrel.

Regards,
Pletch