How to stop misfires?

[Rifleman1776]

Tt
The whole problem may be as simple as your patch jag. It must be small enough and long enough to allow the patch to slide down the bore without pushing crud in front of it. Then when it is withdrawn the patch bunches up and pulls the crud OUT. I learned that here on this forum, and is the best piece of advice I have yet to find when it comes to dependable firing of my flintlocks.

BINGO!

 

[Crow Choker]

BINGO!

I long ago quite using a blunt, flat end jag. Use the TC pointed one and/or a slotted jag. The slotted jag with a patch will pull/remove alot of crud that a flat end jag only pushes it into the end of the barrel where it will eventually only accumulate and cause poor ignition/misfires-- (the subject of this thread). CC

 

[R.J.Bruce]

If I was to bet serious cash money on it, I would place my bets on the early frontiersmen using a smaller diameter ball than is common today (0.015"-0.020" under bore size), in conjunction with a thicker than is common today patch material (0.035"-0.040" thick) in order to achieve the same effect as what I was describing in my above posts.

They simply had NO TIME to spend cleaning the bore of a rifle that was an every day tool. I forget where I read that the average lifespan of an 18th-19th Century firearm was 2-3 years. They got used up/worn out quickly, probably because they were not cleaned as rigorously as we do today. In addition to which, they were carried all day long, so wear & tear was constant.

Pushing the spent fouling down on top of the new powder charge, with a patch lubed with some form of animal tallow, surrounding the ball, makes more sense than anything else that I have read/heard since I have been involved in muzzleloading.

 

[bigted]

I am with you Bruce. I very much doubt that our forfathers used as tight of a setup as we do today.

Accuracy has increased over time not decayed. My feelings are that a pie plate group is about all that was desired back when the muzzleloading gun was an everyday tool. A stalk on a game animal more than likely done at fairly short range (compared to what we do on modern SKITTISH animals due to long range modern rifles). The game sought back when were not harassed like they are today.

Loading in a hurry is not lent on tight balls and tighter patching. Late competition muzzleloaders are a far cry from what vintage woodsmen carried. Back when a flash of sunlight off an ornate rifle would get you killed, I very much think that as to clothing, the guns were simple and only as accurate as needed to defend yourself or feed yourself.

In light of these observations ... OP ... smaller ball and thicker patch lubed with tallow and an easy loading will keep er shooting till you decide you have had enough for the day.

 

[Britsmoothy]

I am with you Bruce. I very much doubt that our forfathers used as tight of a setup as we do today.

Accuracy has increased over time not decayed. My feelings are that a pie plate group is about all that was desired back when the muzzleloading gun was an everyday tool. A stalk on a game animal more than likely done at fairly short range (compared to what we do on modern SKITTISH animals due to long range modern rifles). The game sought back when were not harassed like they are today.

Loading in a hurry is not lent on tight balls and tighter patching. Late competition muzzleloaders are a far cry from what vintage woodsmen carried. Back when a flash of sunlight off an ornate rifle would get you killed, I very much think that as to clothing, the guns were simple and only as accurate as needed to defend yourself or feed yourself.

In light of these observations ... OP ... smaller ball and thicker patch lubed with tallow and an easy loading will keep er shooting till you decide you have had enough for the day.

Funny that.....my last muzzleloading rifle would shoot 3" or less at 100yds off hand regularly.
No short starter needed just thumb started. No swabbing. Just a wet thin cotton patch.

Personally I would think that squirrel and other small game was the usual fair over big game all the time. Why struggle keeping a large amount of meat from rotting when fresh is hopping about all the time! Hence an accurate rifle was desired even back then. If it was not desired why was not the smoothbore more prolific? I have regularly seen a smoothbore or two match an average shot from a rifle to 60yds!

I humbly disagree with your assumption but will indeed assume that folk of old would pull some funny faces watching some load a muzzleloader today!

 

[R.J.Bruce]

The population of the fairly new United States in 1800 was approximately 5.3 million people, and at least half of them were armed. The majority of them were armed with smoothbore military weapons, and inexpensive fowlers, not the more expensive rifles. The average lifespan of one of those guns was only 2-3 years. They got used up; worn out; broken; blown up; lost in lakes, rivers, & oceans; and the salvageable parts utilized to build new guns. Nothing useable was thrown away.

What survives today are those weapons that were put away & forgotten; treasured as family heirlooms; lost, and then found; stored away by governments, never to be used as newer technology came along; collected by those wealthy enough to do so; and those donated to museums.

These surviving guns are but a tiny fraction of the totality of the flintlock and percussion weapons that were imported/smuggled into the colonies, imported/smuggled into the United States, or manufactured here in the United States.

I think I recall reading that approximately 25,000-30,000 Carolina Trade guns were shipped to the southern colonies over a 30-40 year period in the early 18th Century. But, there is NOT ONE COMPLETE surviving example of one of these guns.

 

[R.J.Bruce]

The population of the fairly new United States in 1800 was approximately 5.3 million people, and at least half of them were armed. The majority of them were armed with smoothbore military weapons, and inexpensive fowlers, not the more expensive rifles. The average lifespan of one of those guns was only 2-3 years. They got used up; worn out; broken; blown up; lost in lakes, rivers, & oceans; and the salvageable parts utilized to build new guns. Nothing useable was thrown away.

What survives today are those weapons that were put away & forgotten; treasured as family heirlooms; lost, and then found; stored away by governments, never to be used as newer technology came along; collected by those wealthy enough to do so; and those donated to museums.

These surviving guns are but a tiny fraction of the totality of the flintlock and percussion weapons that were imported/smuggled into the colonies, imported/smuggled into the United States, or manufactured here in the United States.

I think I recall reading that approximately 25,000-30,000 Carolina Trade guns were shipped to the southern colonies over a 30-40 year period in the early 18th Century. But, there is NOT ONE COMPLETE surviving example of one of these guns.

I forgot to mention that guns got lost in battles with native tribes, bandits, theives, murderers, pirates, as well as all the various conflicts that were going on in North America as the struggles for domination of the continent raged.

 

[Col. Batguano]

2-3 years of daily handling is 700-1000 days of almost all day handling, or maybe 10,000 hours. For those of us (today) that are weekend shooters (handling them 3-4 hours, 30-40 times a year) that's maybe 100 hours, or 1/100th as much. No wonder our 10 year-old guns look so pristine compared to the originals!

 

[bigted]

Funny that.....my last muzzleloading rifle would shoot 3" or less at 100yds off hand regularly.
No short starter needed just thumb started. No swabbing. Just a wet thin cotton patch.

Personally I would think that squirrel and other small game was the usual fair over big game all the time. Why struggle keeping a large amount of meat from rotting when fresh is hopping about all the time! Hence an accurate rifle was desired even back then. If it was not desired why was not the smoothbore more prolific? I have regularly seen a smoothbore or two match an average shot from a rifle to 60yds!

I humbly disagree with your assumption but will indeed assume that folk of old would pull some funny faces watching some load a muzzleloader today!

Britts, great observations. My view is based on my experience in Alaska where there there ate still places that no white man has ever stepped. Those animals and birds are no where near as skittish as those animals closer to civilization. Based on these observations, I guess my assumptions on accuracy are based on a 20 to 50 yard normal hunting distance in country that is un-molested

In view of these distances on first hand experience, I can guess that if one can stalk even closer, these small game animals and birds COULD (not that I have this ability) take food or small game with a bow, sling or even throwing a rock to feed ones self instead of burning ball n powder for this small table fare.

It is because of these distances in wild country that I based my "assumption" of the accuracy needs/possession of our wild country living forefathers.

Undoubtedly in "settled" country where animals are more skittish and range becomes longer where a more accurate shooting weapon would be needed/desired.

Not an argument Britts, just did not splain meself very well in the above. In my fevered imagination I seem to gravitate towards a fairly lonely solo existence in the early days of our forefathers. I tend to be more a loner now and my assumption is that I would have been a loner in the wilderness of yesteryear. Therefore a smoothbore weapon would have served me very well for self defence and the chance occasionally to collect a deer sized animal for jerking and smoking for the nites/days where a cold camp would have been needed. Pie plate accuracy would have served very nicely in this style of easy existence.

 

[Britsmoothy]

Britts, great observations. My view is based on my experience in Alaska where there there ate still places that no white man has ever stepped. Those animals and birds are no where near as skittish as those animals closer to civilization. Based on these observations, I guess my assumptions on accuracy are based on a 20 to 50 yard normal hunting distance in country that is un-molested

In view of these distances on first hand experience, I can guess that if one can stalk even closer, these small game animals and birds COULD (not that I have this ability) take food or small game with a bow, sling or even throwing a rock to feed ones self instead of burning ball n powder for this small table fare.

It is because of these distances in wild country that I based my "assumption" of the accuracy needs/possession of our wild country living forefathers.

Undoubtedly in "settled" country where animals are more skittish and range becomes longer where a more accurate shooting weapon would be needed/desired.

Not an argument Britts, just did not splain meself very well in the above. In my fevered imagination I seem to gravitate towards a fairly lonely solo existence in the early days of our forefathers. I tend to be more a loner now and my assumption is that I would have been a loner in the wilderness of yesteryear. Therefore a smoothbore weapon would have served me very well for self defence and the chance occasionally to collect a deer sized animal for jerking and smoking for the nites/days where a cold camp would have been needed. Pie plate accuracy would have served very nicely in this style of easy existence.

You make excellent valid points.
Thank you.

 

[waksupi]

You are pushing fouling down on the breech. Get a breech scraper, and use it. I found in particular with my smooth bore, if I get a misfire, or have a good sight picture but miss a target, cleaning the breech face brings it right back on target, and is sure fire.