Muzzleloading Myths

[smo]

I just got admonished for a comment I posted yesterday on this post and was told my account could be affected. Be careful what you guys post or even mention.

Been there, done that…

 

[Bobby44]

I always thought that modern steels would be much "purer" and stronger than the locally made blacksmith stuff from back in history; I agree with you.

Is anyone aware if copper pressure unit testing has been done on BP arms. I am sure modern factories have done something but it may never have been published. I do know modern BP arms are made of more suitable materials than the historical arms and would expect them to be capable of 30 to 40 k pressure. This is a guess because of the better steels and the wall thickness (by visual)

 

[Grenadier1758]

The first Lyman Black Powder Loading Manual (1975?) expressed the pressure levels in both lead and copper pressure units.

 

[TDM]

Did not know that @Uncle Miltie. Interesting.

 

[Erwan]

The first Lyman Black Powder Loading Manual (1975?) expressed the pressure levels in both lead and copper pressure units.

That is just: my Lyman BP handbook (1975) gives the pressures on copper crushers and the speeds with a stopwatch with field break (wire break)

 

[Trapper Scott]

I don't know what that was, but this in general is a site that should reflect good taste and common courtesy; I guess any of us could be guilty of a too-hasty typing comment. Most people here love history and tradition and politeness toward all.

Just to set the record straight. My comment was not derogatory or impolite at all and I can assure you it wasn't typed in hast. It was a simple comment on the subject title about, dare I say it " the different F's of black powder" and how I think they came about in history. I'm not one for getting into tiffs with anyone, especially on a social media forum. Now, common sense and my upbringing dictate that I give myself a long time out to think about what I've done.

 

[centershot]

Is anyone aware if copper pressure unit testing has been done on BP arms. I am sure modern factories have done something but it may never have been published. I do know modern BP arms are made of more suitable materials than the historical arms and would expect them to be capable of 30 to 40 k pressure. This is a guess because of the better steels and the wall thickness (by visual)

I'm not at all sure that a new production muzzleloader would hold 40K psi of pressure. I am quite sure that I do not want to hold it when the trigger is pulled! Up until the 1850's steel didn't exist. Once they figured out how to reduce the carbon content of iron we were on the way to the "steel age". Before that, all those rifle barrels were made of cast iron, and that's why the old myth about "seasoning" your barrel carried on into the 20th century. And cast iron barrels sure won't hold 40K pressure! Today, IIRC, most muzzleloader barrels are manufactured from leaded steel like 10L11, not the chrome-moly steels such as 4140. We could build a .50 caliber ML that weighs a scant 6 pounds using chrome-moly steel. And, we can, and have, built ML rifles that are fueled by smokeless powder. We don't concern ourselves with that because we're a bunch of traditional-minded people here, but I for one am all for a lighter weight rifle! My aging shoulders strongly agree!

 

[Uncle Miltie]

I'm not at all sure that a new production muzzleloader would hold 40K psi of pressure. I am quite sure that I do not want to hold it when the trigger is pulled! Up until the 1850's steel didn't exist. Once they figured out how to reduce the carbon content of iron we were on the way to the "steel age". Before that, all those rifle barrels were made of cast iron, and that's why the old myth about "seasoning" your barrel carried on into the 20th century. And cast iron barrels sure won't hold 40K pressure! Today, IIRC, most muzzleloader barrels are manufactured from leaded steel like 10L11, not the chrome-moly steels such as 4140. We could build a .50 caliber ML that weighs a scant 6 pounds using chrome-moly steel. And, we can, and have, built ML rifles that are fueled by smokeless powder. We don't concern ourselves with that because we're a bunch of traditional-minded people here, but I for one am all for a lighter weight rifle! My aging shoulders strongly agree!

Not to nitpick but barrels were of forged iron, not cast.

 

[Rudyard]

Percussion rifles really are pipe bombs, and were known to be so even in the old days. When the hammer comes down on the cap for an instant everything is sealed, with no place for excess pressure to go if something bad should happen. In Europe quality percussion arms often had blow out plugs of gold or platinum which would hopefully keep the barrel from bursting in case of a "problem": such things are never seen on flint guns. In the US tiny holes were sometimes made in percussion drums to vent them if needed. And if you want to know why some contemporary makers will not build percussion guns at all, now you know.

The platina plugs are not some ' blow out safety' idea & the fine hole is for air to vent & while the no air gap theory is valid enough the Chasspot rifle & others where designed to have an air chamber .same with some Indian barrels .
I never heard of the fearful contempory gunmakers concerns re percussion . for any reason .Not that that matters to me .
Rudyard

 

[beardedhorse]

Ned Roberts book The Muzzle Loading Caplock Rifle mentions his Uncle Alvaro who was a sniper in the Civil War. They used what they called straight starters. The Rev War sample is news to me. Museum of the Fur Trade short starter - do they have a date assigned to it?

 

[TFoley]

I'm not at all sure that a new production muzzleloader would hold 40K psi of pressure. I am quite sure that I do not want to hold it when the trigger is pulled! Up until the 1850's steel didn't exist. Once they figured out how to reduce the carbon content of iron we were on the way to the "steel age". Before that, all those rifle barrels were made of cast iron, and that's why the old myth about "seasoning" your barrel carried on into the 20th century. And cast iron barrels sure won't hold 40K pressure! Today, IIRC, most muzzleloader barrels are manufactured from leaded steel like 10L11, not the chrome-moly steels such as 4140. We could build a .50 caliber ML that weighs a scant 6 pounds using chrome-moly steel. And, we can, and have, built ML rifles that are fueled by smokeless powder. We don't concern ourselves with that because we're a bunch of traditional-minded people here, but I for one am all for a lighter weight rifle! My aging shoulders strongly agree!

I beg to differ, Sir. Gun barrels were made of WROUGHT iron, forged in to barrels around a mandrel, or made up of strips, stubs, again forged around a mandrel. Longitudinal seam hammer-welding was also a well-practiced art, again, using wrought iron.

 

[Eterry]

Modern guns are designed to take high pressures.

That is true, but even they can be ruined, detonated, with serious harm to self and others.

I know a guy who ruined 2 modern bolt actions. Both by using the wrong powder For the weight of bullet.

Another guy I worked with destroyed 2 guns. One a mid-20th century classic bolt originally made in Germany in 1898, the other a 1990s vintage handgun originally made for US military service in 1911. He tried using the same powder in both guns.

If you think shooting black powder can get complicated, you should know there are over 160 makes of smokeless powder. Some are similar but each has a different burn rate

 

[Eterry]

My father believed a sharp enough impact could cause black powder to ignite and as a result of this fear (unfounded) he never had black powder, he would only shoot pyrodex and had me afraid to use the stuff. I didn't shoot actual holey black until about 13 years ago. Was just sure it was a dangerous substance and likely to blow up...
Now I only shoot Black Powder and the last can of pyrodex I bought has been sitting in my stuff untouched for about 12 years now. Just prefer BP. I find it is less stinky than pyrodex.

In the early 1980s when powder was cheap I saw a guy put a nearly full can of Goex on a corner post, walked 100 steps, knelt and used his coyote rifle to center punch it. The explosion caused the acorns to fall from nearby post oak trees, and the blast wave was felt over 100 yards away. We found the bottom of the can, but little else.

 

[TDM]

I used to do a lot of reloading. I never deviated from what the book said and was careful with all my powder weights. Unpleasant surprises come to those that don’t.

 

[TDM]

In the early 1980s when powder was cheap I saw a guy put a nearly full can of Goex on a corner post, walked 100 steps, knelt and used his coyote rifle to center punch it. The explosion caused the acorns to fall from nearby post oak trees, and the blast wave was felt over 100 yards away. We found the bottom of the can, but little else.

I have to admit that years ago I always wanted to try that. Wouldn’t do it now.

 

[cynthialee]

In the early 1980s when powder was cheap I saw a guy put a nearly full can of Goex on a corner post, walked 100 steps, knelt and used his coyote rifle to center punch it. The explosion caused the acorns to fall from nearby post oak trees, and the blast wave was felt over 100 yards away. We found the bottom of the can, but little else.

lol good way to get DHS on your tail now eh?

The heat of the bullet penetrating the metal can would have been what set that off.

 

[Coinneach]

I did not say a barrel can’t blow up or bulge. What I said was that it doesn’t automatically turn into a pipe bomb. Of course you shouldn’t intentionally do this, why would you. If it were accidental, well you wouldn’t realize you did it. The peace of mind is knowing that if you ever do this accidentally no bad is automatic and actually odds are favorable that there will be no ill effect.

"If you don't seat a projectile all the way down tight against the powder the barrel will not suddenly blow apart."

Your words.

 

[Mr. Flintlock]

I'm not at all sure that a new production muzzleloader would hold 40K psi of pressure. I am quite sure that I do not want to hold it when the trigger is pulled! Up until the 1850's steel didn't exist. Once they figured out how to reduce the carbon content of iron we were on the way to the "steel age". Before that, all those rifle barrels were made of cast iron, and that's why the old myth about "seasoning" your barrel carried on into the 20th century. And cast iron barrels sure won't hold 40K pressure! Today, IIRC, most muzzleloader barrels are manufactured from leaded steel like 10L11, not the chrome-moly steels such as 4140. We could build a .50 caliber ML that weighs a scant 6 pounds using chrome-moly steel. And, we can, and have, built ML rifles that are fueled by smokeless powder. We don't concern ourselves with that because we're a bunch of traditional-minded people here, but I for one am all for a lighter weight rifle! My aging shoulders strongly agree!

I believe Rice makes a chrome-moly smoothhbore barrel. Special order..

 

[Johnny Tremain]

Myth... Extra powder is just wasted out the barrel on fire...aka, The Davenport Formula..
Nonsense!

Funny how something that has been around for decades does not work. I used it on many rifles, and they dont flame after the calculation.

Its designed to stop wasting powder, one the ball leaves the barrel, the flame does not push it any faster.

 

[Woodwright]

I was going to mention the short starter as possibly not being used back then but I didn't relpy in time. Another "myth" that I never heard a positive answer to is that you can't overload a barrel with powder. Anything over a maximum load would be just blown out the muzzles as unburned powder.

Dixie Gun Works did a test years ago where they took a short length of rifle barrel and threaded and plugged both ends. They drilled a touch hole in the center and filled the barrel section with black powder. A fuse was inserted in the touch hole and lit. All of the flame from the burning powder came out of the touch hole and the barrel remained intact. This was pictured in their catalog years ago. I do not remember what grade of powder was used. Checking a 1999 Dixie Gun Works catalog I still have, I was not able to find this included in that issue.