Myths dispelled

[roundball]

There are some information articles posted at the top of The Muzzleloading Forum, one of which includes a section entitled "Myths Dispelled" that seems to be in error.

MYTHS DISPELLED

Flintlocks are actually faster to fire than a percussion gun, all things being equal. By that I mean, if you have two side lock actions, one flint and other percussion, and the flintlock is tuned properly (has the flint mounted properly in the cock, has a good frizzen that sparks, the angle of the cock will throw the sparks into the middle of the priming pan, and the main charge has been poked with a vent pick to allow more than one granule of powder to be ignited by the priming charge at one time), the main charge in a flintlock will be burning before the hammer on the percussion gun strikes the percussion cap. The priming powder ignites and in turn ignites the main charge in the barrel before the cock finishes its stroke and comes to a rest. The percussion gun, by design, has to strike the cap between the hammer and the nipple to cause ignition, so the flintlock has to fire sooner. Flintlocks fire quicker, lock time being equal.


In reality, the excellent hands on experience from actual work performed and then documented in the 'Larry Pletch videos' shows this not to be the case, dispelling this myth about dispelling myths.

:v

 

[jtmattison]

There are some information articles posted at the top of The Muzzleloading Forum, one of which includes a section entitled "Myths Dispelled" that seems to be in error.

Where are these articles? I work here and don't know what you're talking about.

HD

 

[flintriflesmith]

This one is under "Member Resources> How TO>" shooting flintlocks

 

[Haleh]

the main charge in a flintlock will be burning before the hammer on the percussion gun strikes the percussion cap.
I have also heard this and can't seem to figure how it is possible. Assuming both hammers fall at the same speed, it would mean that when the flint hits the frizzen and removes the hot metal sparks that those pieces would have to gain speed down to the pan. Is that possible? Can the sparks travel faster than the hammer that caused them?

H.Hale

 

[Larry Pletcher]

Steve Chapman and I just finished tests addressing this. It is in the form of three emails. Here is the first:

If a percussion lock is faster that a flint, how much faster? Is a mule ear faster than a side hammer? How much faster is it? We all have had our opinions about these questions. Our next research is to answer these questions.

Steve Chapman and I have spent time recently designing a fixture, collecting locks, and developing the methods we will use for this project. This project was hatched in Jim Chamber’s booth at Friendship. Jim asked if I had ever timed a percussion lock and compared it to a flint. We discussed ways that this might be done. Jim started us off with a pistol stock inlet for his pistol kit. Since it was inlet for a small Siler lock we could use it to make comparisons by swapping locks.

The project grew when more locks became available. A fellow shooter and friend makes a sweet mule ear lock on a small Siler lock plate. We quickly added that to our project. Another long time friend owns a much modified small Siler flintlock. It was timed twice and is the fastest non-original flintlock I have timed.

This brings the lock list up to four: a stock Siler, an intensely modified Siler, a small Siler percussion, and a mule ear percussion. Below are two photos of the pistol and fixture. The first shows the pistol in battery. The second shows a closeup of the pistol rotated vertically. In this photo you can see the brass contact below the sear. The muzzle photocell can be seen in the first photo.

Since the fixture holds the pistol in two positions, we can rotate it to vertical for cleaning and reloading. Then the pistol is lowered into battery and prepared for firing. The lock is fired by a computer-controlled solenoid located below the sear. A thin brass blade is positioned just below the sear. (These can be seen in the second photo.) When the solenoid is fired it presses the brass blade against the sear, trips the sear, and starts the computer clock. A photocell is located at the muzzle and used to stop time. The actual time measured is from sear contact until material exits the muzzle. We anticipate that there will be differences in the sear locations of the locks and will shim the brass to keep the distance between the brass and the sear the same.

The methodology will be to load and fire each lock fifteen times and find the average. The barrel will be drilled and taped for a 1/4x28 drum and also for the mule ear nipple. After the percussion locks are done, the barrel will be drilled out to handle a 5/16x32 Chambers liner. The two flintlocks will then be timed and averaged.

In an attempt to control variables, the barrel will be carefully wiped between shots. The powder, caps, priming powder, etc will be the same throughout. Loading and cleaning procedures will remain the same throughout.

Our goal for Tuesday is to complete the percussion phase of the testing. The flintlock phase will be done after the WL liner is installed.

*** Photos are in the next post. ***

Regards,
Pletch

 

[Larry Pletcher]

Here are the promised photos.

#1 The pistol is in battery ready to fire. You can see the plunger under the sear and the photo cell at the muzzle.

#2 A closer view

#3 Here the pistol is rotated for loading and cleaning. The brass contact is visible here below the sear. the plunger drives the brass up against the sear as it fires the lock. The contact between the sear and the brass leaf starts the clock. The yellow wires are connected to the computer interface.

Regards,
Pletch

 

[roundball]

I'm no authority...but it goes against the grain of a lifetime of my understanding of physics...so I guess I'd have to say: Not a chance :grin:

And it sounds like you have real world hands on experience with Flintlocks and caplocks...

 

[Larry Pletcher]

We finished up testing shortly after lunch and had some expected results and some unexpected.


First of all, we found the small Siler percussion to be faster than the mule ear. It was marginally faster but the difference was measurable. We had expected the short throw and the absense of turns to make the mule ear quicker. Here are the actual numbers for the 15 trials:

Mule Ear-----------S Siler Perc
.010--------------------.011
.014--------------------.012
.010--------------------.010
.016--------------------.010
.010--------------------.010
.011--------------------.010
.009--------------------.012
.019--------------------.010
.023--------------------.008
.009--------------------.012
.013--------------------.025
.019--------------------.013
.016--------------------.009
.010--------------------.012
.016--------------------.008
------------------------------------
.0137------------------.0115 average in seconds

Temp. varied from 56-60 deg - humidity down from 60-42%

Keep in mind that the same nipple was used. All cleaning methods were the same. CCI standard caps were used throuhout. Also remember that the time was measured from the plunger contact on the sear until fire and smoke came from the muzzle. We only changed the locks (and of course used a drum with the side hammer lock. It is our opinion that there is no advantage in the use of this mule ear lock over this side hammer lock on this day- as we would have expected.

We also understand that individual locks differ in the strength of springs, so we consider this simply a test of one lock vs another.

After our surprise wore off and we ate lunch, we decided that we didn't want to wait to see how the flintlock compared. We had not planned to do this because we wanted to drill and tap for a 5/16" WL liner. However we had a TC liner that fit the 1/4x28 existing hole. We will retest this lock with the WL liner, but did the test with the TC liner because we couldn't wait.

Here are the numbers for the standard small Siler with TC liner:

Siler Flint
-------------------
.069
.069
.084
.074
.063
.071
.088
.072
.081
.091
.081
.053
.077
.066
.071
--------------------
.074 average

We expected this type of result. From earlier trials measuring from pan ignition to muzzle we got numbers ranging from .036-.046 seconds. Adding to that the ignition times from known Siler locks (.0370s- my old test Siler) times of .075 would not be unexpected.

When we next test, we will time an extensively modified small Siler and retest this standard small Siler. Both will use the 5/16 WL liner. I'd speculate that the next set of tests will be an improvement over these flintlock times, but I don't expect them to equal the percussion. I think we all would have predicted the flint to be slower, but perhaps not have seen the mule ear to be slower than a side hammer.

BTW Steve and I will be going to Friendship Wed to work with the rep from Olympus on high speed video. We want to get our "ducks in a row" before the June Shoot.

Take care,
Pletch

 

[roundball]

Thanks for the data Pletch-man...when actual hands on experience & knowledge collide with opinions that are posted as facts, the outcome is never in doubt.

Hope the Friendship trials go well...

 

[Tom Compton]

Surprised and curious about the mule ear time vs standard lock. Any info on length of stroke and spring tension?

Also surprised by the magnitude of difference with the flintlock. Expected something in the range of 2X not 5X What size is the touch hole? Was priming powder 4F or other?
Thx
TC

 

[Zonie]

Pletch
Excellent work as usual.

I know it is not in your plans but as you have everything set up to easily test it, perhaps you could consider testing the Chambers White Lightning vent against a non-relieved (or coned) vent liner?

This would envolve making a plain vent liner with a vent hole the same diameter as Chambers White Lightning, the only difference being that the vent hole would extend the full length of the plug.

I suggest this because as you know, there are many who ask questions like, "Is there any real benefit to using a vent liner instead of the vent hole that is drilled thru the wall of my barrel?"


Just a thought.

 

[dbutch]

Thank You ! I was not surprised, I have found flintlocks harder to keep on aim point. The difference in lock time matters. Can you say "follow through" ?

 

[Larry Pletcher]

Surprised and curious about the mule ear time vs standard lock. Any info on length of stroke and spring tension?

Also surprised by the magnitude of difference with the flintlock. Expected something in the range of 2X not 5X What size is the touch hole? Was priming powder 4F or other?
Thx
TC

we were surprised at the sidehammer vs mule ear too. At this point I'd be speculating, but I wonder if the throw of the mule was too short. It's spring was VERY stiff and short; I can't seeit being the spring. I could see an extremely short throw being so short it doesn't have time to accelerate. That's my best guess.

As far as the flint goes - if I combined the 2 previous tests, it seems reasonable. Look at the numbers in the former post - adding them together puts these in the ballpark. My surprise wasn't the flint time, but the very low perc times.

BTW the small Siler in this test was box stock - don't know who made it but it wasn't Chambers. We will be redoing the flint part as I mentioned earlier. The remaining lock is VERY fast. I timed it on 2 different occasions. It is the fastest non-original lock I've timed. It may give very different numbers.

Regards,
Pletch

 

There are some information articles posted at the top of The Muzzleloading Forum, one of which includes a section entitled "Myths Dispelled" that seems to be in error.

Where are these articles? I work here and don't know what you're talking about.

HD

I've searched and cannot find "Myths Dispelled" either?

 

[jtmattison]

This one is under "Member Resources> How TO>" shooting flintlocks

Thanks. It's one of those hidden treasures on the forum.

Here it is

:thumbsup:

HD

 

Pletch
Excellent work as usual.

I know it is not in your plans but as you have everything set up to easily test it, perhaps you could consider testing the Chambers White Lightning vent against a non-relieved (or coned) vent liner?

This would envolve making a plain vent liner with a vent hole the same diameter as Chambers White Lightning, the only difference being that the vent hole would extend the full length of the plug.

I suggest this because as you know, there are many who ask questions like, "Is there any real benefit to using a vent liner instead of the vent hole that is drilled thru the wall of my barrel?"


Just a thought.

That would be a really interesting test on the vent liners.

Cool results on this one. It surprised me that the mulie was slower. Just goes to show that there is a lot of lore out there that has been sans data for a couple of centuries.

Sean

 

[Larry Pletcher]

Pletch
Excellent work as usual.

I know it is not in your plans but as you have everything set up to easily test it, perhaps you could consider testing the Chambers White Lightning vent against a non-relieved (or coned) vent liner?

This would envolve making a plain vent liner with a vent hole the same diameter as Chambers White Lightning, the only difference being that the vent hole would extend the full length of the plug.

I suggest this because as you know, there are many who ask questions like, "Is there any real benefit to using a vent liner instead of the vent hole that is drilled thru the wall of my barrel?"


Just a thought.

Zonie,
We have done tests very close to your idea. We need to sit down and sort out our conclusions. Briefly we like Chambers-shaped vents and large holes. We had an exterior coned vent with a huge hole (.090) do very well. If I were pinned down I'd say that small cylinder holes work well if kept extreeeeemly clean. They can't compete with a good vent liner under normal fouling conditions.

I'll get back to you with the rest of the numbers. I'm away from my data right now.

Regards,
Pletch

 

[renovato]

the main charge in a flintlock will be burning before the hammer on the percussion gun strikes the percussion cap.
I have also heard this and can't seem to figure how it is possible. Assuming both hammers fall at the same speed, it would mean that when the flint hits the frizzen and removes the hot metal sparks that those pieces would have to gain speed down to the pan. Is that possible? Can the sparks travel faster than the hammer that caused them?

H.Hale

Every chipped a rock with a hammer and had a shard come flying out with enough speed to cut your skin? It's possible for a heavier object to transfer momentum to a lighter one and the lighter one to go faster than the heavier one. Doesn't matter though, because the priming powder takes time to ignite. What seems to be instant to our senses is actually a grain by grain ignition process, as shown by Pletch's high speed cameras. Even if the sparks got to the prime faster than a percussion cap fired, it still takes longer for the prime to ignite enough to fire the main charge.

 

[paulvallandigham]

Does a baseball come off a bat faster than the bat that hit it is moving? OF COURSE IT DOES!

And if your flintlock is tuned properly, the sparks ARE THROWN off the frizzen faster than the cock is falling, that made the sparks. At greater speed, they arrive and ignite the flash powder before the hammer( cock) finished falling, and in a well primed, and properly loaded gun barrel, the main charge ignites also before the cock finishes its fall.

ERGO: It can be faster at igniting the charge in the barrel than a percussion sidelock hammer.

I didn't believe this either, when I read the article I have referred to in the past that was published in the Guns&AMMO Black Powder Annual, back in 1978, or 1979. Written by Buz Fawcett, its an interview with Bob Trauwig of Minnesota, about Fine tuning flintlocks. It is Bob who first made it evident to me personally, that it was possible for a flintlock to shoot faster than a percussion gun.

As I said above, I was also a sceptic, and remained so, until I tuned my lock per Trauwig's directions, and then was shooting at the club range. One day, a friend from the club came all the way down the line to ask me if I was now shooting a percussion rifle. I showed him my gun, with its LH flint action, and told him, " NO, Why?" He said, " I swear that gun sounds like its going off faster than a percussion rifle right next to you!". I then proceeded to let him watch as I loaded and prepared the gun to fire- picking the main charge through the touch hole with my vent pick-- and leaving a nice hole in the main charge. He watched behind and to my Left as I took the next shot, and became excited. He had actually seen the priming powder ignite while the hammer was still falling, and was willing to swear that the main charge fired before the hammer came to a rest. I was too busy concentrating on my front sight, and the target- so I just accepted his word for this. After all, he was merely repeating what Bob Trauwig told Buz Fawcett in the article.

I included the comment in my articles because I believed then, and still believe now, that if a flintlock is properly tuned, and prepared to fire, the powder charge will ignite before the hammer finishes its fall.

Does this happen every time I pull the trigger? Sorry to say, No it doesn't. I am still not that consistent in how I prepare the gun to fire. But, I continue to improve, and it seems to happen often enough to keep me trying to get the lock to fire that fast all the time.

I really don't care what you Think, Bill. What you call Myth, or theory, was such to me when I just read Buz's article. But, after the experience I related to you above, I am begrudgingly beginning to believe Bob was correct. I can not hear the difference myself. Again, I am too busy concentrating on my shot, sight picture, and front sight, breath control, and follow through to be "Listening " that intently. I depend on others who make comments to me when everything works right, and then gather others around to see if they also see and hear what they heard happen.

Since you never shoot when anyone else is around, Bill, I don't think you can ever have the same experiences I do, and you won't know the truth of this, one way or another. Opinions are like noses- everyone has one. You are entitled to your own. But get off my back! As The Virginian said to Trampus," you better be smiling when you call me that!" I did not make up the FACTS for that article, nor did I pass on something That had not been tested and proved to my satisfaction.

I was not interested in finding a way to make a flintlock fire FASTER than a Percussion action, when I started reading about tuning locks. I was only interested in getting past the KLATCH-shssssssBoom! delayed ignition that I so often saw and heard on TV as a kid, and still occasionally see at shoots. I still meet older shooters who think that a flintlock is SUPPOSE TO SHOOT with a DELAY in the ignition- KlatchShsssssss Boom! Some actually resent the fact that I have found a way to get locks to fire faster! :shocked2: Again, they are entitled to their opinion. Just don't think I am going to sit by why you pee down my back. :cursing:

Are we clear?????? :hmm: :thumbsup:

 

[paulvallandigham]

I have made this offer before, so I will make it again. If you, or anyone ( Including Bill) would like a copy of the G&A article to read, I will send it to you at my cost. All you have to do is send me a PT asking for it, and send me your Snail Mail address.

I have sent copies of this articles to other members in past months in response to my prior offer, and they have all responded that they found the article both highly technical, and informative. It is both. That is why I have kept a copy all these years. :hatsoff:

Somehow, I am not going to be holding my breath waiting to receive a PT from Roundball. He doesn't want to be confused by the facts. He would rather rant and rave, and play the bully here, than to be better educated.

Now is your chance to prove me wrong, Bill. IF you do, I will gladly inform the members here that I am wrong, and publicly apologize for underestimating your true character. And, of course, I will happily send you a copy of the articles, and await your comments about it.