• Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

pietta 1851 .36

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
The small pin is called a "cap rake", and keeps the cap from being pulled, or falling, off the tube and jamming up the action. After the cylinder is cocked, the cap is free to fall harmlessly to the side. The rake apparently does the job, and is the preferred fix (rather than eliminating the safety pin notch in the hammer).

The maneuver traditionally used to drop the caps away from the gun's innards, was to continue the upsweep of the barrel (after the shot) as you re-cocked the hammer, allowing any cap fragment to fall backwards, rather than down into the opening in front of the hammer. No real loss of time, especially compared to having the gun tied up by a cap fragment in the works.

Are there any historically contemporary accounts of men being endangered or killed because their Colt jammed up?
This may be more of a "problem" today, on the range, than it was back then. :idunno:
 
I guess I have been fortunate. I havn't had a cap fall into the "innards" like some have. And no way would I fill off or fill in the the safety posts or slit on my guns. If something happened and I can see the law suit coming. And if you fire your guns enough that little twist doesn't take that long to do. And where in todays world would you need to empty the whole chamber that fast, who are you showing off to by fanning? Spray and pray? To me "slow and sure" is the better way.
 
Poor Private said:
I guess I have been fortunate. I havn't had a cap fall into the "innards" like some have. And no way would I fill off or fill in the the safety posts or slit on my guns. If something happened and I can see the law suit coming. And if you fire your guns enough that little twist doesn't take that long to do. And where in todays world would you need to empty the whole chamber that fast, who are you showing off to by fanning? Spray and pray? To me "slow and sure" is the better way.

If you have not had cap problems just be grateful that you evidently bought a finely tuned gun. But besides that you miss the points that have been made. No one is espousing fanning as a spray and pray technique to rely upon for anything other than fun. It demonstrates and reassures the operator that he has a finely tuned instrument that he can use with assurance. The original poster made the statement that he wanted to be able to hunt with his pistol and questioned the modifications needed to assure that possibility. That lead to the discussion about what the "old timers" did when they faced the same situation, if they did at all, and there is some question about that. That "little twist", as you call it, would be something that possibly hindered protecting oneself adequately years ago, and definitely can adversely effect hunting.
 
Thanks USMA

If I have to worry about whether or not the cap is going to jam the cylinder, I can't concentrate on accurate shooting.

Also, I hunt to just get out in the woods and relax, to put my aggrevations of the world aside for a while. I don't want to face the aggrevation of a jammed gun.

And I like to eat what I hunt. Not so much anymore, but there was a time when I depended on the firearm and my ability (or lack thereof) to put meat on the table.
 
I saw a fix once that involved a little flap of spring steel screwed to the recoil shield that transferred the hammer blow to the cap and prevented the cap from blowing backward. Must have been a tough piece of metal to take repeated hammer blows.

Bob
 
I'd be curious to compare an actual cap from 150 years ago to a modern cap. It appears that they were manufactured from heavier gauge, softer copper, which could have resulted in a cap less prone to fragmentation and more easily digested by the action in the event of a jam.
"The copper for making the caps is obtained in sheets 4 feet long and 14 inches wide weighing three pounds: a variation of four ounces more or less is allowed. The copper should be pure, free from seams, holes or blisters, well annealed, and as evenly rolled as possible with straight and smooth edges." From: A Practical Treatise On The Fabrication Of Matches, Gun Cotton, Colored Fires And Fulminating Powders by H. Dussance, published Philadelphia, 1864.
 
Back
Top