touch hole liners

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

tnlonghunter

40 Cal.
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
783
Reaction score
515
Location
Maryland
I was reading on the Caywood Guns website about touch hole liners. They stated that touch hole liners were not historically accurate (not a great leap of faith to believe that). More to the point, they stated that touch hole liners are not as safe as the inverted cone method of making touch holes. As I'm really new to this, what exactly is the inverted cone? I read on TOW that the White Lightning liner has a big concave opening to get the primer closer to the main charge. Does the inverted cone method do this? If so, it would seem better since there is one less part to fail on the gun. What then is the advantage of a touch hole liner if this other method is better? Just really curious for when I finally get to start building my own rifle.
 
Boy, you are really opening a can of worms here. Everyone who shoots flinters seems to have a very strong opinion on this subject.
I feel the Caywoods overstate their case when they say all touch hole liners are unsafe. I will agree that an improperly installed or worn touchhole liner is unsafe just as a percussion rifle with an improperly fitted drum is unsafe. If tha liner blows out of the side of the rifle the guy standing next to you is in trouble.
A properly fitted and installed touch hole liner is safe and will not blow out, even with very heavy loads.

The Chambers liners have a cone on the inside which brings the main charge closer to the priming powder in the pan. This should provide faster ignition than a straight drilled touch hole or a straight liner. The Caywood practice of coning the outside of the barrel next to the pan has advantages in that the hot gases from the ignited priming powder are directed by the cone into the touch hole and thus into the powder charge. The gases are traveling faster than powder would be burning through the touch hole channel to the powder charge.

I used to own a 36 cal. flint rifle that had a platinum touch hole liner with the cone on the outside which extended almost to the powder charge. Only the rugged properties of the platinum kept the liner from burning out. That sucker was fast. Shooting that rifle was like shooting a percussion rifle. The perception was that there was no delay at all. I don't think that many American rifles had liners because we didn't have the manufacturing base to economiclly build them. I have seen high end European, mainly British rifles, with gold or platinum liners and many double barrel percussion shotguns have platinum blow out plugs.

If I had a source for platinum touch hole liners today I would have them in all my flint rifles.

Freedom isn't free

Doug in Virginia
 
This is a hot button topic and if you search you'll find a lot of posts. Many people have lots of ideas and we don't know that much about hard data- speed and reliability tests on the same gun, lock, barrel, with different touch holes, under the same conditions, cleaned or not, the same, each time. This is especially difficult because flints wear. If you get a slow fire, is it because the flint is throwing few sparks? Or is it the touch hole?

Most American made flinters originally had straight drilled touch holes and there are debates about the right size for best reliability, speed, and velocity. Internal coning can be done with special tools but it's not known how often this was done. Vent liners seem primarily to have been put on American flintlocks to fix an eroded touch hole.

A vent liner may or may not speed ignition, but hey, anything named, "White Lightning" will sell. Possible problems with vent liners: if not properly installed they may protrude into the bore and be a spot that grabs your jag or patch when cleaning and crud could build up. They could be difficult to clean of caked residue that could stick in the cone if you just wipe with patches and do not shoot water out of your vent. But many people who use them love them and would never build a gun without them. This makes it difficult for custom builders of longrifles to build a rifle without one. I do not believe for a minute they are unsafe unless folks have the practice of removing them, as may be done on TC's etc. Most vent liners are installed permanently and will never "come out" on their own.

I have always used them because I believed what was written about them being essential for fast and reliable ignition. I am no longer sure those "facts" are "facts".
 
I returned a perc. SxS 20ga. back to it's origianl flint configuration. The drums were removed, plugged and welded. Of course vents were then drilled. My gosh the ignition was so slow, it was like a fuse! I then installed the 1/4-32 Whitelightning vents. Now the gun fires in a very timely fashion. May not be period correct (who really knows when you look at an original SxS they are all lined that I have see.) But, it works and makes shooting a pleasure.
 
In a side by side, often the vent goes all the way through the barrel and through much of the breechplug, to a cavity in the face of the breechplug. That's a long way for flash to travel, much longer than with the average rifle barrel wall. But certainly, the presence of vent liners in fine flint doubles of late vintage has increased their appeal.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top