Traditional Muzzleloading Association

Shooting Traditional Firearms and Weapons => General Interest => Topic started by: jtwodogs on March 23, 2009, 08:57:37 PM

Title: Accuracy and lock time?
Post by: jtwodogs on March 23, 2009, 08:57:37 PM: Is the lock time on a flintlock ie: Time of actual ignition, as fast as a caplock?

The reason I am asking is accuracy, obviously, I hope,(I have seen a lot of pre-conceived ideas shot down lately). That a faster lock time equates to a more accurate shot. (Less waddle time while the ball is in the barrel).

So what are you gentleman's experiences in this area. Are flintlocks by in large as accurate as caplocks if loaded correctly?
Title: Yes,
Post by: KHickam on March 23, 2009, 10:03:12 PM: It has been my experience that flintlocks are as accurate as caplocks and a well tuned flintlock is just as fast.

Case in point;

I went to a rendevous this weekend - I shot my flintlock smoothbore using patched round ball - I had two klatchs (my own fault for not wiping the frizzen face) and several cap locks had that many or more failures. I ended up with the high score in the rifle portion of the aggregate.
Title:
Post by: biliff on March 23, 2009, 10:09:41 PM: Someone on another forum actually timed the two, using high speed film. From what I remember he found caplocks fired the cap in .02-03 seconds. The better flintlocks, including an original Manton lock, fired the prime in .04-.06 seconds. Based on that the lock time is twice as long on a flintlock. But the difference is not within the range of human reaction time which is around a tenth of a second.
Title:
Post by: Captchee on March 23, 2009, 10:18:18 PM: i believe some years back Im thinking it was jim chambers ?? Or maybe it was Hershel ???? but i could be wrong . but they did some tests . with time laps . using ignition to ignition . IE flash in the pan to flash of cap .
the ignition of the two properly built and tuned lock was less the 10 /1000 of a second .
as was said , beyond the ability of humans to physically tell .
as far as accuracy. Once learned . There will be no difference IMO between the two .
As to reliability , IMO a flint lock is a lot more reliable then a cap lock . But that’s in the experienced hands .
Myself I have seen the same as others here when out on the trail . Even a novice that is being guided by a learned shooter , seem to have far less issues them amy of the more experience cap lock shooters
Title:
Post by: Uncle Russ on March 23, 2009, 10:46:16 PM: FWIW....Back in the early days, I shot a cap lock for many years, thinking, as many others of the time, that they were far superior to the flintlock insofar as accuracy and lock time.....and I have to admit that when I got my very first flint lock, sometime in the early 1970's, the caplock was much faster, mostly because of the "fuse" we laid with the priming powder, while thinking that was the right thing to do....the clack, puff, fizzle, bang thingy was very common back in those days, and detrimental to accuracy.

As time went on, and it was a learning process but after maybe 5 or 6 years, it was figured out that the right amount of prime, along with a "correct" size flash-hole, made all the difference in the world.

Keep in mind this was all before the days of the computer, and modern communication...most "knowledge", if such could be said, was gleaned through Turner Kirkland's bunch at Dixie Gun Works, and although it was the best for it's day, it was a far cry from what's available today.....not to take anything away from that wonderful catalog, it still contains some of the best info around.

Nowadays, I would be hard pressed to say which is faster. I have read, like many of you, that the cap lock is still the fastest, but for "sure fire shootin" I have honestly learned to lean toward the flinter......if there is a defined difference in a well tuned flint lock and a very similar cap lock, I am not astute enough to see that difference.

Just my thoughts.

Uncle Russ...
Title:
Post by: Gordon H.Kemp on March 23, 2009, 10:48:24 PM: I have a lock that came from captchee. The rifle it's on is one I put together from various parts accumalated over a few years.It goes off as fast as any of my caplocks.
Title:
Post by: cb on March 24, 2009, 02:36:37 AM: Larry Pletcher is the man's name who has and continues to do hi-speed photography testing of muzzleloaders - many of the videos are on youtube. He's the editor of Blackpowdermag and has reprinted some articles online http://www.blackpowdermag.com/featured- ... rt-iii.php (http://www.blackpowdermag.com/featured-articles/lock-timing-part-iii.php)
He has also dispelled some "common" knowledge, such as the one about having your prime to the outside of the pan, away from the barrel being the best - his extensive testing has shown just the opposite......
The main thing his testing has proven is while we may "see" or "hear" things while shooting, actual testing has proven that the eye and ear are far from being the best judge - as biliff noted in every test with quality locks (including Mantons) of both types caplocks "win" when it comes to the speed (which makes sense from a mechanical engineering standpoint), but the difference is exceedingly small. The difference is in milliseconds - so small that only scientific testing has shown the difference - in some tests he had observers note which they "sensed" were faster - and in most cases the observers were in fact wrong.....
Me? I like them both and after 48 years of shooting them I'll take either one when properly built, which IMO is the real difference......there's nothing worse than a poorly built caplock or flinter.....and nothing better when built right....
Title:
Post by: Wyoming Mike on March 24, 2009, 08:23:55 AM: Flintlocks are just as accurate as percussion. I do a lot of competative shooting, offhand mostly, with both and can see no difference in how one shoots over the other. There is a little more chance of a hang fire with a flinter but not much and that's what follow through is for. I have seen the same thing with people shooting percussions just not quite as often.

I have two flinters that are exceedingly fast. The lock and touch hole geometry combine to make these very fast. The others are fast but not like these two. One has an old L&R Manton the other a Dixie Ashmore. I have one rifle with a Cochran lock that is fast if the flint is set just right.

The edge the percussion rifles have is that they are more consistant and have less moving parts to go wrong. The greatest edge the flintlocks have is they are so much more fun to shoot.
Title:
Post by: Loyalist Dave on March 24, 2009, 08:39:56 AM: First the caplock was developed to give more consistent ignition in less than optimum weather, for MILITARY applicaltions. The locks themselves are much simpler and more durable in design, again making them an advantage for production in military arsenals.

When talkin' target shooting, you look for consistency, and the shooter makes up for the rest. The "problems" with a flintlock is the higher number of variables lean to a better chance at inconsistency when in target competition. That's all.

I have seen a bunch of flintlock tests, though I admit to not having seen or read them all. I think they are nice to show what a flintlock can do..., I don't know if they show what they often will do. Ya see they are all done under laboratory conditions. New locks, dry enviornments, a couple of tests that I saw used a hot wire as an ignition source. While this makes the test uniform and consistent, it doesn't recreate actual shooting conditions..., unless we all hunt and shoot in laboratories?

Accuracy tests, and ignition tests, all remove the human element, and fire from static, solid positions, but we then hand the firelock (be it caplock or flinter) to a human to shoot it outside the lab, and often don't use a bench. We add a whole bunch of additional factors into the equation, and say "we know the truth".

Things they don't account for in testing:

Every time the flint hits the frizzen the surface of the frizzen as well as the edge of the flint changes, and that can have an effect on firing...,

We use new locks, new barrels, as near to perfect as we can get alignment between touch hole, lock, and trigger, but don't account for what happens to a rifle after say a decade of weekly firing...,

Prime in the pan absorbs moisture from the air over time, and 4Fg absorbs it faster than 3Fg, etc...

The atmosphere we fire in has variable humidity over time, altering the speed of moisture absorbtion by the prime...

Electronic ignition has no moving parts, bolt guns move toward the muzzle when releasing the firing pin, but caplocks and flintlocks move on the side of the barrel in a arc..., has anybody ever tested to see if the motion of the hammer or cock moves the rifle in an odd manner depending on the lock design?? Inertia is inertia, and when the hammer or cock is released, it moves and strikes another part of the rifle? Does that give the rifle a tiny "twitch"? Which lock is better or worse at causing this movement? Does this movement matter when fired by a human? Does a flinter dissipate that impact as the cock strikes the frizzen which moves and absorbs part of the impact prior to the cock coming to a rest on the lock plate..., while a caplock just drops the hammer against the cap supported on a nipple, installed in a drum attached to the side of the barrel?

AAAAAAH my head hurts!

Bottom line (imho), a flinter can be just as fast if not faster than a caplock..., but there are more variables that can interfere with igntion to cause inconsistency. I think with less variables it's easier for the average shooter to master the caplock vs. the flintlock, hence the higher popularity of the caplock, that's all.

LD
Title:
Post by: Gordon H.Kemp on March 24, 2009, 09:38:16 AM: LD, I think you have made several good points. The controlled labratory test certainly eliminate the human error factor , but as you said I know of no one that hunts or target shoots in a lab.
The human factor is one that can be constantly improved on, practice, practice, practice.
Title:
Post by: Mike R on March 24, 2009, 09:44:52 AM: My subjective experience is that caplocks SEEM faster, but it may be that the differences are minute. I have some fast flintlocks. I shoot my caplocks better and more accurately. I have been told that you have to hold the sight picture longer with a flinter in order to be as accurate as with a caplock--does that sound like a flinter is just as fast? Once the caplock became distributed and available they took over fast from flintlocks except for a few holdouts [flintlocks for example were widely used in the back hills of the south until the Civil War]. There were many reasons, but reliability was the key issue. Despite what flintlock lovers today want to believe [insist, argue about] caplocks are more reliable in all weather conditions. JJ Audabon saw his first caplock rifle in ~1830 in New Orleans. The owner could not wait to show him a 'trick'--he submerged the lock in a basin of water and pulled the trigger with the lock under water--the rifle went off. Try that with your flinters. Now I'll get a whole bunch of angry replies from flint lovers--be aware that I love my flinters too.
Title: Lock time
Post by: jtwodogs on March 24, 2009, 10:27:05 AM: Ah, but the same can be said of a caplock all day in the rain verses a modern in-line

I figured alot depends on the way the flinter is loaded.

Is there a basic method or something I can click on to see the proper way to load a Flintlock, ya see, I have never shot one!
Title:
Post by: Gordon H.Kemp on March 24, 2009, 10:44:12 AM: Mike, first off, I seldom fire my rifles underwater so I don't think that test proves a great deal. If you study the history of firelocks you'll find there were several flintlocks that could be submerged in water and the pan was watertight so the lock would fire after the dunking. The caplock was one more item that encourage people to become lazy and dependent on mass produced goods. If you were in the boondocks and used or lost your cas, I doubt that you would find many made by nature laying on the ground ,like flints.
Title:
Post by: Mike R on March 24, 2009, 10:59:14 AM: ...like I said, keep the cards and letters coming...I am interested mainly in history as well as firearm usage. I read alot of early "period" writings and history. In the 18th cent the flintlock was the advanced arm of the day, yet there are NUMEROUS accounts of its failings in real use on the frontier either hunting or fighting. "Flash in the pan" did not become a common phrase for no reason. In real use, all sorts of things can occur that hampers the proper [and quick] action of a flintlock arm. Today we have all sorts of 20th/21st cent techniques of handling many of them--such as our fixation on magic lubes and loads that reduce fowling. Plus we carry all sorts of stuff with us and on the range to service the piece. I of course use a flintlock arm when reenacting 18th cent and early 19th cent 'living history'. But I try to use it in the old ways. There are numerous old reports of guns fowling, pans flashing, hangfires, wet conditions inhibiting firing--in fact some major battles were affected by rain. The caplock cured alot of that and that is why it became so popular--someone said it was developed for the military--not true and in fact civilians adopted it first.
Title:
Post by: Kermit on March 24, 2009, 11:09:11 AM: Anybody here still shoot in a club that separates flinters from capguns in competition? The last bunch I shot with did in the 70's-early 80's, and then gave it up. Our experience was that flinters were shot by the older/more practiced shooters, so if caplocks had an advantage, it was going to the newer shooters. Probably a lot of bunk, but we just finally went with "shoot what you brung."

I shoot flint exclusively now. But I admit to still having this wee fascination with underhammers...

Anyone want to chime in with the patent breech/bolster/mule ear/underhammer question when considering caplocks? Seems I recall seeing an underhammer FLINT gun in my wanderings.

Too many questions. My head hurts.
Title:
Post by: mark davidson on March 24, 2009, 12:17:51 PM: Observation: I am kinda new as you know here but to me the flintlock at least SEEMS a LOT slower than caplock. My flinter is plenty fast igniting with no pfffft-boom and I think I do have the proper loading method fairly down-pat. However, when I shoot a caplock the ignition seems just darn near instant! I can tell virtually no difference between my caplock Mler and my modern centerfire. The flinter on the other hand is obviously slower than either one and absolutely requires more follow through and concentration . The flinter is fun and I virtually never shoot or hunt with the caplock any more and my new custom guns are all flinters. Still I think flint is slower and noticably slower than caplocks and more of a challenge to shoot really well. JMO
Title:
Post by: pathfinder on March 24, 2009, 07:24:09 PM: If you don't practice for a perfect follow thru, it really doesn't matter which is faster. You can hit targets with a good hang fire if you follow thru with yer shot! Interesting to ponder on the differences though.
Title:
Post by: Ohio Joe on March 24, 2009, 09:50:00 PM: I don't feel lock time plays that big of a part with accuracy when we're talking 10ths of a second.

There are very good caplock shooters, and there are very good flintlock shooters. These folks who are good with either ignition system - got good through practicing with one specific ignition.

Accept what you own (cap or flint) and practice every chance you get and then make room to practice even more. That is the only way to accuracy. There simply are no short cuts no matter what you choose to shoot.

Just my two cents worth...
Title:
Post by: Captchee on March 24, 2009, 10:09:51 PM: also original caps were much more subject to moisture then today's, i also believe reliability to be a gimmick when it comes to the cap . there simply is no way of knowing if the cap has been contaminated . where with a flintlock , its easily seen . the other issue is the nipple . you cannot tell if it is fouled tell you get the dreaded pop . while a flintlock may have 1 more moving part . 2 id you count the top jaw. 3 if you count the jaw screw . the flintlock actually has the same when you add the nipple m bolster and clean out of a cap lock rifle . depending on the cap lock , a flintlock can actualy have less parts then a caplock to

in fact when you think about it . there is less that could go wrong with a flintlock then a cap lock when we com pair what could render then un usable .

through the years i have hunted and shot both in about every imaginable type of weather . myself, i find the flintlock to be much more reliable, exspecialy in wet weather . this is why that all my rifles and fowling piece are flintlocks . this wasn't always so and it took some learnin . but today there are not many takers when a lay a 5 spot on the barrel of pie to the person who will stand in the rain with me , betting on my flintlock will clatch before their caplock will lol
Title:
Post by: Mike R on March 25, 2009, 08:49:56 AM: yep, flintlock devotees will defend their locks to the death--now don't get me wrong, I love my flinters, I just think that emotion gets the better of us when history tells a different story. I have been shooting rifles offhand since I was about 5 years old. I am 64 now. Started with .22s. You get used to finding a sight picture and squeezing off a shot, then relaxing, because the bullet has cleared the bore before you lose the sight picture. I find caplocks [or at least MY caplocks] to handle very much like my old .22s offhand. I do NOT find my flintlocks [all high quality ones] to handle the same way--they require a longer hold. That is evidence enough for me to say that my caplocks are faster. But each to his own as my ol' pappy used to say. As for reliability, facts simply do not support the notion that flinters were more reliable under all conditions--that flinters can be made reliable enough is an individual question--what is 'enough' for each person? I personally do not care if I get a small percentage of failures to fire with my well-tuned and excellent locks. But my experience has been that I get alot fewer failures with my caplocks. A gunmaker friend of mine with alot of experience always substitutes a caplock for his favorite deer hunting flinter in rainy weather. He wants meat. If a person has the time and inclination to constantly check between every shot all the things on a lock--priming, flint condition, touchhole condition, etc--and weather is OK, he will likely get reliable ignition. Fast is another story. Can you guys honestly say that you never get failures to fire with your flinters? Down here in Lousyanna we have high humidity and I have had my pan and touchhole gum up after one shot! Action timing is in part due to the type of lock you are using. Some have long hammer throws and others short ones. So it is hard to make blanket statements about how fast a flinter is--which flinter? Most caplocks have a quick hammer fall, but they too are dependent on the lock size. I had a little L&R Bailes flint lock which had a very fast short throw, especially as compared to the Chambers Colonial Virginia lock on another rifle. anyway I own 6 flinters and three caplocks--and I ain't getting rid of any of them!
Title:
Post by: IronDawg on March 25, 2009, 09:12:56 AM: I have an old traditions cap lock and a custom made flinter with an L&R Manton lock on it. This human can tell. the flint lock on the custom is faster than the cap lock on the stock traditions rifle. I know thats a custom compared to a stock, but still. I can tell it. And my accuracy shows it.
Title:
Post by: rollingb on March 25, 2009, 09:13:55 AM: I won't argue with anyone regarding actual "lock time" on well tuned flint or percussion guns, because I think they are very nearly the same (at least on my rifleguns).

Where I think we see the biggest difference in "time",... when comparing flint and percussion systems,... is the actual time of the main powder-charge's "ignition", which is often (mistakenly) included when talking about lock-time.
Title:
Post by: Captchee on March 25, 2009, 09:47:42 AM: i think mike , the word experience is the key here .
flintlocks , powder for powder will shoot at a lower velocity then a cap lock , do to the flash hole .. percussion caps fail and they fail from moisture . i also again believe this boils down to a gimmick and convenience . imagine the marketing back tin the 1820's . basically the same as today for the latest greatest thing . it doesn't mean its better . doest mean it more reliable .
I mean really , cant we all hear it now ?

Quote
Tired of losing your flint ? how about the constant battle of keeping it sharp and in alignment .
Are you worried for the little woman being able to understand the complexities of the flintlock rifle , when it comes to home protection . Are you tired of that cloud of smoke coming from the pan .
with our new patent percussion cap , you can simply forget about all these issues . no more messing will dull rocks or alignments . the cap fits correctly every time. juts place the cap on the percussion nipple , cock and fire . even the little lady can do it . also with this system you get the added benefit that less smoke clouds your view , with no pesky flash to blind or throw sparks at your face .

i think we could go on and on with that . but i submit that their is a reason that the flintlock is the longest lasting firearms ignition system.

also for the record here . i learned on a cap lock . basically because i fell for all the sales pitches and more . but then i found one day that they for the most part were false or just something to get me to buy one product over another .
my wife still shoots a capper . she doenst like the flash of a flinlock . But i chose a flintock because through the years of not only using both systems for hunting and target shooting. here in the west as well as the South , in all types of weather . I find the flintlock , once learned , to be much more reliable .. but here is the key , ONCE LEARNED. its not a set it and forget it system .
To answer your question mike , yes i have had clatches . and i do have clatches now and then ??? maybe 1 in 50-75 shots . flash in the pan ??? maybe one in a great while . most times it happens when i forget to load LOL .

had this happen while hunting ? yep i have . BUT when i set down and ask why , the finger always ends up pointing at me . IE the flint needed change and i knew it .
one time i had a pan foul . i knew if i wasn't more careful it would foul . i simply got lazy . when the time came and the rifle didn't work , i was mad, but guess what . the only person i could blame was me . see i failed to do my part . in failing to do so , the team lost because i didn't uphold my end .

so as time goes on more and more gimmicks come out . all designed so folks have to worry and do less and less . while it can be said that they reduce the possibility of human error . i submit that they also reduce the possibility of human intervention proper to a mechanical error .
i would hope that in today's world the quality of these caps are better the 150 years ago . but if so why the % of cap failure in just 1 tin ?. why do folks prefer one brand over another ?? surly they all are better then those made 150 years ago ?.

but for me LMAO , when my wife's rifle goes pop , pop, or she throws away an empty tin. i just smile , Knapp alittle off my rock and keep on shooting , because she forgot and left the tin of caps open on the tail gate all morning
Title:
Post by: Gordon H.Kemp on March 25, 2009, 10:39:09 AM: I think captchee has found the secret word " experience " !! I believe that the majority of folks that shoot flint are on average ,more interested in the mechanics involved in what actions produce the quickest and most consistant ignition. For the most part, the " average " caplock shooter knows little of the mechanics of his/her gun. Most believe the hype of the mfg./dealers. I would have to add " dedecation " to detail to go along with "experience ".
Title:
Post by: mark davidson on March 25, 2009, 12:21:06 PM: Information and a little UN-hardheadedness were the keys to making me a flintlock convert. I was VERY skeptical at first of flinters. I took the plunge and learned everything I could about rock angle and the best type locks and types of flints and how much powder in the pan and picking the vent hole and all the stuff that you "experienced" guys already knew. The result was a custom flinter for me with two more on the way. I have had ZERO malfunctions while hunting. The absolute only failures to fire I have had otherwise were due to a blunted and broken flint that needed changing. I keep fresh powder in the pan while hunting and I have hunted in some sho-nuff muggy humid Mississippi weather and also in light rain and killed deer in it with no hangfire or mess up. I find messing with the little pan primer easier to prime and un prime than placing and removing the cap with cold fingers. My point is that I am a real newbie to flinters and black powder in general but with a little knowlege have found flintlocks to be absolutely reliable and way more fun than my caplock guns. Experience is important but it did not take me a decade to get a flintlock to work reliabley. I killed seven deer with my new one the first season in all types of weather. Accuracy is just as good from a solid rest as caplock but the flinter is a bit harder to shoot accurately off-hand at least to me. I bet time and experience helps that too. :-)
Title:
Post by: Loyalist Dave on March 25, 2009, 12:33:06 PM: Actually, the original patent for percussion ignition using fulminate of mercury was in 1807 by Alexander John Forsyth, with an idea to improve his bird shooting by eliminating the flash of the pan. This was called the "scent bottle" lock. He developed his ignition system at The Tower Armories, England's government, military arsenal. His activities were halted due to the danger of accidental explosions wrecking England's National Armory, and the decision to halt the experiments and developement was made by the Master General of Ordinance. Napleon Bonaparte offered to buy the idea. (Sounds military to me)

Joseph Manton took the idea a step further, and came up with the tube or "pill" lock, which used a pellet of Fulminate of Mercury. Forsyth's previous system was an enclosed chamber that was primed like a flinter, then sealed, and the impact on an external pin caused the mercury to detonate while keeping the flash enclosed. Manton's was simpler and quicker. While bird hunters liked the system, it wasn't widespread until it was adopted by the Austrian Army for their muskets. (Again, military)

Joshua Shaw, an Englishman, figured out the percussion cap, and patented it in 1822 in America to avoid legal action by Forsyth and Manton in England. 8 years later, it was adopted by the armies of Great Britain, France, and Russia for muskets. 3 years later it was adopted by Britain and Russia for cannon.

In America the vast majority of shotgun, pistol and riflemakers, made flintlocks, until state armories and the United States Army adopted the caplock system. The US Model 1842 was the first in the American army, and 275,00 were produced. Copper caps were expensive, so a system of tape with pellets of FM was developed by Dr Edward Maynard, and adopted in the US Model 1855 Rifle (sometimes called the Springfield 1855) at the order of the Secretary of War, Jefferson Davis (late the President of The Confederate States of America). The Model 1861 abandoned the system, and returned to the simpler caplock.

In the United States, the following models 1842, 1855, 1861, and 1865 rifled musket amounted to 1,735,000 caplocks produced over roughly a 25 year period, or 69,400 caplock military rifles per year.

LD
Title:
Post by: Ohio Joe on March 25, 2009, 12:53:35 PM: Quote from: "Mike R"
I had a little L&R Bailes flint lock which had a very fast short throw, especially as compared to the Chambers Colonial Virginia lock on another rifle. anyway I own 6 flinters and three caplocks--and I ain't getting rid of any of them!

Mike, I have had both the Cap & Flint lock version's of the little L&R John Bailes on the same rifle (a conversion) and I believe them both to be fast. Actually I can't tell a lot of difference other then the groupings are never the same as they wouldn't be because of the amount of gasses escaping from the vent as compared to what little gasses escape from under the hammer of a cap rifle. You just have to aim and hold on target a bit different with each one. The caplock Bailes is dead nuts on. A lot of this is probably do to the throw, and the mainspring not being overly heavy (in either the cap or flint lock).

To continue, in saying this I would add that the speed of ignition from these two L&R locks is more from a direct results of the vent being removed and a "drum" being installed. When powder is loaded it also goes into the drum. A good RWS cap (the only type I use) will give very fast ignition - no worries, and never fails. A person has to buy good caps.

Secondly I can see a caplock with a slant breech for example becoming slower in ignition simply through the distance that the jet of flame coming from the cap has to travel to reach the main charge. In this instance I would give the flintlock the edge in lock time,,, and at the very least - equal lock time compared to the flintlock.

I do believe both ignitions are reliable if care is taken when loading and then priming or placing a good quality cap on a nipple. If the cap is not seated on the nipple then the rifle may not go off on the first hammer strike. Then again if care is not given to the flint and frizzen, it may not produce results either.

Both ignition systems can be waterproofed with bees wax either around the priming pan edges, or the sides of the nipple. Anyone who misfires has themself to blame, not the ignition system.

Again I'll say I have seen fantastic flint and cap shooters in my time. I've seen more fantastic cap shooter simply because that is what most folks use. That's just the way of it.

So, I guess the question really becomes, can a flint shooter out shoot a cap shooter and vise-versa... Sure, it all comes down to how well practiced each individual is with what they choose to shoot. If they are good with either ignition system it is because they took the time to learn one or the other and they have stuck with it.
Title:
Post by: biliff on March 25, 2009, 01:43:41 PM: Quote
i would hope that in today's world the quality of these caps are better the 150 years ago . but if so why the % of cap failure in just 1 tin ?. why do folks prefer one brand over another ?? surly they all are better then those made 150 years ago ?.

Never underestimate the ability of today's modern manufacturing methods to produce cheap junk.

150 years ago, percussion caps could be had that were waterproofed with varnish or lacquer and sometimes the compound was further protected with an additional layer of foil.

I don't believe (may be wrong) that any of today's manufacturers do that, probably because of cost issues. If anybody knows of waterproof caps let me know.

You can, however, take some extra steps and waterproof them yourselves. Not really worth the time for target shooting, but definately a plus while hunting.
Title:
Post by: Ohio Joe on March 25, 2009, 01:59:54 PM: Actually biliff, a couple years back I dropped a few CCI caps in the snow outside my workshop that I later found in the spring after the snow melted away. Just for the heck of it I decided to see if they would still work after laying in the snow and rain for 3 months. I couldn't say for sure how long they had been drying in the sunny grass before I found them but they both went right off without any problems, one in the workshop and one at the range with a 65 grain load of 3fg Goex.

It convinced me that CCI was a good cap, though these days I prefer the RWS caps because I have about 10,000 of them on hand that I got for a great price many years ago.

I've seen folks use the Remington caps and they seem to have a lot
of misfires which I believe is due to the paper plugging the nipple and the jetting flame just doesn't reach the charge.

In all honesty of what Mike R was relating to us, I've seen far more failure to fire from flintlock users then cap users. Then again it all depends on the individual and how well they know and take care of their muzzleloader...
Title:
Post by: Mike R on March 25, 2009, 05:09:02 PM: ...I think I am being slandered here :)
Title: Re: Accuracy and lock time?
Post by: Ohio Joe on March 25, 2009, 06:29:44 PM: Quote from: "jack simpson"
Is the lock time on a flintlock ie: Time of actual ignition, as fast as a caplock?

The reason I am asking is accuracy, obviously, I hope,(I have seen a lot of pre-conceived ideas shot down lately). That a faster lock time equates to a more accurate shot. (Less waddle time while the ball is in the barrel).

So what are you gentleman's experiences in this area. Are flintlocks by in large as accurate as caplocks if loaded correctly? :shake
Title:
Post by: Captchee on March 25, 2009, 10:29:37 PM: man mike , i dint see any one calling you those things lol :lol: .. i would agree that it depends alot on the lock . i think i siad that also before .
but here is the point . ill make it again . if a flint fails to go off , its becouse the shooter has not attended to it properly . IE rock not sharp ,miss aligned ,. bad prime , plugged flash hole even failing to keep it clean of fouling .. when all those things are done and the shooter recognizes when they need to be corretced , you have a very reliable system .
But with a capper ?? that all means not . the nipple can plug and you wont know it . a patten breach can foul and you wont know it . the cap can draw moisture and you wont know it , why becuse all looks well

as to caps. i have used the CCI, Rem, RW and a couple diffrent german ones . all have duds . some alot more then others . Rems seem to draw moisture worse then the others . leaving the paper inpregnated fominate on the nipple . i have had this happen , as i said , just from setting out on the tailgate of the truck in the morning dew . it gets so frustrating you take the whole tin and throw it just as far as you can

as to better manufacturing ? today they are all made by mechine , not by hand . how many of you remeber when we used to pinch out and make our own caps ????. i dont think you can even buy that set up today . now those were good caps .

but i submit this . any time you can take part in a long range shoot , in a toinchal down poor .with 20+ shooters . only 3 being flintlocks and an hour later find of the last 4 standing , 3 are flinlocks and they are waiting for a person with a caplock who pos cap after cap ?? 4 if i recall , before his shot goes off . thats got to say something . i know2 other shooters here that can attest to that one . rained so hard you could hardly see the target that afternoon .

as to holding longer ? i wouldnt know , myself i dont shoot my flints any diffrent then i shoot a caplock ?.
also as joe said , yess you lose more pressure from the vent . however this can be comensated for. your groups shot not be any diffrent . eather your rifle will hold a given POI for a given pressure or it will not

as to the history of them , lets not forget that the original model was not for shoulder fire weapons but artilary . also that a large cap that looked very much like todays 209 came before the #11
Title:
Post by: Loyalist Dave on March 26, 2009, 07:18:50 AM: Quote
...I think I am being slandered here

Slander is spoken. If it appears on a web-board it's libel, as long as it's presented as fact and not a person's opinion.

Because of the real world shooting conditions from shot to shot..., meaning it's possible to have a slow ignition than is not "normally" encountered from the lock on a flinter. I think a human is more likely to influence a shot fired from a flintlock than from a caplock because of this. It may not happen very often, but it does, so the caplock would be "faster". My opinion is the difference there is negligible, and as was stated before, the caplock give the shooter better reliability in less than optimum shooting conditions.

LD
Title:
Post by: Mike R on March 26, 2009, 08:15:09 AM: as to caps being unreliable--I guess I have been lucky. Never had that problem, nor problems with the nipple clogging, etc--of course one has to service a caplock as well as a flintlock. I have some old Remington caps that I bought in 1978, shortly before I switched to mainly shooting flintlocks. Well, a couple years ago I bought a sweet little .32 Tenn squirrel rifle made by a friend of mine, but with a small Siler caplock. Those old Remington caps have gone off every time. The only problem I have experienced is that I bought some new CCI caps and tried them on my oldest home- made rifle [I made it in 1978] and they were sized differently than the old Remingtons [supposed to be the same # cap]--they were too tight on the nipple and it took a second hammer fall to ignite them! I discovered this at a shooting match! Where I managed to win both events despite having to pull the trigger twice at each target shot. The first fall seated the cap and the second hammer fall shot it! Yeah at first the boys laughed, but I took home a 20 lb turkey and a new custom made pistol as prizes! :)
Title:
Post by: jtwodogs on March 26, 2009, 11:34:38 AM: Thank-you gentlemen for all your opinions, as I expected each have there own personal favorites.
My question was from a stand point of inexperience. I have shot caplocks, (My first was a cva kit I built in 89) Since then I have shot mainly in-lines, but recently kinda gone back to my roots you might say, and have always had a hankerin for a flint lock, they are just very interesting to me although I have never shot one, I believe it is what I want to shoot. Along with a touch of Magnumitis, I am also and accuracy fanatic, that is why I asked the question, but I think it is clear from all the responces that a flintlock can be every bit as accurate as a caplock.
Thanks again for view points on both sides of the fence, that's what makes the world go-round.
Blessings
Jack
Title:
Post by: Voyageur on March 26, 2009, 11:58:11 AM: I would like to add a few lines here as to "locktime." I shoot an International Event called "FREE PISTOL." which does not mean the pistol is "FREE"---farthest from the truth as a good FP can cost into the thousands of dollars. The essential is that you have an 11" bbl, micrometer iron sights, on an ergonomic stock and no trigger pull regulations. The trigger pulls are generally anywhere from 10 grams to 50 grams, depending on a the shooters desire. The event is shot at 50 meters with ten scoring rings and the ten is the size of a 50 cent piece at 50 metres. The reduced target for 50 ft. is a real eye ball twister with again ten scoring rings and the ten is the size of the capital letter "O"at twelve pica. The small trigger pull and the "lock time " of the striker (similar to a firing pin" is measure in microseconds including those with electronic trigger releases. You can imagine trying to hold sub-six or center of mass with irons and get a ten---that's why the trigger is so light and the lock time in the speed of light class. Why wouldn't the lock time on a flintlock be of importance to accuracy---we have all heard the click---bang from the gun---your ears can pick up the sounds, therefore the closer the click and bang are to each other the less is the gun movement in the interim, hence less factors disturbing the sight picture and follow through. The flinch is alone enough to set a persons sight off, the closeness of the sparks and smoke are all factors. Hence the necessity of a good long "follow-through." Coaching a pistol shooter, I always emphasize the follow through and not the quick rush to see the spotting scopes results. "Doc"
Title:
Post by: mark davidson on March 26, 2009, 12:23:05 PM: Jack, You and I seem to come from similar backgrounds and have a similar approach to this black powder thing. I went with flintlock to begin with for the cool factor and for the challenge but I planned from the start to aquire a gun that would shoot right at MOA at 100 yards or it was gone! My first custom flinter after a little load development would routinely put two round balls side by side roughly an inch apart in an index card off the bench at 100 yards. Accuracy with a flinter is not an issue; they will shoot with any caplock and many centerfire rifles. The barrel quality and the load itself are way more important than how the spark is derived. Nothing wrong with magnumitis; we already covered that.
Finally, Voyager, I have dabbled in the competitive shooting sports for about 30 years too. By centerfire competitive standards, MLers in general and especially flinters are not supposed to shoot well or hit the broad side of a barn. We know however through experience that that sentiment is false. Bumblebees are not supposed to fly either but they do!! A flinter or caplock either can both be shot extremely well with the right load and a competent shooter. The most important factor is the "nut" at the back of the stock! :-)