Traditional Muzzleloading Association
Traditional Firearms => Flintlock Long Guns => Topic started by: Smokey on January 19, 2021, 01:20:24 PM
-
I know opinions vary about short starters, so I want to avoid a brawl.
Nonetheless, I have to ask whether a short starter is absolutely necessary.
I want to make sure that I have what I need before heading to the club.
Are they a good tool to have handy just in case that ball. won't. go. down?
-
I would say yes, good to have until you learn what its like and get used to loading your particualr gun. You can make them cheaply or buy them not expensive. My favorite one was a hand made gift, basically a dowl epoxied into a nice brass door knob. :toast
-
I know opinions vary about short starters, so I want to avoid a brawl.
Nonetheless, I have to ask whether a short starter is absolutely necessary.
I want to make sure that I have what I need before heading to the club.
Are they a good tool to have handy just in case that ball. won't. go. down?
I agree with ridjrunr.
If you need to use a short starter - then use one, and don't worry about it.
I use one because I like a tight fitting patch and ball combination for accuracy and it only takes about 2/3 seconds to use one...
The other options are going smaller diameter ball / and or patch thickness / or a combination of both. I've yet to be on a firing line where I haven't seen them being used. :shake
-
I shoot tight prb as well, and use a short starter in all rifles. I could do without one when shooting the smoothbore but still always have one with me.
-
I use on to protect my wood ramrod. With just a little room to get the ball started and to keep the rod straight, knock wood, I've not broken a ramrod yet.
-
I have one, but seldom use it any more. Instead, i use the handle of my knife to push start the ball. then take a short hold on the ramrod to get it going down the bore. That is actually what I came up with when I started muzzle loading and had not seen nor heard of a ball starter; it worked well for me for 20+ years before I finally bought one.
It's just like a ball puller. I have had one since I started this game, and I used it a couple of times before learning that I could just dribble some powder into the touch hole, or pull the nipple and do the same on a percussion gun, and shoot the ball out. Much easier and puts less strain on the ramrod.
~Kees~
-
The "old" coned barrels comes into play here... (Which I believe was common practice way back in the day) - that or use a smaller patch & ball combination.
Back in the day, I believe it was common for the muzzle of the barrel to be coned which aided greatly to starting a patched ball without a short starter. However, todays barrel market was (and has been) flooded in today's world without coned barrels.
One could seek out a gunsmith with the knowledge to cone one's ML barrel, but the short started is a way less expensive route to go. :shake
-
The "old" coned barrels comes into play here... (Which I believe was common practice way back in the day) - that or use a smaller patch & ball combination.
Back in the day, I believe it was common for the muzzle of the barrel to be coned which aided greatly to starting a patched ball without a short starter. However, todays barrel market was (and has been) flooded in today's world without coned barrels.
One could seek out a gunsmith with the knowledge to cone one's ML barrel, but the short started is a ways less expensive route to go. :shake
I agree Joe, Just last night I got a reply from a guy that makes a coning tool to fit from .32-.62 just by screwing in an appropriet jag and hope to ordervthat soon. I believe if done properly it would have no effect on accuracy but would in ease of loading. The tool is 54 bux and precision made.
-
The "old" coned barrels comes into play here... (Which I believe was common practice way back in the day) - that or use a smaller patch & ball combination.
Back in the day, I believe it was common for the muzzle of the barrel to be coned which aided greatly to starting a patched ball without a short starter. However, todays barrel market was (and has been) flooded in today's world without coned barrels.
One could seek out a gunsmith with the knowledge to cone one's ML barrel, but the short started is a ways less expensive route to go. :shake
I agree Joe, Just last night I got a reply from a guy that makes a coning tool to fit from .32-.62 just by screwing in an appropriet jag and hope to ordervthat soon. I believe if done properly it would have no effect on accuracy but would in ease of loading. The tool is 54 bux and precision made.
I watched Mike Bellavue / "Duelist Den" (I think I spelled his name right) on a Youtube video where he coned one of his barrels & if I recall correctly, he didn't have any issues with accuracy - so I would sure think you'd be just fine.
I too have thought about that same tool for many years - but never took the plunge (so to speak) out of the same concerns you have. However, Mike does walk a person through the process, and I see no reason why it wouldn't work. :shake
Here's the link to that video, if you haven't seen it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6Q5hjVprug
-
I coned the muzzle of a rifle many years ago, using Joe Woods' tool and it worked very well, with no change in accuracy that I could see.
~Kees~
-
I have probably used a short starter for nearly 50 years, it works, and I see no reason to change the way I load a rifle.
If you want to do it differently, that certainly is your choice.
The "right way" to do it is the way that works best for you.
John (Bigsmoke)
-
I have probably used a short starter for nearly 50 years, it works, and I see no reason to change the way I load a rifle.
If you want to do it differently, that certainly is your choice.
The "right way" to do it is the way that works best for you.
John (Bigsmoke)
Sound wisdom! :hairy
-
I've never owned a coned barrel nor seen any real need for one. What I do, however, is to use my thumb and sandpaper to polish the crown, breaking up the sharpness at the start of the lands and smoothing the entry into the bore. Often patches get cut this way (loading) and not from "burrs" in the bore from firing. This has enabled me to use tight loads which seat easily and I don't need to swab until I get home and clean. When I was younger I just choked up on the ramrod and seated prb without a short starter. Arthritis forced me to use a short starter.
-
Sound wisdom! :hairy
Amen to that!
~Kees~
-
Short starter acquired. We'll see if I need, or NEED it when the time comes.
Thanks for the advice, everbody. I appreciate it.
-
It's purely a personal thing, as is almost everything about trad muzzleloaders.
I prefer to emulate the 18th century, load my guns "loose" and therefore have no need for 20th century short starters. :bigsmile:
-
It's purely a personal thing, as is almost everything about trad muzzleloaders.
I prefer to emulate the 18th century load my guns "loose" and therefore have no need for 20th century short starters. :bigsmile:
The same here. :hairy
Life during the 16th., 17th., 18th., (and even up until the mid-19th. century), was so closely connected to the use of their "arms and accouterments", that I consider our forefathers to be the REAL EXPERTS on the topic.
That's why I read a lot (in my attempt to learn what "traditional" truly was at the time) and put it into practical usage today. :)
-
Rondo, you're much better read than me. I have never found anything about how tightly they tried to patch ball to bore. I know that we experiment with patch thickness as part of our load development. In my new rifle, my old standby .018 patch that could be started with the flat of my patch knife in my other guns, would need a hammer to get the ball started.
Appreciated if you could point me into a reference of some kind.
-
If a patched ball can't be started with the thumb or knife handle, then some manner of starter will be required.
Unfortunately, there's only so much original text available from the 18th century concerning the loading of guns. What's been missing so far in both words and artifacts is an 18th century short ball starter.
My personal feeling is that guns were needed for food, defense, and warfare. When it comes to defense/warfare, rate of fire is far more important than accuracy. Minute of entire Redcoat at 50 yards is more important minute of Redcoat head or heart at 50 yards. Dittos for the hostiles.
Then there's the matter of ball patching material. Paper cartouches were the typical military load on both sides of the rev war. I doubt that cloth was used for the most part. Cloth was precious, time consuming to create, and at least somewhat expensive. Tow, paper, leaves, hide, etc, were probably mostly used, along with nothing but powder and ball. So much for a tight ball load requiring a short starter.
And, I believe the typical civilian arm was the smoothbore because it provided double duty for both shot and ball.
-
Rondo, you're much better read than me. I have never found anything about how tightly they tried to patch ball to bore. I know that we experiment with patch thickness as part of our load development. In my new rifle, my old standby .018 patch that could be started with the flat of my patch knife in my other guns, would need a hammer to get the ball started.
Appreciated if you could point me into a reference of some kind.
James Audubon, c1810, describing his host preparing to go raccoon hunting:
"… He blows through his rifle to ascertain that it is clear, examines his flint, and thrusts a feather into the touch-hole. To a leathern bag swung at his side is attached a powder-horn; his sheath-knife is there also; below hangs a narrow strip of homespun linen. He takes from his bag a bullet, pulls with his teeth the wooden stopper from his powder-horn, lays the ball in one hand, and with the other pours the powder upon it until it is just overtopped. Raising the horn to his mouth, he again closes it with the stopper, and restores it to its place. He introduces the powder into the tube; springs the box of his gun, greases the "patch" over with some melted tallow, or damps it; then places it on the honey-combed muzzle of his piece. The bullet is placed on the patch over the bore, and pressed with the handle of the knife, which now trims the edge of the linen. The elastic hickory rod, held with both hands, smoothly pushes the ball to its bed; once, twice, thrice has it rebounded. The rifle leaps as it were into the hunters arms, the feather is drawn from the touch-hole, the powder fills the pan, which is closed. “Now I’m ready,” cries the woodsman….
Journals, Vol. 2, (1972 reprint), page 492.
-
Rondo, you are the man! Thank you.
:hairy
-
Rondo, you are the man! Thank you.
:hairy
My pleasure! :shake :*:
-
Over my years with trad muzzys, that 19th century writing by Mr. Audubon has been most important to me for five reasons ...
1. Blowing down the barrel.
2. Bouncing the rod.
3. The use of linen patch material.
4. Easy loading and no mention of a short starter. :)
5. It more better defines muzzleloading in the early 19th century, when American innovations, industrialization, and entrepreneurship began in earnest, such as the 1807 invention of the percussion cap, and is many decades advanced from the Colonial period of the 18th century where things were a bit more primitive.
-
So, to play this part, I now have to yell, "Now I am ready !!"
I gotta tell you, if you do that every time you prime/cap your rifle, you're gonna get some strange looks from your fellow shooters. :luff:
I also noticed that the rifle in question that is being loaded has a generous sized touch hole as it self primes.
And Ready Teddy is also a ramrod bouncer as well. Also the first step in his loading process is not endorsed by the NMLRA.
Oi vey...
John (Bigsmoke)
-
... Also the first step in his loading process is not endorsed by the NMLRA.
Oi vey...
John (Bigsmoke)
You do know the story behind the NMLRA and blowing down the tube?
BwanaBob sez ...
"It’s A Libertarian Thing
The bedrock rule of firearms safety that we all follow is - ‘Always treat a gun as being loaded’. I am a buckskinner and re-enactor with the ‘persona’ of a revolutionary war farmer and, although I like to shoot and hunt, ‘paper punching’ at a match has always been viewed more as a duty to support my club than as a fun activity in its own right. I recently moved to a new town and, not having been involved with organized muzzle loading for years, I decided to join a local muzzle loading club. On my first shoot day, after laying out all my shooting gear and loading up my rifle, I approached the firing line with just a little anxiety. Happily, all went well and, after my rifle fired, with only the usual little delay of an out-of-practice flint lock, standing on the firing line I blew down the barrel. I was immediately startled by a bellowed “Never do that again!” from a by-stander. A little annoyed at the forwardness of the individual, but not wanting to make a scene at my first match, I thanked him for his concern and went to the bench to reload. It was then that I learned that this club has a safety rule forbidding blowing down the gun barrel and a range officer whose job it is to enforce it.
Ok, reloading and returning to the firing line again, I was frustrated that my rifle, a good flint lock and usually very reliable, could not be induced to discharge. After multiple attempts, I finally noticed a little wisp of cloth coming from the touch hole at my breech. My vent was plugged solidly by a fragment of patching. As I left the firing line to pull the ball, I recalled that on blowing down the barrel I had noticed increased resistance to my effort. Distracted by the range officer’s outburst, this had gone right by me, and as a result, I now had some unnecessary and potentially hazardous work to do - removing a charged ball, that I feel could have been easily avoided.
Gun safety with me is very important. Is muzzleloading shooting unsafe? Potentially, yes. Among many other things, it only takes someone carelessly pointing the muzzle of their gun after a misfire or a hang fire, or a yahoo firing a ‘duplex load’ of black and smokeless powder, or someone firing with the ball stuck half-way down the barrel, to immediately generate extremely unsafe conditions for nearby shooters and, frequently, themselves. I simply do not participate in an activity where I feel unsafe, and yet I regularly blow down the barrel of my gun.
I define blowing down the barrel as, immediately after discharging a muzzle loading firearm firing black powder and while still at the firing position, blowing down the barrel to initiate the process of reloading the gun. Is this an exception to our bedrock rule of always treating a gun as if it’s loaded? You betcha. I just fired the gun, I know it’s unloaded. Furthermore, after experiencing the heat and pressures of discharge, it’s utterly impossible that it still could be loaded - and ‘impossible’ is a word that I use very, very rarely. Could there be a spark, a glowing ember, still burning down there in the gook of black powder residue? Well, yes, that’s exactly why I do it, but the ember can’t hurt the blower as long as there is no added powder thrown down the bore.
The cardinal rule of safe gun handling is - “Always treat a gun as if it is loaded”, but every rule has exceptions or we couldn’t clean our guns. A blanket policy forbidding the blowing down of a gun’s barrel immediately after discharge, raises this otherwise essential rule of shooting to the level of a fetish. “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, …”
Blowing down the barrel is not, as some say, a mindless ritual. While blowing, watch the plume of powder smoke coming from the touch hole or nipple. It should blossom and then disappear while you continue to blow. If it persists, you have a problem. If there is no plume, as happened with me at that range, then your vent or nipple is plugged, or even your breech and, again, you have a problem.
Blowing down the barrel of a firearm before loading has been practiced for hundreds of years. Audubon in 1805 describes a coon hunter loading his rifle, preparing to set out on a night’s hunt.
“He blows through his rifle to clear it, ….”
We can only speculate where this practice originated, but several hundred years ago, black powder was not the uniform, cleanly burning product with which we are familiar now. Reportedly, E. I. DuPont got into the black powder business because he saw that the quality of the available powders was so poor. Additionally, wet or poorly stored black powder cakes and the clumps must then be broken up before firing. It is reasonable to me that blowing down the barrel was a natural and effective response to this problem of inconsistent black powder; the blast furnace-like effect of the oxygen forced down the barrel extinguishing any last lingering embers in the clumps of partially burned powder residue while simultaneously clearing any remaining debris from the touch hole and softening the black powder residue.
Do unexpected ignitions occur with today’s powders? Danged right! In an article in the February 2002 issue of ‘Muzzleblasts’ entitled “The Other Guy”, the author describes firing his rifle at a target. He then poured powder down the barrel, used short starter to place a patched ball in the muzzle, and then, as he pushed the ball down the muzzle with his ramrod, having the firearm discharge. His conclusion, stated to me orally, was that there was an ember somewhere down the barrel that had ignited the powder prematurely. Would blowing down the barrel have prevented this? Of course I don’t know, but it surely wouldn’t have hurt and I strongly suspect that it would have prevented the unexpected discharge. How about my own situation at that new club, where a fragment of patching somehow had remained in my barrel, actually plugging the touch hole at the second shot? It doesn’t take a lot of imagination to envision that cloth patching smoldering away, needing only the arrival of the next powder charge to initiate an unexpected and possibly fatal discharge of the firearm, a discharge that I feel would have been avoided if the blockage was discovered on my blowing down the barrel.
In my opinion, far from being a safety hazard, blowing down the barrel at a range immediately after firing is actually the time-tested mandatory first step in reloading a traditional muzzle loader shooting black powder, ensuring that it is now safe to proceed with pouring powder down the bore. Swabbing the bore with a wet patch is certainly a suitable alternative, but it takes more time and effort and, especially with patent breeches, unless a second, smaller diameter swab is used, the entire breech may not be reached. Why not just use a tube to blow down the barrel? Because it’s a clumsy solution to a nonexistent problem.
Where did this ban on blowing down the barrel originate? In a Presidential Message written by Tom Schiffer of the National Muzzle Loading Rifle Association (NMLRA) in February 1992, he described blowing down the barrel as a harmless ‘ritual’, but still a bad habit that can lead shooters to be distracted “when the shooter is concentrating on the alignment hold and release” and make some undefined hazardous mistake. The NMLRA has never held that blowing down the barrel, as I have defined it, is dangerous in itself.
President Schiffer made two basic arguments in supporting their position:
First, a person might be blowing down the fired barrel of a double barrel gun with the other barrel still loaded. This argument is absurd. You never put your face in front of even a potentially loaded gun, double barrel or not. If you are prone to being so absent minded, you also shouldn’t be permitted to go out alone or have things like a driver’s license.
The second argument was that a shooter may not notice that the gun they thought they had just fired actually had experienced only a severe hang fire, and it may then fire as the shooter blows down the barrel. This tragedy apparently actually happened with a woman who was new to muzzleloading. It’s hard for me to understand how anybody could fail to realize, after shooting the firearm even once, what a real discharge feels like. The smallest muzzleloading rifle I am aware of, a .25 caliber caplock, leaves no doubt when it has fired. I feel that if you cannot tell if a gun has discharged or not, you simply aren’t ready to be out there shooting, unsupervised. Several years ago there was a dreadful death in the state of West Virginia when a father, thinking the gun unloaded, blew down the barrel of his son’s gun which had actually experienced only a hangfire. A marked ramrod is always used to determine if a gun is loaded or not. The common denominator in both these terrible incidents is that the cardinal rule, ‘Always treat a gun as being loaded’ was ignored.
Not mentioned by the NMLRA, I have also read the argument that on blowing down the barrel you may accidentally burn your lips. I don’t know what firearm you use, but I don’t shoot a flame thrower.
It seems to me that in eliminating this time-tested method for extinguishing residual embers in a muzzleloader firing black powder, the NMLRA has, quite arbitrarily, actually inadvertently increased the hazards of firing muzzle loading firearms, not decreased them. Handling firearms is inherently dangerous. Arbitrarily, why not have a rule requiring an ‘expert’ range officer to confirm that all balls are fully resting on the powder before that gun can be discharged? An airspace below the ball is infinitely more dangerous then blowing down the barrel of a just-discharged gun.
In summary, I feel that blowing down the barrel of a muzzle loader using black powder immediately after discharge actually INCREASES firearms safety, and the NMLRA, while agreeing that it is not a dangerous practice in itself, has arbitrarily decided that the threat of setting a dangerous example for others overrules this value. As an analogy, semi-automatic rifles mechanically all work the same way, but they can be ‘dressed up’ to look quite different. Senator Feinstein notoriously has wanted to outlaw mililtary-style semi-automatic rifles because they look scary. It appears to me that the NMLRA has actually banned blowing down the barrel immediately after discharge primarily because it looks scary.
Would I object to a NMLRA rule stating something like;
“In a firearm using black powder, blowing down the barrel of the gun immediately after discharge and before moving from the firing line is strongly discouraged as being a practice that may result in harm under certain situations, but is not actually forbidden”?
Not at all, I think that this would actually be a good idea, pointing out the possible dangers of this practice for careless, inexperienced, or ignorant people.
Until then -
Memo to the National Muzzleloading Rifle Association - <deleted!>"
-
The bullet is placed on the patch over the bore, and pressed with the handle of the knife, which now trims the edge of the linen..
The above is still a step in "short starting a patched ball" with an object, (the knife handle).
The bullet is placed on the patch over the bore - it was not thumb pressed into the bore... Therefore the knife handle acted as a "short starter..."
:shake
-
The bullet is placed on the patch over the bore, and pressed with the handle of the knife, which now trims the edge of the linen..
The above is still a step in "short starting a patched ball" with an object, (the knife handle).
The bullet is placed on the patch over the bore - it was not thumb pressed into the bore... Therefore the knife handle acted as a "short starter..."
:shake
I don't agree, Joe.
Thumb press or knife handle just gets the patch material engraved by the rifling, and with a loose load the rod easily pushes the patched ball down on the powder charge. This will not happen for most folks and a tight load, which will require a short starter to get the patched ball a good 4" (or more) past the muzzle.
I added a brass nub to the handle of my patch knife to more easily than using a thumb get the patched ball past the muzzle. After that, the rod easily pushes the payload to the powder. At that point bouncing the rod insures the load is not only on the powder (no air space), but the powder is slightly compressed.
[ Invalid Attachment ]
-
I like the knife! Besides the brass nub, what are the details on it? Who made it, length, etc.
Thanks!
~Kees~
-
It's one of many knives I've put together using Helle blades or, as in this case, a Green River Russell "Rifleman" blade. I ripped the scales out of some red oak I had lying about the shop and used brass rivets to secure 'em. I added a sheath for it to the shooting bag I made. I like this bag/knife arrangement quite a bit.
[ Invalid Attachment ]
[ Invalid Attachment ]
-
Rob, I really like the knife sheath under the flap! I'm stealin' the idea. :bl th up
-
Yep, pretty functional for me, quite handy. :bl th up
[ Invalid Attachment ]
[ Invalid Attachment ]
[ Invalid Attachment ]
-
Is this the one?
https://www.crazycrow.com/green-river-knife-blades/green-river-riflemans-longhunter-blade
It shows a half tang, while yours appears to be full length.
~Kees~
-
Is this the one?
https://www.crazycrow.com/green-river-knife-blades/green-river-riflemans-longhunter-blade
It shows a half tang, while yours appears to be full length.
~Kees~
Kinda ... ? I have the same blade, but the tang is 4-1/2" long!
(https://i.imgur.com/F4NYO8E.jpg)
-
Aha! This is the blade ... Green River Boning Blade
https://knifemaking.com/collections/russel-green-river-blades/products/boning-blade
-
Cool, and cheaper than Crazy Crow's offer! Thank ye kindly! :bow
~Kees~
-
Yer very welcome,
Sir ... er, Bud! :luff:
-
You know, I hadn't realized my name was "Bud" or "Buddy" until I came to Ohio.... :laffing Even the high school drop outs call me that, so it must be true! :lol sign
~Kees~