CAP AND BALL SLOW MOTION VIDEO

[BillinOregon]

Great video by our friends a Forgotten Weapons. I became convinced of the real cause of chain fire some time ago, but still appreciate shaving a thin ring of lead up front.

 

[Packrat]

There is a factor called "barrel time". A heavy recoiling rifle will shoot higher with lower velocity loads because the muzzle will rise slightly with the bullet still in the bore. A pistol that has some appreciable recoil shoots to different points depending on the shooter's grip. If it didn't recoil until the bullet had left the barrel it wouldn't matter if you used a loose or tight grip. So I have to respectfully disagree with M. De Land. Just disagree, not arguing. After all, maybe he is right and I am wrong. Besides, he can probably out shoot me. I agree that the video doesn't show any noticeable recoil before the bullet leaves, but it takes only a very tiny movement to make a big difference in the impact point. That's one reason I'm not a very good shot. I forgot to say that this is a great video.

I too believe in what I call, Time In Barrel. There is a recoil, lifting of the Barrell that must be taken into account. In Heavier rifles this is lessened by the weight. A light firearm will rise more IMO

 

[Jeepfarm]

I'm new to the forum and read this thread with interest. Also never posted before.
Picture is of my son shooting a Colt Walker. I always marveled at how it captured the blast at all three areas: the muzzle, the front of the cylinder, and the nipple. Notice how far the hammer is pushed back. Also it caught the reflection of the blast in the glasses.

 

[B P Arn]

^^^ If that hammer came back any further, you would have a semi-automatic Walker!

 

[Blitz]

As the original poster, I intended to show how much more fire is circulating around the rear of the cylinder than the front. Nothing about recoil or how many guns can you tie to a tree (WTH?)

Yes , understood intent before viewing video, that is why I alluded to Sam Colts comments about chain fires originating at rear and not front of cylinder.
Buzz

 

[LME]

If it's slo-mo video of 1860 Army revolvers you want, then that's what you get:



Advance to the 6:40 mark if you want to see the guns firing. Every ignition spark is flying straight up, not out. As if the cutouts around the nipple have some role in deflecting the flash away from the other chambers.

I am sure glad you have to clean all those pistols and not me! LOL!

 

[Blitz]

When you quote someone talking about barrel rise under recoil and then someone replies about barrel rise under recoil+blowback, you do not have the ground to get all indignant about how there'e no mention of chain fire going on.

In the first place I am not indignant, secondly I quoted not about barrel rise or blow back no mention was made of either, thirdly the OP in a later post alluded to chain fire as I was pointing out.
You sir have the incorrect respondent, please read the text more carefully. Buzz

 

[Blitz]

View attachment 71076
I'm new to the forum and read this thread with interest. Also never posted before.
Picture is of my son shooting a Colt Walker. I always marveled at how it captured the blast at all three areas: the muzzle, the front of the cylinder, and the nipple. Notice how far the hammer is pushed back. Also it caught the reflection of the blast in the glasses.

Very interesting photo ! Perhaps a bit longer barrel or a bit less charge would be beneficial. Reminds me of a 60 grain load I fired in my ,50 cal pistol, much fire and un burned powder down range.

Buzz

 

[russellshaffer]

That's a great photo. Also interesting that the muzzle doesn't appear to have started to rise yet. I'm sure that it did.

 

[TFoley]

And here's a still from an older movie of a pal shooting my P-H Musketoon - notice how the detritus from the cap is directed downwards by the hammer having a recessed striking surface....

 

[Jeepfarm]

Very interesting photo ! Perhaps a bit longer barrel or a bit less charge would be beneficial. Reminds me of a 60 grain load I fired in my ,50 cal pistol, much fire and un burned powder down range.

Buzz

Yes, I use a lighter charge now when shooting that gun.

 

[saaman]

This article tells how to avoid chain fire and how he found no evidence of originating from the nipples.
http://www.geojohn.org/BlackPowder/bps2.htmlI decided to try his experiment myself. I have pinched loose caps for over 50 years with no chain fire, so I tried leaving the caps off of adjacent chambers. Guess what? No chain fire. Emboldened I decided to load all six chambers and only cap and fire one. Still no chain fire. No matter how many times I tried it would never chain fire.

 

[deerstalkert]

This article tells how to avoid chain fire and how he found no evidence of originating from the nipples.
http://www.geojohn.org/BlackPowder/bps2.htmlI decided to try his experiment myself. I have pinched loose caps for over 50 years with no chain fire, so I tried leaving the caps off of adjacent chambers. Guess what? No chain fire. Emboldened I decided to load all six chambers and only cap and fire one. Still no chain fire. No matter how many times I tried it would never chain fire.

until it does! that will wake one up! i have in 50 or so years never had a chain fire either, i send a request upward every time i fire my revolvers, that he sees to it i don't. then i do my part.

 

[M. De Land]

That's a great photo. Also interesting that the muzzle doesn't appear to have started to rise yet. I'm sure that it did.

That is a good example of what I was talking about bullet travel up bore counteracting recoil until clear of muzzle. When one thinks about it there is a series of action and counter action beginning with hammer drop, cylinder movement forward inertia then discharge, cylinder moving reward , powder mass converted to gas, bullet hitting the forcing cone and moving forward with barrel friction until ball exit.
If recoil before projectile exit really was the total influence over barrel rise it would be impossible to hit anything the sights were regulated to.
If you have ever driven a lead ball or bullet through a barrel you will get some idea of the friction resistance involved in the projectiles trip up bore.
Also slower moving projectiles have a more curved trajectory than faster moving ones of the same mass and shape which has at least as much to do with a different sight register as does barrel time.

 

[M. De Land]

This article tells how to avoid chain fire and how he found no evidence of originating from the nipples.
http://www.geojohn.org/BlackPowder/bps2.htmlI decided to try his experiment myself. I have pinched loose caps for over 50 years with no chain fire, so I tried leaving the caps off of adjacent chambers. Guess what? No chain fire. Emboldened I decided to load all six chambers and only cap and fire one. Still no chain fire. No matter how many times I tried it would never chain fire.

I believe barrel gap plays a part in this as well because the cylinder is driven forward at hammer fall increasing the clearance at the rear for fire to travel at discharge. Also I think caps splitting open play a part in fire deflection increasing chain fire risk at the cone.
My guess is if the gap gets say in the .010 range there is increased risk of chain fire from the rear.

 

[Henry Miles]

The article referenced above by saaman tells you to intentionally stage a chain fire, since they pose no danger, as long as it's clear down range. Seriously? Look down the barrel of your unloaded C&B pistol and see if it looks clear for subsequent chambers to discharge. This guy is a dangerous idiot, to put it mildly. Just proves anyone can post anything on a website, regardless of how dangerous it may be. DO NOT ATTEMPT THE ABOVE POST! SMH

 

[DeeTV]

I decided to load all six chambers and only cap and fire one. Still no chain fire. No matter how many times I tried it would never chain fire.

Just remembered Paul Harrell mentioned in one of his videos that he tried the same thing with the same result.

 

[Mustakrakish]

Just remembered Paul Harrell mentioned in one of his videos that he tried the same thing with the same result.

If it's the same video that I'm thinking of, he was making the argument that chainfires propagate from the front of the cylinder, not the rear. He then shot off a cylinder with no grease or wads and got a chainfire.

Do chainfires start at the front or the back? Samuel Colt thought that they started at the back, and proved it by redesigning the gun. Paul Harrell thought that they started at the front, and proved it by demonstrating it on video. Both theories seem to be correct.

 

[Henry Miles]

I don't know Paul Harrel but the video I posted shows a dramatic amount of fire/hot gas at the rear of the cylinder and only a small amount from the cylinder/barrel gap. If the ball is the proper size, it would be impossible for a chain fire to occur from the front, while the rear has holes leading directly to the powder charge. If a cap is missing or dislodges from recoil, you have a perfect situation for a chain fire. I don't know what's so hard to grasp about this. Good luck cap pinchers! Be safe!

 

[Hawken]

Guess I don't understand why it must always be an "either/or" issue. Why not both?

I'm not especially persuaded by the argument that a thin ring of lead produced when seating the roundball is necessarily always proof against chainfire. Recall that Lead melts at a little over 600° F; it wouldn't surprise me that explosive hot gasses could melt or soften a microscopically thin layer of lead and plow their way through into the adjacent chamber powder charge.