• This community needs YOUR help today. We rely 100% on Supporting Memberships to fund our efforts. With the ever increasing fees of everything, we need help. We need more Supporting Members, today. Please invest back into this community. I will ship a few decals too in addition to all the account perks you get.



    Sign up here: https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/account/upgrades

First Chainfire

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Sure can see where this is going, Hillbilly! It wouldn't be hard to get the wrong sized balls, for whatever silly reason- I could think of any number.

Yes, I think the problem occurs because the guns are misnamed .44 caliber yet they use a ".45" caliber ball, but a ".45 caliber rifle" take a ".44" caliber ball. So it definitely goes against the rules of logic. So it's very easy to pick up the wrong size, and there are some people who just see that .440 or .445 on the box and figure they have the right size, because they have a .44 caliber gun, right? [color]

I keep all my projectiles in clearly marked containers (9mm and .357 slugs are close, but not the same), as I don't want to mix them and it would be easy to do so!

Have you ever loaded some 9mm (.355 diameter) bullets in a .357 Magnum or .38 Special revolver... they do a lousy job at accuracy and almost rattle down the barrel. Always a good idea to keep separate things separate.

Undersized balls, hot gases, no grease or wad- and we have a chainfire- sometimes.


Yes, I'm hoping to at least prove that it's a possibility that this is the reason that a front end chain fire can happen. You are likewise thinking kind of what I'm thinking as well. It's that qualifier - "sometimes" -- that makes it so difficult to predict when it might happen. If only for that reason to do the extra step by loading the wad or greasing the loaded chambers, I feel it's worth the insurance which may not be 100% effective.

Shoot Safely!
WV_Hillbilly
 
Well, when I mentioned upsetting an undersize ball, I meant a reasonable caliber size - not a .375 in a .440 chamber or something else abnormal. As you concluded, if a pure lead ball falls into a clean chamber and is seated on a full charge of powder, it may upset enough to not fall out if the cylinder is inverted. However, there is a point where any normal upset will not fill the chamber on an undersize pill.

I have always used .457 balls in my 44's because I felt the greater bearing surface might be more accurate.
 
Well, when I mentioned upsetting an undersize ball, I meant a reasonable caliber size - not a .375 in a .440 chamber or something else abnormal.

No problem I kinda figured that you were thinking along the lines of a .445 into a .450 chamber, or maybe a .440 into a .447 chamber... which both of these are entirely possible with typical chamber sizes and that the rifle caliber round balls are also near by...

As you concluded, if a pure lead ball falls into a clean chamber and is seated on a full charge of powder, it may upset enough to not fall out if the cylinder is inverted. However, there is a point where any normal upset will not fill the chamber on an undersize pill.

Yes, to be sure. In fact the recoil reaction is trying to "pull" (apparently) the ball out of the chamber, It's the same as forgetting or NOT using a heavy crimp on bullets in a .44 magnum--the bullets want to "stay put" while in reality ist's the revolver that "pulls" back away from them.

I'd certainly thick that if someone accidently put a greatly undersized ball, like say a .320 diameter into a .372 chamber (.36 caliber cap-n-ball revolver) that it would be easily noticed and should fall out almost immediately, BUT what if someone doesn't tip the gun forward and shoots a big load of grease over the ball before they check...? That ball might come out upon recoil of the first shot and cause an unsafe opening to the adjacent chamber's powder charge. I know that's a lot of IF's, and it also depends upon the carefulness OR careLESSness of the user. But that is true of anything where multiple steps are involved in the procedure. Sometimes shortcuts are taken that bypass certain practices that were first added to make the whole process safer, not to make things take longer... though they probably do add considerable time to the whole loading processes.


I have always used .457 balls in my 44's because I felt the greater bearing surface might be more accurate.

For me it depends on the chamber size, but I typically have stuck with .454 diameter in almost every .44 caliber revolver. As I said before, he chambers invariably measured .450 +or- .001, so I didn't want to put the extra force on the loading lever--especially in the type that only bear on the link surfaces themselves. The rack & pinion "creeping" style loading lever of the Colt 1860 & 1861 guns has theoretically more leverage, and is less likely to break. But I've never broken one, or heard of anyone breaking the other type of loading levers anyway.

Shoot Safely!
WV_Hillbilly
 
Here is another possible, that may be part of the equation:

With a slightly undersized ball, it may be possible for a couple of granules of powder (probably crushed) to be stuck between ball and chamber. This will help hold the ball in place and may work as a kind of 'priming pan', being ignited by firing and flashing into the cylinder.

I'm probably trying to re-invent the wheel here! Sure someone has thought of this before...
 
Here is another possible, that may be part of the equation:

With a slightly undersized ball, it may be possible for a couple of granules of powder (probably crushed) to be stuck between ball and chamber. This will help hold the ball in place and may work as a kind of 'priming pan', being ignited by firing and flashing into the cylinder.

Yes, I believe that may have been suggested by someone. I'm still trying to organize the entire thread by relate facst, theory, and conjecture. There's a lot of information, but very little data--which is understandable that a person's memory is perhaps NOT wanting to recollect the chain-fire event in detail, but just storing it in some dusty corner of the brain.

I'm probably trying to re-invent the wheel here! Sure someone has thought of this before...

I suppose that it could be a possibility and add to the potential conditions that inevitably would lead to an unintended secondary ignition from an adjacent chamber

Please keep the gears working... I've almost got the problem of how to limit damage to the gun worked out so that the ball from the adjacent chamber that fires does not have enough energy or propellant to do much damage.


For right now though, I'm going to keep this technique to myself as I wouldn't want someone else to try recreating my experiment and getting injured or damaging their revolver, but I will admit that it is a surpringly simple procedure and I can control the amount of force and velocity very closely on that adjacent chamber should it fire unintentionally in addition to the chamber under the hammer

Keep safe and keep shooting safely!
WV_Hillbilly
 
I read a post that was taken from "Sixguns by Keith, Chapter XIV, Loading and Management of Cap and Ball Sixguns "
I'll post an excerpt here. The original article is long. I posted it seperately in a new post.

"Nipples vary in size and percussion caps from 9 to 12 will fit about any size sixgun nipples. The No. 12 I have is marked Colt, and it fits a big Dragoon revolver. One should select a cap size that is a snug push fit on the nipples, but not tight enough to prevent their seating fully down on the nipple. A couple times I have had muzzle loading rifles fire when I pressed the cap down too hard on the nipple. The caps were a bit small and I forced them down, splitting them. Each time they fired from this pressure with the ball of my thumb, they raised instantly a healthy blister. So be careful to get caps that will fit snug and tight, but which will also seat easily. Never try to use a Percussion sixgun with loose caps as recoil of one charge will jar the cap on another chamber; the flash may get into it and fire a second or third chamber at the same time. I have had it happen. Also I have had caps that were too small and did not seat fully, fire the charge of other chambers from recoil which threw them back against the frame of the gun. I once had the bottom chamber of a .36 Navy go off and drive the ball into the recess in the rammer, expanding it until it was next to impossible to remove and had to be turned down again before it would work. Multiple discharge must be avoided at all costs as it is not conducive to longevity, nor will it leave the guns in good shape for posterity."

The whole article is very good, and I figure Elmer Keith probably knew about anything he wrote about.

HTH,
Jim
 
"Also I have had caps that were too small and did not seat fully, fire the charge of other chambers from recoil which threw them back against the frame of the gun. I once had the bottom chamber of a .36 Navy go off and drive the ball into the recess in the rammer, expanding it until it was next to impossible to remove and had to be turned down again before it would work. Multiple discharge must be avoided at all costs as it is not conducive to longevity, nor will it leave the guns in good shape for posterity."


I would have never thought of caps getting set off from them hitting the frame during recoil! Thanks Elmer!

Hmmm....both loose and too tight caps.
 
That is an interesting bit of information.

I wonder if it could be...
that the recoil in such a tiny gun as that, is so unusually high, that it is an instance of another round banging it's rim against the recoil shield of the gun and then causing a "too sensitive" priming in a "too thin" brass rim to ignite. I'm just thinking out loud here. I don't really know for sure. It does seem to follow suit with the same concept of percussion caps striking the recoil shield and igniting. Back in Elmer Keith's time those caps had very sensitive priming and were probably likewise very thinly constructed.

BUT, I have shot the NAA mini revolver in .22 magnum (not with PMC though) and it has as much recoil as a full power .357 in a full size gun, maybe even more. The recoil is VERY noticeable anyway.

I also put a new post in the Non Muzzleloading Discussions section with some questions about problems with PMC .22 Magnum ammunition. Please check that out if you shoot this ammo in your guns.

Shoot Safely!
WV_Hillbilly
 
I saw a first this weekend. A man in our unit had a chain fire using blanks right next to me.

After the battle I asked him a ton of questions.

#1 He used the same powder and caps he has been using.
#2 1851 Navy used about 7 years.
#3 The chain fire occured on the first shot.
#4 The cylinder to the right and to the left of the cylinder online of the barrel are the ones that chained fired.

He did do somehting he usually didnt do. We were going to have a tactical in the woods. He decided he wanted more bang for his buck. He filled the chambers with powder, then rammed them. He then filled the chambers with more powder and rammed them again.

I am guessing about 60 grains of BP compressed.

He doesnt normally do this, but he wanted to see what would happen with this load.

No filler was used. He normally uses cream of wheat for a filler, but he did not this time.

He put some hard crisco oil on the chambers, but in his words "it was a very thin covering."

His first shot and he was holding a roman candel.
A very impressive sight to see.
 
I reckon it would be a lot easier to get a chainfire with a blank load- no big lead ball plugging the cylinder.

I know a lot of grease comes out of the adjacent chambers on firing- if there is just a thin wad behind the grease, then compressed powder behind that - Fireworks!
 
That story about the blank loads chain firing is the kind of information that we all need to be aware of.

I didn't see though, about any speculation as to where the chain-fire event initiated, front-end or back-end? I would guess the front from the loading procedure that was described. I would NOT have wanted to be close to that gun going off.

Shoot Safely!
WV_Hillbilly
 
Folks,

I have had some personal family matters and situations that are requiring MUCH of my attention and time. Please continue to post data and information about chain-fires and hopefully this will all get sorted out somehow.

I hope to be around "some", but will not be online near as much--other than to check e-mail and PM's. I hope you all understand that I am NOT deserting the thread, nor jumping ship. I just really need to be there for my family and to help keep things working together in a positive manner. Thanks for your thoughts and concerns, you may find out a little more about things (IF you're interested) in the Non-Muzzeleloading Discussions section. I put a post there and you may PM me if you need to. Thanks again!

Being streched to my limits,
WV_Hillbilly
 
That story about the blank loads chain firing is the kind of information that we all need to be aware of.

I didn't see though, about any speculation as to where the chain-fire event initiated, front-end or back-end? I would guess the front from the loading procedure that was described. I would NOT have wanted to be close to that gun going off.

Shoot Safely!
WV_Hillbilly

As we had a tide of blue uniforms coming towards us, I really didnt have time to stop and check out the gun :crackup:

I was standing about 10 foot away when it went off. All I saw was a very large flame. The shot also didnt sound normal, kind of long and drawn out. Sort of a fizzing noise. What does suprise me is that the remaining 3 charges went off as normal.

Pure speculation here but, I dont see how that could have happened from the front. If it did occur from the front with that much powder and lack of filler, the remainder of the shots should have done the same. With most of the grease being burned off on the first shot, all that would be left was exposed powder, but he had the last three shots fire normally.

It was used the day before and the only thing done to it was a bore swab. The nipples and cylinder were not cleaned.
 
As some of you know, there are some home & family related situations that I MUST take care of--that are MUCH MORE important than my continuing to test for re-creating a chain-fire to determine the most likely cause(s).

I hope that y'all will keep watching closely and carefully, and that you will report any problems or information--as your data is VERY important in finding a solution to preventing these chain-fires.

I am hopeful also that things will SOON be resolved and will get to continue testing, and (finally!) be able to "help" everyone with the resulting information. That IS my sole purpose for doing all of this--to keep every one from needlessly getting injured, from injuring onlooker(s), or damaging their equipment.

Shoot Safely!
WV_Hillbilly
 
Thanks for that link I think I had read most of it before, but I still appreciate that there are a few users still interested in this topic.

Hopefully I be able to provide some new info within the next couple of weeks. I need the weather to cool down some here first.

Shoot Safely!
WV_Hillbilly
 
I'm the one who started this thread. I think I discovered, by accident, what my problem was. I bought a new 1851 Navy. Took it out to shoot. One shot would be very accurate at 25 yds. The next, I couldn't even hit the tree much less the target. I came back totally disgusted and cussing Basspro for the junk they sold me.

Long story short, I had bought a box of .451 a couple of years ago and they had gotten mixed in with some .454 I had in a shooting bag. I loaded the 1851 with a mix. The .454 were hitting target and the .451 were going wild.

I believe I did the same thing with the 1858 that had the chainfire. I believe the .451 did not seat well enough. They were so loose on the 1851 that after applying bore butter over the ball it came forward after I shot and I could push it back in with my finger.

I have since found all the .451 and will melt and recast in .454.

Hope this sheds light even though I may be wrong.
 
Hi,

I also use Wonderwads in my two Uberti 1858 Remingtons and the New Army Ruger. When I load the correct size balls, I shave off some lead. They fit tightly ontop my charge.

When I load I make sure there is no powder left over from loading a ball over my 20 gr. target charge. Once in awhile I have forgotton to push the Wads in on top on the ball, and fire all the rounds with no mishaps. I have seen others at the range forget to clean the excess powder out of and around the front of the cylinder and they'll get a flash-over from loose fitting balls or loose caps. Not a nice sight.

Just make sure to knock out, brush or blow any excess powder out of the cylinders and from the gaithering of powder a the forcing cone once they are charged and most importantly, make sure the caps fit on snug. Crisco allows the bp build up.

Way back 30 years ago I used soft red jewelers wax instead of Wonderwads. I can't find the red wax anymore!

Crisco is way to messy.

Just my 2 cents,

Terry
 
"I have forgotton to push the Wads in on top on the ball"

The ball should go on top of the wad??
 

Latest posts

Back
Top