First Chainfire

[crockett]

One of the stronger arguments for the balls moving forward is the relatively minor amount of damage to the gun and shooter. On modern revolvers, I have had a few revolvers with a lead spitting problem that would stick little pieces of lead in my hand. It SEEMS to me that only if the ball was about out of the chamber, so pressure was far less, would the minor amount of damage seen on percussion revolvers be explained. I agree, it seems one of the major companies should use a slow motion camera and try to create a chain firing situation to determine the cause(s). It seems probable that if caps fell off several nipples that MAYBE on that particular round these un-capped nipples wouldn't fire but they would probably do so on the next shot. I still find it interesting that almost all chain firings are the first shot of a loaded cylinder and often first shot of the day on a clean revolver. It seems that if a cap got knocked off, it could happen on any nipple, not just the one next to the fired chamber. There could only be three results:
1. The chamber with the cap that fell off would misfire on the first shot however there would be a random dispersion of chambers rather than a tendencity for the chamber next to the fired chamber to misfire. OR...
2. The chamber with the cap that fell off would not misfire on the first shot which would then result in more misfires on second or third shots. OR...
3. The chamber with the cap that fell off never misfires until the shooter cocks the hammer under that chamber and then discovers there is no cap on the nipple.

HOWEVER, we don't have random dispersion of chambers that misfire, second or third shot misfires, or chambers without caps not firing.

ON THE OTHER HAND, if the misfires are occurring from the chamber ends, then it seems logical the misfiring chambers would be next to the fired chamber but this could occur at any sequence in the firing of the revolver, not just the first shot, and could be more common after the lube burns or melts off.

I agree, only with a slo-mo camera can these things ever be verified for sure.

 

With regard to clean revolver or "first shot" experiences, it may be that fouling provides enough interference on subsequent shots that the caps do not fall off quite as easily, i.e., if you don't have a chain fire early in the day, then you don't have one at all. This assumes that nipple-end ignition is a culprit.

The usual absence of real gun damage may come from the powder exploding right at the chamber mouth instead of developing pressure and velocity as the ball goes down the barrel but the ball is still exiting fast enough to likely cause injury if anyone was hit. In addition, the only chamber that is really blocked is the one under the rammer - the rest are more or less free to release a projectile that may glance off the side of the barrel.

I wonder if this is a reason that the Colt percussion revolving rifles were so unpopular. The supporting hand would have been in the way of a multiple discharge.

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

The Colt revolving percussion rifles had both foes and fans. The proper way to hold one when firing is with both hands well behind the cylinder gap, sort of a modified two hand hold such as might be used on any handgun. Anyone who forgot this did so only once, as the hot gases escaping at the barrel/cylinder gap would toast his forearm. It is true that if a chain-fire also occured, any portion of the anatomy out in front of the cylinder would suffer. This, too, probably only happened once to the same individual.

 

[WV_Hillbilly]

I don't know if now is the right time to shout "Eureka", or go streaking around the neighborhood in a bath towel; but please stay with me on this... I think we MIGHT just have caught on to something very important here!

I think crockett's last post finally snapped the remaining logic circuits were left in my brain into "turbo mode". What did it, was his reference to the "high speed camera" as a "slo-mo camera"... BOTH terms are essentially correct.

We are attempting to resolve the problem as an "instantaneous event", but if we could view things in "slo-motion", we would expect to easily see what happens. That is the key to unlocking this mystery.

I never queried ANY of the posters if their "chain fire" event seemed to happen all at once, OR, if it happened like a shoot-out in a Sam Peckinpah movie.

Time is not linear, but we have to force ourselves to think that way. We work 8 hr days, but how much REAL TIME passed on that "day that seemed to go on forever"? Likewise, when we are travelling by car to a vacation spot at the beach, or whatever... doesn't it seem that time doesn't pass at the same rate as it would if you were at work that day?

In times of dire circumstances and conditions, we humans tend to experience events in a relative way--relative to time that is. Yet when we tell of these events, they always seem to "happen in a blur". But in some events that our life is threatened (bad car accidents, for example), time perception is distorted as in "we can see our entire life flash before us". How is that so? Yet it "seems" that way is true...?

SO....
I just really got relaxed and put on some good progressive, "mind-expanding", rock music from the 70's and slowly ate a piece of "turtle pie"--enjoying every bite. I read over crockett's post and the "idea about time percpetion and relativity" just seemed to jump off the screen and whack me in the face. I know I'm probably sounding very weird (and NO, I'm not tripping on acid either!) and heavy and hard to comprehend. Don't call the men in the white coats yet!

Well, I don't have the easy-flowing financial resources to rent a really good high speed movie camera (digital), and ding up my favourite revolver. Though I have gotten scratches and dings on it from normal use... I can't bring myself to purposely wrack it some more--but I don't think I need to either!

Here's the bulk of my thoughts/ideas/theories that just seemed to flow out like an artesian well. I know... I can't prove them without the hard evidence; but please save this post, print it out & Take some "quiet time" sometime tonight or soon to relax and evaluate them. You've got to do it away from distractions though... or it will probably just appear to be so much fanciful imaginings of "some lunatic from the Appalachians Mountains of West Virginia".

If you're having difficulty with this... I'm sorry. I can't make it more simple or make it disappear. It is what it is. I think I understand how an explorer feels when he realizes that he couldnt' "see the forest for the trees". I know you'll all know this analogy. Remember in "The Last Crusade" when Indiana Jones climbed the stairs to the mezzanine in the Venetian Library and finally noticed the Roman Numeral 10 or "X" on the floor? It was literally - "X marks the spot"! Yet, he had barely got through telling Dr. Schneider that X NEVER marks the spot in archeological exploration.

I don't know how else to explain it...

It is possible that there may be a significant time delay between the intended chamber firing under the hammer and the subsequent ignition of one or more additional chambers.

It does seem then that the "chain fire" does start off in an adjacent chamber, but then may "jump" to more chambers as the powder flare up gets larger and more dispersed across the face of the cylinder.

I think that "almost" guarantees that it happens at the front. The time delay would during the rearward motion of recoil of the first shot and the slice of time that it takes for that first shot's powder flare to burn the grease out of the adjacent chamber(s).

Remember I said that even though the "old timers" may not have been formally educated, they do tend to describe events in "easy for everyone to understand" terms. "chain fire" - it makes so much sense if you picture the events occurring sequentially and NOT simultaneously.

Now, I think what we have to add to the solution is how the loose cap theory might be involved. AND I think I've got that one figured out as well...!

I need to give it some more intent thought, and probably burn out some neurons and memory cells in my brain, while also depleting several very crucial chemical compounds. I will need to take some antacid after all this, as I'm sure to either have an ulcer from it or need a vacation!

Shoot Safely, Think Slowly, Choose Wisely!
WV_Hillbilly

 

[WV_Hillbilly]

Wow!I must've really "frightened" everyone with that last post. I notice no one has posted any new additonal information or even commented since then. :cry:

No, they did NOT come and haul me away either. :shake: I just had a really nice time writing that post with a little bit of "tongue-in-cheek" and "dry" humour thrown in. Guess it didn't go over as well as I planned... :hmm:
4
I still think we've almost got the thing sewn up, we just need to get that hard evidence--the camera footage! I've got a couple more information sources to check out, but I don't know that it will benefit us unless we want to finish working out "the job".

Also, I meant no offense to ANYONE & EVERYONE and I am sincerely apologetic if anyone was disturbed by my commentary. It may have been the venom from that spider bite that I got about a week ago

Anyway, I'd love to see some more activity and get this completely resolved to a high degree of certainty before someone decides to "flame" someone, and then things get ugly. Seen it happen too many times on other Talk Boards :curse:

Regards, and Shoot Safely! Gotta get some sleep time in.
WV_Hillbilly :front:

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

Hey, I can't imagine anyone taking offense, my friend. I think you're right about the chain-fire being a sequential event. One that occurs in a very, very brief time frame.
Whether the chain-fire lights off at the front or rear of the cylinder, is, at this point a bit like the "bevel up or bevel down" discussion we flinters so enjoy. Providing that the ball fits properly in the chamber, I just don't see it moving forward, or the flash getting by. With a loose ball or damaged or out of round chamber, there may be a chance. So, I guess that I'm a rear of the cylinder guy, until proven wrong. I would love to know the truth. So far, we've been limited to "thought experiments" as Einstein referred to them. We need to do some real tests--tests that duplicate real field use. If fired from a rigid rest, the dynamics are altered because you don't get free recoil. So, I think our next step should be to try and come up with a safe and realistic test. I don't think we need to load the chamber that will be on the bottom when the revolver is fired. That will reduce the major damage factor a lot. There has to be a way to safely test all our ideas. No matter what we find out, this has certainly been a great discussion!

 

[WV_Hillbilly]

To "Russ T.",
Thanks there buddy, I really appreciate your comments and encouragement. I am in 110% agreement about making sure that the gun is allowed to freely recoil; and also about NOT loading the bottom chamber of the cylinder.

------------------------------------------------------------

To All,
I could really use some input if anyone thinks that a particular test procedure should be added, dropped, or modified to make the test go smoother, or produce better results, or make things safer, whatever... I appreciate your assistance in this matter. The results from the test belong to everyone here who participated. We are ALL going to benefit from the knowledge.

------------------------------------------------------------

Some background info...
Actually, long long ago, back when my one and only "chain-fire" event occurred; I just accepted it as part of normal cap-n-ball quirky-ness and figured it was an inherent (though very infrequent) hazard. After many years, I started doing some research on "chain-fires", and I then became the "antagonist" and switched to thinking that the "rear of cylinder, loose or missing caps" theories made more sense. BUT hard as I tried, it just couldn't explain away a large amount of data. So, I begrudgingly started shifting my thinking back again towards the "front of cylinder, loose ball, recoil" theories. Came full circle...

Currently...
I'm taking a little bit of a break in my "just wondering", and am working on my test plan to purposely create a "chain-fire" and to make it repeat at least two more consecutive times (which "may" not even be possible?!?!).

Actually, IF I can get it to happen 2 to maybe 3 or 4 times in maybe 20 cylinders of shooting, I would still consider the method I used to invoke the "chain-fire" to be a valid proof.

On the prowl...
I'm in the process of "scouring the land" looking for a reasonably unused BUT low priced revolver to (most likely) "sacrifice" for the sake of science and learning. I'd like to find one for around $75, as finances are reasonably tight for me this time of year.

Anyone want to help...?
IF someone else finds one before I do, would you PLEASE let me know if you'd care to sell it to me for the test. That would get the test started much faster than waiting for just me to find one alone. NOTE: I do NOT want any one giving ANY money, NOR would I solicit for any. IF someone wants to loan out a revolver, that is up to them. I WILL return it--in whatever condition the test leaves it in.

Does this sound reasonable...?
Probably the most commonly owned (or first bought) revolver out there is a brass framed CVA or Traditions (Pietta mostly) "Colt" 1851 Navy in .44 caliber. That way I can use the various .44/.45 ball diameters available to try the "loose fitting ball theory".

Additonal necessary components...
I have several brands of percussion caps and in different sizes. I also have a new can of 3Fg black powder and Pyrodex P set aside for the test already. I have Wonder Wads and also my own "starched and punched" felt wads lubed with Wonder Lube. I have CVA grease patch, and Bore Butter, and of course the Crisco as well.

IS this going to be a problem...?
I know of no easy way to load the cylinder in the gun with the loading lever that will allow me to apply exactly the same amount of force to every load. I could remove the cylinder and use an arbor press or a hydraulic jack setup with a dowel/ram and with a set of scales, measure the force applied. Not exactly perfect, but considerably more accurate than "guess-timation". IF anyone think it won't make a significant difference, then I could eliminate this setup--which will speed up the testing a good bit.

Some pre-determined steps...
Since most "chain-fires" seem to be occurring on the first shot and in a "clean gun"; I am going to do a quick but thorough clean-up of the gun after every cylinder is shot. I do think that this is an important process. It may get scrubbed and oiled a LOT during the testing phase. I don't expect to dirty the revolver to the point where it becomes too tight to turn the cylinder or cock the hammer.

Safety FIRST!...
Despite that it would be more realistic; I am NOT considering actually holding the gun while attempting to make a "chain-fire" occur. So I'm also working on ideas about making an artificial "arm" (and hand) to hold the gun and this is going to be extremely complicated as the gun has to be able to possibly move in 8 directions, some simultaneously, and some sequentially, and some more freely than others. Also, because of the majority of shooters, I need this device to operate as if it were a right handed shooter--using a one handed hold. Sorry to you lefties out there. I am not going to consider a 2 handed hold for this string of testing, though it might need to be done later on.

Visual Evidence... but more safety too...!
I will check on the best manner to get some actual motion footage of the event, but this may easily become a "fly in the ointment". I do NOT want destroy a VERY costly high speed video or camera system. NEITHER do I want a living person to be in the positions required to take images at the appropriate angles and proximity to the gun. I realise that "seeing is believing", though anymore almost anything can be faked with CGI and the right "special effects". I still do NOT want the results to be instantly challenged though.... Video & Still Imaging is going to be a very difficult phase of the test to maintain properly. ERRRR!


Then what should follow...
I will of course write up the results of the testing with accompanying photos (if there are some that appear to validate the findings). I will try to get them published, so that the information is "protected". I haven't really gotten that far, as other phases of the test need more detailing. All of the test equipment needs to be found or built first as well. I think the "little duckies will line up" IF and WHEN the test gets properly completed. Of course, even if the test can NOT prove the cause of the "chain-fire", it will be an interesting experiment and hopefully provide some useable information despite it's "perceived strike-out".

Repeating this part...

I need your help to acquire a brass framed CVA or Traditions (even an A.S.M. or DGG) "Colt" 1851 Navy in .44 caliber for around $75 in very good used condition. I can then start taking measurements for building test fixtures and complete the setup and various procedures needed. IF you find one for sale before I do (which is most likely), I will buy it from you for the "test subject".

Shoot Safely!
WV_Hillbilly

 

[arcticap]

I was reading an unrelated post on the forum today where the writer asked whether anyone ever tried to shoot off a capped loaded rifle by holding a lighter to the percussion cap that was simply sitting on the nipple? (His hammer was lost in the woods.) If a percussion cap could be set off from simply heating the exterior or coming into contact with an amount of flame, then couldn't that be a cause for chainfires built in to the very design of the pistol? To test, one wouldn't need to actually cause a chainfire, just heat a cap enough to see if it could be set off that way. Maybe the flame could only set it off if it came into close enough contact with the interior of the cap, the priming mix, or not at all under any circumstance. At least you would be able to determine if the cap itself is causing the chainfire. What do you think? :hatsoff:

 

[unspellable]

For camera protection you might consider placing the camera behind a barrier and aiming it into a mirror at the corner of the barrier. This is a common trick for this sort of thing, such as a head on view of the bullet leaving the muzzle. (In which case the mirror is sacrificed.)

I have a brass framed 44 "Navy" that is NIB except for having been taken down a few times and the cylinder having been rotated. I'd let that one go for $90. (Warning, the trigger pull is atrociously creepy.)

My chain fire was distinctly NOT instantaneous. Ignition may have been quick, but the charges in the two extra chambers were noticably slow in burning off. The effect was like a Roamn candle with the two extra chambers taking at least a half second to butn off.

 

[WV_Hillbilly]

I was reading an unrelated post on the forum today where the writer asked whether anyone ever tried to shoot off a capped loaded rifle by holding a lighter to the percussion cap that was simply sitting on the nipple? (His hammer was lost in the woods.) If a percussion cap could be set off from simply heating the exterior or coming into contact with an amount of flame, then couldn't that be a cause for chainfires built in to the very design of the pistol? To test, one wouldn't need to actually cause a chainfire, just heat a cap enough to see if it could be set off that way. Maybe the flame could only set it off if it came into close enough contact with the interior of the cap, the priming mix, or not at all under any circumstance. At least you would be able to determine if the cap itself is causing the chainfire. What do you think? :hatsoff:

That is a very good idea and that is exactly the kind of expanded thinking that the world needs more of!:front:

However, I'm hoping though to get that information from a source (sorry but I can't reveal their ID) that should provide me with data on percussion caps (at least one brand anyway) regarding direct impact force, shock, heat sensitivity, static electricity, things like that. I could perform lots of these test phases myself, but any of the data that I can get already accumulated will make a big difference--as those would be independent sources--rather than everything falling on my time, skills, and verity, (NOT that I would lie about anything though).

I STILL may do some of these tests on the cap redundantly, just to have a guideline to compare against this "already tested data" to see if it does confirm the general tendencies and characteristics of percussion cap ignition.

"articap" and all,
I should clarify something here also. IF ANY one else has an idea such as this, and would like to go ahead and carry it out, I hope you have some solid background in R&D, hazardous materials testing, AND maybe the most important thing--which is a VERY "safety-conscious" attitude. PLEASE do NOT do it! NOT that I am flat-out refusing your assistance, OR that I think you all incompetent, OR that I don't trust the veracity of your results, OR that I don't thing anyone else is "safe", OR that I'm some kind of "report hog" (does anyone have grandkids, or kids, that watched that episode of "The Brain" on the "Arthur & Friends" show on PBS?). I just do NOT wish to see anyone hurt by "experimenting around" with this stuff. AND I guess I need to do the following...

WARNING! Any kind of activity other than the "normal & regular" loading, firing, cleaning, etc... procedures involved in muzzleloading can be VERY dangerous; and CAN cause injury, damage, and even death--to the individual and bystander. I DO NOT recommend that ANYONE attempt experimentation, tests, or deviation from standard practices. So I assume NO responsibility or liability of ANY kind in this instance. You are responsible AND liable for YOUR OWN actions, regardless of how you got the idea. Also this forum has a disclaimer, at least I think so...OK, actually, I've not seen it. If someone knows where it is, could you point it out to me?

So I don't want ANY of you trying this stuff yourself, OK? I'll get it done, it might take a long time to do it safely and to do it properly, but I SHALL get it done.

Think, Load, and Shoot Safely!
WV_Hillbilly

 

[crockett]

A couple of thoughts.

1. I started out with this theory that if black powder can explode at 660 degrees, then how hot does the clynider get when two chambers ignite almost instantanteously? In other words, all chain fires involve one faulty, adjacent chamber( cap, no lube, etc.) but when this second chamber explodes the heat in the cylinder now reaches about 660 degree that sometimes explodes another chamber.
2. Now Arcticap came up with something I just plain missed. If a quick pass of a propance torch can explode a cap, then can excessive heat explode caps? What happens if a manufacturer simply puts too much material under the cap that generates too much heat that explodes an ajoining cap.
Got looking at some of my books and noticed a percussion revolver converted into a "pocket pistol". It was a Colt. The cylinder pin was cut off, protruding about a half inch beyond the cylinder. It was threaded or tapped with a washer to hold the nut/ screw in place. With this gun a second chamber going off shouldn't cause damage- I think.

 

[WV_Hillbilly]

A couple of thoughts.

1. I started out with this theory that if black powder can explode at 660 degrees, then how hot does the clynider get when two chambers ignite almost instantanteously? In other words, all chain fires involve one faulty, adjacent chamber( cap, no lube, etc.) but when this second chamber explodes the heat in the cylinder now reaches about 660 degree that sometimes explodes another chamber.

What happens if a manufacturer simply puts too much material under the cap that generates too much heat that explodes an ajoining cap.

I personally don't think that a slightly larger amount of priming compound is going to produce significantly more peripheral heat... but again, there are lots of things like this that we just do not know. I'm pretty sure there is a tolerance variation in the amount of priming compound loaded into caps--but that information is probably not available from CCI or Remington, or RWS, etc...

It would be interesting (if it were possible) to screw a musket nipple into a single chamber and if all the clearance problems were able to be resolved then that would be a good way to see if more collateral heat could cause a chain-fire.

Gotta scoot for now... will be back shortly.

Shoot Safely!
WV_Hillbilly

 

[pepperbelly]

I found the following on the MLML (Muzzle Loader Mailing List) cleaning page while reading up cleaning a rifle. MLML cleaning :

"Revolvers: use Wonder Lube or Crisco

 

[WV_Hillbilly]

pepperbelly,

I appreciate the information provided. Thanks! My plans include tests from the front end of the cylinder with loose fitting ball and also the back of the cylinder including loose or missing caps or open nipples.

Keep your ideas coming in. While I was doing some initial testing with caps, I figured I might as well also check out the function of my smoke detector in the basement--just in case a small fire did get out of hand, since I do have a wood burning stove for an additional/backup heat source.

Well, I burned an entire sheet of 1/4 folded copy paper including a wooden safety match sticking through it upside down with a percussion cap on the tail end of the match (sticking upright). There was plenty of smoke and I was only about 20 ft from the smoke detector but that blasted thing wouldn't even make a peep. The percussion cap went off (as expected) and blew the smoke around from the paper even more... and still the smoke detector didn't work at all! I have GOT TO look into this some more.

I know that's completely off topic BUT I had to mention it, since I did do it during some of the test planning. I am going to post a safety warning about this in the General Muzzleloading Secton.

Regards, and Shoot Safely!
WV_Hillbilly

 

[walruskid1]

wv hillbilly, what kind of spider was it and where can i buy one? really - you make good sense. fired a colt and had the chamber aligned with the barrel go off and the chambers on both sides.

 

[WV_Hillbilly]

wv hillbilly, what kind of spider was it and where can i buy one? really - you make good sense. fired a colt and had the chamber aligned with the barrel go off and the chambers on both sides.

Hey there walruskid!

First the important thing... I hope you were NOT injured from your chain fire experience. Was there any damage to the gun?
If you can remember... would you please reply again and answer the following questions: (I'm sorry there's so many, but it will help my research by a HUGE amount!)

Were you hurt? and if so how badly?
Was the gun damaged significant? Tell how bad it was.
You already said it was a Colt type open frame gun--True?
Did the gun have a brass frame or a steel frame?
Which model of Colt was it? 1851, 1860, 1862, 1849, etc...
Did you have all 6 chambers loaded or just 5?
You already told me that the two on either side of the one fired with the hammer were the extra ones that fired-OK?
What caliber is the gun - .44 or .36?
What size diameter round ball were you using?
Were you using 3F black powder or Pyrodex P?
How much powder were you using?
How badly did the gun recoil from the chain fire (compared to just firing a normal single shot?
Did your percussion caps go on tight or loose?
Did you continue to fire the rest of the loaded chambers or was there enough commotion or lost caps to have to stop?
Did you use grease to seal the front of the chambers or a lubricated wad between the powder and the ball?
Did the balls from the other two chambers that fired cause any damage near the gun or did you not notice?
Did the experience frighten you in any way? Will you shoot it again when you get the chance?

Thanks for you help... I really need all the data like this that I can get. It will help solve the mystery (I hope!)

I've went round & round trying to determine where the chain fire starts. I still feel that in whatever case, the ball must be falling out of the chamber, as the chain fire is taking place. I did some pre-testing tonight... see me next post in this thread for results.

I seriously do not know what kind of spider it was. We usually have them coming in the basement when it gets rainy and stays that way for several days. I guess they don't care to stay outside and drown OR they like my basement which much of is below grade.

I didn't see it but it couldn't havebeem veru big or one with very potent venom as my respiratory system didn't react too severly. I think I fell asleep while reading down here and the spider just decided to see how that big guy snoring away in the recliner would taste.

Obviously I was just a little too big for his bite, but it still had me swollen and a little bit distressed as far as my breathing goes. Also did have some confusion, disoritation, but no hallucinations or really weird stuff. At least it didn't bite me on the sprained ankle that's been trying to heal for 8 weeks. Yes, I know I heal slow--it's because of my Diabetes. I have pretty good doctors and that in itself is a VERY fortunate thing with a chronic disease.

Shoot Safely! (And I don't mean that sarcasticly either!)
WV_Hillbilly

 

[WV_Hillbilly]

Duplicate Post deleted by Liver eatin Johnson

 

[WV_Hillbilly]

Folks,

I did a couple of "impromptu" tests with percussion caps. The results were both expected and surprising as I did more than one test.

First
I did a simple fire test: I made a little paper holder for a wooden match and put the match upside down through a hole in the center of the highest surface of the paper. On the tail of the match I put 1 percussion cap. I lit the match under the paper and let it burn it's way up to the cap naturally. The cap did explode though I found it all in one piece. I was surprised though that it was actually surrounded and totally in the fire before it ignited. I had expected the heat to set it off way before the actual flames reached it. Oh Well... it's a "learning thing"

Second
I tried an electrical shock test. I used a little "Tesla Coil" and generated 100,000 volts with I arced through the cap. Yes, I know... I expected it to pop immediately, but it was NO GO! I did it three separate times for about 2 seconds and then held it on for a 4-5 second burst of voltage. Then tried a different cap. Didn't matter. I would've done it longer but didn't want to burn up the components in my Tesla Coil. Too much like work to replace them. So here's another unexpected, surprising result...at least to me anyways.

Three
I did an impact test. Placed a cap on concrete pad and from various heights I let one side of a 20lb dumbbell fall on the cap. Keepign one end on the ground and letting the other side pivot on the ground end. Tried it with several caps.Even from the highest position, it still would not set the cap off. Ended up with a bunch of flattened caps. I was able to set these off with a hammer then on the concrete, though they were very much already flattened.

Four
Tried a pressure test. I used the bench vise and squeezed the cap until it was flattened. I think if I could have put more pressure on it and maybe used different jaw style of vise, that they would have ignited, but NO GO! I also squeezed one as flat as I could with a set of Vise-Grip Lockign Pliers, but it wouldn't ignite either. Surprised again!

Five
I did a simple hammer test. I put a cap on a piece of cast iron (an old skillet) and whacked it a good shot. That cap went off immediately... Finally one that ignited as expected!

I don't know about the rest of you, but I find that the cap survived much of that "destructive testing" extremely well. Maybe these caps are tougher and less sensitive than we think? I know anyway, that at least I expected the caps to go off with just a "stern look". But if nothing else it has prompted some more testing and got me to look at the cap design a little closer.

Does anyone else notice that the priming mixture in the cap looks like a little pinch of powder between two little foil circles stuck together? Yet when a cap is on a nipple it doesn't take nearly any large amount of effort to set it off... EXCEPT when it doesn't fit the nipple (Cap doesn't go on far enough because the sides of the nipple are too angular) Then the hammer actually pushes the cap further on the nipple on the first striker and then the second or third hammer strike finally sets it off. The cap body itself has little ridges in the material. Probably to let it slide off the nipple--for easier removal? or for better grip to hold it one the nipple? Which is it...?

I remember something also. The old timers (19th century cap-n-ball revolver shooters) used to seal the caps on with wax. Was this to keep "loose fitting" caps on? OR Was it to keep the weather out? Sometimes the gun might stay loaded for a week or two at a time. Does anyone here remember or use those little flexible cap retainers? I can't recall the proper name for them. They were little short pieces of what looked like pink translucent fleible tubing. They slid over the cap so that just the head of the cap was exposed.

IF we find that it IS "loose fitting caps" OR that there is a peripheral heat, flame, or spark, setting off the adjacent caps--Could these prevent a chain fire from happening?

I think it is an excellent idea to keep the caps intstalled on the nipples and also keep the weather from seeping into the nipples, so it might be prudent to ALWAYS use these little bits of flexible tubing on the caps. Now the problem, where do we buy the tubing to cut these out ourselves? I guess we could take come wax and seal them, but I'm not too thrilled about putting hot wax on the sides of the cap.

Many things go unanswered still though...
Still we don't know why more than just the adjacent chambers fire unless there's an awful lot of falling caps AND the extra shots don't cause any damage it seems...? I will be testing something with that in mind in a couple of days.

I think it also might be best if I can use a steel framed gun for my testing, as I don't want the brass frame to be contributing to the problem. Yet, that may also affect finding a "cheap" enough gun to use for the test subject. So keep your peepers open for either brass or steel framed Colt 1851 Navy 44 as 1st choice, then a 1860 Colt Army .44 in steel or brass as 2nd choice. Thanks for your help.

Regards and Shoot Safely!
WV_Hillbilly

 

[Nightwind]

WV Hillbilly,

When I did the cap test awhile back, it was with a clean cylinder. I do know that after a round or two, there is enough "soot" on the nipples to help seal and keep the caps from slipping off the nipples. So, maybe there is something for the chainfires happening during the first shot or two of the day?

 

[mewing6003]

I remember something also. The old timers (19th century cap-n-ball revolver shooters) used to seal the caps on with wax. Was this to keep "loose fitting" caps on? OR Was it to keep the weather out? Sometimes the gun might stay loaded for a week or two at a time. Does anyone here remember or use those little flexible cap retainers? I can't recall the proper name for them. They were little short pieces of what looked like pink translucent fleible tubing. They slid over the cap so that just the head of the cap was exposed.

I think the wax was used to both keep the weather out and keep the cap on the nipple. Wouldnt do to have to use your revolver in a pinch and find out the cap(s) had fallen off! Seems likely to be a practical solution to two different problems.

I used to use those cap retainers when I got back into cap and ball shooting years ago. The only purpose they served was to keep the cap intact after firing so it would not jam up the works if I recall. A major pain to use, you cant use a capper with them, but they seemed to do the job. I dont use them anymore as it seems to me that a proper fitting cap stays on the nipple after firing. :m2c: