Flintolock pistol rises, never hit the target :-(

[RMFnLA]

Not so. Rise begins as soon as ignition happens. With rifles the effect is almost unnoticeable because of barrel length and weight. With pistols it is a real factor. Target pistols often have a tall front sight just to compensate for this effect.

If that was the case there would be no such thing as shot groups because there’s no way that movement would be consistent.

 

[French Colonial]

If that was the case there would be no such thing as shot groups because there’s no way that movement would be consistent.

I do not mean to upset you or make you mad but you need to either take a physics 101 class or read a couple books.

Again, do not take that negatively but you should listen to some of us who have a little more experience with physics.

 

[azmntman]

If that was the case there would be no such thing as shot groups because there’s no way that movement would be consistent.

Same load would provide duplicate conditions as much as possible. If it matters that much try weighing the powder and ball and even the dab of lube on the same size patch. Won't get any better duplication till the Lord comes back. I would think this particular pistol doesn't warrant that much shooting prep but to each his own. I would shoot this one just for fun (that's why I don't have one, I too am into accuracy 1st).

BTW I am not any kind of physics guy but my older brother graduated first in his PHD class in physics so the genes are there (but my girl was better looking so I couldn't give the same attention to lessor matters like physics that he did).

 

[Doug Fay]

Wow! I love this discussion. I am an old physics nerd, and I agree the recoil happens as soon as the ball starts to accelerate while still in the barrel - like if you throw a ball while on rollerskates, you start to move back as soon as your arm starts to move forward, not when the ball leaves your hand.

My pistol balls are .595 caliber and therefore pretty heavy, and the barrel is 12" long, which means there is a heavier force pushing back on the pistol for a longer period of time than if the balls were lighter and the barrel shorter.

I was thinking that maybe using a larger powder load (I was using 30 grains) might reduce the muzzle rise by getting the ball out of the barrel in less time, but I suspect the increased force would offset that, and therefore not reduce the muzzle rise.

What amazed me is that PathfinderNC's video () show him hitting a target much farther away.

I'll be going to shoot again in a couple of days, and I'll try to figure out what's going on and will report back.

 

[Dcrockett]

Wow! I love this discussion. I am an old physics nerd, and I agree the recoil happens as soon as the ball starts to accelerate while still in the barrel - like if you throw a ball while on rollerskates, you start to move back as soon as your arm starts to move forward, not when the ball leaves your hand.

My pistol balls are .595 caliber and therefore pretty heavy, and the barrel is 12" long, which means there is a heavier force pushing back on the pistol for a longer period of time than if the balls were lighter and the barrel shorter.

I was thinking that maybe using a larger powder load (I was using 30 grains) might reduce the muzzle rise by getting the ball out of the barrel in less time, but I suspect the increased force would offset that, and therefore not reduce the muzzle rise.

What amazed me is that PathfinderNC's video () show him hitting a target much farther away.

I'll be going to shoot again in a couple of days, and I'll try to figure out what's going on and will report back.

I was having this same problem and was convinced that the recoil was causing the barrel to rise before the bullet had left. I talked to two former NMLRA pistol champions and they both told me that it was me that was moving the gun. Didn’t want to believe them but I did a video of my shots and sure enough, as I pulled the trigger I was pushing on the grip with the meat of my palm and pulling with the three fingers around the front of the grip! Once I focused on this I started to shoot more consistent shots with a lot of tens. I would encourage you to accept the fact that it is not the gun and most likely your hand while you are pulling the trigger. Good luck.

 

[Doug Fay]

Thank you! I can believe that might be the problem. I will work on doing what you suggest next time I shoot. I've been practicing trying not to pull up on the gun when pulling the trigger (while not actually shooting), but I suspect you're right!

 

[French Colonial]

Try dry firing and see what the sights do when the hammer falls, if you can keep the sights from moving when the hammer falls you are on your way, this works with modern guns as well. This will show if you are pulling the gun either with your grip or with to much or to little finger on the trigger.

On my 1851 navy I put 1/2 of a foam earplug under the hammer to keep from battering the nipples and will play with it several nights in a row before a serious shooting day.

With a flintlock use a wooden flint and do the same.

 

[Doug Fay]

Good idea! Thank you

 

[deerstalkert]

and the advice to get as big a target as possible is sound also. if you can't see where your hits are you are shooting blind.

 

[Doug Fay]

Yes, definitely will try to do that.

 

[RMFnLA]

I do not mean to upset you or make you mad but you need to either take a physics 101 class or read a couple books.

Again, do not take that negatively but you should listen to some of us who have a little more experience with physics.

Here’s a thought.

Rather than be condescending, why not post a link to something definitive that illustrates your point?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tItuD6zVKcM

After seeing this I learned that there are two stages of recoil, so I stand corrected.

Thanks!

 

[French Colonial]

Here’s a thought.

Rather than be condescending, why not post a link to something definitive that illustrates your point?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tItuD6zVKcM

After seeing this I learned that there are two stages of recoil, so I stand corrected.

Thanks!

Again, did not mean to offend, but look at the knowledge you gained by following my advice.

 

[RMFnLA]

Again, did not mean to offend, but look at the knowledge you gained by following my advice.

Why do you think I’d be offended?

 

[Rifleman1776]

I am an old physics nerd, and I agree the recoil happens as soon as the ball starts to accelerate while still in the barrel

Amen, Bro.

 

[cebusey]

I took my Royal Navy Sea Service pistol shooting yesterday for the first time and never hit the target at 7 yards. It's .62 caliber, 12" barrel, and I used 30 grains of 1fg or 2fg on various shots. Most of the shots were with a lubed-patched round ball. I probably did 8 shots total. Had I been in a fierce battle with pirates of the Spanish Main, I would surely have been killed.

My guess is that by the time the bullet left the barrel, the recoil had already caused the barrel to rise, thus shooting very high. The smoke prevented me from seeing where the bullets actually went. I think I did get one bullet in the wood about 18" above the target, because there was a large hole in it.

A picture of the pistol is attached - as you can see, the grip is not terribly far below the barrel.

Does anybody have any ideas or advice?

I have an East India Company Sea Service pistol circa 1790 - to 1820 date range. I took it out and ran it through it's paces and found that with light charges the shots were all over the place. I increased the charges from 30 grains to 43 and it changed the performance drastically. I was using a patched 66 caliber ball. I was able at 20 yards to keep 8 out of ten shots with in a 9 inch aluminum pie plate. The pistol did shoot very high. If you imagine the pie plate as the center of a mans chest - I would be aiming at his left knee cap. I hope to take it out again and try it with buck and ball.

 

[RMFnLA]

Wow! I love this discussion. I am an old physics nerd, and I agree the recoil happens as soon as the ball starts to accelerate while still in the barrel - like if you throw a ball while on rollerskates, you start to move back as soon as your arm starts to move forward, not when the ball leaves your hand.

Good analogy, but there is also the friction of the bullet on the barrel to consider, otherwise locked-breech semi-autos wouldn’t function.

I see from the video I found and posted that there are actually two stages of recoil, guess I never thought about it in that much depth.

 

[Bad Karma]

Good analogy, but there is also the friction of the bullet on the barrel to consider, otherwise locked-breech semi-autos wouldn’t function.

I see from the video I found and posted that there are actually two stages of recoil, guess I never thought about it in that much depth.

You can test it yourself with two different bullet weights from a single pistol. The heavier, slower bullets will print higher due to longer barrel dwell time during recoil.

 

[Codger Craig Wilcox]

The cock on our old fashioned pistols also has mass. And as it goes forward (clock-wise if you're on the right), it can cause a counter-clockwise torque effect, adding to the firing recoil.

 

[RMFnLA]

You can test it yourself with two different bullet weights from a single pistol. The heavier, slower bullets will print higher due to longer barrel dwell time during recoil.

This also matters.

I have virtually no experience with shooting MLs, and those slow, heavy bullets make a difference.

 

[Bad Karma]

This also matters.

I have virtually no experience with shooting MLs, and those slow, heavy bullets make a difference.

They do. If you have a revolver sighted to shoot one bullet of, say 200 grains, around 1200 fps, and then load another, maybe 275 grains at 950, the difference is startling. And it’s an excellent excuse to load and shoot…