Priming before/after loading

[RAEDWALD]

Now please be gentle with me. I know very well that the invariable advice is that nowadays we prime after loading. I got to thinking (always dangerous) and I could not find a reason why this is so.

Now burning embers from the previous shot are often given as the reason. However, surely the modern advice is not to waste time priming but to shove your charge down the barrel straight away. So, if there are embers, you are dumping powder on them as soon as possible?

Could it be because the old practice was to prime from fair size rigid powder flasks? If you load from a paper cartridge as the first step and an ember sets off the priming (thus the charge in the paper), there is a certainty of injury of course. If the same happens with a rigid powder flask the result is that the much greater volume of powder stored in the flask will give a bigger explosion and this would be exacerbated by the shards of torn copper etc. imitating a grenade casing.

This would have give a logical reason to change practice. As a safety aid to prevent powder flask explosions. IIRC this was one reason why the Rifle Brigade moved away from flasks in the Peninsula campaign. If the main charge has been set off by embers then the priming is less likely to.

So, even if my hypothesis should be faulty, can anyone explain to this simple person why it is considered safer to load before priming?

As far as this person of little brain can see it seems safer to use a paper cartridge (or other single charge soft container) and prime first than to load first. The fact that priming first, from a paper (or other soft) cartridge is faster is not the point.

My mind is open to enlightenment on this.

I do see that a hunter might wish to have his piece loaded but not yet primed to allow for safety and convenience, especially in damp conditions. I am thinking more about on the firing line at a range.

 

[biliff]

I am thinking more about on the firing line at a range.

Dedicated muzzleloader ranges in the States generally have you charging at a loading area behind the shooting line to avoid having containers of BP on the firing line itself. The gun must then be carried to the line. Priming first would mean handling a loaded gun behind the line (and other people) which is not considered a safe condition. Same goes for trail walks, charging is done behind the shooting position but priming is not permitted until at the shooting stake so as not to have people "down range" from a loaded gun.

Beyond basic range rules, there is also less likelihood of an accidental discharge with the frizzen open, hammer fully down and no priming charge present than on a primed and halfcocked gun. Just imagine lifting your primed gun up off the ground, hooking the hammer on your leggings and having it drop onto the cock. Priming last is just a safer bet as it provides one more degree of separation from a fully loaded gun.

 

[Col. Batguano]

I am thinking more about on the firing line at a range.

Beyond basic range rules, there is also less likelihood of an accidental discharge with the frizzen open, hammer fully down and no priming charge present than on a primed and halfcocked gun. Just imagine lifting your primed gun up off the ground, hooking the hammer on your leggings and having it drop onto the cock. Priming last is just a safer bet as it provides one more degree of separation from a fully loaded gun.

This.

The reason they primed their muskets first in the days of yore was because their charges, primer and ball were all in 1 self-contained cartridge. They generally didn't carry separate priming flasks. It's easier (but primarily faster) to put a little primer in a pan first than to save a little out of a bigger main charge pour, level the rifle again to prime, then tip it up again to pour the remainder in the barrel and then stuff the paper and ball in the bore, and ram it home.

As you can imagine, with a single-shot and relatively short range weapon, against an enemy that can see where you are, speed of reloading and an ability to shoot again counts for a lot.

 

[Sean Gadhar]

Top of my head, I think Not having a primed lock at my feet (be it on the range with people walking by, or hunting with grass & brush near trigger & lock) gives me a slightly better chance while loading to....well to keep the top of my head :wink:


I know the muzzle should never be pointed at "my Head" Ok ok :surrender: keep my hand & wrist ....but it's not near so witty as top of my head

 

[ohio ramrod]

For over fifty years I ALWAYS loaded before priming. Then four years I was sighting in a @#$%^ muzzleloader for a friend and got distracted and primed it before I loaded. When I set it down to load the safety lever must have hit my pant leg and went forward. When I rammed the projectile down the "bounce" set the gun off and my ring finger went with it! So I insist NEVER prime before you load! :surrender: :surrender:

 

[Rifleman1776]

Without reading the other responses, I'll give my view on this.
First, this is an excellent question and you are to be complimented for having the common sense to ask rather than do something that has the potential for harm.
Many of us swab between every shot. This is done partly to keep a consistent barrel condition for accurate shooting. But, also to assure any remaining embers are snuffed before dropping a charge down the barrel for the next shot.
Back in the day, for military purposes, priming came before charging. This was for speed and rapid fire. Such was considered more important than the safety of the soldier.
My reccomendation is to make a practice of swabbing between every shot and prime after charging.

 

[Spikebuck]

As a safety aid to prevent powder flask explosions.

I load from a measure, so the most that could go off is the 90 or so grains of powder I'm pouring down the barrel if a hot ember would be present. Since I swab between shots at the range, that seems unlikely.

I have always been told to never load directly from a flask or horn and that seems logical to me.

Personally, I'll continue to load first from a measure, then prime when I'm done. Seems like the safest method to me.

 

[Grenadier1758]

The practice of loading the primer before loading the rest of the load has been used by military practice for speed of reloading. To be sure safety is not much of an issue when an opposing line of infantry is firing at you.

For hunting application most likely you will be charging a measure with powder to load the main charge. Then with the muzzle pointed in a safe direction, it is time to prime the pan.

At the range and shooting targets, you want consistency of loading. This will mean charging with a constant volume/ grain weight of powder. Priming first can change the remaining weight of the charge by several grains and open the group. Big groups are not a fun part of target shooting.

While I have been reenacting battle scenarios as part of historic events, I will charge the pan from my paper cartridge. Then I will load the remaining charge. These are blanks so the muzzle is generally pointing in a safe direction when I am loading and exposure of my hand to the unexpected firing is minimized.

When I use the same Long Land Pattern musket for woods walks, I will load the powder from my cartridge down the barrel, then the ball. Priming is done when it is time to fire. Even in multi round firing stations, priming is the last step of the loading process.

With a loaded round ball load, I have seen no advantage in priming before pouring the powder down the barrel. It okay for firing of blanks but not for firing a ball.

 

[hanshi]

I prime AFTER I load. :2

 

[Loyalist Dave]

So, even if my hypothesis should be faulty, can anyone explain to this simple person why it is considered safer to load before priming?

As far as this person of little brain can see it seems safer to use a paper cartridge (or other single charge soft container) and prime first than to load first. The fact that priming first, from a paper (or other soft) cartridge is faster is not the point.

Whether you prime first or not, the risk is still the same when you pour that second or subsequent shot down the barrel that an ember might still be present and hot enough to set off the fresh powder, right?

This is providing you don't swab the bore between shots when you're not a soldier. If you do wipe between shots the issue is moot.

Now, the question comes down to... what is more likely, a "cook-off" of powder when it's added to the barrel, OR...the musket or rifle going off "half-cocked" ....or the shooter under stress has accidentally pulled the lock to full cock, and a bump of the gun or rifle causes the lock to fall???

Having seen a musket "cook-off" when a cartridge was loaded, and seen it more than once, it only happens when extremely high rates of fire happen, and after several shots. Further, it happens immediately when the powder is poured, and long before the ball is rammed home.

It is much more likely that after having primed the gun or rifle, while one is ramming home the cartridge, that the musket lock will malfunction, and go off "half-cocked"... hence, except for the military who are trained for speed, it is safer to load, and then prime the lock. It is so much more common that the term "going off half-cocked" is a well known phrase.

btw... unless there is a danger of being "overrun" I think that even His Majesty's Riflemen loaded from a cartridge OR from a measure, not directly from a flask.

LD

 

[Alden]

For over fifty years I ALWAYS loaded before priming. Then four years I was sighting in a @#$%^ muzzleloader for a friend and got distracted and primed it before I loaded. When I set it down to load the safety lever must have hit my pant leg and went forward. When I rammed the projectile down the "bounce" set the gun off and my ring finger went with it! So I insist NEVER prime before you load! :surrender: :surrender:

Pictures or it didn't happen...

LOL

Thanks for sharing that Sir!

 

[RAEDWALD]

btw... unless there is a danger of being "overrun" I think that even His Majesty's Riflemen loaded from a cartridge OR from a measure, not directly from a flask.

on 26th June 1826, in a letter from the Commander-in-Chief, responding to post Napoleonic Rifle Brigade officers asking for flasks to be reissued, the reply was that 'it has appeared from the oldest practical soldiers in the Rifle Brigade that the copper flasks were discontinued on service in the peninsula in consequence of the Accidents, and the Personal injuries thereby sustained, from their constant liability to blow up in Action'.

He did grant that the current issue of paper carbine cartridges at 24 ball to the pound were too slack to be the sole rifle issue and henceforth they were to be at 20 balls to the pound. 110 grains of RA (rifle arms)powder and a .600" ball in the issue paper cartridge.

So the fear of using copper flasks on service was founded on experience. It is touching that they actually asked those who used them for comments.

 

[nhmoose]

Remember back 2-3 hundred years ago, so a solider blows up, eats a large lead ball when loading, What's the big deal??

Feel that way now inform all you know and care for them NOT to sue anyone because you chose to be a moron by priming before loading your TOY.