Short Starter

[Flinter987]

Hello,
I was wondering if they had short starters in the early 1800's, and what they would be made of? :hmm:
Thanks a lot,
Fred

 

OH BOY!!

You've done it now! Last time anyone asked this it went on for about 10 pages!

You really should move the querry to the accessory section for the best results.

For a real laugh you could move it to the Historical Documentation section and watch the bookworms self distruct!

The only way you could have more excitement on the computer would be going to a Mustang forum and griping about the lemon you had in '66!!!

:rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf: :rotf:

 

[doverdog]

I agree with that! There are those out there who would rather chew a ball of tinfoil than use a short starter, and YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE! :blah: Personally, I find it hard to believe that of the 10's of thousands of people who owned ML's back then, there wasn't one intelligent chap who thought to himself "There must be a better way to start this darn tight ball and patch." and came up with a short starter. They may not have been in widespread use, but I'm sure there were a few around. Therefore, I take it upon myself to deem them Period Correct, and use one every time I load. If others prefer not to, that is their choice, just don't tell me I can't.

 

You see most folks staying away from this topic, because I don't think anyone knows [for sure] the answer. Because there is "no" documentation for them in the early days, most reenactors stay away from them--of course absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Most shooters, on the other hand use them, including me. It is otherwise too hard to load our modern tight-fitting patch/ball combos [unless you desecrate the muzzle of your rifle with 'coning']. In most reenactments you don't shoot ball rounds, so the point is moot--you don't have to have one. But on the range line or hunting I need one! Mine are either made from short sections cut off ramrods with antler or wood 'heads' or are commercially made (including a hunting one for my .32 that has an aluminum shaft --NOT PC!).

 

[Flinter987]

I'm sorry,I should have checked the search.
It IS a hot topic. If you haven't seen it yet, you can find it in the search. The topic is called
"Ball starters" and it was posted 3/14/06
Thanks,Fred

 

[Stumpkiller]

There are those out there who would rather chew a ball of tinfoil than use a short starter, and YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE! :blah:

"Grommer [crinkle] crammer cronkle [spark, crinkle] fraggin shirt snotters"

Wood. Occasionally I use a stubby 1" one to push a ball out of a ball-block for an easy start. If I'm aching to kill time and not much else. :haha:

 

[Old Ironsights]

My barrel is crowned. I don need a Short Starter. :blah:

 

[davy]

Well now I guess it depends on how you define "short starter" dont it?

The way I understand it there have allus been folks using all manner of things to get a ball started, hammers, rocks, knives etc.. into the bores of their guns, from the beginning. So are not a mallet or knive blade both forms of "very" short starter? The newer starters just go a little deeper .. thats all! :thumbsup:

Davy

 

[Stumpkiller]

Yep. I've seen guys grab the far end of a rammer with just three inches in the bore and push. They're the ones who later come back with a scar and a carbide tipped titanium range rod and tell me my hickory is poopie stuff. :shake:

Anything can be misused. I've got a "medium crown" (no coning) on my Rice and I can thumb start 0.530" balls with 0.018" tick. The 0.022" tick needs a bit more "oomph", and a knife edge or pommel, or a choked up rod, are necessary. When I get REAL lazy I shoot with 0.015" or 0.010" patches. The latter I can set with a two-stage push right through the block. :grin:

 

[davy]

Well I use a starter, but ... I agree when I do use a wood ramrod I choke up on it close to the bore ... I do not want any scars to remind me of my foolish ways! :hmm: :thumbsup:

Davy

 

[tg]

", I take it upon myself to deem them Period Correct, and use one every time I load. If others prefer not to, that is their choice, just don't tell me I can't.'

You may use what you wish, you may stretch preference/speculation into historical fact, but the latter does no justice for those newcommers who are trying to follow the path of what we KNOW of history, and don't be surprised if called out on such statements, as well it should be in the interest of reality in a research based hobby.

 

I have two of them, one is right-handed and the other is left-handed, and they are called THUMBS. I think they qualify as PC, or HC. :rotf: :rotf: :rotf:
On a more serious note, if there is no real documentation, be it as little as a dated period sketch, or journal entry, the use of an implement in a particular time period is speculation only, and it is a disservice to newbies and the public to present such as fact Bill

 

[Bob Gular]

On page 160 of George Neumann's Illustrated Encyclopedia of the American Revolution two wooden short starters are shown, so at least two guys used them in the 18th century. Bob Gular

 

[scott k]

This maybe a dumb question, If short starts were not used way back just when did they come into use? How modern are they.
btw I don't have any barrels with a cone And I doen't reanact so I use one.
Lehigh...

 

[tg]

I have not seen any dated info on when they were first recorded, the ones in Neumans book are of questionable provinace as to time of origin I believe.