AmericanLongRifles Forums
General discussion => Gun Building => Topic started by: Mark Elliott on November 15, 2012, 04:39:05 AM
-
This wasn't my idea. I was asked about assembling flintlocks from stainless steel castings (17-4PH). Has anybody done this before? Does this work? My concern is a stainless frizzen. I know you can make the rest out of stainless, except for maybe the spring. Does anybody know anything about this?
Thanks
Mark
-
couldn't you just face the frizzen - the rest could be stanless
-
I guess I could face the frizzen, but that really wasn't my question. Can a stainless steel frizzen function? If you face it with plain carbon tool steel, then it isn't a stainless steel frizzen any more from a functional point of view. Heat treating frizzens can be tricky business. I know how to heat treat plain carbon tool steel or a case hardened mild steel or wrought frizzen. I don't have a clue how to heat treat a stainless steel one to spark or if it is even possible. I am thinking that this is a Jim Kibler question.
-
I try to ignore dumb ideas. Might be a good route to take.
-
I actually laughed out loud at that one, Jim!
-
Jim, I was trying not to be judgmental. After all, I don't know everything. :D
-
Stainless chips don't burn so well as do plain carbon steel.
In my opinion, you would be exceedingly unhappy with a 17-4PH stainless frizzen. Rockwell C40 to C48 is about what you can expect with condition H900, which is as hard as you can get 17-4PH
I got this from a data sheet which I wrote for this grade a few years ago.
I don't believe 17-4PH is actually used for non-sparking tools, as is some bronze grade or other, but it just won't spark worth a @!*%.
-
Thanks JC.
That is what I thought, but I needed the opinion of someone more knowledgeable than myself.
-
I'm for being judgemental. Avoid stainless steel flintlocks. Who would want one, but a lazy fairy from Shakraland (wherever that is).
-
Just for starters, stainless steel is just what the name implies stainLESS, not stain proof. It oxidizes just like carbon steel only at a slower rate. A friend of mine bought an engraved Tryon Trailblazer in stainless, years ago. This would be a very rare replica today. But he found, after owning it a while, that he didn't like the stainless. he asked me what he could do to make it more acceptable at Rendezvous. I told him I didn't have a clue. A few days later he showed up at my home with it. it had the smoothest red/brown finish I had ever seen. I asked him what he'd done. He said he had used a very popular browning solution on it, and it browned up like a champ.
I think you are going to get more problems than solutions from such a project.
Hungry Horse
-
I read somewhere that the spark is the carbon burning and not the iron in the steel. Carbon enables the iron to be hardened. The flint causes friction heat as it tears through the iron/carbon alloy. The heat ignites the carbon particles. The carbon content may be very small by weight but it is a sizeable percentage by volume. Anyway, that's what I read.
-
With respect, get thee some #0000 steel wool and light a match to it. Blow on it gently & make a nice hot "coal"
It is the steel, sir, that is burning.
Some amount of carbon is necessary to harden the steel so the flint scrapes off a hot curly (frizzy, you might even say) which catches fire & burns.
A stainless steel flintlock would, I believe, be a very, very safe weapon.
-
Ok guys. I know I have some hair brained ideas, but this wasn't mine. I swear, even though you are not supposed to. Someone asked me to assemble a bunch of locks from stainless steel castings. I told him that I didn't know how to make a stainless steel flintlock and wasn't sure it would even work. So, in order to rectify my ignorance on the subject, I bravely asked here for a more informed opinion. I agree that it was a solution in search of a problem.
I believe that Thompson Center does make an all stainless steel flintlock, but it appears to me to have a carbon steel frizzen. The frizzen is brown and the rest is a brushed stainless. Oh, and it also has a plastic stock. ;D
I am so backward, I still make my lock parts from wrought iron. I learned that lesson when I tried forging O-1. There is no reason to invent some new way to implement 300 year old technology.
Mark
-
If one absolutely wanted to, the striking face of a 420 frizzen can be carburized to increase the amount of spark but it's going to wear rather quickly and it's got to be done right to avoid creating a brittle transition zone or over saturation. It would be far more cost effective and eliminate color differences to send a production lock to a job shop that does micro-PTA or CST work, whole thing can be done including the springs leaving just the striking area as-is.
Mark
-
Who would want one, but a lazy fairy from Shakraland (wherever that is).
Previously known as California! ;D
John
-
J C Kelly, nice hot 'coal'? Coal=carbon? Steel wool=iron+carbon? Could it still be the carbon in the steel filaments that is burning?
Just mho.
-
The steel burns. Well, it oxidized really, really fast. Oxidation of steel gives off heat. Fast oxidation of steel gives off more heat. Rusting steel gives off heat, too. It's just harder to get warm by.
-
A stainless steel lock would be cool, but where would you find a black polymer stock to go with it????
-
I have had a request or two in years past for stainless steel lock plates
for caplocks but never heard of it for a flinter.
Now to the heart of this post. As some of you know,last Spring I had
some urinary tract/bladder problems that played hob with shop work
and recently,both myself and my wife had some sort of "viral respiratory
infection"that was like a cold on steroids and even with Doxycyclene was
hard to shake. I am behind on shop work and have lock orders and will work
as hard as possible and consistent with my idea about quality control to
get this work done,get paid and ship the locks.I am doing my best so rest
assured I haven't forgotten anyone.
Bob Roller
-
A stainless steel lock would be cool, but where would you find a black polymer stock to go with it????
As Mark Elliot mentioned that would be Thompson Center ::)
http://www.tcarms.com/firearms/firearmDetails.php?ID=5049 (http://www.tcarms.com/firearms/firearmDetails.php?ID=5049)
-
Even alloy steels with chrome & molybdenum spark very poorly. 4140 for example. It will through harden but makes a dismal frizzen.
If you have a cheap 440 stainless knife try running it on a grinder and look at the "sparks".
Then try even unhardened high carbon steel like 1070-1095.
It will be evident why SS frizzens are not going to work.
Stainless, in general, has proven to be a poor material for firearms anyway and I sold off anything I owned with a SS barrel a couple of years ago.
416 and its modifications, is essentially the 12L14 of the stainless world, oversimplification perhaps but 416 barrels DO fail for no reason in applications with pressure levels similar to PRB rifles. It is a "free machining" material.
Dan
-
Jim, I was trying not to be judgmental. After all, I don't know everything. :D
One of the most glaring flaws of this place is people being afraid to be judgemental OR being hammered for being so in print. The "don't be judgemental" thing stems from people wanting to do anything they want no matter how immoral or disgusting and then have other people who know better still accept them in society because to do otherwise would be "judgemental". Its a form of name calling used to brow beat people into accepting immorality and now its creeping into gun building. It is possible to be PC to the point of stupidity.
Stainless steel FLs is a dumb idea. BP is not that corrosive, fouling buildup reduces reliability so it needs to be wiped or washed off anyway. Its not as though you can leave it with fouling buildup or use it without some lubrication.
Just because something is new and modern is not sign it will work in a given application or is even SAFE.
EVERYONE makes judgements everyday. We mentally judge the people we meet and deal with everyday. If we don't we are setting ourselves up for trouble.
Dan
-
The 17-4PH (S17400) alloy is the wrong material, at least for the frizzen with its very low 0.03% C content. 420 (S42000) with 0.15% C will take additional C sufficient to produce acceptable ignition in a FL if all is done correctly not only for ending content but also producing the required dilution. Yes, it "can" be done but it makes no sense when one can simply run a standard production lock through a micro-PTA or CST process for a whole lot less time and cost.
The OP's question asked about a particular alloy, not discussion of historical relevance or personal opinion which are completely irrelevant to the OP's question but since such seems to be the primary concerns ... has anyone considered the possibility that the reason for choosing a low-corroding alloy may be because the guns will be used primarily for display/demonstration where they could not be afforded proper care & maintenance or perhaps on a ship or beach-front location with a highly corrosive atmosphere? Besides, how many people could tell the alloy composition of equally polished specimens just by looking?
Mark
-
How about a knotty pine stock with copper trim?
Bob Roller
-
Hammer, steel burns.
It is the steel burning that makes a nice glowing hot whatever.
#0000 steel wool, for the Politically Incorrect, makes nice tinder.
Or, just snap your flintlock over a piece of paper. Assuming you don't burn up the paper you will see little curly chips. Of steel. Eyes like mine may require magnification.
The work "frizzen" I understand came from the word "frizzle", which was the steel one used for making fire in general. It was a frizzle because the steel chips (that burn) are like frizzy hair.
Bob R, I really like your idea. With a good grade of pine one needn't even paint the stock.
-
Hammer, steel burns.
It is the steel burning that makes a nice glowing hot whatever.
#0000 steel wool, for the Politically Incorrect, makes nice tinder.
Or, just snap your flintlock over a piece of paper. Assuming you don't burn up the paper you will see little curly chips. Of steel. Eyes like mine may require magnification.
The work "frizzen" I understand came from the word "frizzle", which was the steel one used for making fire in general. It was a frizzle because the steel chips (that burn) are like frizzy hair.
Bob R, I really like your idea. With a good grade of pine one needn't even paint the stock.
In ambient atmosphere (approx 21% O2) steel does not "burn", if it did it could not be cast, forged, welded, ect. Thus is why one is left with a pile of itty bitty pieces of magnetic iron dust when grinding Fe-base alloys. The "frizzle" (properly termed "forks") is the carbon molecules oxidizing which is why the higher the carbon content, the more forks one will see coming off a grinding wheel which is the same results obtained when striking a frizzen with a flint, it's just a one-time shot instead of continuous as would be seen with a grinding wheel. The balance of iron and other alloying elements in relation to the carbon content is what will determine the length of the straw before the forks appear as well as the amount and display properties of the forks themselves. The little curls of steel shaved off by the flint are red-hot, partly from the friction heat and partly from the carbon molecules that have been released by the mechanical cutting action and ignited by the friction heat. In the case of steel wool, it's high carbon content and small cross section easily allows the carbon to be liberated and consumed, reducing a wad of steel wool in ambient atmosphere will leave all but the carbon behind - burn a piece then run a magnet over what remains.
Ambient atmosphere reduction should not be confused with the rapid exothermic chemical chain reaction reduction seen when nearly pure oxygen is introduced to preheated steel in oxy-fuel cutting. The preheat flame brings the temperature up to the point at which the carbon bonds will begin to break-down, when the pure (or nearly so) oxygen is introduced it produces the exothermic rapid oxidation process which will immediately cease when the oxygen levels drop below the necessary minimum to sustain the chemical chain reaction. Different iron-base alloys react differently to oxy-fuel cutting irrespective of the carbon content where very low and very high carbon alloys require different techniques. Cast iron alloys with >2% carbon will not readily oxidize as is seen with common steel alloys because the iron melts at a far lower temperature than the oxides so despite the plentiful carbon content, the iron melts away leaving the oxides to act as an inhibitor. In very high carbon content steels the carbon in the kerf area is easily consumed but inhibition of the cut results from alloy matrix changes as a result of flame hardening adjacent to the kerf. In the case of so-called "stainless" Fe-base alloys inhibition of the oxy-fuel cut is a result of the non/lesser oxidizing alloying elements which again can be easily overcome with common oxy-fuel equipment by simply utilizing the proper techniques.
Going back to the issue of flintlock ignition, there are a multitude of metal alloys that given the proper geometry and striking velocity the flint will produce shavings plenty hot enough to ignite the pan powder although said shavings will not show their thermal content as visible light. Example is certain alloys like aluminum where there is no visible indication of the thermal energy given off as light but you'll certainly feel it as it burns a hole in your hide. Point being, just because you can't "see" the heat, that does not mean it isn't there.
Mark
-
Stainless, in general, has proven to be a poor material for firearms anyway and I sold off anything I owned with a SS barrel a couple of years ago.
416 and its modifications, is essentially the 12L14 of the stainless world, oversimplification perhaps but 416 barrels DO fail for no reason in applications with pressure levels similar to PRB rifles. It is a "free machining" material.
Dan
Since the thread has thus drifted so far off-topic anyway ...
Nothing fails "for no reason", if such were the case the world would just crumble and we wouldn't be here. There's a reason for every failure and in the case of alloys subjected to shock loading, be they carbon or stainless, the two most common causes are:
1. Poor distribution of the alloying elements.
2. Improper heat-treatment prior to being put in service.
Somewhat of an oversimplification but if one were to mix concrete grout and merely pour it over the aggregate, the resultant product will readily fail however, if the aggregate is thoroughly and evenly distributed throughout the grout mixture the resultant product will be very durable. Same principle applies to metal alloys, if the elements are not thoroughly and evenly distributed throughout the mixture, it will fail.
Every machining/forming process introduces heat and/or stress into the base metal, failure to properly normalize the material following machining/forming operations will result in failure.
Doesn't matter what the failure is, there is always a cause for it and in this, as with many others, the particular alloy is not the problem, the processing of the alloy is the problem.
-
i'll buy that.
wrt stainless taking a stain...a while back in another pursuit i had mixed some cast parts which come in steel and stainless steel. how to unmix? yes a magnet identified some parts with very low ferric content, but not all, not even half.
so i thinks...hey this cold blue should bounce right offa the stainless (impart no color), or at least color much less. Wrong. It colored up nicely.
So i'm back to the salt-n-see method of ss/steel (small) parts differentiation.
OTOH in the junkyard sometimes i differentiate SS from Aluminum by touching the metal. I didn't even realize how this worked until i thought about it...it's the thermal transfer/conductivity that triggers my response...which is similar to using touch to distinguish seasoned vs. unseasoned wood. i digressed didn't i? Well anyway, dryer wood feels warmer to the touch because the moisture isn't there that conducts heat away from your fingers...
And a carbon-fibre stock could be laid up at home...tubular titanium ramrod. have to add weight back to balance the ugly bastard and keep it from kicking like a mule with a fly on his flank.
-
Some of these posts amaze me.
Hey, I like that titanium ramrod. Titanium does burn like $#*!! Just ask someone who machines Ti what happens when a barrel of chips catches fire.
It happens that iron oxide melts at a lower temperature than does iron itself. I first learnt this by watching molten scale drip off a white-hot ingot as it was removed from the soaking pit for forging.
In recent years I had occasion to quantify this. Mild steel melts around 2600 - 2800F, and (blue, magnetic Fe3O4 scale) iron oxide melts about 2500F.
How to tell whether scrap is stainless or plain old steel? Steel is magnetic. There are different kinds of stainless. Some are magnetic like steel, some are not, and some of which I will not speak are half-and-half.
The stuff Wife's pots & pans are made of is not magnetic. Well, maybe just a touch where it has been formed or bent. "Good" stainless utensils are sometimes marked on the back "18-8" or "18-10", i.e., 18% chromium 8 or 10% nickel. These are non-magnetic stainless, 304 being the common example.
Your local Coney Dog uses magnetic stainless knives & forks, as they are less expensive. Nickel metal is pricey these days. The better are sometimes marked 18CR, implying 18% chromium, no nickel. The stainless grades made with no nickel are magnetic, much like plain old rusty steel. Wife's good stainless carving knife & your Benchmade or Victorinox knife are magnetic stainless, no nickel (to speak of).
17-4PH stainless, which would make such a lousey flintlock, is magnetic.
Nice to know someone can tell aluminum from stainless by touch. Yup, the aluminum would feel colder, just like WadePatton says.
The day I learned to make my first forge weld in wrought iron, I also burnt my first iron, shortly thereafter.
-
Oh, yeah - the blue oxide of iron, Fe3O4, is itself magnetic, just like the metal iron.
Google "lodestone"
-
Stainless, in general, has proven to be a poor material for firearms anyway and I sold off anything I owned with a SS barrel a couple of years ago.
416 and its modifications, is essentially the 12L14 of the stainless world, oversimplification perhaps but 416 barrels DO fail for no reason in applications with pressure levels similar to PRB rifles. It is a "free machining" material.
Dan
Since the thread has thus drifted so far off-topic anyway ...
Nothing fails "for no reason", if such were the case the world would just crumble and we wouldn't be here. There's a reason for every failure and in the case of alloys subjected to shock loading, be they carbon or stainless, the two most common causes are:
1. Poor distribution of the alloying elements.
2. Improper heat-treatment prior to being put in service.
Somewhat of an oversimplification but if one were to mix concrete grout and merely pour it over the aggregate, the resultant product will readily fail however, if the aggregate is thoroughly and evenly distributed throughout the grout mixture the resultant product will be very durable. Same principle applies to metal alloys, if the elements are not thoroughly and evenly distributed throughout the mixture, it will fail.
Every machining/forming process introduces heat and/or stress into the base metal, failure to properly normalize the material following machining/forming operations will result in failure.
Doesn't matter what the failure is, there is always a cause for it and in this, as with many others, the particular alloy is not the problem, the processing of the alloy is the problem.
Yeah, poor choice of words. What I meant there was was nothing obvious. No handloads, no plugged bore, nothing. New rifle shot with factory ammo blows up after about 10 rounds. Yes, there was a reason. The material the barrel was made from. Sako had a recall due to many failures and some injuries. I have seen a video on one Remington blowing. All pictures I have seen have been brittle type splits.
Krieger states that their SS barrels should not be used at temps under 0 degrees f. Nor should they be reduced in profiled due to poor fatigue resistance. They do not put this limitation on the 4150 barrels.
416R has about 4 times the sulfur of 4140-4150 used for most "alloy steel" barrels. This is not good idea from my reading.
These reasons are why I don't own any SS barrels.
Dan
-
It happens that iron oxide melts at a lower temperature than does iron itself. I first learnt this by watching molten scale drip off a white-hot ingot as it was removed from the soaking pit for forging.
In recent years I had occasion to quantify this. Mild steel melts around 2600 - 2800F, and (blue, magnetic Fe3O4 scale) iron oxide melts about 2500F.
True but that does not change the fact that the oxides formed when attempting to oxy-fuel cut cast iron are exactly the opposite which is why cast iron will not cut easily like mild steel. It also doesn't change the fact that the iron is not consumed in ambient atmosphere because there isn't enough oxygen to support the necessary chemical chain reaction. Iron melts at roughly 2800F and boils at 5200F yet it only melts when exposed to a welding arc at 10,000-14,000F, it still only melts when subjected to considerably hotter plasma arc. Yes, a certain amount of oxides are formed but lacking a nearly pure oxygen environment the chemical chain reaction required to produce the rapid exothermic oxidation of the iron cannot be sustained. Thus in common atmosphere when a flint hits a frizzen or the frizzen is put to a grinding wheel or flame put to steel wool, the carbon is being consumed producing the forks but the iron is not consumed.
Mark
-
Yeah, poor choice of words. What I meant there was was nothing obvious. No handloads, no plugged bore, nothing.
Dan
Clarification noted. There's a lot of confusion between 416 which contains P and Crucible 416R which does not. Crucible claims the ductile to brittle transition temperature of 416R is sufficient for use in gun barrels to -40F. I haven't followed it so I don't know if Sako used genuine Crucible 416R or not but nonetheless, the biggest issue with most stainless alloys is poor homogenization as has presented itself in a number of SS gun failures. Second most common is proper heat-treatment post-machining, S&W and Colt are quite popular among the blown-gun pic's but Ruger is absent from that hall of shame yet they use the same alloy designation in similar handguns.
Mark