AmericanLongRifles Forums
General discussion => Gun Building => Topic started by: Captchee on November 21, 2010, 07:38:59 PM
-
In the under hammer topic the subject was raised about early inline ignition flintlocks .
I have built (1) of these many years ago . So I thought I would make a new thread concerning that system so as not to disrupt the under hammer thread .
so im posting this so as to help out another poster in the underhammer thread
Let me start by saying that there are many different opinions on what qualifies as a inline ignition. Some folks accept items like box locks like the Nock pistols . Others do not .
When I built the rifle I used an early design that imo was a true inline ignition .
IE the complete ignition was to be inline with the barrel not stricking down as with box locks .
Back ground on this was that I became intrigued by a photo of a Spanish SXS flintlock with a plunger system, that was profiled in one of Pope’s writings and dated 1710 .
No schematics were provided on that piece only a photo
After some digging I was able to come up with some basic drawing which I used to make the lock . While I thought then this system was a novelty . I wanted to see for myself as to just how reliable , functional not to mention practical the system would have been
Now to most us the issues with this system should be obvious . To others it may not . So ill p post the issues I found
1) reliability is extremely poo
2) as can be seen in the drawings .. Upon firing the sights become completely un usable as the frizzen completely blocks them .
3) the flint is extremely hard to maintain . Within a few shots it requires adjustment
Knapping the flint was impossible without taking it out of the rifle .
4) as you can see by the drawings . The ignition flash comes right back at the shooters face . Now much of this blast is blocked . However it is rather unnerving and isn’t pleasant to shoot .
The majority of the flash goes into the lock itself . With very little shooting the fouling would build up and the gun needed disassembly and cleaning .
Over all a very ,VERY poor application for a flintlock ignition .
That being said I do believe it to be a design that was far ahead of its time . One that would become much more reliable with the advent of the percussion cap and cartridge evolution
Ill however throw these photos which I still have on hand for those interested .
SXS metioned in Popes writings
(https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi6.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy242%2Fcaptchee%2FSXS%2FImage1.jpg&hash=0bee264ce0a4f1c0bbd5c9bac9104df6893ae4e0)
(https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi6.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy242%2Fcaptchee%2Fdocumentation%2Finlineflint.jpg&hash=d5432bb187a11c327fdc95581d4c81f2b452cf56)
(https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi6.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy242%2Fcaptchee%2Fdocumentation%2FPercinline.jpg&hash=d422e190586fc29f9b0f04e0ddc4b3e400d658aa)
(https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi6.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy242%2Fcaptchee%2Fdocumentation%2Fhallgun.gif&hash=f1e2d60d0705f0881000173cc40ce0a97b0f7990)
(https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi6.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy242%2Fcaptchee%2Fdocumentation%2Fhall1811.jpg&hash=4469701b5dff2ec5f8f2df6c003d8f504a694d76)
-
Captchee, Thanks for the photos. Back about 73 or so, I picked up a Hall for a little bit of nothing. Until your photos, I never associated it with an "inline" at all. You have shown us some beautiful and interesting firearms. Thanks! Cheers, Bookie
-
So much for keeping your eye on the sights for following thru on the shot!
Tom
-
Yes great photo's and thanks for showing them.
The design that I had in mind would not have a flip up frizen as those pictured. The frizen wound be under the flint with the flint pointed slightly downward and hopefully pushing the sparks toward the touchole. I would have a flip up lid to prime the gun but this would be locked in place before firing. There would also be a vent to the side to allow the gasses to excape. The biggest problem I see with type of system would be fowling getting into the works. The firing mechanism would have to be removable to allow for a good cleaning. Flint asjustment could be made automatic by a spring pressure system that would advance the flint forward as it wore down similar to the flint in a cig. lighter.
-
So much for keeping your eye on the sights for following thru on the shot!
Tom
thats an understatment tom LOL
-
It always struck me how with all the workmanship, skilled artist, and inventing going on for so much of the 18th Century and first half of the 19th Century, why did it take so long to come up with metallic cartridges..They "re-invented the wheel" in so many ways, it seems would have been easy to make the leap as far as the skills needed. I guess it would have taken somebody to think way outside the box it that era. I guess it's alot easier to see something from the standpoint of history and not so easy if you were actually from that period.
-
Cartridge evolution goes way back to. the problem is that it was expensive.
There is a number of documented flint lock cartridges
-
Does Toby Bridges know about these? :D
-
Does Toby Bridges know about these? :D
LMAO Kermit . now ill need electric shock theropy just to get the spots out from infront of my eyes
Ok I messed up . I got the basic info on the SXS all screwed up . Its not in one of Popes writings it was in one of Lindsay’s writings published back in 1967
Here is what the photo says:
(https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi6.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy242%2Fcaptchee%2FSXS%2FImage1.jpg&hash=0bee264ce0a4f1c0bbd5c9bac9104df6893ae4e0)
Double barreled flintlock shotgun .
Tortoise shell veneered stock with silver inlay .
Bolt action enclosed locks .
Made in Regensburg or Prague C,1715-21
Possibly by Paczelt .
Loa 54 ˝ “,bbls 31 ˝, 22 gauge
No 13/589, Bayerisches National museum , Muniich
-
Captchee -
Another important addition to the body of work you have produced in reproducing early shotguns. I have watched in admiration as you built an impressive number of flint and percussion doubles, mostly from scratch, all tracing the history of shotgun mechanics. This is a fitting addition to all that research and work.
Maybe I'm missing something, but which of the photos is the in-line built by yourself (or is that one shown?). Could it be the 3d photo from the top? I mention this one because it seems to have Faux grain on the barrel extension at the breech, which very closely mimics some types of damascus grain.
Some time ago, I wrote an article for Muzzle Blasts on in-line muzzle loaders. We got a lot of static at the time on what constituted a "real" in-line. There were photos and drawings from 6 or 7 examples, chosen from museums and royal collections, all over Europe. I have forgotten which issue this was (and I'm too lazy to look it up).
This is a subject which has intrigued me for some time, and I thank you for adding to our store of knowledge on the subject,
Bill
-
Thank you Mr Brockway for you kind words .
The one I built is not shown .
I built it back ??? 1983?? Maybe 84
In reality it was more a test platform then a finished for sale piece .
I basically never went past what would be considered an in the white piece today
The actual locks I built off of the above tower of London drawing .
Instead of using a cocking trigger , I ran a cocking lever out the side . These were directly attached to the bolt not to a slide plate as shown in the photo of the SXS Lindsay published
I was actually more interested in the functional and practical application then actually completely recreating a finished piece .
. The 3rd photo is of an original that I ran across . Its also notable that this was converted to cap . If one looks closely it can bee seen that the striker plate has been removed from the frizzen and a nipple is clearly visible in the breech plug .. It also seemed to have been cocked either with a key like a wheel lock or a crank type lever that had long since disappeared .
As a Note . A few years back I saw a flintlock rifle very close to the one I posted “cocking mechanism was different “ up for sale on gun broker . I nearly bid on it but I figured it would go for more then I could afford. After the auction had ended I saw that it sold for less then 500.00 .
so they do come up on the auction sites now and then
As to the faux patterns on the barrel. The lock section pattern as near I was able to tell was done prior to fire bluing . Possibly with some type of pen application . Possibly even an application like potters do with adding hair to the firing process . Im not sure as I have not been able to duplicate it .
As a note though Derringer was known for such barrel patterns which he was able to do in yellows and reds . But again I have not discovered how he did it either .
The nearest I have came was a later 19th century Faux twist patterns using different bluing compounds
Which achieve this type pattern on modern barrel steels
(https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi6.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy242%2Fcaptchee%2FSXS%2Fdailylogs09-22-07010.jpg&hash=62da3a6dab47840042d49c76486acddf8c22e176)
Its also notable that this process was outlawed in many countries by the end of the 19th century when even many of the more complex Damascus patterns were being reproduced as faux work being imported to the US.
I have been told that the patterns were achieved by use of repeating wheels being coated in a acid solution . But as one tries to dig deeper into that information , the discussions normally dry up very quickly.
So either the subject is still very guarded by those who know the information or the information has been either somewhat or completely lost
But back to the in-inline ignition subject .
What is and is not an true inline ignition seems to very greatly . Some folks accept the definition to mean any ignition system which achieves main charge ignition, center of the breech plug thus inline with the bore . Still others only accept an ignition type which is fully inline with the bore .
The later being a far more strict definition which excludes many of the box lock designs like those built by Nock or the rifles made by Hall . IE providing a flash channel directing ignition center of the bore
(https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi6.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fy242%2Fcaptchee%2FSXS%2FIFTRdonationletter2004001.jpg&hash=d7920c7881c4c917caddb2dd1c5d9a67dab3c41f)
Thus I became more interested back then with what I felt was an undisputed inline design ..
At one time I had far ,far more information of this subject but through the years its been reduced to basically what you see above . A few photos and experiences with the one I built ..
But there should be no doubt that such ignitions did exist though in very low numbers and IMO most probably morphed into cartridge bolt actions where the design is best suited
Doc white has information that parallels some of the information i compiled through the years , over on his web site as well as a single barreled version of the sxs that I posted above which is also in the Munich National Museum.
Infact to tell the truth he may have gotten some of his information from your writings as well . Cant say . He does use his own words
Doc also has built a number of inline designs . But most are either not completely functional in the true since or are along the lines of those built by Pauley.
He however doesn’t mention ever building a flintlock model .
LMAO if he had , im sure he would be saying the same thing I did .
Its just not something a person wants to shoot much or IMO could get used to shooting