AmericanLongRifles Forums
General discussion => Gun Building => Topic started by: Ron Hodge on May 12, 2025, 04:00:51 AM
-
In regard to the location of the touch hole to the pan, I was always told I should set right on or close to the bottom of the pan. Is this correct?
-
In regard to the location of the touch hole to the pan, I was always told I should set right on or close to the bottom of the pan. Is this correct?
I’ve seen originals done as you describe. I was taught to shoot for the “sunset” position where the touch hole is even with a straight line drawn across the top of the pan/ bottom of the frizzen pan cover.
If you shoot from under a covered firing line it will make no difference whether your touch hole is low or high. In my experience during damp or wet hunting or woods walk shooting competitions, wet fouling in the bottom of the pan is common. I avoid that.
-
The width of the touch hole liner somewhat dictates the location particularly on the skinny barrels. Getting the wrist skinny can mean moving the lock higher and affects the relationship of the touch hole position to the bottom of the pan also. Saying it just depends doesn't answer your question but there's no apparent advantage to a lower touch hole as far as ignition.
-
Pletch's timed tests showed low vent in the powder, at or near the bottom of the pan gave faster ignition than the common-today sunset position.
Wet or very humid climates, as noted, can pose problems with wet fouling in the pan.
-
Pletch's timed tests showed low vent in the powder, at or near the bottom of the pan gave faster ignition than the common-today sunset position.
Wet or very humid climates, as noted, can pose problems with wet fouling in the pan.
Thanks for reminding everyone of this! Old habits or beliefs are hard to break.
-
Very interesting read (See link below) about the Pletcher tests.
https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=32160.0
More critical than the vent position is how the priming powder is placed in the pan. Banking the primer away from the vent is the least efficient method regardless of vent position. Priming level with the vent is another tested method and covering the vent is the third tested method on both vent positions. Getting the priming powder as close to the vent as possible was the fastest test variable. It's worth reading and the other articles in the link above.
(https://i.ibb.co/fYWvSJMM/Screenshot-20250520-220349.png) (https://ibb.co/1fN6ncZZ)
-
Yes, the "banked away" method of priming was boosted some years ago as "gospel" by one prolific writer of the day.
Interesting how actual tests with technology changes perspectives.
-
I put together my neighbor’s 30 year-old Thompson Center kit “Hawken” rifle for him.
The pre-drilled touch hole was so high it was above the pan cover!
Dang if that rifle didn’t fire every single time.
-
In regard to the location of the touch hole to the pan, I was always told I should set right on or close to the bottom of the pan. Is this correct?
If I recall correctly Larry Pletcher’s testing indicates its not very important. But I like it closer to the middle or the top of the pan. But I can’t find Larry’s stuff on the WWW anymore. Maybe the censors chopped out.
-
The proper location is the one that allows you to fill the pan to the top, while still giving instant ignition.
-
I’m of course involved with many blackpowder shooters. For years I’ve preached Larry Pletchers research, but most just ignore it and continue to believe what they always have. I don’t think science and information is the flavor of the day.
-
A wise (old) man (Taylor ;)) once told me an even older, "old saying".
"A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still".
-
I’m of course involved with many blackpowder shooters. For years I’ve preached Larry Pletchers research, but most just ignore it and continue to believe what they always have. I don’t think science and information is the flavor of the day.
.....as I child I would listen to the preachers tell me that Noah's flood was across the entire Earth, but I always pondered how them Bison and Antelopes crossed great Mountain ranges and Oceans to get on a small boat in Eastern Turkey...........It wasn't until I did my own research that I realized the Flood was a regional one, and that a full pan is a blessing with a properly located touch hole..... ;) ;) ;)
-
I can top y'all with this one.
1973 Old West Arms muzzleloading store in Grand Junction Colorado a man in buckskins behind the counter told me with authority that the inside location of the touchhole location is what mattered. According to him the hole went through the beech plug and exited in the center face of the plug!
I wonder if that's where the urban legend of extreme delayed ignition comes from? ;D ;D Just heard it again last week from a highly successful modern gunsmith who smirked at my flintlocks and said he didn't want anything to do with one of those things that go sssssssboom!
-
Dan, that sssssssssboom was my impression with flinter as well, as it first the only one I ever saw, was Taylor's TC Hawken(ses). Seems to me he was using 2F GO for prime but it might have been Hartless and Scuvey or Meteor.
-
The only sssssss-boom I've heard was the first time I shot my first flintlock,,,,,a lyman GPR. That is, I heard it when it actually went off, which was rarely. I deduced the problem to be the touch hole liner which had a tiny hole and a long passage for the fire to travel to reach the powder charge.
Being a Tool&Die maker at the time I took all the liners to work and modified them. Turned out my mods were almost the same as a "White Lightning" but they turned that rifle into a shooter.
Today I still place my liners in the sunset position. All I use are the "White lightnings", I do drill out the flash hole a number drill size larger than when testing shows good ignition. And I slightly chamfer the hole. Because I think it helps guide the fire into the hole. I use a push type dispensor and put about 11/2 pushes down the center of the pan. I make no attempt to bank the prime one way or another because the prime can move if the rifle is carried.
I worked hard to learn to tune my own locks and they are smooth and fast. Most shots there is no discernable pause between the prime igniting and the boom. I just don't see how I can better this.
Another thing I do is work the top of the pan until zero light can be seen between the bottom of the the frizzen and top of the pan. If there is a gap the prime can work out when the gun is carried. If that happens you will indeed have slow ignition.
I've read most of Mr. Pletcher's writings on the subject and don't find most to be Practical to my personal methods.
-
I have apparently been doing things all wrong for the last 50 odd years :o
I keep reading comments about filling the pan. My preferred touch hole location is the sunset position and my priming averages 2 - 4 grains of 4F or 3F in the bottom of the pan. Ignition in a well set up lock is fast and consistent and I cannot get my head around why some see the need to fill the pan. What am I missing here?
-
I have apparently been doing things all wrong for the last 50 odd years :o
I keep reading comments about filling the pan. My preferred touch hole location is the sunset position and my priming averages 2 - 4 grains of 4F or 3F in the bottom of the pan. Ignition in a well set up lock is fast and consistent and I cannot get my head around why some see the need to fill the pan. What am I missing here?
Folks do what they’ve been taught and if it works for them, they think it must be the best way. Or perhaps the only way.
I really like a wide saucer pan like on some English locks of the mid 1700s. Do they work better? I have no proof. It just feels good to look at that wide expanse of priming!
Filling the pan may mean different things to some. If I fill it - to the brim, not like a cup of coffee - there’s a chance of grains preventing a good frizzen to pan seal. A chance of compression. So I try for the cup of coffee method - leave some room so I don’t spill. Many methods work but some are passionate about their way. Same for touch hole location. There’s a ball of fire when the pan ignites and I’m pretty sure it’s going to burn whether the hole is 1/16” left, right, up, or down.
-
I do not think anyone will argue with the fact that just a pinch of priming powder will ignite a charge. It will indeed. In fact, an unprimed pan can also ignite a charge if the spark showers hit right. With that being said, if you cannot get good ignition everytime with a full pan, you really need to think about your touch hole location. If you have to "bank" your pan charge, the same applies. I have a gun that I did not build and it's touch hole location is lower than I would have have placed it, but it still shoots fast with a full pan, so it's a non issue for me.
No one is stopping anyone from loading their pans with the amount of powder that is pleasing to them, regardless of the touch hole location of their Flintlock. The issue is having an "expert" trotted out and expecting everyone to fall in line with their "scientific" findings as the proper way to fly.
We have enough of that nonsense in politics, religions and healthcare. My involvement with Flintlocks, self backed bows, fly rods and homesteading is to get away from all those "charts and graphs" .... ;)
Load your gun, prime the pan and have fun!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Experts and science are what have allowed us to understand the world isn't flat. At least for some... Further it's allowed us to have the wonderful life most of us enjoy.
In the end, I don't really mind what someone does. The only time it can become an issue is when it relates to our products.
Just the other day, I was in a neighboring town and a scraggly old fellow had a big magnetic sign on his car door that read:
If you believe in science you are a moron.
If you follow science you are a fool.
All I could do is shake my head...
-
So a fellow shooter came to me with his new gun. He had gotten the liner in so low the hole was about 25% below the bottom of the pan. It still worked but the hot gasses eroded a divot right in that area and he would build up a lot of fouling in front of the vent hole.. He then deepened the pan about an 1\8 inch which helped a lot. ;)
-
In regard to the location of the touch hole to the pan, I was always told I should set right on or close to the bottom of the pan. Is this correct?
It does not matter.
-
Experts and science are what have allowed us to understand the world isn't flat. At least for some... Further it's allowed us to have the wonderful life most of us enjoy.
In the end, I don't really mind what someone does. The only time it can become an issue is when it relates to our products.
Just the other day, I was in a neighboring town and a scraggly old fellow had a big magnetic sign on his car door that read:
If you believe in science you are a moron.
If you follow science you are a fool.
All I could do is shake my head...
So long as "science" supports reality, then it can be useful. Sadly "science" is often an agenda driven vehicle for a desired outcome, and when it becomes that way, it becomes little more than a bludgeon to be used against those who question it's bias.......As a Christian teacher I take a lot of heat when I agree with the "science" that suggests that the Earth is millions of years old, because it is. This reality does not go against the Reality of Creation, but rather underpins it......I use this example to point out that some "science" can be taken to the bank and not to guide the thread into a debate about theology.
Now, to get back to the topic. I could care less if some Black Powder "expert" comes up with a hypothesis about the speed of ignition based on his clinical results ,regardless if some want to call it "science" and foist it upon everyone they meet....I am a retired Electrical Contractor/Engineer and have had a life-time of charts, graphs, theories, calculations and the science of Electromotive Force to deal with.....With all due respect, re-creating 18th century weapons ain't rocket science. It is basically folk art, and anyone with a shoe box full of hand tools and a good eye can stock a rifle that is beautiful and that can produce years of wonderful enjoyment . I took up building years ago to get my mind off real science....It fascinated me that before the advent of electricity, fossil fuels, and now CNC machines, slow motion cameras and the internet, weapons were being crafted that provided the very security of men who built them, along with food for the table......I wonder if those fellows were as worried if their buddies had their pans fully charged as some here are?.............. ;) ;) ;)
-
I have to assume you are referring to Larry as the "expert". I don't think he has "foisted" it on anybody. He has simply done actual testing to try to sus out several aspects of flintlocks and how they relate to ignition speed. He's presented his testing methods, the data and left it at that. I would think people ought to be grateful for his free research. There's no agenda or "hypothesis" involved. Anybody can take it or leave it.
-
I have to assume you are referring to Larry as the "expert". I don't think he has "foisted" it on anybody. He has simply done actual testing to try to sus out several aspects of flintlocks and how they relate to ignition speed. He's presented his testing methods, the data and left it at that. I would think people ought to be grateful for his free research. There's no agenda or "hypothesis" involved. Anybody can take it or leave it.
I did not accuse him of foisting his findings on others at all. I am sure he is a fine fellow, but I simply could care less about his testing as I have the Free Liberty and the ability to test for myself and draw my own conclusions just as he has .....I reserved the accusation of "foisting" for those who want to rob me of that Free Liberty by trying to convince me that their way or belief is the one I have to follow ........... ;)
-
So being an "engineer" I assume you have some kind of a test rig as he does to accurately time ignition speed? ;)
-
Let’s stay on topic which is not philosophy or individual views on liberty or science or whatever else.
Please feel free to share your own studies or anyone else’s, or what you think is best, for ignition. That’s the topic here.
-
The vast majority of antiques I've had here that have not been converted and are original flint tend to carry vents lower than the 'sunset' position most popular today. Some are quite low. I think this is the reason that many old flintlocks that are still flintlocks (again, non-converted) will display a somewhat eroded 'V' or 'U' right down at the bottom of the pan (at the center), extending downward angularly into the bolster material.
Also, most carry a filed groove in the bottom of the frizzen angled inward from the barrel contact side of the pan cover toward the center of the pan cover. Was this done to accommodate vents in a higher position ('sunset') or was it an attempt to relieve the underside of the pan cover to ensure the metal of the pan cover underside - and potential condensation - was as far removed from the priming as possible? Could be both.
-
Eric, I’ve got an original New England militia gun that has that eroded V at the bottom of the pan and a very low touch hole. I’m admitting I’m skeered to try it. Is it possible that this reduced self-priming? Just an idea that popped into my head. Some period accounts of Boone or Audubon ( I forget) mention jamming a feather into the touch hole while loading as well. I’m surmising this was to prevent a lot of powder falling out of the larger touch holes of that period. Random thoughts.
-
Unfortunately I think it's impossible to determine with any degree of certainty as to exactly how large or small the vents of 200+ years ago may have been relative to what we do today. I would speculate they started larger on average and eroded more quickly even larger. To find really clean, unchanged examples, you've got to look at European arms and many that I've handled do seem a bit larger (again, on average) than our modern tiny 'max' 1/16" (and I think some folks are using sub-1/16"). I think (again, speculative based upon some Euro observation) that 5/64" was likely closer to average but then most all of what I've had to examine tended to be larger bores, rifled or smooth. What was used here, however, is anyone's guess - even really clean pieces always seem to evidence some erosion.
-
I kind of believe the old timers didn't really give the touch hole location NEAR the amount of consideration we give it. I'd expect that if it were somewhere between the top and bottom of the pan it would be considered good enough. Makes sense since this has been shown to make little difference.
Anybody know how this idea of the top of pan or "sunset" position got started?
-
So being an "engineer" I assume you have some kind of a test rig as he does to accurately time ignition speed? ;)
There is simply no need for me to turn to a 21st century "test rig", to determine the lock speed of an 18th century longarm that I am re-creating, as the Colonials got along just fine without slow motion videos and so have I...... A complete waste of time to me, as my years of shooting and building such re-creations have given me all the data I need to make a sound conclusion, and as I said earlier....."It ain't rocket science". I do understand that in these days of AI, and the path of least resistance, there are those that turn to computers, CNC machining, charts, and graphs to design and build their re-creations, of 18th century arms, and I am totally OK with that even though I do not understand it.
I only wish that those who do trust in modern technology in the re-creations of their longrifles would allow me to engage in the time tested primitive technology and folk art that is my personal approach to the re-creation of my longrifles, with the same tolerance that I afford them. Sadly some of them cannot help themselves , and will not rest until everyone admits that their way is the only way, while proclaiming it under the guise of wanting what's best for us all............. ;)
-
Oh my…. You okay?
-
Someone's comment about the liner being too thick at the hole and causing slow ignition has me thinking. I sometimes get slow ignitions despite doing everything right as far as I know. My liner is a tad deep, which would make the wall surrounding the hole a little thicker.
Is there any downside to beveling/countersinking the outside of the liner hole just a little to get the pan charge closer to the main charge?
-
I use skinny barrels and more often than not trim the liner on the inside after installation. Makes sense to me for thin walled barrels.
-
I use skinny barrels and more often than not trim the liner on the inside after installation. Makes sense to me for thin walled barrels.
Yes I filed down the inside of the liner to be flush with the barrel wall on the inside. I was referring to the wall thickness of the liner surrounding the flash hole. It's a bit hard to describe without a picture. If the liner is installed with a very shallow countersink, after filing off the excess outside the barrel the liner wall around the hole will be thin. If it is countersunk deeper, the liner wall will be thicker around the hole after filing off the excess.
One downside to a thinner wall around the flash hole is that the flash hole might become enlarged very quickly when it starts to erode due to there being less material there to erode. So a person would not want it to be too thin.
-
The " web " of the liner i think is what your referring to. :-\ I and I know of others who have " filed " a very shallow grove up to the liner hole, Just in t he bottom to " theoretically ( sp) allow the heat from the pan flash to access the main charge faster \ easier. Does it work? :-\ I don't know, maybe Larry P. could tell you.
-
One downside to a thinner wall around the flash hole is that the flash hole might become enlarged very quickly when it starts to erode due to there being less material there to erode. So a person would not want it to be too thin.
I primarily use non-stainless steel White Lightning touch hole liners and they can burn out eventually. Web thickness at the touch hole depends a tiny bit on how deep the countersink is for the liner. I dread 😬 over-drilling the countersink or gouging the barrel when hack sawing the “neck” of the liner. I could go a bit deeper with the countersink and gain 0.010” or more of web thickness I guess. I know the stainless ones last very long. The look is not for me though unless a customer really prefers it.
-
One downside to a thinner wall around the flash hole is that the flash hole might become enlarged very quickly when it starts to erode due to there being less material there to erode. So a person would not want it to be too thin.
I primarily use non-stainless steel White Lightning touch hole liners and they can burn out eventually. Web thickness at the touch hole depends a tiny bit on how deep the countersink is for the liner. I dread 😬 over-drilling the countersink or gouging the barrel when hack sawing the “neck” of the liner. I could go a bit deeper with the countersink and gain 0.010” or more of web thickness I guess. I know the stainless ones last very long. The look is not for me though unless a customer really prefers it.
Any thoughts on how long the non SS liners last? That's what I'm using and rue the day I have to replace it.
-
One downside to a thinner wall around the flash hole is that the flash hole might become enlarged very quickly when it starts to erode due to there being less material there to erode. So a person would not want it to be too thin.
I primarily use non-stainless steel White Lightning touch hole liners and they can burn out eventually. Web thickness at the touch hole depends a tiny bit on how deep the countersink is for the liner. I dread 😬 over-drilling the countersink or gouging the barrel when hack sawing the “neck” of the liner. I could go a bit deeper with the countersink and gain 0.010” or more of web thickness I guess. I know the stainless ones last very long. The look is not for me though unless a customer really prefers it.
Any thoughts on how long the non SS liners last? That's what I'm using and rue the day I have to replace it.
A lot depends on whether you leave the touch hole tiny at first or open it up to 1/16” or slightly larger. I’m thinking 2500-5000 round ball shots. Heavy bullets would be another story.
-
I have a SS WL liner in a 58 hunting rifle that has just short of a thousand shots through it. Most of those were at trail walks and running bore, but all with 100 grain charges. I can't see myself burning it out in the years I have left. How much and how agessive you pic your vent might have more to do with vent life.
-
I have always placed my touch hole at the 'sunrise' position.
Reasons,
The wick effect you get is from the powder trickling into the touch hole. Your main charge is set off by the flash, not the burning powder. When powder enters the touch hole, it burns like a wick, which in turn slows down your ignition, hence the wick effect.
As previously mentioned, a buildup in the pan blocks a low-located touch hole.
As the wood shifts from temperature and humidity changes, a low-located touch hole could be partially or fully blocked by the bolster.
It's more difficult to pick a low-placed touch hole than a higher-placed one.
When you're brushing your pan, all that $#@* gets swept into a low-placed touch hole.
If your touch hole is drilled and coned, it's more difficult to drill and vent when needed on a low-placed touch hole.
Rick
-
I think that unless you are an elite shooter, folks spend too much time on this issue. Drill the vent and shoot the gun. If you get a flash in the pan go a bit larger. For 95% of shooters it is a cop-out to blame ignition time for your poor shooting. That, at least, is one guy's opinion and we know what that is worth.
-
This is almost a lively as a patch lube or cleaning liquid thread.
-
;D ;D ;D
-
I think that unless you are an elite shooter, folks spend too much time on this issue. Drill the vent and shoot the gun. If you get a flash in the pan go a bit larger. For 95% of shooters it is a cop-out to blame ignition time for your poor shooting. That, at least, is one guy's opinion and we know what that is worth.
Well....I know what my opinions are worth. In fact....my opinions, and $1.45 will get you a cup of coffee at the local convenience store. ;D
-
This is almost a lively as a patch lube or cleaning liquid thread.
BUTTER!!!!!
PARKAY!!!!!
-
I made a mistake once and drilled my touch hole a lot lower in the the pan than I had intended. I was upset about it and was worried that I'd have ignition issue or slow lock times.
The end result turned out to be a very fast and, so far, extremely reliable Flintlock.
-
Forgive me for being a slow to the party. I’ve been traveling for work. I wanted to add a few comments for the benefit of new builders.
Vents on old many old guns were drilled for proofing before the guns were built. We know that to be the case. And many barrels were made by people other than the gun builder. Vents were drilled before locks were inlet. So, we might expect some variation in placement of vents in such firearms, especially American-built firearms. And that’s even before considering variation in the skill levels of builders who constructed those antiques. In comparison, if we look at high-end English firearms, such as later period shotguns, we’re generally looking at every part being built in a coordinated effort, with careful planning and precision —and lot of guns with vents at sunset position. The point of my mentioning this is to note (for the benefit of newer builders) that the question of where vents occurred on various old guns is a bit distinct from a discussion about where a modern builder may want to put a vent if he/she is drilling the hole after the lock is installed.
Regarding how much powder to use, I think a lot of us would suggest a good answer would be “enough”. There also seems to be such a thing as “too much”. Most of us try to keep the vent clear of powder (so as to avoid the “wick” effect). For similar reason, most of us also try to avoid piling a thick layer of powder over the vent. But there are pros and cons to keeping the vent completely uncovered, verses having a light covering. I generally try to avoid covering the vent, but I charge and prime from a single horn, and if I spill a little too much powder in the pan and it slightly covers the vent, I don’t try to correct it. It works both ways. I’m shooting a rifle that is ignited by a rock. I’m not surprised or disappointed or frustrated if I experience some mild variation in results—the same sort of variation that the old guys dealt with. For me, it’s part of the fun. I like a nice crisp “boom”, but if once in a while I hear “ka-boom”, no big deal. If I want or need complete predictability, I’ll pull something else off the rack.
Regarding Pletch’s experiments, I like seeing them. But I’d like to see more control of variables. “Banking” this way or that seems a bit vague to me. Is he covering the vent? If so, by how much? How thick a layer? Where is the point of diminishing returns? (If he described those details somewhere, then I missed seeing them. You can point me toward more information.)
I liked Rick’s observation about vent picks. I almost always push a wire pick through the vent and into the center of the main charge before priming the pan. This is a round-wire pick that is no larger in diameter than the vent hole itself. I learned that from a mentor who was a two-time national champion. It works well for me. And sunset position works well with that technique.
I also liked Smylee's observation about pick design. I NEVER use a pick that has any risk of reaming out the hole. Picks are pushing tools. They are not digging tools. They should push powder and fouling out of the hole without damaging it. A careful review of Madison Grant's book on pouches will show you a half dozen or so antique picks. All of them look to be thin wire.
-
I cannot remember ever using a vent pick before priming the pan....ever. Don't even own one.Now, if on the very rare occasion I feel the touch hole may be blocked, I will use a strand of wire cut from a piece of #10 thhn copper as a "pick".....Can't remember the last time that happened. Then again my touch holes are always above the powder charge, in a high "sunset" position and my pan is always filled with 4f powder so from shot to shot it automatically clears itself by the explosion....I never wipe the bore between shots either has I find that can clog up the system.
I will add that on wet and humid days my ignition time will slow after numerous shots due to the nature of damp burnt powder and about that time I stop shooting and clean my rifle for the day :D
-
Hi,
I am too lazy to worry about how much powder is in the pan. I use whatever the amount is that pours from my priming horn. As long as my lock produces sparks the guns always go boom. As long as I am not shooting at flying birds, I don't care if the gun goes "click ....boom" because I don't notice it as long as I am focusing on the sights as I should be. For those who don't want noticeable stainless steel liners on their barrels, remember Barbie Chambers also sells white lightning liners made from carbon steel so they tarnish with the barrel. I use those on muskets and they simply disappear in the barrel. On a Brown Bess I usually drill the hole out to 5/64". On all the other vent liners I drill the hole with a #51 drill.
dave
-
If in doubt,someplace close to the flash pan might work. ;D ;D ;D
Bob Roller
-
Hey why not, my daughter and I shoot competitively. Two of my son's , daughter and I hunt the PA flintlock Christmas season ( we hunt most ever day during this season, snow included , in fact we hope for snow). All the guns have white lightening touch hole liners. We never pick, the hole diameter that is in the liner is what we go with ( think it's something like .056), we never drill it out(bigger). We all have "brass pencil primers", one push is all the powder that goes in the pan. We never concern ourselves with banking powder one way or the other. The guns during hunting season get carried, leaned against a tree, picked up and fired. I don't want to jinks myself but the guns go off 99% of the time , fast. We do dump prime powder frequently (5,6,7 times a day ) while hunting. The touch hole placement is sun rise or sun set or even with top of pan what ever you call this location. My take from this thread is : don't get your panties in an uproar, just keep the hole close to the flash in the pan. Currently building a gun with a Chambers Early Germanic lock , the most challenging lock I've used to date to position "properly". This hole is going to be below the "Sunset " position, not going to sweat it. It's all good, thanks to all for your inputs. Steve