Well, It Happened

[Bent Ramrod]

I was out yesterday with a friend doing our monthly plinking session with cap-and-ball revolvers. This time, I took my old Armi San Marco Walker clone. I had traded for it maybe 25 years previously and it is one of those guns that is as much a gunsmithing project as a shooter. I have a few of these "betes noires" in the safe and every now and then I drag one of them out, attend to their latest woes and complaints, and go "Waltzing Matilda" with them to see what else they will do to to aggravate me. Just stubborn, I guess. The last operation was gluing in the arbor with JB Weld to correct a tendency to loosen on firing from the rather coarse threads and lack of "meat" at the rear of the frame.

It had done well with ~30-grain charges the last time out; the arbor had remained tight. This time I changed out the spout for one closer to 50 grains, to see how the arbor would handle the extra strain. (Shooting wimp loads in a Walker is not satisfying; it's like running errands in a Nitro-Burning Funny Car.) The gun was performing very well, regularly popping all our accumulated water-filled household throwaways, except for one particularly defiant and invulnerable coffee can, which appeared to have the power to deflect round balls under, over and to the sides.

I had fired at least 40 shots, and the cylinder was beginning to turn rather stickily. I popped out the wedge and daubed some Bore Butter on the arbor, which, to my delight, was still tight in the frame. Reassembly showed the cylinder turned as easily as at the beginning of the session, which is really noteworthy. On my other revolvers, using much smaller charges, the arbors must be wiped with a wet cloth and relubed after 60 shots max, and the disassembly and relubing will need to be done again after another three or four cylinders. Eventually, the disassembly and wiping becomes more frequent than the shooting in between, and it's time for lunch.

This time, the Walker had had no misfires, was shedding busted caps out the cutout in the side of the recoil shield--neither sticking on the nipples nor falling down into the lockwork (my friend's 1851 Navy is a particular offender that way) and though the loading lever now loosened after a cylinder full of these heavy loads, it didn't fall far enough to tie up the gun. Ramming was getting harder; the chambers were a little rough, and perhaps the fouling was accumulating in there. Some of the balls needed a second ram as they were rising from air compression in the chambers while others were being loaded. I swabbed Bore Butter on top of the round balls, and was using Navy Arms RWS #11 caps, pinched slightly before insertion so they didn't fall off. Hey, all right, I thought; maybe the old clunk is finally starting to work like it should.

Another couple cylinders did their devastation on the milk cartons and plastic bottles. The cylinder was still turning fine. Time for another try at the coffee can. I loaded, greased and capped the cylinder and pointed the gun at the target. Have at you, Sir, I thought, and pulled the trigger. There was a tremendous, ragged roar, like that of a Volley Gun, and the target was obscured by smoke. "Hey, was that a Chain Fire?" Steve asked.

Yes it was, the Mother of all Chain Fires. I had experienced a couple or three in the past, generally confined to the next load to the right of the barrel; once or twice the one adjacent to that also went off. This one was the entire cylinderful, and, exasperatingly, none of the shots had hit the coffee can. I gingerly peeked sideways at the chambers, seeing they were all empty, and noted the cylinder still seemed to rotate OK. I rotated the cylinder, flicking the caps off the nipples. They had all cooked off; except for the lack of priming compound, they looked unfired. The bottom chamber had driven the ball against the rammer, but the lever was still up. I pulled it down, and, with some effort, pushed the ball out of the rammer slot. The ram still slid normally, and none of the screws seemed bent. Elmer Keith's experience that the rammer had been upset in the slot and had to be driven out and turned down to work again hadn't happened to me. The barrel was still wedged in the arbor; nothing was loose.

I cocked the gun, pulled the trigger while holding the hammer and letting it down gradually. It looked like the gun still functioned, although the outside was all over black powder fouling and grey lead smears. Well, time for lunch. We packed up all the shot-up and undamaged targets, including the ironclad coffee can, and drove to the restaurant.

When I got home, I took the revolver completely apart and cleaned it. The arbor was still tight. (Thanx and a wave of the Bent Ramrod to whoever gave me the JB Weld idea; that is Good Stuff!) All the parts came out, looked normal, and the reassembled, cleaned and lubed gun seems to function normally. The cylinder has (and had) no endshake, but the cleaned chambers still look rough. I think I'll polish them out and go to 0.454" balls next time; the .452" balls were obviously none too tight and maybe the roughness of the chambers, the looseness of the balls in the chambers and the much larger powder charges had allowed the flame to get in the front and set the cylinder off.

The saving grace of revolvers is that the assembly is out in front of you and any mishap will likely project forward and vertical. No magazine under one's hand or slide to come back at one's face. Still, nothing to be complacent about; at a regular pistol range, with shooters shoulder-to-shoulder, there might be serious consequences. But I'm kind of gratified at the way the old Armi San Marco took the abuse. The Walker is too massive to even recoil hard under the chain-fire, although the recoil was noticeable, for sure. It'll be going out again in the future, with some lessons learned.

[Earlwb]

You were pretty lucky with that. it is nice the gun didn't get damaged too. Did you use something like Crisco grease over each chamber after it was loaded? I smear each cylinder end on top of the bullets with Crisco before I fire it. The grease tends to get blown out but some still seals the bullets in good preventing chain fires. Granted it is a little more messy though. But not bad.

[tomme boy]

Chain fires come from worn nipples ot wrong primers not from the front

[Ragnarok]

Only time I've had a chain-fire I wasn't greasing the chambers. I would guess Bent Ramrod's balls are too small from his loading description in the OP.

I do know that my Uberti Dragoon needs .457" balls for a tight fit. The bigger the charge the less grease you can get in the chamber....more cylinder gap flash too.

Loose caps and igniting from the back of the cylinder I presume to be possible. I made a 'jig' thingy-bob with a small tapered hole that I use to re-size #11 caps for a better fit on revolver nipples. However a nearby gun store has started to keep a really good supply of reloading stuff..including black powder..substitute powder and all sizes of caps!

I've never really bought into the chain-fire from the rear theory as a primary cause of the phenomenon. I've shot hundreds and hundreds of shots from BP revolvers with pinched #11 caps without any KABOOMS. I think loose ball fit...large powder charges and little or no chamber grease cause the lion's share of the issue.

I also never really understood why any particular manufacturer can build a fine looking/working percussion revolver but cannot put nipples on them that will fit any particular size cap! I mean really? #11 caps of about any make are loose...and #10 caps are usually so tight it's scary pushing them on a loaded chamber's nipple far enough to clear and rotate...(I can visualize caps igniting other chambers if they are touching the frame!)

[swheeler]

Sounds fun, 300 grs of black does make a lot of smoke!:shock:

[Hawks Feather]

Sounds like you were pretty lucky. You still have both the gun and your body parts.

[Der Gebirgsjager]

Wow! This is certainly a topic that is very interesting and timely in my life! Back in the early '80s I was getting interested in black powder revolvers. Stupid me. I will only say in my own defense that everyone starts somewhere. I had 3 such incidents in about a 6 week period! I bought a Uberti 1860 Army .44. I did read the information that came with the handgun, the various cautions and warnings, but for some reason didn't take all of it seriously. I might also say that I didn't acquire my first computer until the mid-'90s, so lacked that resource.

Anyway, I knew that the Colts were widely used in the Civil War, and had seen movies of soldiers (actors!) reloading and resuming firing, and never observed any of them using grease in the tops of the cylinder chambers. And logic would seem to indicate that one wouldn't have time for the grease step in the heat of combat. I don't know the truth of this (but hope that someone does and will expound on it) so I decided to skip the step. I just went with the powder, ball, and cap. I guess I should also say that at that time I had just read numerous articles about what great stuff Pyrodex was, far superior to black powder; so I was a Pyrodex baby, and the truth of the matter is that to this day that is all I have ever used. RS in rifles, P in handguns, but have also picked up a couple of pounds of Select and Ctg. for future experimentation.

Well, I got away with it for perhaps 60 or 70 shots, and then experienced my first chain fire. Just one more than I intended to fire, and it scared the dickens out of me. So, that encouraged me to do a lot more reading and chatting with other shooters, and I heard about the grease as being essential to living a long, un-maimed life. So, I greased them with Crisco. At this point I'll just interject that, for me at least, Crisco proved unsatisfactory for use as it tended to melt and run out of the mouths of the chambers after the first or second shot heated up the cylinder. Eventually I bought a can of high temperature bearing grease which proved to stay in place better -- but still wasn't perfect. Also tried white lithium grease and CVA Grease Patch (which seemed like white lithium grease in a proprietary package and label), petroleum jelly, and several other concoctions, with the bearing grease seeming the best.

Things went along fine for awhile and then it happened again! This time, with the grease which at the time was Crisco, two additional cylinders fired. I had intended for the one at 12 O'clock to go off, but not those at 9 O'clock and 3 O'clock! Talk about "shock and awe"! But I congratulated myself on still having my major body parts and upon not having dropped the beautiful revolver in the dirt. At this point I began to really respect Col. Colt and his design ability, in that the 1860's barrel is scalloped in on both sides in front of 9 and 3 O'clock and allowed the balls to pass without striking the forward part of the revolver. This lead to speculation that chain fires must have been well known back in the day when the revolvers were designed, and even if not a desired event certainly an anticipated event.

Back to the drawing board, as they say. Read more, talked more, and heard the theory that chain fires originate at the back of the gun through loose caps, loose nipples, worn or defective nipples. Some folks were saying that the fire somehow made it's way from the forcing cone back around to the rear and entered one of these openings. Others said the explosion from the cap crossed over to adjacent nipples and entered their chambers (despite the presence of their in place caps), while others said, no, the fire entered from around loose or undersized nipples. And the argument for fire entering adjacent chambers from the front continued as well, loose ball, no grease, etc.

Now being a fastidious cleaner of firearms I always removed the nipples for cleaning, so thought that perhaps I hadn't reinstalled them tightly. I paid special attention to that when reassembling the 1860 after cleaning, and put some grease in the threads to seal any possible entrance around them and to assure that they could be removed again. Thought I had all bases covered until it happened again. I decided to "hang it up" after again having both 12 and 3 O'clock discharge at the same time. Lots of years have passed and I have again become interested in the old C&B revolvers and am getting back into it. But I guarantee you that I'll always wear shooting glasses, and have added one more step to loading them which is the addition of the little red tubular "cap guards". They keep the cap in place, provide some waterproofing, and I believe that they will prevent any crossing over of spark from the cap that is intentionally fired to an adjacent chamber. They're pretty inexpensive, and speed loading isn't in the cards for these revolvers anyway, so what's one more step for insurance?

All of the foregoing having been said, here's what I wonder about: Was this a problem during the Civil War? Were there any injuries resulting from chain fires during that era or since? Frankly, I've never heard of any, but it's not logical to assume none happened. Then, in the period following the war, say from 1865 until 1873 when the Single Action Army came on the scene, did the Army have a solution to preventing the chain fire problem? I suppose that somewhere there exists a manual describing the regulation way to load the 1860? I'd be fascinated to read it.

[Idz]

Reading accounts of battlefield muskets being found with multiple balls and charges in the barrel I suspect in the heat of battle soldiers didn't operate at full capacity and a chain fire probably went unnoticed.
I haven't had a chainfire yet but I use a waxed wad under the ball instead of crisco.

[Battis]

My theory is that the roundballs were too undersized, even if they shaved a ring. .452 balls would be fine for awhile, but when the fouling began, and they became harder to ram, the grit, fouling, **** - whatever - kept the undersized balls from forming and sealing properly in the cylinder.
I had two chain fires, in two different .36 revolvers, and the common denominator was the mold from which the balls were cast. They were irregular in shape and did not completely fill the cylinder. Did you cast the balls? If so, check the mold.
I started using the vegetable spray PAM over the balls. As mentioned, Bore Butter is gone after the first shot, but PAM stays around longer. I also use it on the arbor and down the barrels of my muzzleloaders.

[Der Gebirgsjager]

Definitely some food for thought, Battis. No, I did not cast the balls myself. I have both .44 and .36 molds, but have never used them. Your thought about fouling changing the seal is a good one, but like I said, I've always used Pyrodex which in my experience produces less fouling. I forgot to add that I now use Ox Yoke Wonder Wads under the ball and the bearing grease over the top. Kind of like wearing both belt and suspenders, I guess!
Now I use Hornady .452 dia. balls. They have a very prominent sprue mark, and I'm being very careful to have it be straight up or straight down, my thinking being that if it goes in sideways that could effect the ball's seal. No misadventures so far. I'm also really sold on the cap guards for keeping the caps in place, because, in addition to the other benefits I cited, I can see where if recoil caused a cap to fall off a chain fire could then occur through the nipple with the missing cap. Not authentic or true to period, I know -- but neither is Pyrodex.

[rodwha]

My father had a chainfire while using felt wads. No way that came from the front.

[ofitg]

I suppose that somewhere there exists a manual describing the regulation way to load the 1860? I'd be fascinated to read it.

1861 Manual of Arms -

https://web.archive.org/web/20140530064404/http://ehistory.osu.edu/uscw/library/books/carbine.cfm

No mention of wads or lube - the soldiers were training with cartridges (probably non-combustible cartridges, since they discarded the paper), and so far as I have heard, such cartridges used conical slugs instead of round balls.

[Battis]

Der Gebirgsjager, you had a chain fire with Pyrodex? I always wondered if that could happen.
I read that Colt sprinkled loose powder over the chamber mouths during the Army testing to prove that the guns were safe. He did not have one chain fire.
Apparently the early Colt Patersons had shrouds over the nipples, which caused all kinds of chain firing.

[AntiqueSledMan]

Hey tome boy, I'm not so sure that "Chain Fires" are caused from the caps.
See this article by John L. Fuhring.

http://www.geojohn.org/BlackPowder/bps2Mobile.html

[rodwha]

I've seen this before. I must say that I find it rather difficult to believe that lead can be engraved by a grain of black powder like that. It just doesn't seem plausible to me. Being much harder it would just push it back into the chamber to my thinking.

My father's chainfire happened with a felt wad between the powder and ball. He didn't slather any lube over the chamber mouths adding something for powder to stick to.

Has anyone had or heard of a chainfire with conicals?

[Petrol & Powder]

That's exciting !

[Battis]

I don't think the lead was engraved as much as the chamber's dimensions changed (unevenly), which is why the balls were harder to ram down due to the fouling. And if the balls were too small to begin with (.452), a path could be, might be, opened for a spark or flame or whatever.
Then again, each chamber would have to be more or less uniformly "deformed" due to the fouling, which is hard to believe. It would have to be a perfect storm scenario in each chamber. Maybe it is a case of chamber mouth and loose nipple, or a bad recoil shield, or who knows what...
I do know that, in my case, the balls had uneven surfaces due to the damaged mold. Was that positively the cause of my chain fires? There's no way to prove it, but you gotta go with the odds.

[rodwha]

In a recent multi-chainfire incident it was shown to likey be from the cylinder's ability to move fore and aft with nipples that way have been slightly too long this hammering 5 of the caps against the recoil shield and firing those 5 of 6 chambers.

I've also read of tests done in attempts to achieve chainfires by leaving caps off of nipples as well as using undersized balls with neither achieving the result.

On one hand I see it hard to believe that the flames we see from the nipple side could turn around a slightly loose fitting cap, bend again to slide down the nipple channel far enough to ignite the charge. And then on the other, assuming a proper chamber and projectile, flames passing the driving band.

In my father's case I don't see how flames could have passed both the ball and the felt wad.

Despite using Rem #11 caps that required pinching I never got a chainfire. But as soon as that one tin was used I set forth to work on proper cap fit.

[Der Gebirgsjager]

Battis - yes, with Pyrodex. Not once, but three times! I've never used black.

ofitg - Thanks for that research. Very interesting. Highly trained horses, to put up with all that nonsense occurring on their backs! Yes, it does seem like they were using cartridges of ball and powder and discarding the paper. First instinct would be that the paper would be used as a patch, but obviously any exposed paper would burn and cause a chain fire.

Like I said in my second post on this subject, getting back into this area of shooting after an approx. 30 year absence I now am doubly safe and probably doubly apprehensive. But so far, using a lubed felt wad under the ball, grease over the ball, and the cap guards I have had no incidents.
I was just telling the story, and do not feel competent to side with anyone on how these events occur. The truth may be that they can happen in any one of two or three ways. One this is for certain - if it happens you'll know it!

A skill I'm trying to master is to get those little felt wads to enter the chambers in a nice, round, smooth configuration so that they sit flat without bending and tipping and picking up granules of powder on the top surface of the wad on the way down. At present that's the situation with about 50% of them. That makes me a bit nervous - having a little bit of powder on the top surface of the wad - and it's a pain to fish them out again. And you can't get the lube to let go of the powder particles, so you either have to discard the wad and try again, or just go with it. So adding the grease on top of the ball sure makes me feel better. :lol:

[Battis]

I used to make lube sticks out of the beeswax-paraffin lube. Plug the barrel, pour the lube from the other end, let it cool, push it out and bingo - lube sticks from which you can cut lube pills that exactly fit the chamber. These went over the ball. Did they work any better? Well, they were easier to use at the range.

[Bent Ramrod]

All the indications in all the chain fires I’ve had were that the flame came from the front of the cylinder. A couple times in the past I forgot to put grease over the balls. This time, they sometimes rose out of the chambers, apparently from air compression, and needed another push from the ram. This could smear the Bore Butter along the fouled chamber surface and open channels for the flame past the balls.

Most of my guns have short cylinders and chambers, probably not enough air to push back, and better fitting for the balls. Armi San Marco is long out of business, driven out by better-quality stuff by other companies. I haven’t seen their recommendation for round ball size; each gun might be a law unto itself.

The cap nipples are in deep cutouts (especially deep in the Walker; needs a “knack” to cap with your fingers) and there was no end shake and no indication of impact on the cooked-off caps. Pinched No. 11s, in my opinion, are more acceptable than slightly undersized No. 10s, which often need a snap to seat them fully and another to fire them. The pinched caps don’t go through cappers very well, though.

The Walker chambers have plenty of room for wads. I might try them some time.

I’ll take my pin gauges to the chambers, polish them out and cast some .454”s. That coffee can had better watch out next time! :mrgreen:

[rodwha]

Powder on one side of the wad cannot possibly ignite the powder on the other side without a trail along the side.

I'll need to read that article. Paper cartridges during the Civil War for cap n ball pistols didn't have the paper discarded. It was all crammed into the chamber. Only the rifle paper cartridges that were poured down the barrel, and not the breech loading type, discarded the paper from what I understand.

[rodwha]

Very odd. The first time I've come across anything that stated the cartridge for revolvers was opened and then discarded, as well as using a ball (assuming it is indeed a ball). Every paper cartridge I've read about used a conical. And the original paper cartridges listed all state such with no reference to one with a ball.

[ofitg]

Very odd. The first time I've come across anything that stated the cartridge for revolvers was opened and then discarded, as well as using a ball (assuming it is indeed a ball). Every paper cartridge I've read about used a conical. And the original paper cartridges listed all state such with no reference to one with a ball.

Agreed. I suspect that the word "ball" was commonly used in those days in reference to any type of projectile, spherical or not. I noticed that the loading instructions for the Sharps carbine also mentioned "the ball".

Not sure what to think about discarding the paper..... combustible cartridges were being introduced around that time; perhaps troops were training with "old stock" cartridges? Or perhaps this Manual of Arms was pasted together with sections from earlier publications?

EDIT - I came across an interesting thread -

http://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/fusionbb/showtopic.php?tid/302462/

"Zonie" has posted Colt's instructions for loading with loose powder, projectile, etc. Note that these instructions specify "the pointed end" of the ball. The instructions also specify "without wadding or patch"..... and there is no mention of lube.

[tomme boy]

Hey tome boy, I'm not so sure that "Chain Fires" are caused from the caps.
See this article by John L. Fuhring.

http://www.geojohn.org/BlackPowder/bps2Mobile.html

I can write an article too. Just because someone wrote it does not make them right.

I have had 2 chainfire's. Both times it was at a private indoor range I go to. I was shooting a 1858 Remington. I was using 454balls. Lubed wonder wads. And TC grease. The owner wanted to see how the ventilation system would handle a black powder pistol.

First shot every cylinder went off. Pulled the trigger and it was bang....a slight pause then you could barely hear the rest. But the 2.5' of flames out the front told me something was wrong. I was using #11 caps as I was out of #10.

That was that. I went and got some #10's and came back the next week. Loaded the same as before but used #10 caps. Everything went fine. I had a spare cylinder so I loaded that one up and shot it fine. The owner wanted to know what happened last week. I told him that I was told it was the caps. So we loaded the spare cylinder back up and this time used the same #11 caps.

Guess what happened? 3 chambers went off. So tell me how that it happened 2x's and the only common thing was the #11 caps. Each time it happened the caps were gone. Who knows were they went???

[yeahbub]

I had a chain-fire in a Remington New Model Army (aka, 1858 Rem) back in the '70's, definitely from RB's that seemed tight in the chambers, but the narrow wedding band of engagement was insufficient to seal well enough, even with the use of. . . Crisco, I believe. I was a know-nothing young tyro wanting to hunt groundhogs but not thinking this thing through very well. Those balls went in pretty easy, but I didn't know how tight they should have been. All six went, and the balls were seen trundling down the driveway a couple yards. Some were recovered and the engagement band was barely there. The mold was one of those brass 2-cavity combo molds that came with the pistol - not nearly big enough, a .450 being pressed into a .447-.448 chamber. These days I use a .458 ball of ACWW and is a stiff press fit with a pronounced lead ring left over, and they do obturate enough that recovered specimens show a .180 wide band at full groove diameter. I haven't had a chain-fire incident since using the sequence of powder, card wad, lube cookie and that tight ball, or a lubed, sized Lee .45 cal 200gr REAL (three driving bands) and the heel band reduced enough to get it to slip in. I have had no experiences with crossfire with loose caps, or even no caps but the one under the hammer. Logic and Murphy tell me it should be an eventuality to anticipate, but it hasn't happened yet. Some photos:

Soft lead on the left, ACWW on the right. The rifling on the WW ball survived the trip through the turf better. Nice wide engagement band just a hair narrower than the soft lead.212228

The Lee 200gr REAL lubed and swaged to a short SWC form, which also added to the width of the driving bands somewhat. Soft lead recovered from the turf. Notice how obturation made the driving bands wider than on the unfired one in the middle. 212230

[missionary5155]

Good morning
And just to toss another possibility into the soup... can a percussion cap ignite simple because it is in the proximity of a firing revolver ? Seems I read some years back a worker at a powder facility who was hand carrying a fresh batch of priming compound from the mixing room to the cap assembly room was atomized when that batch of mix for some reason detonated out in the open air.
Just another of the variables that make shooting a percussion revolver as interesting as can be.
Mike in Peru

[Good Cheer]

The arguments arise from preference for claiming that chain fires occur only through ignition from either the front or the rear.
No one who hasn't staked out a position should take either to heart before ruminating on the likelihood that ignition from either front or rear does not occur.

[masscaster]

I only sell .454 RB's for use in the Walker, since .454 is the recommended size.
I also cast heeled 185gr. SWC Conicals for the Walker, these are sized and lubed @ .452. The same boolit is sized to .454.5 for the ROA.

Jeff

[fcvan]

Back in the 1980s I shot a lot of .454 RB through my 1858 Remington copy and a few conicals as well. I cast my own from dead soft lead. Back in the 1970s, an old timer showed me how to load the cylinder with Pyrodex and corn meal filler so the ball was flush fit to the cylinder face. Fill six holes with with Pyrodex, top with corn meal, give the cylinder a quick spin. This removed an even amount of corn meal allowing for the call to seat. 25 grains of Pyrodez with corn meal shot like 30 grains without. Corn meal prevents flame from getting around the ball to the charge. Conicals were shot with 30 grains and seated to the charge. I have never had a chain fire. BTW, corn meal seems to clear out some of the fouling extending my shooting before cleaning. I still have to re-lube the base pin every 50 rounds.

[indian joe]

[QUOTE=rodwha;4265336]In a recent multi-chainfire incident it was shown to likey be from the cylinder's ability to move fore and aft with nipples that way have been slightly too long this hammering 5 of the caps against the recoil shield and firing those 5 of 6 chambers.

Why has no one ever mentioned this ? Too obvious maybe !!- how many of these chain fire incidents have even been checked to ensure safe clearance from the nipples to recoil shield ? To me it is the most obvious potential source of a chainfire. I have had to "fit" nipples to a couple of our capguns - no way would I drop the hammer on one without first checking this .

[indian joe]

I can write an article too. Just because someone wrote it does not make them right.

I have had 2 chainfire's. Both times it was at a private indoor range I go to. I was shooting a 1858 Remington. I was using 454balls. Lubed wonder wads. And TC grease. The owner wanted to see how the ventilation system would handle a black powder pistol.

First shot every cylinder went off. Pulled the trigger and it was bang....a slight pause then you could barely hear the rest. But the 2.5' of flames out the front told me something was wrong. I was using #11 caps as I was out of #10.

That was that. I went and got some #10's and came back the next week. Loaded the same as before but used #10 caps. Everything went fine. I had a spare cylinder so I loaded that one up and shot it fine. The owner wanted to know what happened last week. I told him that I was told it was the caps. So we loaded the spare cylinder back up and this time used the same #11 caps.

Guess what happened? 3 chambers went off. So tell me how that it happened 2x's and the only common thing was the #11 caps. Each time it happened the caps were gone. Who knows were they went???

I'm gonna say here that the no 11 caps were too long on the nipples and when she fired the first round - the recoil impacted the over sized caps onto the recoil shield and the rest went off - second time around you likely got some of em seated a little deeper and only had a triple -- whatryadoin loadin six anyway?? thought I was the only feller did that .

[Der Gebirgsjager]

Glad to see this thread getting some more visits.

Battis: I really like your wax wad idea. If I used them (I'm going to make some up!) and had a chain fire I'd feel pretty certain that it originated from the rear of the cylinder, because the wax must squish some when compressed by the ball and really fill up the chamber.

indian joe: I think you are on to something here, about the nipple length and cap relationship. Also, it is crossing my mind that the specs for nipples and caps, now mostly made in Italy by several different manufacturers, may have changed from when they were all being made in the U.S. 150 years ago. It may well be that now it is necessary to pay special attention to this, and maybe shorten nipples, perhaps reduce the diameter of the nipples a bit, just all depending on the fit of the caps. I know I'll be taking a hard look at my guns and treating them as individuals rather than one size fits all. It might well be that a slightly shortened and reduced diameter nipple and a No.10 cap might solve some problems.

[Battis]

It is a good theory and one worth checking out. But, I think that a cap that sticks out far enough to hit the recoil shield would prevent the cylinder from turning. And, I think a #10 cap that was too small would sit higher than a #11 cap that would cover the nipple.
Like I said, it's a good theory.

[charlie b]

Hey tome boy, I'm not so sure that "Chain Fires" are caused from the caps.
See this article by John L. Fuhring.

http://www.geojohn.org/BlackPowder/bps2Mobile.htmlBack when I was playing with revolvers my father in law and I wondered about chain fires. At first I used crisco. Then after discovering how messy it was we looked for other methods. FYI, I had a Navy Arms 1858 Rem which turned out to be very accurate. .452 round balls, all cast from RCBS mold blocks. FIL had two Colt .36 revolvers, one of which was from one of the limited runs Colt did back in the 80's (or so).

The articles above verify what we found out. FWIW, I have not had a chain fire after not using lube across the face of the chamber. That was several years and at least 1000 rounds down range.

First, we just loaded powder and ball and shot. No chain fires but the pistols would start to get fouled after a few cylinder loads were fired.

Second, we tried lubes in the chambers between ball and powder. This was inconsistent due to fouling the powder.

Third, powder, card wad, lube and ball. This worked very well, especially after we started using cookie sheets for lube cookies. Lube was crisco and beeswax. But, it took a while to load.

Last, paper cartridges. Just as in the article above. We did try nitrated paper, but, it did not work as well. One thing we did do was make the paper cartridges so the back end could be punched out before loading.

In the end we used the individual loading (powder, card wad, lube cookie, ball) when we wanted to target shoot for the day. If we wanted to carry the guns in the field we carried the paper cartridges for follow up shots (jackrabbits and coyotes).

FWIW, the only issue I ever had during all that was when I Ieft the chambers loaded for a long period of time (over a month). The summer heat out here in NM must have softened the lube enough to migrate into the powder and I had a cylinder full of duds.

[Texas by God]

Chain fires come from worn nipples ot wrong primers not from the frontWould you mind proving that statement?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[Golfswithwolves]

Hey tome boy, I'm not so sure that "Chain Fires" are caused from the caps.
See this article by John L. Fuhring.

http://www.geojohn.org/BlackPowder/bps2Mobile.html

I don't know yet if Mr. geojohn's methods will prevent all chainfires. I can say that the use of the lube underneath the ball does make clean-up very easy, as the lube seems to "atomize" and coat all the inner surfaces of the revolver when it is used in the fashion he suggests.

[Texas by God]

I've experienced two chainfires. I nor the gun were damaged luckily. No grease or wads both times, the Remington caps fit tightly. After I started using lubed felt wads under the balls it hasn't happened since. If it does I may argue the other way.........

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[dondiego]

Would you mind proving that statement?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

He can't prove it because it is not true.

[rodwha]

He can't prove it because it is not true.

Something that is quite hard to prove isn’t it?

My father went shooting with me with an ASM 1860 Army using wads and got a chai fire. Absolutely no way that came from the front. 100% from the rear. Worn nipples? Caps that didn’t fit quite right? A cylinder with end play that struck a nipple hard enough? Dunno. But 100% came from the rear as it was 101% impossible from the front as there’s just no way any flame could have circumvented a ball and a wad.

And the only way to get a chainfire from the fore is a void in a ball that left a channel, an undersized projectile, or possibly a chamber wall with a groove or oblong cut allowing space for some flame.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

In a recent multi-chainfire incident it was shown to likey be from the cylinder's ability to move fore and aft with nipples that way have been slightly too long this hammering 5 of the caps against the recoil shield and firing those 5 of 6 chambers.

I've also read of tests done in attempts to achieve chainfires by leaving caps off of nipples as well as using undersized balls with neither achieving the result.

On one hand I see it hard to believe that the flames we see from the nipple side could turn around a slightly loose fitting cap, bend again to slide down the nipple channel far enough to ignite the charge. And then on the other, assuming a proper chamber and projectile, flames passing the driving band.

In my father's case I don't see how flames could have passed both the ball and the felt wad.

Despite using Rem #11 caps that required pinching I never got a chainfire. But as soon as that one tin was used I set forth to work on proper cap fit.

Now that is interesting. I have always believed that chainfires can happen at either end, by penetration of the flame. and I still believe they can do so some of the time. Long ago I used to shoot an original London Navy, which on the basis of serial number and the government's broad arrow mark had some chance of having been down the valley and back in the Charge of the Light Brigade. I tried to work it with the Lee conical bullet and just the lube in the grooves, and got chainfires solely in one chamber which had become oversized. It wasn't a really loose bullet either, for it didn't creep forward under recoil.

I always mistrust experiments which may not have been repeated often enough for total validity, or with other variables eliminated. The reason for something not happening demands better statistical validity than the reason for something happening. But the non-happening of chainfires with a loaded and uncapped cylinder seems pretty compelling. I don't see any reason why 300 degrees of the breech face couldn't be slightly relieved to prevent contact with the caps. But it might be that gas impact on the caps was doing it.

There used to be a dodge employed by waterfowl shooters, of having a piece of soft rubber tubing over cap and nipple for waterproofing. (I would think of it as bicycle valve tubing, which dates me.) If chainfires at the rear really are due to penetration of the flame, this would surely eliminate it. At the front, soft grease which goes down into the crack between ogive and chamber wall surely would.

[rodwha]

Now that is interesting. I have always believed that chainfires can happen at either end, by penetration of the flame. and I still believe they can do so some of the time. Long ago I used to shoot an original London Navy, which on the basis of serial number and the government's broad arrow mark had some chance of having been down the valley and back in the Charge of the Light Brigade. I tried to work it with the Lee conical bullet and just the lube in the grooves, and got chainfires solely in one chamber which had become oversized. It wasn't a really loose bullet either, for it didn't creep forward under recoil.

I always mistrust experiments which may not have been repeated often enough for total validity, or with other variables eliminated. The reason for something not happening demands better statistical validity than the reason for something happening. But the non-happening of chainfires with a loaded and uncapped cylinder seems pretty compelling. I don't see any reason why 300 degrees of the breech face couldn't be slightly relieved to prevent contact with the caps. But it might be that gas impact on the caps was doing it.

There used to be a dodge employed by waterfowl shooters, of having a piece of soft rubber tubing over cap and nipple for waterproofing. (I would think of it as bicycle valve tubing, which dates me.) If chainfires at the rear really are due to penetration of the flame, this would surely eliminate it. At the front, soft grease which goes down into the crack between ogive and chamber wall surely would.

It certainly is hard to prove what all causes chainfires. Quite frankly it just doesn’t seem all that plausible from flames at the fore or rear as what has to happen just seems so unlikely outside of caps slamming into the recoil shield or caps falling off.

The history of your pistol is rather exciting. That was a crazy time in history and I enjoy the song The Trooper about it.

[indian joe]

[QUOTE=rodwha;4303843]It certainly is hard to prove what all causes chainfires. Quite frankly it just doesn’t seem all that plausible from flames at the fore or rear as what has to happen just seems so unlikely outside of caps slamming into the recoil shield or caps falling off.

I believe that lack of clearance at the recoil shield is an obvious potential cause of chainfires - but its crazy to even think of shooting a capgun like that! Caps falling off nipples ? another obvious potential - but again crazy to do it . I had one double ignition in my life - cant prove where it initiated (none of us can) but it was the one time I forgot to use grease at the front end (I only shoot round ball) - had just recieved my neat little 36 pocket pistol and couldnt wait to shoot it - first shot I thought was a bit loud - three more were ok number five went "click " ----what the ..... that one is empty??????? ......NO ! I loaded all five ..... I backtracked to where I loaded .... no sign of the grease equipment ... oooooops!

[dondiego]

Something that is quite hard to prove isn’t it?

My father went shooting with me with an ASM 1860 Army using wads and got a chai fire. Absolutely no way that came from the front. 100% from the rear. Worn nipples? Caps that didn’t fit quite right? A cylinder with end play that struck a nipple hard enough? Dunno. But 100% came from the rear as it was 101% impossible from the front as there’s just no way any flame could have circumvented a ball and a wad.

And the only way to get a chainfire from the fore is a void in a ball that left a channel, an undersized projectile, or possibly a chamber wall with a groove or oblong cut allowing space for some flame.

Well, it has been shown, and is repeatable that when a cylinder gets dirty, powder grains stick to the front of the cylinder and while seating the ball a grain of powder is dragged along with the ball creating a powder trail along the cylinder wall. When an adjacent cylinder is fired, the powder trail is ignited creating a chain fire. While less likely with a felt wad, it is not entirely impossible. Also, have you ever forgotten any component while loading? Is there any scintilla of possibility of your dad forgetting a wad? Were they greased?
I have had 2 chain fires with my 1858 Rem. Both occurred later in the shooting cycle and both times I didn't add the grease over the balls. I have also loaded all 6 chambers and only capped every other one and fired them without any chain fires. The possibility of recoil causing a chain fire is new to me and I will be checking that scenario out.

[rodwha]

I have not ever forgotten to load a component. But then I typically just use bullets these days. Not much one could forget. I’m rather methodical, as is my father so I doubt he forgot a wad, but I certainly couldn’t say with 100% certainty he did. And the uses store bought lubed wads of some sort.

I’ve read of people attempting to create chainfires by not calling or using well undersized balls and not happening. It’s an odd thing for sure. Glad I haven’t had one.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

I was quite sure mine were related to one chamber out of six, the oversized one. It is also possible that if the ball was scarred or dropped to form a flat on it, or the halves of the mould met imperfectly, you might get a momentary jet of gas blowing through even soft grease on top of the bullet.

[Der Gebirgsjager]

I was looking through the current Dixie Gun Works, Inc., (2018) catalog this morning and found this information on page 569-570:

Cap Size
Percussion caps are something of a problem to fit correctly on a nipple. The sizes are not exactly standard. Our modern made nipples generally measure .163 " tapered to .168" plus or minus .002" top to bottom. The .167-8 caps will have a snug fit on some nipples, others will fit only by forcing. If the cap that you are using must be forced on your nipples, you can grind or polish the neck of the nipple to reduce the diameter and thus, allow you caps to fit better. It is hoped that this chart will serve to further enlighten the subject.

Inside Dia. Length of Cap
No. 10 Alcan 167 .178
No. 11 Alcan (Italy) 168 .153
No. 1075 German 170 .170
Ely No. F4-12 170
No. 1055 German 170 .220
No. 11 Remington 170 .190
No. 11 Italian (Dixie) 172 .206
Ely No. F4-12 175
No. 11 Winchester 175 .200
Ely No. Fr-25 177
No. 12 Alcan 178 .195
No. 12 Remington 178 .190

************************
This is how it appears in the catalog, and where numbers are missing that is how it is in the book. I have a feeling that this information is pretty old.
Is Alcan even around anymore? But maybe some of their caps are, and the information could prove useful. It is obvious that there exists a significant variation in cap dimensions. As pertains to revolvers, Dixie seems to presently only carry Remington # 10 #11, RWS German #11, and CCI #10, #11, #11 Magnum. Note that the dimensions for CCI caps are missing from the above data, so that's another clue that the data may be dated.
************************

So I thought to inspect my revolvers based on indian joe's ideas about chain fires maybe being caused by caps that are too long and which strike the recoil shield upon firing. I have 3 revolvers currently loaded, and all were capped with CCI #11 caps. I was kind of surprised at what I found.
First revolver, a Uberti 1873 percussion, all the caps were below (just barely) of being flush with the rear face of the cylinder. Second revolver, another Uberti 1873 percussion, had two caps that would actually slightly scrape the recoil shield when the hammer was put on half cock and the cylinder freely turned. Certainly potential trouble there! The third revolver is a Pietta 1860 Army, and all caps were almost exactly flush with the rear face of the cylinder.

In the case of the second 1873 and the 1860 I tried pressing the caps onto the nipples farther with my fingers with no success. Then, wearing safety glasses and a welder's glove, I tried pushing them on farther with a wooden popsicle stick. No success there either, and some of the caps' top surface actually dented in a bit. Yes, I was nervous, expecting to pop a cap at any time, but it didn't happen. After reflecting on it a bit I decided to leave the 1860 as it was, because if I couldn't get the caps on any farther then they probably wouldn't back out either, but it is something that I'll keep an eye on when I shoot it. But the 1873 with the high caps had to be addressed, so I removed the caps and found two old tins of caps that I've had in my kit for so long I can't remember where I got them, but they're at least 30 years old and maybe older. One is Remington. It doesn't say what size the caps are on the tin, but they fit on the 1873's nipples much better, sat much lower, and seemed to be a snug fit. The other tin contains Navy Arms German-made caps, and they stood too high on every nipple, size stated on the label to be 1075 (Not 1055), but probably close to a #11, as they are larger than a #10 CCI of which I also had one container.

My conclusion, at this point, is that indian joe has a large part of the answer at to why chain fires occur. I think I just avoided one. I'll be looking to get some more Remington #11 caps, especially since Remington has entered into bankruptcy proceedings and who knows if they'll be around in another couple of years. I could order 1,000 from Dixie, but they want a $30 Haz Mat fee, so that makes for pretty expensive caps. I'll have to see if I can find a tin here and there in likely stores. Another thing I'm going to examine is reducing the length and/or diameter of nipples to fit the rather large stockpile of CCI caps I've stored away. I'm thinking that the diameter might be reduced satisfactorily using a pin vise and a Dremel tool with a Craytex wheel. Of course, buying custom ready-made nipples would be easier, but so far I haven't found too many to be available. There are 3-packs of Pietta-made nipples available from both Dixie and Midway, so if my customization doesn't work out I can at least replace what I ruin.

Well, all of this "for the good of the order." May your lives be untroubled by chain fires. 215573

DG

[Texas by God]

On the subject of caps, I've made it a habit to lower the hammer on each cap and push the cap down with the hammer firmly. No drag, no hangfires. I do it on my single shot cap locks as well.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[webfoot10]

I've been watching these posts on chain fires in C&B revolvers. I shoot a 1858 Remington
clone and have never had a chain fire. I use a loading block to load the two cylinders I
have with my blackpowder charge and a .454 dia rb. then I cap the cylinders with cci no.11
caps. I then take a popcicle stick and push the caps down firmly on the nipples.
Then (making sure your powder is out of the way) I take a candle and drip the candle
wax onto the mouths of the cylinder covering the RB's then before the wax hardens
I wipe any excess off with my finger, leaving a coat of wax on the RB's. Then drip
some wax on the caps on the nipples. When hard take the popcicle stick and scrape
off any excess on the top of the caps, leaving the top of the caps free of wax.
The cylinder is now sealed from any crossfiring and is waterproof. Sounds complicated
but is not if you are set up for a day of shooting. After shooting wipe the revolver down
with a rag and start over.
webfoot10

[Texas by God]

I have used candle wax on the caps as described above when hunting in moist weather (fog, drizzle). Waxing the chamber mouths is an excellent idea for cool weather. Thanks, Webfoot10!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[Der Gebirgsjager]

Thanks, webfoot10 and TbG for these pointers.
I'm wondering about how persistent the wax is. Does it start melting out of the unfired cylinder chambers after the first shot or two as the cylinder heats up?
I'm really liking Battis' wax wads which he showed us back in post #20, but am just a bit reluctant to use my barrels as molds. I'll be looking around for a tube with the right size hole.
For now, this is where I'm at. Cap guards for waterproofing and extra insurance to keep the caps in place, and grease in the front. As for the waterproofing, this is a good time of year for it!
215601 215602 215603

[webfoot10]

I've never had the wax melt out of my revolver cylinder. Maybe if you left it in the sun too
long. Another way to load the wax wads is to seat a card wad cut from a waxed milk carton
on top of the powder then seat your RB. Then fill with wax, You'll still lube the bullet and the barrel.
you may
have to back off on your powder charge to allow for the card wad. I used to load shot loads
in my 1860 colt clone when I lived in California out in the desert. I filled the chamber half
full of 4f blackpowder then a card wad then filled it with #8 shot, then dripped candle wax
on the shot to the mouth of cylinder. Made a wax bullet filled with shot. Worked on the dam
sneaky rattlesnakes. Never had any melt in the desert heat.
webfoot10

[samari46]

Friend of mine way back when bought a pepperbox kit and we spent the day putting it together. What little info I could dig up said that these firearms were prone to chain fire. So advised him to use ox yoke wonder wads over the bullet.He went to his aunt's place to test it out. Not once but twice did he get chain fires. Said it made for an interesting day. Only thing we could figure out was the flame from an exploding cap would set off the one next to it and migrate to the next cap. So ended that pepperbox episode. I polished all the steel and brass and he had all the steel parts blued. Made up a shadow box and as far as I know it's still there today. Frank

[Texas by God]

Mountain Hunter- how is that '73 cap & ball working for you?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[Battis]

I think it was Mark Twain who said that the only safe place around a pepperbox is behind it.

[Der Gebirgsjager]

Mountain Hunter- how is that '73 cap & ball working for you?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Love it, Tex! Slow to reload, but I've got an extra cylinder on back order with VTI Gunparts. It's as accurate as my 1860 Army. So far I've only shot ball, no conicals, but plan on getting around to it after a careful casting session. I have a few from several years ago, but they came out a bit wrinkly. I used a Dixie GW mold and it's not of the best quality. I'm also going to give Battis' wax wads a try. Fun, fun, fun! :D

[Texas by God]

Lee has the 4502001R mould that might work for you if the 73 is "44" cal.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[elk hunter]

Fifty years ago we made chamber lube/sealer for our percussion revolvers by melting bees wax on top of boiling water to about 1/8" thickness and when cooled to solid we punched out wads that we then pressed down with the rammer over the seated ball. Using those along with correct fitting caps we never had a chain fire. Since I've been unable to find #9 caps to fit my current old Colt's I'm thinking of making a sizing die and punch to see if I can size down #10 caps to fit. Just don't want to damage the old guns.

[Der Gebirgsjager]

Just wanted to point out that a couple of days ago here on this forum in another thread a member showed how to use small pistol primers and plastic tubing purchased at Home Depot in place/substitution of regular percussion caps. Really ingenious and a good read, recommend reading it, 'cause down the road we don't know what will continue to be available. Works very much like the Cap Guard tubes I'm using, but since the primers don't stand as tall as the caps there would be almost no chance that they'd contact the recoil shield behind the cylinder and chain fire.
Said to be very reliable ignition, so I'll be trying it when I get the time.