Author Topic: Flintlocks (Read 4391 times)

Swampman · « **Reply #30 on:** March 20, 2009, 01:26:48 AM »

Quote

If you do the study you will find that the old trappers and hunters held onto the flintlocks as long as possible.

History doesn't show this to be the case. Caplocks took off like wildfire even in the far west.

Sourdough · « **Reply #31 on:** March 21, 2009, 03:49:46 AM »

I think economics may have had a lot to do with it as well. How many folks could afford the newest whiz-bang caplock when they first came out? Also when weapons system like that comes out that totally overshadows the the old systems, governments have to have them. What do they do with their old systems? They sell them cheap. The less affluent (Common Man) bought them for use at home and in the field. It would take several years for the markets to absorb those old Flintlocks. And once a man spent good money for a flint lock he would shoot it as long as it worked properly. And the economy went a lot slower back then. Technology was moving at a much slower pace.

Hence the long time before the civilian populace went to Cap Locks.

Look at our own government. When they went to Bolt Actions they flooded the market with the old needle guns (45-70 Springfields), then when the 30 cal USGOV (30-06) was adopted they flooded the market with the old 30-40 Graig Jorgenson.

Swampman · « **Reply #32 on:** March 21, 2009, 03:56:08 AM »

Most governments converted their flintlocks to caplocks rather quickly.

streak · « **Reply #33 on:** March 21, 2009, 01:48:48 PM »

As I have numerous flintlocks, and percussion pistols and rifles, I think for a great survival combination, the .62 caliber swivel breech in a flintlock would be a heck of a combination. One barrel at .62 caliber
smoothbore and the other.62 caliber rifled! Smoothbore for waterfowl and upland birds, and small upland game,can also be used with a patched ball along with the rifled barrel for a second fast shot on big game. It is amazing how fast you can become with a swivel breech for that sometimes fast second shot!
I like the balance of my swivel breech,the weight of the extra barrel seems to really aid in the overall balance of the gun.

kevthebassman · « **Reply #34 on:** March 21, 2009, 05:23:09 PM »

I still don't think that flinters have any place in a survival arsenal. I love mine, but rimfire is just too damn cheap for me to even think of having to use a flinter as my primary means of defense.

I've got a Henry lever gun and a Winchester autoloader, and I've stacked .22lr deep. There is a scope on the Henry, and I can shoot the brass bases off of spent shotgun shells at 25 yards with Federal bulk ammo.

With the amount of .22lr that I have stockpiled, I have a hard time believing that I'd use it up in a lifetime of squirrel and coon hunting.

pab1 · « **Reply #35 on:** March 23, 2009, 07:39:44 AM »

Quote from: kevthebassman on March 21, 2009, 05:23:09 PM

I still don't think that flinters have any place in a survival arsenal. I love mine, but rimfire is just too damn cheap for me to even think of having to use a flinter as my primary means of defense.

I think there are two different types of survival situations to consider. In a "short term" situation, a few bricks of .22lr ammo will get you by. In this type of situation, a rimfire or centerfire would definitly be preferable. In an EOTWAWKI "long term" sutuation, at some point the ammo and loading components for centerfires will dry up. This is when a flintlock would be very nice to have around. As others have pointed out, blackpowder is not difficult to make and primers, which will run out at some point, are not needed. This is the same reason a smoothbore would be more versatile to have. If you run out of round balls and shot, you can substitute many different objects that will do the job.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #36 on:** March 23, 2009, 08:05:29 AM »

the trappers used the flintlock , makes sense as they often went a couple years with out resupply and most streams had flint, caves had bat droppings , sulfur was also findable and char was easy to make . lead was also around . Much of the woods craft of the day included where such things could be found along with water , food etc. . Also many guns were double bbl with one side cap lock the other flintlock. the British made alot of these guns for use in far off places again as resupply was spotty . If you check some of the larger guns used for market hunting in this country and in England were also of this type . There was a show on not to long ago that featured just such a gun still in use in England today.

If any one travels in Va. there is a homestead on the Blue Ridge Pwk. that features the tools to make flintlocks and powder and bullets . well worth the stop. It is south of the I 64 crossing a few miles .

Bat droppings you ask - that or ashes will make saltpeter . Yep they show you at the homestead . They use the ashes for soap production also .
another source of imfo is the Foxfire books

don heath · « **Reply #37 on:** March 27, 2009, 04:04:01 AM »

In the more remote parts of Africa today, it is not uncommon to still encounter percussion muskets in the hands of villagers (and poachers). In all my years as a Parks officer in Zim, I never once encountered a flintlock still in action, although several people owned them.

Part of the reason is that it is easy enough to "remake" a percussion cap. A suitable punch, scraper and some match heads and you have a new cap (all use the old style top hat caps). Bearing in mind that these caps are either home made or dating from the 1890's it is pretty impressive. The other factor is the local shortage of Sulphur. Nitrate is easy to come by and they locals mostly use a charcoal with a high sulphur content, but there are very few sulphur springs and even fewer deposits in central Africa. (one species of comiphora tree concentrates sulphur in it's wood and is highly prised for making charcoal to be used in gunpower manufacture.

Given a decent start, our fairly crummy 'African powder' with it's incorrect chemical mix, actually works reasonably well - well enough for poachers to kill buffalo and the odd parks game scout!. It would never "flash" well enough to carry the flame from the pan to the main charge on a flint lock.

You would be surprised how easy it is to make any of the fulminates - mercury, silver or even gold. They were known several hundred years before Rev Forsyth thought to use them in an ignition mechanisim for firearms. A little more knowledge and you will not need to hamper yourself with a flint lock!

As an after though, considering just how many reloads I have got out of my Martini Henry cases using black powder...why not buy a ,45-70 and a good stock of primers? Used carefully a hundred cases would last several lifetimes ( and within a generation somebody would get arround to making fresh primers by careful hand stampings etc!)

Cornbelt · « **Reply #38 on:** April 03, 2009, 09:16:09 AM »

With everyone anteing up with their favorite meat-getting sciences, don't forget one of the easiest and most reliable sources available to hunters and non-hunters alike; the highway, and you don't even need to clean your gun. Like anything else, there's a science to it.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #39 on:** April 03, 2009, 09:19:06 AM »

now thats where a big bore mags. would strut its stuff , on the road .
compacts need not apply .

Swampman · « **Reply #40 on:** April 03, 2009, 11:47:12 AM »

Quote

the trappers used the flintlock

Not after percussion caps were invented.

mannyrock · « **Reply #41 on:** April 04, 2009, 02:02:31 PM »

If there ever is a catastrophic situation, and by chance I live so long afterwards that there is no .22 lr left to trade for, then I'm sure not gonna waste my time scraping up bat-poop to make black powder for a flintlock rifle. There will be no game left to hunt, and when it comes to self-defense, the flintlock rifle is no better than (and in many situations worse than) a long-bow. Settlers on the frontier, armed with flintlocks, were routinely wipped out by the tomahawk and bow, particularly in the Ohio river valley.

Buckskins & Black Powder · « **Reply #42 on:** April 04, 2009, 03:05:10 PM »

ummm custer was wiped out by indians with bows and hawks, and custer and his men did not have flintlocks.

Badnews Bob · « **Reply #43 on:** April 05, 2009, 12:04:11 AM »

Custer got wiped out by Lever action repaters and the fact that he was to arrogant to allow his men to carry reapeters or bring along the wagon mounted Gatlin guns they left at the fort. One mans stupid arrogance is what killed all those soldiers.

Single shots of any kind are not very good self defense weapons, They do however make good reliable tools for feeding you.

243dave · « **Reply #44 on:** April 05, 2009, 08:58:28 AM »

Your whole post is dead on Badnews Bob.

mannyrock · « **Reply #45 on:** April 05, 2009, 03:11:43 PM »

Dear Guys,

Having the Gattling guns would not have saved Custer's command. (In fact, having walked the battlefield three times, it is easy to see that he could never have even dragged them to the hillside position of his final stand.) The Indians did not charge Custer's command in mass, as depicted in the movies. They thoroughly surrounded it with 2,000 braves, crept up as close as possible using the many ravines, ditches and neighboring hills, and then just poured lead into the little blue mass, non-stop, with lever action rifles, until no soldiers were shooting back. It only took them about 15 minutes. Having two or three guys standing there hand-cranking Gattling guns, all unaimed fire, at barren hillsides and ravines would not have changed much. Indeed, since these guys would have been standing up, they would have been the first to die. (The others were busy shooting their horses in the head, so they would have something to lay down behind. Of course, it didn't help.)

Custer only had one-third of his command with him on that hill, because he had divided his 7th Calvary into three groups, sending them into different directions, to set up the attack. Had he kept them together, all 700+ of them, the outcome of the battle may well have been different.

But, the LARGEST arrogant mistake made by Custer was that before leaving the infantry column two days earlier, General Terry told Custer to take not only his 7th Calvary, but also to take charge of and bring the 5th Cavalry as well. All told, this would have been a huge force of almost 1,500 men. But, Custer refused. He only wanted his 7th Cavalry to have the "glory" of defeating the Sioux, and he didn't want to share the spotlight with the 5th Calvary. (After all, he was planning to run for President.)

Regards, Mannyrock

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #46 on:** April 06, 2009, 10:21:14 AM »

swampman , you better check the trappers used them long after the cap was invented as care and storage not to mention resupply was still a problem .

Buckskins & Black Powder · « **Reply #47 on:** April 07, 2009, 01:12:29 PM »

used them well into the 1820s - 1830s. They were well adapted to the flinter and did not trust the percussion caps.

I know if i were in that time period, a flinter would be in my hands.

Swampman · « **Reply #48 on:** April 07, 2009, 01:51:57 PM »

Quote from: SHOOTALL on April 06, 2009, 10:21:14 AM

swampman , you better check the trappers used them long after the cap was invented as care and storage not to mention resupply was still a problem .

Those myths have been repeated for years, but history shows that flintlocks were abandoned quickly.

Buckskins & Black Powder · « **Reply #49 on:** April 07, 2009, 02:47:43 PM »

have any real info on that?

Swampman · « **Reply #50 on:** April 07, 2009, 02:57:22 PM »

http://home.att.net/~mman/Guns.htm

flintlock · « **Reply #51 on:** April 07, 2009, 03:06:31 PM »

Have you guys ever heard of Jamestown Rifles???

Well, they were made right here in the Piedmont area of NC...There is a fellow that I shoot with quite a bit that lives in this area, he has a good collection of these rifles as well as others...He also builds rifles, several have won at Friendship, the guy is also called in to digs when relics are found to tell the archaeologists...The family farm that he lives on in Alamance County was the location of a bloody battle during the Revolution...He can talk for days about the local history...In short, he is an expert...

He has in his posession order books from the 1850s from these factories in the area that made these rifles...

Flintlocks in the Piedmont area of North Carolina were still being made in the 1850s...

Swampman · « **Reply #52 on:** April 07, 2009, 03:18:17 PM »

They were in use in Tennessee until the 1930s but only by people who were dirt poor.

gstewart44 · « **Reply #53 on:** April 07, 2009, 04:08:40 PM »

Quote from: Swampman on April 07, 2009, 01:51:57 PM

Quote from: SHOOTALL on April 06, 2009, 10:21:14 AM
swampman , you better check the trappers used them long after the cap was invented as care and storage not to mention resupply was still a problem .

Those myths have been repeated for years, but history shows that flintlocks were abandoned quickly.

Swampman - I just read your link http://home.att.net/~mman/Guns.htm and it says the mountain men used more flintlocks than percussion, were slow to change over due to distrust of the new system and availability of caps, and even though gradually switching to percussion over several decades, the older mountain men still used their flints into the 1850's. I don't think a thirty year changover from vast majority of flinters to majority percussion is what I would call a "quick abandonment".

Swampman · « **Reply #54 on:** April 07, 2009, 11:44:51 PM »

A million percussion caps shipped to the Rockies in the early 1830s? I guess the natives were making jewelry out of them?

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #55 on:** April 08, 2009, 01:42:59 AM »

i agree every one but the very poor of which many existed in the U S at that time and the long hunters and trappers had switched by 1840 or so but there are many articles in Buckskinner mag. to the contary to your statement .

myronman3 · « **Reply #56 on:** April 08, 2009, 03:51:35 AM »

keep the discussion respectful guys... i see the way this is headed and let's not do that....

gstewart44 · « **Reply #57 on:** April 08, 2009, 05:58:19 AM »

Meaning no disrespect with any posts but I have been re-reading all of them in this lively discussion and find a couple of points. Several members have stated that the trappers, ie "mountain men" utilized their flintlocks well into the percussion era. Others have stated the flintlock would be a good survival tool in the EOTWAWKI situation.

The history I have read and even Swampman's own link supports these comments.

At the same time Swampman has stated that "most governments converted their flintlocks to caplocks very quickly". This rapid conversion did happen in 1842 when the US Army officially adopted the percussion caplock. (25 yrs after the first workable caplock was made). The 1841 Mississippi rifle and the 1842 Musket began production in 1842 at Harpers Ferry and Springfield, as well as the conversion of over 700,000 Model 1816 Musket from flint to cap from 1842 to 1855.

As late as 1846 at the beginning of the Mexican American War, the majority of US troops in Texas were still armed with Flintlocks, one of the notable exceptions being Jefferson Davis' Mississippi Volunteer regiment.

Hawken rifles, manufactured in St. Louis were made as flintlocks up until 1834-35 when the caplocks became the "newest" and more efficient way to go.

The mountain man/trapper era referred to in many posts is collectively thought of as the period between 1810 and the early 1840's. Between 1820 and 1840 there were roughly 3000 trappers in the Rockies living of the bounty of nature. the first Rondezvouz was held in 1819 and about 500 trappers came. By 1840 only about 50 trappers showed up. The trapping became obsolete due to competition from the Hudson Bay company and changing fashions.

Lastly Swampman made the statement that "a million percussion caps shipped to the Rockies in the early 1830's?......" Your own link did not say this. It says that gun dealers in St. Louis (far east of the Rockies) were advertising up to one million caps in stock. St. Louis is well over 500 miles east of the Rockies.

Again I intend no disrespect with this post but Swampman's own link does not support his contentions.

myronman3 · « **Reply #58 on:** April 08, 2009, 06:35:09 AM »

no problem with your post, gstewart44. i see another post or two with a tone to it (not your posts) i dont care for. it is just a warning. there isnt going to be disrespect between members on forums i moderate. debate respectfully all you want.

Dixie Dude · « **Reply #59 on:** April 08, 2009, 06:35:46 AM »

Back to the original idea of TSHF situation. I think a few lbs of today's powder, a lot of primers, and cast bullets with a hand reloader would be more beneficial in today's situation. You can take a .44 mag rifle, 200 brass cases, a hand loader, a few thousand primers, a pound of powder and reload with either modern powder or black powder. You can get a bullet mold, a ladle, and make your own bullets, reuse the brass, and make your own gunpowder. All you need are a lot of primers which take up very little space and can be vacuum sealed in a plastic bag. All of this could fit in a 50 cal ammo can, and you could go for years. Recover your lead from animals killed, and still have a fast shooting rifle for 2 legged predators. You can even make shot shells from the .44. Ammo is fairly common. You can store a lot of brass and powder also whereever.