Chainfire in a revolver?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Crawdad1

Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
3,725
Location
Pennsylvania
Never had one but I don't go out of my way to get one either. To prove a point that chain firing a revolver isn't all that easy, this guy went out of his way to chain fire a revolver by using an undersized ball, no wad or grease.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ne4VgCdAy7Y

In my opinion, you load it right she won't chain fire.
 
When I first got involved with cap and ball, there were a few chain fires.
Mostly caused by undersized balls, and poorly fitting primers, due to being the only ones available.
But they did no harm.
Only three rounds went off, each time.
The intended one and the two on either side, both clearing the frame, nicely.
The others did not go off.
There's really only one to worry about, the chamber at the 6 o' clock position.
The others would only be a problem if there was an unintended target slightly off to the sides.
At least that was my experience.
Haven't had a chain fire in a very long time.
 
I've never used a wad and seldom have used Criso or tallow.

Typically with my Pietta 1858 Remington, I simply use a .457 ball
 
If the ball is properly sized to shave a ring of lead off when loaded, it's IMPOSSIBLE for anything to detonate the powder from the front of the cylinder, leaving only 2 ways a chain fire could occur: At the nipple or at a crack or fissure in a cylinder wall to another chamber.

At the nipple, a loose fitting cap is a possibility, as are improperly sized nipples that would cause their caps to detonate by striking the rear of the frame when the cylinder is pushed back by recoil.

In the cylinder walls, the problem can be avoided by proper maintenance and inspection of the firearm.

The grease/tallow is specifically for lubrication. An un lubed lead ball will leave leading in the barrel that it's fired from, and the grease keeps fouling soft so more shots can be made between cleaning.

The over powder wads are used to take up space in the cylinder so you get proper compression of your powder. They don't seal anything, as the ball takes care of that.
 
Steve2md,
You still can get a chainfire even if a nice ring of lead is shaved. Some cylinder faces will have a slight overhang of metal from machining the cylinder face causing a slight out of round chamber mouth by just a few thou. That allows the ball to be seated but not tightly contacting the chamber wall all the way around which can allow a chainfire from the front. I've had several C&Bs that have beveled chamber mouths which removes the overhang. You can also get "ball creep" from the same situation. Beveling allows the ball to swage fit the chamber.
 
What snidervolley suggested and Crawdad1 seconded. Keep those caps tight.
 
Or, you can let being easily bored and lazy work for you.
Load just one chamber, shoot it, and so on.
The result is about the same number of rounds downrange as loading five at a time.
For the range, of course, not out in the real world.
And no chance of a chain fire, either.
Just a thought.
 
I haven't had one since 1968.

Probably about 1970 when I had one. But nobody was using wads back then, and even if you get a nice ring shaved off, if there is a dent in the ball at the right spot there is still a void that leaves a path open for an errant spark to find its way to the powder.

Just nice to see so many experts who are sure a chainfire can't happen.
 
From my reading I've been given to understand that the risk is about equal for a chainfire to be triggered from the front as from the rear in the event of a cap falling off or a nipple being left uncapped intentionally.

Since my primary purpose for cap&ball guns is cowboy action shooting I need to "reload" on occasion for a stage. At such times I charge all 6 chambers and only cap 5. Early on I shot the 5 then capped and shot the 6th.

But after reading here on THR about one chainfire that was apparently due to a cap coming off I've been drawing and capping the 6th nipple THEN shooting.

And in fact with all the flame and gases around a C&B when it fires it's a wonder I didn't have a chainfire back when I wasn't capping that loaded chamber.
 
BC Rider,
I used to do the exact same thing but now the ROs will actually instruct us to cap first. I found it a speed advantage (as if C&Bers have any advantage) when shooting Colts 'cause after the 5th shot you cocked the gun and there was the open nipple right on top and ready to cap & fire. No fumbling with the cylinder. I only did that recently on a Frontiersman shoot off to gain a second or two on my opponent and lost by about 1/2 second (he got me on a long gun where I had to make up a miss). It felt just like old times to do the capping last.
 
Thought this might be of interest:


Colonel Samuel Colt
Lecture at the London Institution of Civil Engineers, 25 Nov 1851

Fig 11, plate 1, represents a firearm made by the author, in 1836, to rotate and fire by the continued action of the lever, or by the use of a trigger.

The arms so constructed, consisting of a large number of pieces, and assemble in a complicated manner, were to found to possess many practical disadvantages, arising chiefly from the wish of the Author to construct compact and good looking weapons. His original experiments all been made on the skeleton arms, solely with a view to utility, and in them there was not the liability of premature explosion, from the escape of fire at the mouth of the chamber, or by inter-communication of the ignited detonating camps, but when he enclosed the rear, and the mouths of the rotating chambers, the fire, being confined beneath the shield and the cap, was communicated successfully to the percussion caps, and in front was conveyed into the chambers, so that premature and simultaneous explosion of the charges necessarily took place.

In consequence of these premature explosions it became necessary to remove the shield, from over the base of the chambers, and to introduce partitions, between the nipples, or cones, to prevent the fire from spreading to and exploding the adjoining caps; but this only partially accomplished the object There still remained risk of explosion from the spreading of the fire laterally between the base of the barrel and the face of the chamber. To meet this danger, the metal plate which was attached to the barrel, and projected over the chambers, was removed; this obviated to a certain extent, but did not altogether prevent the simultaneous explosion of the charges for during a trial of the arm, by order of the American Government, an accident occurred, from the simultaneous explosion of two chambers, which induced the Author, after much reflection to give a slight chamfer, or bevel to the orifice of each chamber, so as to deflect, or throw off at an outward angle, the fire which expanded laterally across their mouths. The reason for this alteration was, that when the lateral fire met the rectangular edge of the orifice of the chambers, the angle of incidence being equal to the angle of reflection, the fire was conducted downwards, or inwards to the charge’ but when the flame struck the chamfered edge, it was directed outward away from the charge. Unimportant as this alteration may appear, it has proved so effectual, that if loose powder is placed over the charge, in the adjoining chambers, it is not now ignited when the pistol is discharged. These and other improvements have brought the fire-arm to its present safe and effective condition and the Author believes, that no causality can occur, nor that more than on charge can be fired at one time, if the metal is sound and the arm is properly handled
.
 
Interesting..... and yet the modern day replicas have squared off chamber mouths. Or at least they are relieved by a minimal amount just sufficient to avoid us cutting ourselves when handling the parts.

Seems like adding a somewhat more noticeable chamfer would do two things. First off it would deflect the gases and any powder particles as suggested above. Secondly it would swage the balls down in size to fit the chambers instead of cutting off a ring of lead.
 
The Euroarms Remingtons I have all have chamfered chamber mouths. I've read that Euroarms copied an original Beals Remington when they designed their repro.
 
For some reason I have always wanted a Pepperbox;

"George Bemis . . . wore in his belt an old original "Allen" revolver, such as irreverent people called a "pepper-box." Simply drawing the trigger back, cocked and fired the pistol. As the trigger came back, the hammer would begin to rise and the barrel to turn over, and presently down would drop the hammer, and away would speed the ball. To aim along the turning barrel and hit the thing aimed at was a feat which was probably never done with an "Allen" in the world. But George's was a reliable weapon, nevertheless, because, as one of the stage-drivers afterward said, "If she didn't get what she went after, she would fetch something else." And so she did. She went after a deuce of spades nailed against a tree, once, and fetched a mule standing about thirty yards to the left of it. Bemis did not want the mule; but the owner came out with a double-barreled shotgun and persuaded him to buy it, anyhow. It was a cheerful weapon--the "Allen." Sometimes all its six barrels would go off at once, and then there was no safe place in all the region round about, but behind it."

Mark Twain Roughing It.
 
For some reason I have always wanted a Pepperbox;

There were a few on Auction Arms about a year ago from an estate sell. Beautiful pieces. If I recall correctly the were Ethan Allen Pepperboxes and a few were from a European maker.
 
The Euroarms Remingtons I have all have chamfered chamber mouths. I've read that Euroarms copied an original Beals Remington when they designed their repro.

Howdy

Absolutely no chamfer on the chamber mouths of my old EuroArms Remington that I bought new back in 1975, just checked. However the Uberti Stainless Remington that I have does have ever so slight chamfering on the chamber mouths, maybe .005 or so by eye. Have to admit, I never noticed that before. I bought that gun used with a conversion cylinder and I have never actually fired it with the C&B cylinder, probably why I never noticed the slight chamfers.
 
Driftwood, Take another look at your Euroarms Remmie. The Euroarms chamber mouths are more of a tapering rather than a 45 degree beveling. The surface varies a bit in depth (not always centered) to about 1/10 of an inch. If you place a .451 ball in the chamber it will drop below the "equator" on the ball before stopping whereas a .457 will sit on top of the mouth like most other guns.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top