Black Powder Pistols (308, purchase, firearm, cost)

[Mac_Muz]

That 200 figure is going to be a problem. You can beat that figure by about 175 bucks and get the same thing you wanted originally and put together if you wait, hunt and buy right, and then you can get your money back the 25 bucks.

Guns of my link say will cost more, but used will get more back too. On my link I saw pistols for under 400 that looked pretty nice and were made right. I am sure a lot of re-enactors use that type of gun (both long and short.

Just sayin..... Sometimes i can be one of those people that just has a dollar burning a hole in my pocket, and once I have done the deed, have satisfied my gratification, I just wish i waited and found what I really wanted.

I am stuck with something I didn't really want, and no one else wants it, so i can't sell it.

It ends up like to big to fail, but is too good to toss in the trash, but yet no one wants it.

I hate that feeling and I am not so close to that as i once was, but still I can recall it.

I can feel that way when I sit down to start cutting out leather for knee high boot mocs too. The good thing there is no body and i mean no body makes these any better that I could buy.

As store bought for that kinda money you still better check really well, because some low wage earner is building them and he doesn't care a whit about if things line up or how poor the wood to metal fit really is.....

That's just life..... An example is in your shot gun thread... As much as i like guns like that and even while the pics were not close up details I could see the wood to metal fit at the tang is poor. The wood is way up high compared to where the metal is, and to be 'right' the wood would be flush with the metal tang.

This is the BS I have come to expect living in the early part of the 21st century...

Getting OT I know but the last point is I own a Ruger 10-22 that is pre Bible (no warnings stamped on the steel barrel) This was made before 1972.... My son owns another same gun and the fit and finish sucks compared to mine.

Mine has real walnut his is birch. Mine has better metal treatment in polish and blue and his looks like grooves on a old fashion 45 Record and the blue is blacking. Mine has a much tighter wood to metal fit too.

It is what it is.....

The other night my son took his 3.5 year old, me my wife and his So out to a scarey halloween maze in a corn field.

We were not allowed in because evidently it was for ages 10 and up... The little guys says 'Daddy why couldn't we get in?"

My son says shaking a flash light at his chest in a deep scarey voice "Because of Lawyers and Insurance Companies!"

Kinda covers a lot eh?

[itlltickleurinnerds]

From my experience stay away from kits unless you want to build a gun. If you want to save money and are not into building its not going to be a snap. Most people who build like to build more than shoot. Shooting is fun but is also very time consuming and dirty. You have to wash them with soap and water then oil them up. I used to buy them assembled for around 70 bucks for a colt or Remington pistol but now they seem to want two to three bills for one. Not a colt third gen. or Ruger either, we are talking about an Italian knock off. I sold all my guns off but one real 1860 colt from the US Civil War. I keep it to go with my Ames 1860 63 Calv. saber. Makes for a nice display with my Confederate bonds. Of course I don't shoot it.

[Mac_Muz]

Originally Posted by itlltickleurinnerds

From my experience stay away from kits unless you want to build a gun. If you want to save money and are not into building its not going to be a snap. Most people who build like to build more than shoot. Shooting is fun but is also very time consuming and dirty. You have to wash them with soap and water then oil them up. I used to buy them assembled for around 70 bucks for a colt or Remington pistol but now they seem to want two to three bills for one. Not a colt third gen. or Ruger either, we are talking about an Italian knock off. I sold all my guns off but one real 1860 colt from the US Civil War. I keep it to go with my Ames 1860 63 Calv. saber. Makes for a nice display with my Confederate bonds. Of course I don't shoot it.

I think he is after a single shot caintucay pistol this time.... Not a six shooter like you have and had before.

it goes with out saying i think.... You shoot one round in a BP gun and it must be cleaned that day. There are several methods. Mine is plenty of hot water, and nothing else, but jute twine on a worm, and then OIL.

I like to make the metal so hot with hot water that it's hard to touch the metal. That way it makes me think the water will dry in breech block threads (I hope). Single shot guns have parts that should never be taken a part ever!

[arctichomesteader]

Hey Mac, that's an interesting idea with the silver. I use a piece of polished stainless steel. I got more careful about checking barrels after the metal around the nipple on a rusty underhammer pistol gave way (I did clean it but I missed how bad it was there). Nice thing there is it pointed downward.

[Mac_Muz]

When cleaning BP guns that have nipples remove them and make sure the barrel is bone dry before you re-install the nipple.

I used to work silver for my keep, and so i still have a smattering around, polishing it isn't a big problem.

SS will work and wont tarnish as fast. Consider the sulfur........ I work ss too, but never have any disks that size and it would be a pain to make them.

I find a key check comes about 2 maybe 3 days after a cleaning, to make sure the gun is really clean. Any black on a dry patch then will have me cleaning again.

I have shot too much black and Berdan corrosive so I learned to know better, and i know clean sometimes isn't clean enough.

I have no ambition to ever pull a trigger and end up with a handful of splinters and steel.

[tryharder]

Take a really long look at the new blackpowder substitute from Hodgdon powder, guys. Google for them and search their site for Triple Seven. Much, much less smoke, corrosion and moisture attraction problems. Probably need a modern cap to detonate it, tho.

[Mac_Muz]

Originally Posted by tryharder

Take a really long look at the new blackpowder substitute from Hodgdon powder, guys. Google for them and search their site for Triple Seven. Much, much less smoke, corrosion and moisture attraction problems. Probably need a modern cap to detonate it, tho.

yes you will need a cap to fire that powder type off. It won't work well in a flintlock unless you create duplex loads. Some guys do that but i don't. That would mean 4fffg in the pan maybe 10 grains more in the breech and the rest black powder substitute.

I remember when this was new and was also deemed 'safer' it wasn't and the CEO blew himself to kingdom come, with something called Golden Powder.

[Happy in Wyoming]

The real thing works the best and it's the most fun. If I want cleaner ignition I'll add a little smokeless. Yes, I know the purists will say it's not real or that it's unsafe but I've done it with no problem. I don't use original designs; I use modern designs like the Ruger Old Army. If I wanted a flintlock I'd use the most modern design. These vary. The best shotgun designs were those that Joe Manton conceived more than two centuries ago. Sadly, you can't find any current products that use these innovations; few enthusiasts even know they exist. How many have even heard of Joe Manton?

There have been some excellent modern flintlock designs. They don't look like the old ones although they could but they're far more accurate. If you want the old time stuff that's fine but be aware that you'll deal with old time problems.

[Mac_Muz]

I have heard of Joe Manton, but for flintlocks and the man dies before cap locks had been invented by a few years. Maybe he was in on the inventions, but there is no way a man can dies in 1835 and be around for the first cap locks in 1837.

But the short span is causing me to wonder because there must have been a lead up to the accepted date of 1837 being about the first for cap lock ignition.

Old gun history is loaded with errors..... I get the idea I am about to learn something i thought I knew.

Most people think Lewis and Clark took Harper Ferry Rifles with them too, but these rifles were still only on paper at the time they left and so they took the older 1792 Musket which were the best they could get at the time.

[Happy in Wyoming]

Originally Posted by Mac_Muz

I have heard of Joe Manton, but for flintlocks and the man dies before cap locks had been invented by a few years. Maybe he was in on the inventions, but there is no way a man can dies in 1835 and be around for the first cap locks in 1837.

But the short span is causing me to wonder because there must have been a lead up to the accepted date of 1837 being about the first for cap lock ignition.

Old gun history is loaded with errors..... I get the idea I am about to learn something i thought I knew.

Most people think Lewis and Clark took Harper Ferry Rifles with them too, but these rifles were still only on paper at the time they left and so they took the older 1792 Musket which were the best they could get at the time.

The story used to be that Joshua Shaw invented the percussion cap but now a number of people disagree. Some believe that Joe Manton either invented it earlier than 1835 or constructed it based on another's ideas. He certainly worked on different means of enclosing fulminate in tubes to ignite the charge. This was the beginning of percussion so there were all sorts of systems tried.

I don't have the information at hand but I believe that Alexander Forsythe began his experiments in 1807 and had his pill bottle lock (called that from the shape) by 1812.

But my post on Manton earlier was just about his improvements on flintlocks in the shotguns he made.

There's a terrific book on these early systems with dirt cheap prices on both this and another edition.

Early Percussion Firearms: Lewis Winant: Amazon.com: Books