The New CCI "Re-Enactment Caps" YUK!!!

[BADUNAME47]

Because of complaints from the Civil War Re-enactment community, CCI has discontinued manufacturing their "Hot" Musket Caps and is now producing a "Re-enactment" musket cap that has about the same power as some of those roll caps you had when you got your first set of Roy Rogers Cap Pistols in Kindergarden.

From what I understand-it is a F.U.B.A.R (Ask Private Ryan what that means if you don't know) all the way around. Here is the chain of events as near as I can figure them out:

Re-enactors started banning CCI "Hot" Musket Caps from use in Civil War re-enactments because too many of the caps were "fragging" when they fired their muskets with blank charges. They complained to CCI.

Now. keep in mind most re-enactors are not "gun people" and to them their musket is a "prop" and a just a "noise and smoke maker." Many re-enactors do not even take very good care of their muskets because they use them only for firing blanks.

WHAT THE RE-ENACTORS DIDN'T KNOW AND DIDN'T UNDERSTAND is that with a Rifle-Musket, when your Musket Caps start to "FRAG" when the gun is fired, THAT IS A "RED ALARM" INDICATION THAT YOUR NIPPLE IS WORN OUT AND NEEDS TO BE REPLACED IMMEDIATELY!!!!! (Just like your car NOT stopping when you apply the brakes-that means your car needs a brake job!)

Re-enactors being too ignorant, didn't realize that and just complained to CCI. So, CCI quit producing their "Hot" Musket Caps and now they only produce "Re-enactor" grade, weak musket caps.

Based of some of their Press Releases, CCI is "clueless" when it comes to re-enactors because they believe that re-enactors refight "battles" by only popping caps on their rifle-muskets and not using gunpowder! (Like I said, it is an all around "FUBAR.")

What CCI has really done was to ditch a lot of their formerly "Happy" customers-just wrote them off! (Winchester did the same thing back in 1964 and we see how well that turned out.)

In the N-SSA the Sharps, Smith, Burnside and other carbine shooters often used the CCI "Hot" caps because the fire channel from the carbine's nipple to the chamber is a long and tortuous one. In other words, only "Hot" Musket Caps will reliably fire most Civil War Carbines.

This is a VERY, VERY BIG DEAL to N-SSA Skirmishers who shoot in the N-SSA Carbine Team Matches because these events are "time elimation" events. A carbine that mis-fires can cost you and your team a 1st or 2nd Place Medal! (Check out: www.n-ssa.org/)

Now another "dirty little secret" is that most "Substitute black powders" ignite at a higher temperature than good old black powders. Come this Fall's deer season there are going to be hunters that use the new CCI "Re-enactor" Musket Caps that will lose that "Trophy Buck" because their muzzleloader (charged with a "Substitute black powder") mis-fired when they had a perfect shot at Bambi!

Like I said, CCI has driven a lot of formerly "Happy Customers" away by changing the power of their Musket Caps based on a "problem that didn't exist."

Simple logic would indicate that CCI simply market two types of Muskets Caps. Their "Hot" Musket Caps for Carbine shooters and hunters and their "weak as water" Musket Caps for the re-enactment community (that won't be happy with the new caps either.) Until the re-enactors change out their worn nipples, their caps are going to continue to "frag" just not as much as before.

There are a lot of people like me that have shot up all of their "Hot" CCI Musket Caps and are now buying the "Hot" German Musket Caps. Hey, IF CCI doesn't want us as customers and don't want our money-the Germans are more than willing to have us as new customers!

 

[Phantom Captain]

Nope, the reason the CCIs fragment is not worn out nipples but the fact that CCIs are six wing instead of four. The smaller wings do blow apart and fragment easier than four wing caps. I have to say I don't like other reenactors using them for that reason and also for the fact that they really are noticeably louder when they go off right next to one's ear when we are in battle line. They are physically painful actually compared to other cap brands. For the record I use the German caps for reenacting as all in my unit do.

And you are generalizing. Not all reenactors are just out there for show and not "gun people". Some of us are real black powder aficianados first and foremost. I grew up shooting it and respecting it long before I got into reenacting. A couple other guys in my unit also have done the same. You are right on some accounts that there is that contigent that are not "gun people". They do drive me nuts actually and I and the other "gun people" in my unit are constantly doing what we can to educate better those who are not. Cleaning and maintenance of the weapons is my biggest pet peeve and I have become, by default, our company's weapons guy.

 

[19-3Ben]

Just like your car NOT stopping when you apply the brakes-that means your car needs a brake job!

False.

It means someone needs to make your horn louder.

 

[arcticap]

A recent THR thread indicated that the 4 flange caps worked fine:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=587933&highlight=flange

A reputable poster on the Muzzle Loading Forum stated that according to CCI there is no difference in strength between the 4 flange and 6 flange musket caps:

I just got off the phone 1-866-286-7436) with Linda, at CCI, who told me that they recently Discontinued making their 6-Wing musket Caps, and are still selling their 4-Wing musket caps.

Personally, from what I know of the differences, the 4 wing caps are less prone to shear off one of the wings where it can be sent flying into your forearm, compared to the narrower 6-winged versions. There is NO difference in power between the two caps....

http://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/f...60/post/986705/hl/musket/fromsearch/1/#986705

Here's the N-SSA thread and on the 2 pages so far only the OP complained:

http://www.n-ssa.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=14927&hilit=caps

Follow my personal referral link to register for free on the Muzzle Loading Forum:

http://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/fusionbb/index.php?referral/4225/

 

[Busyhands94]

i have had bad experience with CCI caps, they fake a few smacks with a hammer to go off.

 

[SwampMouse]

Southron sr,
You are going to do a couple of things for me to begin to understand what you are talking about. First what do you mean by a worn out nipple? I don't understand what you mean, be specific, tell us exactly what a worn out nipple is and tell us how that causes a cap to fragment. Second If those reencators are sometimes popping only caps what could a worn out nipple have to do with that? Perhaps your explanations of what a worn out nipple is will explain the second.

I know people who have shot with the same nipples for decades and their nipples aren't worn out, whatever that is.

 

[BADUNAME47]

CCI Caps

First of all, I have been a Re-enactor, from time to time, beginning in the late 1960's right on thru the 1990's. I was in the Gettysburg '76 (Bi-Centennial) Re-enactment. I have also done "Living History" at Old Fort Jackson near Savannah, Fort McAllister near Richmond Hill, GA and Fort King George located in Darien, GA.

I HAVE NEVER, NEVER, NEVER HAD A 6 WING CCI CAP "FRAG" ON ME. I have literally shot tens of thousands of them over the years (and usually, but not always, with live ammo.) Then again, I exclusively use Aampco nipplies, replacing them whenever they appear the least bit worn.

How to tell if your musket nipple is "Worn:"

1. The top of the nipple will start to "Mushroom" from repeated blows of the hammer.

2. A hammer striking at an angle will actually batter down one side of the top of the nipple.

3. A combination of cap flash and hot powder gases and rust will erode out (enlarge) the flash channel in the nipple over time. I have seen nipples so bad that the back flow of gases from the breech when the arm is fired will actually blow the hammer back to "Half-Cock!"

Actually, it is my theory that reason #3 can account for a lot of caps that "Frag." I.E., When you have a slightly enlarged Flash Channel in the nipple; while the back flow of gases from the breech might not be enough yet to throw the hammer back to Half-Cock; it can momentarily raise the hammer enough for the percussion cap or parts of it weakened by being crushed to depart, i.e., the cap "Frags."

Another thing that makes #3 so insidious is that unless you actually remove the nipple from the musket, and take a good look at the bottom of it, it is sometimes hard to determine IF your flash channel is undergoing significant erosion and enlargement.

The CCI "Weak as Water" caps I was referring to are clearly marked "Re-enactment" on the label. I have shot several hundred of them and I am not impressed.

Regardless whether you shoot live ammo OR blanks, always wear hearing protection.

CCI needs to take out some ads in the shooting press and let everyone know what is going on with their musket caps.

WITH ALL MY BEST REGARDS
Southron, Sr.,

 

[arcticap]

The OP of the following thread posted on 5/3/11 that he was struck by a cap flange which became embedded in his forehead by simply popping a CCI 6 flange cap on an unloaded TC Black Mountain Magnum sidelock rifle.
He was wearing safety glasses at the time which everyone should always wear when firing anyway, but especially if firing CCI 6 flange caps.

http://www.huntingnet.com/forum/black-powder/344174-found-problem-rifle-finally.html

 

[SwampMouse]

Southron sr,
To respond to your answers.
1. If you are mushrooming your nipples then your hammer is overtaveling. You should not have your hammer set so that it has more overtravel then a few thousands of an inch. This is easier to do on a rifle than a revolver. The cap sits above the nipple between 1/32 and 1/16 of an inch. The farther the hammer can overtravel the great the angle it hits the cap face. Not a good thing.
2. See #1
3. That is why you are using the Ampco nipple. The alloy does not erode like the steel nipples, Ampco is also used in industry in high temperature applications where there is errosion from gas if you use steel. Plus the Ampco nipples have a smaller flash hole and it will not blow the hammer back.

But I still don't understand why you think mushroomed nipples will cause a cap to frag. What is the reason? I agree with the oversize flash holes causing problems that is why they normally split and fragment. When I put Ampco nipples on my rifles they don't fragment other than some simple splits.

 

[BADUNAME47]

Dear Swampmouse:

I have been building and working on rifle-muskets for 40+ years. I have had members of my shooting team bring me their replica rifle-muskets with "Mushroomed" or "Battered" nipples with the complaint that their caps were "Fragging." In every case I can recall, replacing the old nipple with a new Aampco one stopped the cap fragging.

Both Springfield and Enfield (original and replica) locks ARE DESIGNED FOR THE HAMMER TO "OVERTRAVEL!" This is easily demonstrated by removing a lock from the gun and then, holding the hammer back, trip the sear and then easing the hammer down. The hammer will go much further down than it did when the lock was in the gun!

About the only way I can imagine that one could prevent "Hammer Overtravel" would be
to drill and tap a screw hole in the inside of the lockplate. Then install a screw that would limit the rotation of the tumbler. I doubt that this would be a long term solution because the battering the screw would take, would cause it to deform or shatter.

Apparently, the original designers of the locks for both Enfields and Springfields wanted the hammer to rest on an uncovered nipple, the hammer being held down by the spring tension of the mainspring.

Is there any solution you could recommend for stopping "Hammer Overtravel?" I build "Match Quality" Rifle-Muskets and would be interested in doing anything else I could to "tweak" their design to make them more accurate.

 

[junkman_01]

I really doubt that limiting hammer over travel would make a rifle-musket more accurate.

 

[BADUNAME47]

Overtravel

Dear junkman 01

Rifle Muskets are funny critters. On just about every "upgrade" you try you find some that work and some that don't work.

When "Acting Master Armorer" James Burton of Harpers Ferry was conducting an exhausting series of experiments in the early 1850's that led to the development of the Burton "Minie Ball" (as adopted by the U.S. Army in 1855) he was amazed to discover that Minie Rifles shot better with "Musket Powder" rather than "Rifle Powder."

He also discovered that U.S. Model 1842 RIFLED Muskets (former smoothebore muskets that had been rifled) were more ACCURATE than the new design .58 Caliber Rifle Muskets!

Two reasons that the .69 Caliber RIFLED Muskets were NOT adopted in 1855 were:

1. The ammunition weighed more-an important consideration when Army logistics away from railheads was by horse drawn wagons.

2. It was felt that the average soldier could not handle the heavier recoil of a .69 Caliber Rifled Musket firing a heavy .69 Caliber Minie Ball.

 

[junkman_01]

Southron,

I own and shoot a Navy Arms replica 1863 Springfield Rifle-musket and I know they can be funny critters. I just could not fathom how stopping the hammer short could make the thing more accurate. The hammer can only go as far as the nipple will allow it to. The 'extra' travel is there to ensure ignition by giving the cap a very heavy blow.

 

[AethelstanAegen]

I know my CW reenactment unit banned the use of the CCI caps as we had a several of them frag. I know for a fact that in one instance it was not a worn nipple as the nipple had just been replaced. I think it's a mistake to assume the problem was with all reenactors being somehow incompetent in the use of firearms.

My unit has a yearly drill where we afterwards have both a black powder and more modern firearm shoot. Many of the guys in the unit are avid firearms collectors (we've had everything from Brown Bess muskets to full auto Sten guns) and a good chunk of the unit is also involved in a profession of one sort of the other utilizing firearms (ie military, LE, other govt, and a few professional gunsmiths). As a unit we decided not to use these caps as we could not be sure of their safety and of course in a reenactment we can't wear protective eye over and thus frags are a real danger especially given firing in close ranks.

The reenactors complaining to CCI had a legitmate concern and so we also voted with out wallets. I don't think you should blame reenactors for CCI's decision to cease production (it must have become unprofitable) when the reenactor's concerns were in no way frivilous. Whatever the cause of the fragmentation from the caps, it was not worth it to most reenactors to take the risk when the caps from other competitors did not pose the potential danger, which is really just a common-sense and smart decision to make. When firearms are involved, especially with large numbers involved, safety has to be the top priority.

 

[SwampMouse]

Dear Swampmouse:

I have been building and working on rifle-muskets for 40+ years. I have had members of my shooting team bring me their replica rifle-muskets with "Mushroomed" or "Battered" nipples with the complaint that their caps were "Fragging." In every case I can recall, replacing the old nipple with a new Aampco one stopped the cap fragging.

Both Springfield and Enfield (original and replica) locks ARE DESIGNED FOR THE HAMMER TO "OVERTRAVEL!" This is easily demonstrated by removing a lock from the gun and then, holding the hammer back, trip the sear and then easing the hammer down. The hammer will go much further down than it did when the lock was in the gun!

About the only way I can imagine that one could prevent "Hammer Overtravel" would be
to drill and tap a screw hole in the inside of the lockplate. Then install a screw that would limit the rotation of the tumbler. I doubt that this would be a long term solution because the battering the screw would take, would cause it to deform or shatter.

Apparently, the original designers of the locks for both Enfields and Springfields wanted the hammer to rest on an uncovered nipple, the hammer being held down by the spring tension of the mainspring.

Is there any solution you could recommend for stopping "Hammer Overtravel?" I build "Match Quality" Rifle-Muskets and would be interested in doing anything else I could to "tweak" their design to make them more accurate.

I think you just answered the question. When you were brought rifles that fragged caps and had nipples that were battered you said you put ampco nipples on them. That is why I was looking for the photos and Cad models that Makos put on this forum. The reason they quit fragging was not because they didn't have mushroomed nipples, it was because the Ampco nipples have very small flash holes. Even you said that enlarged holes let pressure come back through the flash hole and frag the caps, I agree. You are just not assigning the real reason for the fragging, it’s not the mushroomed heads it’s the oversized flash holes.

I can’t find the files on this forum anymore, it looks like he told mykeal not to copy his files, but he did anyway. So these aren’t as good as the ones that are gone, but they are some of his pictures on the CAS city forum and they show the flash hole differences.

http://www.cascity.com/forumhall/index.php/topic,35422.msg455269.html#msg455269

I don't shoot military muskets, all of my locks have a controlled striking distance and they don't mushroom my nipples. I guess for the military rifles they were more concerned about them going off than wearing out.