Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > European Armoury
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 8th June 2010, 01:52 PM   #1
celtan
Member
 
celtan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: PR, USA
Posts: 679
Thumbs down

Thank you, Bluelake. Probably the quality and purity of the ingredientss (sources) in the 16th C would not have been the highest. So, we are left with BP that was effectively less powerful than what was available in the 18th C.
Best

Manuel

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluelake
I think a lot of it would relate to your point #3. One big problem was having the niter separate; without it, you just have a smoky, smoldering mess, as it is the oxidizer for the bp. However, even when the separation was accounted for, a finely ground powder can still leave a lot to be desired.

I've made bp and tested it alongside modern commercial types, using a standard ratio mix (75:15:10), along with some other ratios. I also used a binder (rice rinse water), which kept things from separating. However, instead of corning, I did a fine grind, which would have been similar to bp here in Korea back in the 14th C. I used a flintlock eprouvette and compared my powder to commercial powders (FFG-FFFFG) and the results were quite lopsided; my powder would register 1~2 on the scale, while the commercial was 3~5. I think that not only was separation a big problem, but also the ratio of niter/charcoal/sulfur. Still, I wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of either type

Last edited by fernando; 8th June 2010 at 03:21 PM. Reason: Inconvenient path
celtan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th August 2015, 08:20 PM   #2
Marcus den toom
Member
 
Marcus den toom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 535
Default

Hi Nando,

Are there any areas on the barrel that can point towards a later alteration like an iron fixing band (leaving a lighter surface area?)
It is interesting to think about how and where that tiller broke off/was sawn off. And what would have happened next.

Beautyfull example of an early hand cannon.
Marcus den toom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th August 2015, 12:52 PM   #3
fernando
(deceased)
 
fernando's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Portugal
Posts: 9,694
Default

Hi Marcus,
This pattern is consistent with another one sold in some auction a few years ago. Only the length in such one is shorter.
The text in the offer mentioned a 'quadrangular cascabel' and not a 'cut off tiller'.
So at facing both examples, we don't have as a fact that, this is short tiller was meant to be like that from the beginning.
... or was there a generalized habit to cut them off for some modified purpose .


.
Attached Images
 
fernando is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th January 2016, 10:13 PM   #4
iskender
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 60
Default in remembrance of Michael Trömner

data of the gun: ca. 22kg ,102.6 cm overall, tiller 18.8 cm doesn't look cut off or alterd. calibre: ca. 38mm. greetings iskender switzerland
Attached Images
            
iskender is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.