The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The North Corral > Black Powder and Cowboy Action Shooting

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old August 17, 2011, 07:55 AM   #1
Bill Akins
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 28, 2007
Location: Hudson, Florida
Posts: 1,135
Is it a magazine or a clip? A snaplock, a snaphance, miquelet or flintlock? Terms.

Although I am familiar with their mechanics, the terms describing the different styles of flint striking steel weapon actions have always puzzled me. There doesn't seem to be a definitive historical nor modern standard of just what exactly comprises these actions and how we should TERM them. We know how they work mechanically, but historically descriptions by authors have misused terms to describe them so much that it causes terminology confusion to this day.

Although I want to get to the flint style actions, a modern era example would be the discussion of is it a "clip" or a "magazine"? From research we know that Ferdinand Von Mannlicher (supposedly) invented the "clip". An example of which is the 8 rd "en bloc" clip used in the M1 Garand rifle. However many people erroneously (or is it erroneous?) use the term "clip" and "magazine" interchangeably.

Many people will object and quickly try to correct someone who calls a magazine a "clip". But just who is correct? That may surprise you.

Case in point....
Many people "feel" that a "magazine" is different from a "clip" in that the magazine is in their minds a removable metal box with an integral spring in it that holds the cartridges, whereas most Von Mannlicher style "clips" do not have an integral spring and only hold the cartridges while a spring separate from the "clip" comes up from the firearm into the open bottom of the clip to force the cartridges upwards. But....if that is true, then why has the lever action rifle's tube beneath its barrel historically been called its "magazine"? That "magazine" tube is not removable and it is questionable whether the spring in the tube belongs to the "magazine" or belongs to the firearm itself. The answer seems to be it depends on your point of view.

Then there is the historical reference to "magazine" that has nothing to do with the weapon itself and everything to do with the actual room or storage area where the ammunition or powder/projectiles or explosives are stored.
So when is the term of "magazine" only pertinent to a supposed removable metal box with an integral spring? And why do trying to be exact with these terms matter if we understand the differences in them mechanically? The answer is that the only reasons the terms matter is so we can place such terms into a context so that ourselves and others can hopefully understand the mechanics of something when it is being described or illustrated. But our terminology and use of that terminology is flawed and leaves much to be desired regarding being exact and technically correct.

There are other modern instances of confusion and disagreement in terminology like the "magazine" verses "clip" example, I just used that as one example since it is so commonly known by most of us.

But the main thing I would like to discuss is what are the differences between a Snaplock, a Snaphance or "Snaphaunce", a "Miquelet" and a "Flintlock's" actions.

First a bit of history.

We know what a "matchlock" is. Basically a weapon that uses a rope (known as the "match") impregnated with sulfur/saltpeter to cause it to burn slowly but not go out (hopefully) unless it gets very wet. That smoldering match is placed into the jaws of or into a hole in the head of, what was known as the serpentine. The early matchlocks didn't have a trigger. You just pushed forward on the serpentine with your thumb to bring the smouldering "match" it held to the touch hole of the barrel. Not the most accurate because of too much movement of your hand manually moving the serpentine forward. So later matchlocks incorporated trigger lock mechanisms that would snap the match to the touch hole. There doesn't seem to be much disagreement or confusion on what comprised "Matchlocks".

Equally so there doesn't seem to be much confusion on what comprised a "Wheellock". Basically a spring loaded serrated wheel that had the jaws of a cock holding a flint brought against it so that when the spring tension was released on the wheel, it spun and showered sparks toward the touch hole just like our cigarette lighters do today.

But....there is much confusion and disagreement on what comprises and what the differences are between the different actions of a cock holding a flint and striking against a steel frizzen are. I am talking about the Snaplock, Snaphance or Snaphaunce, Miquelet and Flintlock.

Some historians term the Snaplock as not being a true flintlock (in their minds) because it does not have a pan cover attached to the frizzen that automatically opens and closes with the movement of the frizzen. (The Snaplock was the earliest of the Flintlock (type) actions). But then there are some Snaplocks that do have a pan cover attached to the frizzen. So it is very confusing. Here is a description worth reading on the Snaplock. That comes from the below link....

"Before the weapon is fired, the pan has a closed cover: the mechanism for opening this cover (ie manual or automatic) can affect whether the weapon is classed as a snaplock. In fact, the term Snaplock may be used in three ways

The most general use of Snaplock is for any lock which strikes flint against steel but which does not have the defining feature of a true flintlock. This is the frizzen, a single piece of metal which is a combined "steel" and self-opening pan cover.
A more restrictive definition excludes the "snaphaunce", more sophisticated weapons with a lateral sear and a pan cover, separate from the steel, that opens automatically.
Sometimes the term is used only for specific Scandinavian, German, and Russian varieties of lock."

....As I said, the above confusing and conflicting description of the Snaplock comes from this below link....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snaplock



The Snaphance or Snaphaunce is (supposedly) a later version of the Snaplock, and supposedly has a pan cover that is attached to the frizzen and automatically uncovers the pan when the frizzen goes forward from being struck by the flint in the jaws of the cock. But as we have read already regarding the Snaplock, it said the Snaplock has either an automatically opening pan cover or a manually operated pan cover. So if that is true then how is the Snaphance any different from the Snaplock? It appears it isn't so why the difference in terms of a Snaplock verses a Snaphance? Again, read the link above and the pertinent sections I posted on the Snaplock having either a manually operated pan opening cover or an automatically opening pan cover attached to the frizzen.

And if some but perhaps not all Snaplocks while all Snaphance's have an automatically opening pan cover attached to the frizzen....they why are they termed Snaplock or Snaphance and not just called a Flintlock?
Are you confused yet? I know I am and I understand the mechanics of this stuff!

Here is a section from the below link on Snaphances.....

"The snaphance first appeared in the late 1550s as a development of the earlier snaplock. The main improvement was that the pan-cover opened automatically (to keep the priming dry until the exact moment of firing), as in the wheel-lock. (The snaplock had a manually operated pan cover similar to that of the matchlock. Some definitions class the snaphaunce as a sub-type of snaplock.)"

But as we read earlier some Snaplocks DID have automatically opening pan covers. So again, why if it has an automatically opening pan cover is it still called a Snaplock by some and a Snaphance/Shaphaunce by others, even still why aren't the ones with the automatically opening pan cover that is attached to the frizzen simply called a Flintlock? All very confusing.

The above regarding the Snaphance/Shaphaunce is from this below link.....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snaphaunce

Next is the Miquelet. It seems the Miquelet is also supposedly a Snaplock. Yet in the three pictures of a Miquelet at the below link, it shows all three having a pan cover attached to the frizzen. Wouldn't that make the Miquelet a Snaphance instead of a Miquelet? Or even further, wouldn't that actually make it a Flintlock? Here's a link to a description and pictures of a Miquelet...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miquelet

Now I notice that in some Snaplocks and some Snaphances and some Miquelet's they have the spring for the lockwork exposed on the outside rather than on the inside of the lockwork. Now some people will say if it has an external spring powering the lockwork, that it isn't a true flintlock and that a true flintlock has an internal spring powering the lockwork, and that, that is what designates a TRUE Flintlock. Well, who made up that rule and why? What difference does it make if the spring powering the lockwork is internal or external when it comes to terming whether it is a flintlock or not? Doesn't the Snaplock, the Snaphance, the Miquelet and the Flintlock all use a flint which strikes a frizzen which showers sparks into a pan? Sure they do. Yet supposedly only one is called a "Flintlock" while the others even if they exhibit the exact same mechanical characteristics of a Flintlock, are called by their own terms. How terribly confusing!

Here is a site describing a Flintlock. But again, it seems some Snaplocks, Snaphances and Miquelets appear to match the same description for a Flintlock. So why call them anything other than "Flintlocks"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flintlock

I have for many years been confused about all the above. I am bringing it here for discussion with the full knowledge that if this confusion of terminology has been going on for hundreds of years, any discussion we may have here could not hope to be definitive and answer all the questions posed. But with that certainty of uncertainty in mind, it is still worth discussing and hearing opinions.

Such is the problem with terms that cross over into each other. And terms are very important when trying to teach someone the mechanics of what you already may know, but are hampered with teaching others by inexact and confusing terms.


.
__________________
"This is my Remy and this is my Colt. Remy loads easy and topstrap strong, Colt balances better and never feels wrong. A repro black powder revolver gun, they smoke and shoot lead and give me much fun. I can't figure out which one I like better, they're both fine revolvers that fit in my leather".
"To be sure of hitting the target, shoot first and call whatever you hit the target".

Last edited by Bill Akins; August 17, 2011 at 09:07 AM.
Bill Akins is offline  
Old August 17, 2011, 08:18 AM   #2
Stephanie B
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2008
Location: NWern SE Missouri
Posts: 339
I imagine that part of the reason for this is unlike, say, the difference between a matchlock and a wheellock, which are sort of different species, the difference between a snaplock and a flintlock were the subject of technological evolution of the same basic idea (pull the trigger and an arm snaps down, striking a piece of flint against a steel surface, causing a shower of sparks and igniting the primer charge).
Stephanie B is offline  
Old August 17, 2011, 09:54 AM   #3
4V50 Gary
Staff
 
Join Date: November 2, 1998
Location: Colorado
Posts: 21,824
I understand the Spanish Miquelet to be a type of flintlock in which the main "V" spring is externally mounted. It some ways it's more clever than the flintlock in that there is only one spring that provides the energy for both the cock and the frizzen.

Why aren't they all called flintlocks? Well, per se they all use a flint and you do raise a good point. Then again, we can call them firelocks like the English army did.
__________________
Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt. Molon Labe!
4V50 Gary is offline  
Old August 17, 2011, 10:00 AM   #4
Hawg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 16,177
I've called magazines clips since I was very little, everybody did back then. I still do a lot but sometimes I call it a magazine. The people that are so anal about what you call it need to grow up and get a life.

Bill if you don't know the difference between the different style locks........Well........TUFF!!!

Last edited by Hawg; August 17, 2011 at 10:05 AM.
Hawg is offline  
Old August 17, 2011, 11:00 AM   #5
Bill Akins
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 28, 2007
Location: Hudson, Florida
Posts: 1,135
Ya need to re-read what I wrote Hawg. I thought I made it obvious that I DO know the difference between the different style locks. What I don't understand is the difference in terms between them when versions of a Snaplock a Snaphance and a Miquelet exhibit the same mechanical characteristics of a Flintlock, yet they are called by other terms than "Flintlock". I also do not understand why if a Miquelet is actually a Snaplock as was stated at one of the links I provided, it isn't just called a Snaplock instead of a Miquelet. I also do not understand why some Snaplocks can have a pan cover attached to the frizzen and not be called a Snaphance. I also do not understand why a Snaphance which always has a pan cover attached to the frizzen, aren't just called "Flintlocks".

Also it wasn't me being particular about the difference in terminology between a "clip" and a "magazine". I was just explaining how some people are particular about that even though the term "magazine" is not always universally correct nor the only term applicable. I was using that example as a modern illustration setting the stage for the discussion on earlier types of locks and their confusing and conflicting terminology.

Or did you realize all that and just pull'n my chain Hawg?


.
__________________
"This is my Remy and this is my Colt. Remy loads easy and topstrap strong, Colt balances better and never feels wrong. A repro black powder revolver gun, they smoke and shoot lead and give me much fun. I can't figure out which one I like better, they're both fine revolvers that fit in my leather".
"To be sure of hitting the target, shoot first and call whatever you hit the target".

Last edited by Bill Akins; August 17, 2011 at 11:07 AM.
Bill Akins is offline  
Old August 17, 2011, 11:48 AM   #6
Hawg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 16,177
Quote:
Or did you realize all that and just pull'n my chain Hawg?
Now you're gettin the picture.
Hawg is offline  
Old August 17, 2011, 01:35 PM   #7
Jo6pak
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 5, 2010
Location: West Coast...of WI
Posts: 1,663
I believe it has to do less with the hardware, and more to do with the fact the evolution of lock systems and terms were taking place concurrantly in several different parts of the world speaking different languages.

Even in modern weapons there are overlapes, redundancies and fuzzy areas between labels. Slide action or Pump action? Battle rifle or Assault Rifle?

And if you look into older weapons you find even more confusion in terminology
__________________
NRA Life Member, SAF contributor.
Jo6pak is offline  
Old August 17, 2011, 10:39 PM   #8
Newton24b
Junior member
 
Join Date: February 10, 2009
Posts: 974
magazines generally can be loaded whilein the gun. although the ar style rifle doesnt appear to have that function, just remove the rear pin and tip the barrel up, and you can reload that magazine without pulling it out.

the biggest difference between magazine and clipis that clips were always meant to be disposed of after firing the ammunition, but those rifles can barely work as singleshots if you loose your clips.


snaplock in its basic form means any mechanical gun action that SNAPS the arm holing the flint or burning match, into the priming pan. its not a type of weapon, its a CLASS of weapon.

glock is a semiautomatic pistol, but all semi autos are not glock by default. it can be a 1911 semi auto.
Newton24b is offline  
Old August 17, 2011, 11:36 PM   #9
zippy13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 23, 2008
Location: SoCal
Posts: 6,442
If we look a the word magazine, it will become clear. Its use predates the use of repeating arms and was used to describe a place where ammo and other military supplies were stored. When repeating arms were developed, it made sense to call the gun's ammunition container a magazine, too. It can be fixed or removable. Might not a revolver's cylinder be called a magazine of sorts?

Think of a clip in terms of a money or hair clip: a spring thing that keeps objects together. An ammo clip keeps the cartridge together to ease feeding the magazine.

That being said, language is dynamic and uses are constantly evolving -- often form the specific to the general. Once clear distinctions between words like bring and take or further and farther seem to be disappearing with modern usage. While most of us can fathom out magazine and clip, the subtle differences between various flintlocks may have been lost by previous generations.
glock is a semiautomatic pistol, but all semi autos are not glock by default.
Unfortunately, this is a concept that not all grok.
zippy13 is offline  
Old August 18, 2011, 04:01 AM   #10
Hawg
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 8, 2007
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 16,177
Everybody and I mean everybody in the 60's called them clips. So you anal retentive magaziners can get over it.
Hawg is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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 -5. The time now is 10:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2021 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Page generated in 0.06577 seconds with 8 queries