Tonight on Mythbusters, they went over several ways of making fire in survival situations including starting a fire with a gun, the chocolate bar and soda can method, and by using ice as a magnifying lens. It was pretty interesting. It airs again on the Discovery Channel at 1:00 am.

I won't spoil it for you, but I will say it was a hoot watching them try to start fires with several well known methods such as the firebow and hand drill. Watching them, it seemed to me like they didn't do their homework before these particular attempts, but it will give you an idea, if you've never tried to do this before, how frustrating it can be.

Mythbusters is usually a fun show. Sometimes they don't look beyond the old NAS Alameda runway most of their investigations take place on. An older show busted the myth of sinking ships pulling people down. Well the S.S. Minnow wasn't H.M.S. Hood and they could have interviewed it's last survivor.

After several hours of practice, I did finally manage to get a live coal with a bow-drill. It needed some awareness of finicky details in the shape of the drill and the baseplate. Also, touching the tip of the drill too much will lubricate it with oil from your skin and prevent it from generating enough friction. Who knew?

My wife managed to get the hand-drill to work, but I never did. Her advice, by the way? Wear gloves. It's rough on your hands. Even better advice? Have some matches.

Oh. And make sure that tinder's ready. Nothing worse than FINALLY getting a coal, just to have it burn out before you can fumble your tinder into place.

Should we send them email telling them how they oopsed on the bow, and how to make a better board?

LOL

If enough people email them, they might do the tests over again in one of their "Mythbusters Revisited" shows. I don't know though, the episode was geared especially for the three lesser known experiments. You know when they bust out a power drill and lock a stick in the chuck that they're not really very serious about testing the bow or hand parts of the drilling exercise. At least they did mention that the primative methods obviously would work if enough time was put into working up the skill. LOL

In scouts I learned to use the Bow, flint/steel, and such. It took awhile but I got the bow down. We put some soap in the top block to keep down the friction/heat on that end. A lot easier that way.

I enjoy that show. Like most dealings I've had with the media, if I actully know something about the subject and I see it reported the facts are frequently not same. Glad I didn't see the show a week ago or I may not have attempted my recent success with the bow drill. Just goes to show- 'Just Do it'

Scott

If you're caught out without soap, you can get the same effect by rubbing the top end of the spindle through your hair / across your forehead.

Especially if you've been out without soap for a few days.... <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I caught the show on Tivo. I always find it entertaining, but it seems that the research department gets the week off for some shows (like this one). They should have come here for answers.

Now, if Keri and I were lost in the woods, we could make a fire.... <img src="/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

I enjoyed the episode and enjoy the show in general, although the fire starting was a minor topic. The part with the gunpowder and resulting explosion certainly seems like one of those, "Don't try this at home, kiddies!" kinds of moments. Just curious, but has anyone ever tried "helping" their fire starting with gunpowder?

*looks innocent* Well, yeah, you're one of us. ETSers should always be able to start fire.

As much time as I've spent around guns I'm almost embarrassed to admit I have never bothered to attempt the bullet firestarting technique. It would probably be a good idea to practice it at least a few times, otherwise I think you'd end up using either too much or too little powder. Something to try the next slow day out in the field I guess.

Regards, Vince

Practice, practice, practice. (Starting a fire, that is.) I am also trying to look innocent.

Nico,

Now that the show is over, can you please share a brief summary?

TR (cable-less in Seattle)

Another Kari fan I see!

which one is Kari?

Kari is the female mythbuster. (make that VERY female mythbuster)

I'll try my best recount what I saw, but I wasn?t taking notes or anything. In other words, this is all coming from memory, so if I miss something, I apologize. LOL

They tested several methods of starting fires. First they covered a couple of friction methods including the use of a fire bow, hand drill and fire plow. By all appearances they weren?t too concerned if they were able to make these methods work because they knew that they would work. As I noted previously, you know when they bust out a power drill and lock a stick in the chuck that they're not really very serious about testing the bow or hand parts of the drilling exercise. At least they did mention that the primitive methods obviously would work if enough time were put into working up the skill.

I can?t exactly tell you why they couldn?t get any friction methods to work initially as I couldn?t really identify the woods used, how much actual pressure was being applied, how familiar they were with the concept involved in each particular method and so on, but I made note of a few problems I think I spotted.

Keri, using the hand drill, appeared to be in an unsuitable sitting position to apply very much downward pressure on the drill. Also, her spindle wasn?t very straight and perhaps a little thin.

Grant, using the fire bow, appeared to have chosen a spindle that was both too long and too thin for a beginner and further still the spindle was less than straight. He could get little more than a stroke before the spindle disengaged either the board or hand-hold. I can?t recall if he had the string?s high side toward his body or not, but I think I do remember noting that the spindle was at least on the ?outside? of the bow. The bow also appeared to be completely stiff. Toward the last portion of this segment he had the string so tight and no give in the bow and couldn?t even get the string to wrap around the spindle.

Kerry and Tory, using the fire plow, seemed to have insufficient tinder for the task. The tinder they used here was packing material that looked like long and thin wood shavings. While I?m sure this would be fine if enough coal was produced, it seemed to me like something ?fuzzier? might have worked better for them. Still, they did mention in a couple of instances that they weren?t producing coals at all and only managed smoke. They also may have been relying more on pressure than speed to get a coal. However, I must admit that I am least familiar with this method, so I could be completely wrong here.

Finding that balance of pressure and speed is a bugger anyway, so without anyone with experience helping them out, I could fully understand why they couldn?t get any of these methods to work. Unfortunately Jamie, who is wilderness survival expert and who has started fires with the above methods, was not helping with these experiments.

No one removed the bark from spindles or plows, and made no attempt to straighten them out either.

In any case, it seems that they truly wanted to focus on the lesser-known fire starting methods, which included, starting a fire with a gun, the chocolate bar and soda can method, by using ice as a magnifying lens, and the steel wool and battery method. In every one of these cases, they were able to start a fire after a little trial and error.

There were a few things I noted about these experiments.

I didn?t pay enough attention the fire by gun method to go into great detail. I tend to think bullets are best used as say, projectiles, and think that if I find myself in a survival situation I would try everything else and be much more capable of starting a fire in another manner before I even got as far as taking apart bullets. Maybe that is shortsighted of me. They did mention that they tried both smokeless powder and black powder, and one worked better than the other. Unfortunately I don?t remember which was which. Sorry.

If you?ve read about starting a fire with a chocolate bar and the concave bottom of a soda can, you know it?s extremely important to get the can to as high a shine as possible. After six hours of work... SIX HOURS... Only one of two aluminum cans was sufficiently polished to start tinder. I hope the potential survivor started polishing well before sun up... Anyway, some folks on the web say they can get a can to an incredibly reflective state much faster than this. It should be noted that they were using only the chocolate as an abrasive and applying it with cloth rather than the wrapper and they didn?t try different chocolate bars. Experimenters on the web have made mention of ways to better polish the can, what wrappers they found best to use to apply the chocolate, and have also tested different chocolates. In any case the Mythbuster All Stars were able to make it work, but had to rig a wire to the can to hold the tinder still. They then propped the can against some rocks to keep it still. When they were holding both by hand they felt it was too shaky to keep the pinpoint of light on one part of the tinder long enough for it to catch.

The Mythbusters also tested a method of starting fires by using ice. This portion of the show I found most interesting. In fact I dare say that though it is an easily understood concept, it still blew my mind. In essence they formed ice into magnifying lenses to intensify light. In some ways this was hilarious, because anyone who had to start a fire by this method would most likely be in a cold climate, and the Mythbuster All Stars were in sunny Caa-lee-for-ne-ah. So, the ice lenses tended to melt quickly and at times dripped on the tinder. Eventually Kari froze a lens so big it couldn?t melt fast enough and she was able to ignite tinder. Now, how plausible it is to do this in a survival situation is a completely different question. LOL

Finally they tested starting fires with batteries of different sizes by placing steel wool and tinder over the contacts. They were also able to make this work though they burned their fingers several times.

OK... That?s all I can remember. <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

If I?m wrong in any of my analysis, please let me know. Though I have been abl to produce fire using a couple of these methods I am far from being an expert. <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

The redhead welder?

Nope. The other one. LOL

Mythbuster Bios

Ahhh Kari not my type you guys can have her. I stick with Scotty since her torch technique are of extraordinary magnitude. And I always wanted to learn welding.

The Ice Lens technique of firestarting was referenced in the movie "The Edge" (one of my faves). Hopkins character riddles Baldwin's "How do you get fire from ice?" in an effort to distract him from the despair of having watched the rescue helicopter heading for the horizon away from them.

If you build a big enough lens, you can get moonlight to start a fire.

We are failing at looking the innocent.

"If you build a big enough lens, you can get moonlight to start a fire."

Ah... I don't think so. Moonlight is just reflected glow-light -- it just doesn't have the "candlepower" that the sun does.

Also, what I don't understand about ice lenses is how to get clear ice. If it's cloudy ice (the only kind I can make <img src="/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />), I don't see how it can focus light. I actually tried making two ice cubes in half-sphere molds (5" dia), then "gluing" them together with water, but I couldn't get it to focus, and that was on the 4th of July at high noon. (I figured if I couldn't do it then, I couldn't do it in MN in January.)

Sue

I've used (or rather, tried to use) both smokeless and black powder to start a fire... NOT a good idea. Smokeless doesn't ignite until you get to a pretty high temp, if you can get your tinder that hot, you don't need the smokeless. Black powder flashes at the least provocation, and you'll singe your fingers and blacken your tinder, but the flash doesn't last long enough for ignition of the tinder. I tried both when I was young and FOOLISH, and learned the hard way. I've never tried the textbook "cloth in a cartridge after pulling the bullet" method, but then again, after learning my lesson with gun powder fire starters, I've never been without (several) better ways to make a fire <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Troy

You just need a REAAAALLLLLYYYYYY big lens.

I've tried the ice lens as an experiment in natural surroundings. I. E. The middle of the winter in the North East. This was long ago in my scout days. Following pictures from a book the lens was about 6 to 8 inches in diameter. The ice was pond ice and appeared cloudy to start. As per the text the lens was shaped using the hands to melt and shape it. Brother was that cold. But as it melted into shape it cleared up. And yes I was able to start a fire.

While it worked and I now know it is an available part of my repertoire. It is definately not very high on my list of ways to start a fire. In fact because it is slow to make, very cold on the hands and once made slow to start the tinder. I would say it is about a last resort method.

Yes, size does matter, at least that's what they say in the commercials.

Okay, maybe not practical for a survival situation, but hey, what a concept.

Re: TANSTAAFL

Are you a Richard Maybury fan?

Sue

Les Stroud started a fire with a "bullet" (bullet head removed) from a rifle. He eventually got it to work.

TANSTAAFL???

There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

Yeah I put about 10 throwing caps in my tinder and was burning 5cm dia. in seconds rather than the couple of minutes it normally takes up here with the cold weather. <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Now, that one I'll remember <img src="/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Sue Who is Richard Maybury?

Tanstaafal come from Robert Heinlein. Specifically The Moon is a Harsh Mistriss.

I think it's older than that, even. From the Great Depression.

Maybury is a writer of easily-understood books on things like finance. The one I just finished was "Whatever Happened to Penny Candy?" and TANSTAAFAL was something he mentioned serveral times.

Love Heinlein!

Sue

Ear wax works well too and if you've been out in the woods a couple days you probably have a decent supply built up. <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

So how do you start a fire using gunpowder?

I don't use gun powder, I use a bic, or a ferro bar, cotton balls & vaseline, bow drill, freznel lense, battery & steel wool...anything but gun powder... I'd rather use the powder to send lead down range <img src="/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Troy

Well, theoretically (as I've said, I have not done it yet), you pull the bullet with your Leatherman Juice (very doable). Then you empty out most of the powder ( just how much is the salient point.) You then stuff a piece of rag into the cartridge in place of the bullet. The idea is that you then fire the cartridge from your gun. The small amount of remaining powder left in the cartridge ignites the piece of rag, which is then expelled out of the muzzle of your gun (presumably at a high rate of speed) burning as it goes. You then scramble frantically over to said burning piece of rag, grasp it with the aforementioned Leatherman Juice, and then stick it under your carefully gathered tinder pile. Voila--inferno.

As I've said, I have never tried it. I hope somebody chimes in who has who can correct me if I have the details wrong.

I've never tried, but I know someone who claims to have.

What he said jives with what we saw on MB- smokeless doesn't really work, but black powder does. It also isn't so reliable. If I had to guess, as I never found this in any old stories, it might be a semi-modern thing inspired by the Battle of the Wilderness and other similiar horrors from the mid-18th century.

That's kind of what I thought. For me it would be a last ditch method, coming just after all my Bics were exhausted and just before I tried to make a bowdrill. <img src="/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

Thanks. I was wondering how they ignited it. I believe most bullets have a percussive cap that ignites when struck. I though they might try to do that with a hammer, Leatherman Juice etc. I'd have thought the rag was liable to blow out when fired from the gun.

I have not tried this, but have seen reference to the use of flintlocks being used to start fire.

During the 1700's - early 1800's, when flint and steel were the common method of making a fire, peices of charred cloth were carried by travelers and used to catch the spark.

I have read somewhere that the early fur traders would use this method for a quick fire. Start with an empty (flint lock) musket or rifle. Dump the priming from the flash pan, put your charred cloth in the flash pan and use the spark from the flintlock. I have also heard that you should leave a little of the powder.

Any Buckskinners who can comment on this?

It must have been a popular method. Dixie Gun Works sells a replica "tinder lighter." It looks like a flint-lock pistol. Instead of a barrel, there is a little pan to place your tinder in. You can get it for $75, but it wouldn't be too practical for a survival kit.

Dixie Gun Works Tinder Lighter

Although I'm not a buckskinner, I've personally witnessed a fire started with a flintlock, but it wasn't done in quite this way. Instead of char cloth, some other tinder was laid across the charged pan and caught sparks when the powder was fired.

If you've got char cloth and a flint lock, you really don't need the powder, since the char cloth will catch a spark really well. The sparks off the flint should be all that's needed.

YMMV

The myth in question has to do with a weapon using cartidges. With a flintlock, you already have a spark system. Think of it as the granddad of the zippo.

In teaching hunter ed, we do a demonstration at the range of how different powders burn. We use at least half a dozen different modern smokeless powders poured sequentially along a trough of 1" angle iron. At the end we pour some 4f blackpowder. I get to light the thing off, using a butane grill lighter from the end opposite the bp. Typically, we start with a slow rifle powder, then alternate along the length between faster pistol powders and slow rifle powder of different composition appearance, so that the students can make out that it is different powders (in case they didn't see me pouring the load out in the first place). It takes a good half a minute to burn the 30 inches to the bp. Once it hits the 4f, that stuff goes up all at once making a small mushroom cloud and causing a few of the nearer students to flinch. There is a huge contrast between the bp and even the fastest of the smokeless stuff. It is not hard at all to get any of the powder going, but some of it was still burning a full thirty seconds after the bp went off, which might make it suitable as a tinder starter.

I'm inclined not to waste cartridges out in the field if I think it reasonable to use something else.