Swamped? Straight?

[Boompa]

  I've been able to examine very few original rifles and most of the ones I've seen were caps from the mid-19th century. Were most rifle barrels from the pre-revolutionary war to early 19th century swamped? It's not always easy to tell by looking at pictures. 

[JTR]

From my limited experience, on RIFLES, I'd say almost 100% of early to say 1810, had swamped barrels. Earlier ones seem to have had a more dramatic swamp than the later ones. By about 1820/1830 swamped barrels were getting less dramatic, and by about 1850 for the most part were gone.
Keep in mind that most early barrels were cut back from the muzzle, so in effect now look like a tapered barrel, but were originally swamped.

Southern Mountain Rifles seem to be an exception as hand made swamped barrels were made much later.

None of this is written in stone, and I'm sure others will point out exceptions.

John

[Dennis Glazener]

One thing that surprised me was the early use of straight taper barrels, at least in VA. I own a flint iron mounted VA rifle that has a hand forged straight taper barrel. It has been dated from the 1790's to around 1810 by several different knowledgeable collectors. I was hesitant to agree that it was that early since it had a straight taper barrel. Wallace Gusler looked at it and told me that there were several early VA rifles with straight taper barrels rather than swamped ones.

Bore is approximately .47 caliber.
Barrel length is 41” and is a straight taper, there is no evidence it has been cut.
Barrel measures .930 at breech, .800 mid-way and .743 at the muzzle.
Dennis

[Boompa]

I watched an old video, (1969), of Mr Gusler at Williamsburg where he was building a barrel the old fashioned way starting with flat steel, pounding it out then forming it around a mandrel.  Then drilling it with different bits until the interior was uniform in size and of course then cut rifling it. Those old gun makers earned their money.

[JCKelly]

It seems to me that current manufacture swamped barrels are more strongly swamped than were Golden Age Kentuckies.
An attributed John Haga rifle has a 45-3/4" .45 cal bbl, 0.91 at breech, tapering to 0.74" a the muzzle, swamp not obvious.
One attributed to George Schroyer, from the Edward Zetler collection, has a .51 cal smooth barrel 45-3/8" long, 0.972 breech, muzzle 0.935 and about 2" back from the muzzle is 0.915. Swamped, but tastefully.

Similar age but not considered Golden Age rifles are two Southern pieces.
A Kentucky Kentucky of mine has breech and muzzle about the same size, but narrows down to a minimum about 13" back from the muzzle. The barrel is 46-1/4" .45 cal, 0.92" at the breech, 0.80" about 13" back from muzzle and 0.89 - 0.90 at muzzle, the range because all sides of the octagon are not the same size.
This particular rifle is described on pp 192- 193 of Shelby Gallien's Kentucky Gunmakers, Vol I. Maker Stephen P'Poole born Granville Co., NC 1763 died 1841 Breckinridge Co, Kentucky
Flint conversion with tube for feather under the cheek-piece.

Finally a Southern rifle, also flint conversion, probably from Virginia, iron mounted has a .42 cal 43-3/8" barrel 0.862 at the breech, 0.832 about 8" back from the muzzle, then widens, a"reverse swamp", to 0.938 at the muzzle.

I rather imagine that barrel-makers would find only a tiny market for barrels swamped as were American rifles say 1785 - 1815. The more subtle swamp might just not be popular with contemporary buyers of custom rifles. But that's just my admittedly uninformed opinion..

[Boompa]

  JC, good post and interesting. Regarding the dimensions of those barrels, with such a small variation between the breech-waist-muzzle, I'm not sure there would be a benefit. If the idea behind a swamped barrel is improved balance I doubt .020-.040 difference is going to help.

[JCKelly]

I've been asked. That Virginia-I-think rifle has a 2-1/2" long "spear-point" design of tang.