AmericanLongRifles Forums
General discussion => Gun Building => Topic started by: Bob Gerard on November 20, 2023, 03:26:24 AM
-
I have a .69 caliber flintlock Fowler. Running a patch down the barrel I found that the patch and jag become quite loose at the breech, about three inches from the face of the breech plug.
The barrel was never used before ( it had no touch hole yet), so I am curious if this was a barrel design to have a slight taper from the breech area into the bore?
-
Many of the Indian made guns have a slight enlargement near the breech. That is caused by the method they use to hand forge hydraulic pipe into gun barrels. As long as it’s not too much of a difference, it should be ok.
-
I didn't know that about the Indian guns.
Tks for that tidbit of information, okawbow.
-
Ugh. This gun is not from India but from Connecticut, probably from 30 years ago.
-
Perhaps it is a forcing cone? Could make sense since the gun is a fowler...?
-
Sounds like it was fire with an air gap between the powder and the shot. In cold country it’s easy to do if your hands are cold, and your shot load compresses air when it is pushed down the barrel.
Hungry Horse
-
Sounds like it was fire with an air gap between the powder and the shot. In cold country it’s easy to do if your hands are cold, and your shot load compresses air when it is pushed down the barrel.
Hungry Horse
Nope. Read my post (above); "The barrel was never used before ( it had no touch hole yet)".
p.s., how would loading shot compress air in a barrel?
-
Bob,
Maybe whoever made it was trying to duplicate the old boring often found in fowling pieces
Breech slightly larger, a length true cylinder, and a part relieved to the muzzle.
The breech enlargement was short, and the muzzle relief was maybe a quarter of the barrel length.
This was quite common at one time. Can you feel any relief to the muzzle as well?
Hawker goes into this in detail.
-
Bob,
Maybe whoever made it was trying to duplicate the old boring often found in fowling pieces
Breech slightly larger, a length true cylinder, and a part relieved to the muzzle.
The breech enlargement was short, and the muzzle relief was maybe a quarter of the barrel length.
This was quite common at one time. Can you feel any relief to the muzzle as well?
Hawker goes into this in detail.
Thanks- I hadn't noticed any bore change towards the front, though I wasn't focusing on it. I will check it out!
I just checked and see that the exterior of the barrel is cylindrical down until it begins to widen at 4.5” forward the breech end of the barrel. I am guessing the inside of the barrel follows this gradual enlargement, which would account for the wider breech chamber.
ps; Where can we find Hawker's research on this?
-
p.s., how would loading shot compress air in a barrel?
The wads, if tightly fitting, compress air beneath them and the standing breech. This happens virtually every load in my 20 bore, however
I've never shot it until the pressure subsides out the vent and the wads are properly seated. If the load is pushed down quickly, the rod will
ride back up with the Over Shot wad and shot column & wads beneath it. I then push it down slowly and air can be heard escaping out the vent
as the wad column and shot is re-seated on the powder. If the powder in the bore was 3F, some might escape out the vent, if the vent was large
enough. This happened with a 'late' friend's .40 cal. which had an enlarged vent. The remedy was to replace the vent liner with a new one.
-
Ah yes, the wad, not the shot. I have the same experience seating wads in my Fusil de Chasse.
-
I would send it back if possible. Or cut it off and rebreech.
-
Bob,
Before you chop it off, (it's real hard to chop back on)
do check if there is a Slight widening towards the muzzle, which would indicate "friction and relief" boring.
How long is the barrel?
This sligt relief could be over 9 or ten inches easily.
The breech enlargement would be much, much shorter.
Hawker;
Instructions to Young Sportsmen.
7th edition, of 1833 was copied much more recently, in the 70's I believe and should show up on a search easily enough.
Hawker detailed the harder shooting and superior patterns thrown with this sort of gun, (with shot)
Best,
Richard.
-
Yes, not everything written back then was spot-on. Forsyth also believed that a barrel relieved at both the breech and muzzle, shot 'harder' with shot.
-
To view or download free Peter Hawker’s ‘Instructions to Young Sportsmen’ 7th Ed.
https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.33135/page/n419/mode/2up
-
From W Greener’s “The Gun” 1835. They did a lot of things. Most useless. But the had very long tapers toward the muzzle and then a long taper to the muzzle. They also tried rough reaming for various reasons. The rough reaming near the muzzle to “retard the wads”. Etc etc. If its too loose at the breech and there is blowby it may well disrupt the pattern. Remember that there are people making barrels that are better used for some other purpose. In any case if its loose at the breech then slug it to find just how big it is. It may need to be reamed larger to uniform the bore. You don’t want to build a gun around a tent peg.
-
Ok already built. Test fire it.
-
Bob,
Before you chop it off, (it's real hard to chop back on)
do check if there is a Slight widening towards the muzzle, which would indicate "friction and relief" boring.
How long is the barrel?
This sligt relief could be over 9 or ten inches easily.
The breech enlargement would be much, much shorter.
Hawker;
Instructions to Young Sportsmen.
7th edition, of 1833 was copied much more recently, in the 70's I believe and should show up on a search easily enough.
Hawker detailed the harder shooting and superior patterns thrown with this sort of gun, (with shot)
Best,
Richard.
Hi Richard-
Fear Not! I have NO intention of doing any alterations to this barrel!
It is 51" long, and the enlargement at the breech is about 5". (I still need to check for any enlargement at the muzzle)
There is also a 'roughing" in the breech for the first 1" (enough to feel when running a cleaning patch down) that might have been a method used to tighten the pattern, I was told.
I think this barrel is kind of interesting and not typical of more modern production.
-
Ok already built. Test fire it.
Yes- it will shoot a .662 round ball pretty accurately, as I tried an un-patched round ball at 26 yards off-hand, using 85 grains of 2f. Here's a link:
https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=79161.msg780275#msg780275
-
Bob,
Back in Hawker's day there were two ways to retard the shot until combistion was more complete,
With flint, something of an Opening behind,
With a detanator, a little tighter or roughening.
Of course there were also permeatations, as it was all experimental,
However, when Hawker had a barrel lengthened by William Fullard, it increased the pattern and penetration.
That there was something in the friction and relief that worked is beyond doubt, as most English game and duck guns had it to some degree.
My little double 20 always shot a killing pattern at 40 yards with English No 4 for duck or no 6 or 7 for game.
Nowadays, we see folks using chokes and jug chokes to try and get some range out of their barrels.
Keith Neil had some of the old long fowling pieces that would knock pigeons down at 70 plus yards.
It may take some experimentation Bob, but I bet your barrel will be a winner when you get it figured.
Keep the powder down a bit, not too heavy.
The relief at the muzzle, (if it has any) was to reduce pressure, so that the pattern would not be disturbed as much.
-
Thank you Richard. I was reading some of Hawker's book for an hour or so and had a bit of a challenge understanding what he was explaining about with regard to 'relief' of the breach or gradually (almost non-measurable ) toward the muzzle. Probably just tiredness on my part but it looks like an interesting book and I will return to it.
It will be fun to see how the gun patterns with shot next, after experimenting with some round ball shooting the other day. I will go lighter on the powder as you suggest.
-
Bob,
Hawker was measuring before they had bore gauges as we know them, and no digital read-out!
That is why he preferred to measure big duck guns.
There should be some charts if I remember right, with measured relief (or tapering wider) at breech and muzzle.
-
Most likely a previous owner left it loaded with the wrong type of patch lube and it corroded that area. Then the corrosion was removed by grinding or sanding it out with a piece of ramrod split to hold sand paper.
The results are exactly how you describe the chamber area is after removing the corrosion.
Just a guess but I've seen it and fixed a couple like that.
-
With 5" of looseness at the breech, it sounds like a smokeless shotgun barrel only started for boring to 12 bore, but left "to sell to a muzzleloading gun maker".
5" is too long for a chamber start, unless it was common to knock off 2" or so before finishing.
-
Dark Horse, did you read the previous comments that the barrel was not drilled for a touch hole? It was never loaded or used.
-
Daryl, have you ever seen a 52” long smokeless shotgun barrel?
-
Maybe it was for 2 shotguns originally, then an order came in for a long smoothbore?
The 5" enlargement is a puzzle, thus there might be a strange reason for it.
-
Dark Horse, did you read the previous comments that the barrel was not drilled for a touch hole? It was never loaded or used.
Yes I did read that and it gave me pause at first. Then I thought that being not much is known perhaps the barrel was cut off just above the touch hole. Since your in unknown territory anything is possible.
-
Bob,
Just had a quick look at Hawker;
Barrel of musket bore, 42 " long.
Cylinder section,
1 foot 10 1/2"
Relief at muzzle end,
one foot,
Open behind,
7 1/2".
Richard.
-
Thanks Richard.
Interesting internal boring. (I had copied several chapters of his book for reference and can’t locate them on my computer.)
What does it mean “open behind”?
-
It means what you have on your barrel, Bob.
The bore tapers wider to the breechplug, in the above case, for 7 1/2 inches.
-
Well that’s kind of fascinating Richard. I wonder where this Mr. Gallaghan got a barrel that used those old bore styles. Between the swell at the wrist, the muzzle treatment and the breech tapering I think the man had something he was following. Thanks for your interest and help!
-
It should shoot very well when you find the right charge, Bob.
I know W Keith Neal shot with some of these long 'duck guns' and thay patterned Very well.
I recall when trying one, he got a single shot at a woodpigeon as it flew out of a tree at 70 yards, and down it came.
The theory of the enlarged chamber was to retard the charge until a more thorough ignition had taken place, and the relief towards the muzzle was to reduce pressure, so the pattern was maintained. As we know, it is excess pressure that blows patterns.
Best,
R.
Edited to add that I have a Thomas Bannister barrel of roughly 1700, and of about 14 bore and 52 inches long.
When I get the bore cleaned up more I will attempt to measure it for you.
It may or may not be bored in this manner!
-
Thanks again Richard.
I am wondering about loading it- using an overpowder wad may not work with the enlarged chamber; My thought is to use tow or something. Corn meal over the powder works well too. The shot loaded directly atop it.
I have been waiting for my clay target launcher to do some flying shots to see what I can do with it. Trying shot patterns on paper needs to be done. It’s just so boring 🥱
-
Here are some first test runs I did today using 2f powder and two different loads.
I used equal volume powder and corn meal. I used my powder measure to measure my shot volume. It’s promising though I want to compare it with my cylinder bored Fusil de Chase.. (The box is about 7” square)
(https://i.ibb.co/bdmDZpv/IMG-0814.jpg) (https://ibb.co/f0FL5mN)
(https://i.ibb.co/cr4ycYS/IMG-0818.jpg) (https://ibb.co/bKc6gbM)
(https://i.ibb.co/jrX6n4X/IMG-0822.jpg) (https://ibb.co/LZ7kVp7)
-
If my memory serves me correctly, Espingarda Perfeyta or The Perfect Gun discusses the differing ways a bore could widen and constrict over its lengths, some configurations being quite elaborate. I don't think the authors go into a lot of detail about the rationale behind the differing approaches, much less discuss loads for them, but it might be worth checking out all the same.
-
I see "Espingarda Perfeyta Or The Perfect Gun" is available on Amazon.
-
Even at 33 yards, I'm seeing huge bird missing holes in the pattern, Bob.
Going to have to do a bunch more "work" on the load, I think.
A suggestion, if I might.
I remember years ago, the Sellier Bellet 12 bore ammo (& some Winchester) had an overpowder wad, that was cupped, that is the wad was creased about its' periphery, so it would expand
outwards into an oversized bore to seal. You could make a form, out of wood(maple), aluminum or whatever, with a tapered entrance like a coned muzzle, to push an oversized card wad, either
12 bore or even 11 bore wad into, using an undersized short starter (3/8" or 1/2" in dia.) to make it form into the 'die", down to .693"(14 bore) Placed over the powder, your larger rod tip
should flatten it out into a better seal over the powder. A couple of them, if thin, would suffice for an over powder wad, then one over the shot.
I'd lay odds this will out pattern the loads you have tried above.
-
This one is gonna take some time getting it right. I was a bit surprised it did as well as it did, even out to 50 yards, with just this first trial.
-
It is a good start Bob.
The best way pattern a gun is at 40 yards, measured for a start.
Have a piece of plain paper stretched tight, at least 4 feet both ways. Or an iron plate which is better. (it can be whitewashed between shots)
Put an aiming mark in the centre, and fire at least 6 rounds at it, of the same load.
Not at the same sheet!
Use a new paper each time.
By eye, find the centre of the shot pattern, and from that centre, draw a 30 inch circle around it.
Count the pellets in the 30 inch circle.
Deduct these from the full charge fired. This gives you the pattern percentage .
Take an average for the 6 shots (at least ) to get average pellet percentage. A cylinder bore should produce a 40 % pattern if well loaded.
See what percentage you are getting, and how even the shot pattern is.
A good bird getting pattern has few 5 inch bare patches.. best patterns may have two or three still.
A wire can be made into a loop 5 inches across, and it can be run over that pattern to see how many 5 " gaps there are. One or two show up in the best of patterns.
Wadding.
Try rolled up soft brown paper if you don't have much else, or newspaper. rub the paper to make it soft.
Roll it in a ball and ram it down.
Powder,
Try 2 1/4 drams if a 14 bore. (about 60 grains) Two drams may work fine, (54 grains) and should do so with an Ounce of shot.
Shot,
Try 1 to 1 -1/4 ounces.
For those that like big heavy charges of powder, this is the reason for blown patterns.
I have friends in the UK, who still use 2 drams in a 12 bore, and an ounce of shot for normal game shooting, and 1 1/2 ounces of shot and Three drams for geese.
The rule of thumb for gunning with black, is one dram (27 1/3 grains) to a half ounce of shot.
So,
You need 3 drams (about 80 grains), if using 1 1/2 ounces of shot.
Forget 90 grain loads of powder. You can try it later if you like!
Don't bother with any filler.
It adds weight to the charge and just makes it kick more.
Use a bit of paper, over the shot, a small ball rolled up and rammed down, or, dry grass, or whatever, or a card wad If it will hold.
With your boring, you are looking for wads that will expand. Card wads can't expand.
Felt wads can work very well.
Tow is no good over powder, unless it is twisted very tight, or comes from an old saddle. Otherwise powder blows through it.
Try this Bob, and see how it does.
-
This is just what I needed to learn- Thank You Richard!
-
I use 75gr. (2 3/4drams)1F in my 12 bore London gun with 1 1/4oz. shot, no chokes.
I missed one bird out of 20 with that load, some years ago at Rendezvous.
-
If you'd used 2 1/4 drams you'd have collected that last bird, Daryl! ;) :)
-
We'll NEVER know for sure, but maybe. ;D
-
You are quite right Daryl!