Log Cabin Fowler class barrel discussion

[BillPac]

Gentlemen:
I am offering these pictures of the original Fowler barrel that we are copying to open a dialog regarding fowlers in general and these English Fowlers in particular.  The two Fowlers we have to study date from the mid eighteenth century.  I want to point out a few interesting observations on the barrel in the photos.
 First notice the overall shape of the breech end.  The barrel is not an octagon, rather it has 5 flats and the underside flats are not there; it is round underneath.

Also note how the bottom of the barrel has less thickness to it than the top.  This is to allow more room for the ram rod.

 The side flats have a bolster or flat shape filed into them (the lock side flat has been somewhat removed). This flat area is tapered narrower toward the bottom of the barrel on the “off” side.  The side flat with taper is to assist while rotating the barrel up out of the stock, utilizing the hooked breech design of the original.  The taper helps to protect the edges of the stock.

The photos of the breech show the slight taper filed into the hook, this of course is to allow the hook to rotate and to tighten as the barrel is rotated down into the standing breech face or conversely to release as the barrel is removed.
 
Look closely at the 5 flats and you will see that they are not equal width and they are slightly rounded.  The top flat is narrow and peaked slightly to assist in sighting.  The flats extend out toward the muzzle for approximately 7 inches as they fade into the round shape of the overall tapered and flared barrel. All of these subtle features add up to a light and lively handling gun.

Flats disappear into the round.

The tenons are dovetailed and brazed onto the barrel.  The dovetail is very shallow but the tabs raised and folded onto the tenons are visible in the photo.
 
The slight edge of  braze is barely visible in the side photo.
 
So, there is my monthly recap of the Log Cabin Fowler Class.  I hope you enjoy the photos and I am sure if there are questions that I do not know the answer to Jim or Ian will come to my rescue.
Thank you for looking.

[Curtis]

It just goes to show that many of the old smiths understood how to direct the eye and how they were masters of illusion, all the while understanding the necessity of balance in the hands as well as the eyes.  A very interestning topic for discussion indeed!

Curtis

[Dave B]

This is exactly the kind of helpful information for those of us that dont have an original to closely study. Having it apart to more closely examine whats going on is paramount. Thank you for taking the time to share this with us all.

[Ky-Flinter]

Bill,

Thank you for taking the time to post the pictures and commentary.  Can you provide some dimensions of this barrel, esp. length, width of the flats at the breech and where the flats end, bore size, etc.?  Do you have any pictures of the muzzle end?  I'm curious about the wall thickness at the muzzle and sight, if any?  Thanks again.

-Ron

[Dr. Tim-Boone]

BillPac,  I would be interested to know how far the hook extends to the rear of the plane of the breech.... Can you get a picture of the inside of the standing breech??

Thanks, this is really helpful stuff!!

[James Rogers]

Doc,

Here are a couple of pictures of a standing breech off another English fowling piece if that might help. It's 9/16" in from the face.

[BillPac]

I do not have a picture of the muzzle or the standing breach at this time.  I was hoping Jim Kibler would see this post and respond, I am sure he will eventually.  What I know regarding the barrel is that it is 39 inches long and the bore is approximately 16 ga.  I don't have access to the gun until next class so for now I can not answer your other questions.  Worst case I will get the info at the next class.  Thank you for the interest.

[Dr. Tim-Boone]

Thanks guys!!  James, those pictures are worth their weight in gold.  Many things to see from that perspective. look how little wood surrounds the whole thing!!!

[James Rogers]

Thanks guys!!  James, those pictures are worth their weight in gold.  Many things to see from that perspective. look how little wood surrounds the whole thing!!!

Next best thing to handling it. I hope I can get all the pictures I recently took of this gun uploaded soon and post them in the antique section. I took a lot of barrel shots being inspired to do so with this topic. Maybe they can add to the discussion on this thread as well. Nothing beats being able to see under the hood on these things.

[Jim Kibler]

Thanks for the post Bill.  Here is a bit more information.  This original barrel is approximately 14 bore (.685" ID).  The breech is approximately 1.375" the small is about .765 and the muzzle flares out to around .875".  This results in a minimum wall thickness of around .040".  Most of the muzzle flare occurs in about the last 1.5-2.0 inches.  The ID flares to approximately match the OD in this last 1.5-2.0 inches.  It's kind of hard to say how far the top "flat" extends since it is only reasonably flat at the very breech.  It develops slightly more radius as it goes down the  barrel until it fades out completely.  It fades out completely around 7 inches or so.  The side panels extend only around 2.75".  I will try to get some photos of the muzzle as requested.   

Hope this information helps.  If you have any additional questions just ask.  It's good to have interest in topics such as this.

[Tim Crosby]

 Bill, great pics, Thanks for posting them and yours to James, as the saying goes "A Picture Is Worth A Thousand Words".

 Tim C.

[Ian Pratt]

 Bill - thanks for posting and getting this good discussion started. The images posted here clearly show not only the reasons behind this type of barrel design, but also can lead us to wonder how they were made.
  Ed Rayl made these barrels for the class. The breeches were machined to standard full octagon. Jim and I removed the neccessary amount of material from the undersides of the barrels and radiused from the breech forward to blend to the round section; from there the students hand filed in the rest of the profile. For our purposes this was the most efficient method, but I would bet that the originals were largely forged to this profile. Any blacksmith knows that excessive grinding and filing equates to wasted time and - possibly more importantly in the time period when this barrel was made - wasted material.
  I should also note that this is not an isolated example. The barrel shown is from a mid 18th century London fowler. The other piece that Jim has been bringing to the class to use as a model is a slightly later piece made in Birmingham which has a similar barrel showing this same form at the breech. James' photos of the standing breech also show a similar arrangement on what I think is a bit later gun.

[Dr. Tim-Boone]

I have my first two hooked breech guns on the bench right now.... the thing I an trying to figure out is what needs to change to allow the barrel to be mounted and the hook slid into the standing breech without pressure of the barrel channel up on the breech causing it to press hard against the standing breech before slipping in and locking.....  what is the secret guys??

[Jim Kibler]

I have my first two hooked breech guns on the bench right now.... the thing I an trying to figure out is what needs to change to allow the barrel to be mounted and the hook slid into the standing breech without pressure of the barrel channel up on the breech causing it to press hard against the standing breech before slipping in and locking.....  what is the secret guys??

Without having your gun to look at, it is difficult to be sure what the problem is.  Some taper on the side flat of the barrel will help avoid pinching as the barrel is inserted and removed.  Also, you can radius the end of the barrel just slightly to prevent it from digging into the wood when installing in the standing breech.  When inletting, I have fixed the standing breech to the barrel and inlet both at the same time.  Perhaps the breech is just a little deep relative to the barrel?  Hard to say without seeing it.

Jim

[Dr. Tim-Boone]

Thanks Jim

I had them fastened together when I inlet them. I think radiusing the bottom of the breech a little, but I wanted to see what other ideas there were in case I missed something obvious out of ignorance. Actually the breech sits pretty high on this barrel.... It may be once I have the standing breech pinned and held in place by the tang screw that it isn't really a problem...rounding off the bottom of the barrel breech just seemed like a good idea.

[James Rogers]

I just put a bunch of pictures of a provincial English fowling piece on a separate thread here  http://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=17040.0 if anyone is interested. Many of the pictures are concerning barrel detail and may be helpful in adding to this discussion.

JCR

[Dr. Tim-Boone]

Those are great pictures James.  There is a lot to learn about fowling pieces. Lots of interesting variations from the rifle.

[Jim Kibler]

There is a lot to learn about English fowling pieces for sure.  My personal view is that it would be about impossible to make a good modern built example without having originals in hand to study during the build.  The good thing is that originals can be purchased today for relatively reasonable prices.  That is, oftentimes for less than a good custom flintlock can be purchased for.  Sometimes pieces in poor shape, can be purchased for very reasonable prices.  These are often perfect study pieces for builders today.  Many of the commonly held beliefs just don't apply to these firearms.