muzzle coning

[ddeaton]

I tried doing a search, but ended up with nothing. If muzzle crown is so important on modern firearms, what effect does it have on rifled black powder barrels when we taper the forcing cone for "easy loading"? Any ill effects?

[Frank]

I have coned the muzzles on my flinters and have had no lose in accuracy.

[Scott Bumpus]

How deep down the barrel and how much in diameter do you cut the cone?

[Dphariss]

John Baird details shooting an original rifle with a "funneled" muzzle in his "Hawken Rifles" the rifle certainly produced good hunting accuracy.
The only way to determine the effects of funneling on a *given barrel* is to put in a GOOD crown and extensively test, probably at least 50 rounds with a the best shooting load. Then funnel the muzzle and shoot again looking to find the best load and then shooting 50 rounds or so.
Anything else is speculation.

I do not believe it is necessary to greatly enlarge the bore at the muzzle, probably 1/2 groove depth for and inch or two is a great plenty.
But we must remember the last inches at the muzzle are the most important part of the barrel and mess with this too much and the barrel might be scrap.
This would require repeatedly funneling a barrel deeper and deeper to find the point where accuracy fails.

We need to keep in mind that rifles used on the frontier were used for personal defense and easy loading might be more important than having the finest accuracy. Thus having a barrel that shot into 8" at 150 yards and loaded easily might be preferable to one that shot into 4" at 150 and loaded harder. Todays match competitor would have different criteria.

Dan

[Dennis Glazener]

I have only coned one barrel, a .58 caliber and sold it before I shot it so I am not speaking from experience

However it seems to me that properly done i.e. with a bore sized pilot inserted deep into the bore and the coning tool cutting the cone,  the cone would have  to be concentric with the bore. It does not seem possible that the "crown" would be anything but perfectly square with the bore.

I used to build benchrest rifles and this is the way we cut the crowns on those rifles (piloted counter bore). They were very capable of shooting sub 1/8 MOA groups. Maybe I am missing something but it appears that a barrel "coned" that way would be far more apt to be square with the bore than if you "crowned" it with a flat file.
Dennis

[Jim Filipski]

There is a lot t be said for good accurate muzzle crowns on modern elongated projectiles fired at higher muzzle velocities but a patched round ball is not particular if it leaves the lands at the muzzle or 3 inches below the muzzle. I have done many coned muzzles and they shoot as well as clean crowned muzzles for round ball rifles. I would not make a rifle for myself unless it was coned. Years ago I used to hear the old ones say that they found an old muzzle loader but couldn't tell what caliber it was because the muzzle was worn out....I now know differently .....many were coned!
Jim

P.S. And my coned muzzles all have a dandy "hinney" treatment  Donny Getz can explain that

By the way I would high recommend Joe Wood's conning tool  Give a nice deep but gradual Cone and very accurate as long as you follow his directions.

[Dphariss]

Baird's description of the interior of a 50 caliber Hoffman & Cambell (Hawken) rifle barrel is as follows:

"...the bore is a slight taper from the breech to a point about 9 1/2 inches from the muzzle. Here a choke is apparent fro about 8 inches, then from there to the muzzle a slight flaring is seen. Measureing about .0005", about 1/4 ince from teh end of the barrel, this flare suddenly increases and additional .002, ..."


This is obviously a 2 angle job to ease loading.
Dan

[Daryl]

I suspect JW Fil's got something in that a RB gun may not be particular about the coning due to low velocity. I also think that the higher the velocity, the more improtant a short crown is, meaning that if you ware pushing 1,800fps through 2,100fps, you'd want as pefect a crown as possible, not a cone.  For tiny-charge, low vel., short range loads, I submit coning might not effect accuracy adversly.
  In my .45 barrel a cone of only 1/2" deep, enlarged 50 yard groups by 50% - tested next day and hundreds of shots to verify.  The original crown was good, and the cone was perfect as well.  I was not impressed with the accuracy, BUT - the accuracy was still tighter than many people can get from their rifles no matter what the crown might be.  I was using the accuracy loads for that rifle, 70gr. 3F and 80gr. 2F.  If I had adjusted the charges some, the original accuracy may have returned. Any time you change anything in loading, you sometimes have to re-invent the wheel - start at the bottom and work your way back again to find the accuracy load.

 For a hunting rifle, I think cones might be the answer as they do load easier - for a purly target-oriented rifle for rondy's, I think they are second fiddle to a good short crown.

[Roger Fisher]

The deep cone is favored by some; but not me.  I'm not knocking it since I haven't tried it.  I don't want to screw up something that is working right.



And I would find a way to do so!

[HistoricalArmsMaker]

When I finished my .38 Beck rifle, I coned the bore using the nearest coning tool I had. I only had a .40 cal and a .36 cal coning tool; in other words, either too big or too small. I mention this because the only thing I was really concerned with was getting it to where I could easily start the ball down the muzzle. It actually takes very little to accomplish this. A lot less than I had thought. What the major surprise was just how well the barrel performs with all the characteristics that usually everybody thinks won't. Its swamped, a very small diameter bore, deep round groove, and a flintlock. So, it amazes me it has won the State championship, our State Club championship, high point award, yada yada. Anyway, all that being said to let you know that coning will not hurt your bore if you don't over-cone. Several of my customers have. Meaning that they have coned past the groove depth. I simply coned the lands until the patched ball loaded easily.
Susie

[Jim Filipski]

I cone til the groove is gone at the muzzle and then most times cut in fancy muzzle treatments.... Have never noticed any ill effects. Actually a few even shot tighter groups then before this treatment.

[Stophel]

So far, I haven't seen an old gun that was coned by just cutting out the bore till the rifling was gone at the muzzle.  I HAVE seen old German rifles with obvious cones that were about an inch or so long, where the rifling grooves were cut out to match the coned bore (I still wonder if this was done, at least partially, with a swage).

Usually, I see a narrow crown with the rifling grooves with their own individual "crowns", making a "flower form" crown at the muzzle. (actually, usually, they're so beat up you can't tell what they're supposed to look like...)

If you can't push the patch and ball into the barrel with your thumb, or at most, with the butt of your knife, it's too tight!

[Daryl]

If you can't push the patch and ball into the barrel with your thumb, or at most, with the butt of your knife, it's too tight!

 Do tell? Too tight for what, acuracy or being period correct? Tell that to the stool sitters and chunk shooters.  I can just imagine the sweat Roger would get himself into loading his normal .454" ball into his .45 by pushing alone.

 The .45 barrel I put the short cone in allows a .440" ball with a .020" patch by pushing but it will raise a sweat doing it and takes a very long time to load due to the pressure needed when just pushing.  Dropping that combination to a .018" patch results in the odd blown (burnt) patch in cool weather and indeed, the .020" patch will 'blow' when it gets hot at Hefley (last year was all cool except for a couple days), hense the use of a .0215" patch with .445" balls 'in the heat'.  I've seen guys shoot loads that were so loose they could load without a short starter, but I've never had the thought they were competition except maybe for 'luck' targets at 10 or 15 yards - luck targets = stings, tacks, straws, cards, you know the type, luck targets. At any distance, nothing but misses & holding things up due to having to swab their bores.  I've only actually seen one someone swab his bore while shooting a short 22 shot string and that guy is a smoothbore shooter only.

[Frank]

I have a 50 caliber Colerain barrel that I coned with Joe Woods tool. 490 ball and .015 patch loads with just easy thumb pressure. That rifle will put them all in one hole at 25 yards and clover leafs at 50 yards. That is plenty good enough for me.

[Stophel]

I have about as much interest in "stool sitting and bench shooting" as I do for watching NASCAR, or men's volleyball, or paint drying.

 

Now, women's volleyball I could get into though...

[Frank]

Now, women's volleyball I could get into though...
[/quote]

You bet, especially beach volleyball. 

[omark]

i have 2 i crowned. one is 62 and the other is a 40. especially on the 40 i coned it deeper than i intended. they will both shoot better than i can. win a local shoot occassionally and very good hunting accuracy. i used a dremel (cringe) and needle files and did them by hand. but next time i will make mandrels and not go quite as deep.

[tg]

"I have about as much interest in "stool sitting and bench shooting" as I do for watching NASCAR, or men's volleyball, or paint drying."

nice selections of loew maintenence activities, this forum does lean toward the more modrern tech aspect of the hoby from what I have seen,one member even did a fiscal analysys on an 18th century farmer to validate the type of gun he should own.....go on and stay in the past Chris your posts are much more interesing from that perspective and I would hate to see one of the really good ones get lost with a 21st century mindset.

[Stophel]

I like the past.  If only they had the internet in the past...

[Hank*in*WV]

I don't want to steal this thread but would you cone a pistol barrel the same depth as a rifle?

[omark]

i would, but then, i dont know much, either.

[Roger Fisher]

I have about as much interest in "stool sitting and bench shooting" as I do for watching NASCAR, or men's volleyball, or paint drying.

 

Now, women's volleyball I could get into though...

Gotta tell ya, bench shooting w/the wind flags and 30 minutes to get off 5 shots doesn't turn my crank much either.  (in fact women's volley ball leaves a lot to be desired also)  But, if I would use a ball/patch combo in my rifles that I could push start with my skinny thumb I would get it 'in over the knuckle" and end up having to shoot it out or maybe pour cold water on it!!!

I load em tight simply because it works for me and I'm too @!*% old to start experimenting 'much'!

Its a matter of different strokes for different folks...!