who could rifle an antique smooth bore barrel

[hawknknife]

I hope this is in the correct subject posting.  I have an English 30 inch octagon barrel that is 16 bore.  I would like to get it rifled to accept a conical bullet.  It is a hook breech mounted in a British sporting gun..Thanks...Carl

[Longknife]

I believe Bob Hoyt is you man, contact info should be here in the Archives....Ed


Is that a Charles Ingram gun??

[Dphariss]

I hope this is in the correct subject posting.  I have an English 30 inch octagon barrel that is 16 bore.  I would like to get it rifled to accept a conical bullet.  It is a hook breech mounted in a British sporting gun..Thanks...Carl

16 bore conical is a bad idea. In a 16 bore it will be very heavy 600 grains or more and will require a heavy rifle, 12-14 pounds or more to dampen the recoil if loaded to any useful velocity.

Find "The Sporting Rifle and Its Projectiles" by Forsythe and read it.
http://www.archive.org/details/sportingriflean00forsgoog
You can download it or read it on line. There is a lot to be learned here.

If its a British smoothbore its unlikely the wall thickness is sufficient for what you are attempting.
Reading the book above.
Both Baker and Forsythe found the conical to be a detriment for shooting heavy game with a ML.
Baker was almost killed using a conical in his belted ball rifle that, with the ball, "never failed to floor a charging Elephant".

Also shooting old barrels is a bad idea and I never recommend it.

Dan

[Bob Roller]

I fully agree with Dan about shooting these relics and cutting fracture lines into a barrel in the form of rifling is asking for grief. I once owned a W.W.Greener 16 bore double rifle and it was a cased outfit with 2 sets of shotgun barrels with it in 12 and 10 bore. The rifle barrels had fairly thick walls and were rifled with 9 round bottom grooves. With 90 grains of DuPont 3fg and round balls,it would make "snake eyes" at 50 yards which was all that was needed for a hunting rifle. The recoil was moderate with this load.
I am convinced that there are still people that subscribe to the idea that "You can't get enough black powder"into a gun to blow it up.
I think I told the story my grandfather told to me about some "goodoleboys"that talked a mentally challenged man into shooting an over loaded,thin barreled shotgun and it blew up and killed him.Grandpa Taylor cautioned me more than once about shooting absurd loads.even in new made muzzle loaders.
Be safe and enjoy the sport to the fullest.

Bob Roller

[hawknknife]

Dan and Mr. Roller, Would it be a better idea to sleeve the barrel to maybe .58? Do you think that would be safe?

[Dphariss]

Dan and Mr. Roller, Would it be a better idea to sleeve the barrel to maybe .58? Do you think that would be safe?

A 58 caliber liner in a 66-67 caliber barrel is not a good idea. The wall thickness of a .670 diameter liner in 58 is only about .035. For a 58 caliber liner you need at least 3/4" diameter liner would give about .075 wall which is better and if a good 4150  liner should work OK with a PRB but I doubt the barrel you have can be bored this large and then the breech will likely not work anymore.
The idea of the liner is to have the liner contain the strain for firing
If the gun is original lining is not going to increase its value.
Somethings are better left alone. But I don't know all the details.

Dan

[JDK]

Seems a bit simpler (especially with a hooked breach) and safer to have a new barrel made.  Then you could get whatever caliber and sight set up that you want and still perserve the original barrel.  J.D.

[Dphariss]

Seems a bit simpler (especially with a hooked breach) and safer to have a new barrel made.  Then you could get whatever caliber and sight set up that you want and still perserve the original barrel.  J.D.

This is the best choice of course but care must be taken to assure the thread diameter and pitch of the original breech if its to be used.

Dan

[JDK]

I wouldn't even consider using the original breech as it would eliminate the interchangeability factor and interchangeability is one of the advantages of the hooked and standing breech.  I would think you would want to go with a machined modern steel plug anyway.  Being an English gun I have to believe it is a patent breech and am sure it can be duplicated.  J.D.

[James Wilson Everett]

Guys,

Check out the topic on lining gun barrels.

http://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=19391.msg183213#msg183213

You can line the original barrel using one of the rifled liners sold by TJ's (address listed in the reference post).  I had a very good experience using one of their liners in an original twist iron barrel.  Even so, I still use a rather modest powder charge in the lined rifled barrel.  If the barrel is really nice and the bore is poor, then lining may be an attractive option.  However, the liner will cost about as much as a new barrel.

Jim

[varsity07840]

I've had Bob Hoyt do a number of relines on .69 cal muskets. One 1816 and two 1842s. The 1816 was and remains a  flint smoothbore. One 1842 full length came to me as an armory sighted rifled musket with a pitted bore and was relined and rifled. The second '42, came to me as a smoothbore cut down to musketoon length and was lined and rifled, using the same rear sight as the full length musket (excellent woods gun). I shoot patched balls out of the 1816 and 500 gr. semi wadcutter minies out of the '42s.

Duane

[Bernard]

I have an old barrel in 12 GA with Birmingham proof marks that was originally installed on a stock in Austria in 1820's. Subsequently reworked circa 1840 and again modified around 1870's rifled in Belgium and sold to the American Union forces to arm the northern forces. This 42.5 inch barrel is very thin walled and sports 3 rifle groves. I can only assume it has been fired many times and didn't fail. If I were to fire it I'd start with a light load and a round ball but I'll have to build a stock for it first and that may not happen anytime soon.

[cmac]

R.A.Hoyt or Freischutz Shop 717-6426696 700 Fairfield PA. Haven't had any liners done but had his re rifle a 50 to a 54. Very nice work. Does gain twist rifling as well

[JDK]

If I were to fire it I'd start with a light load and a round ball but I'll have to build a stock for it first and that may not happen anytime soon.

How 'bout if you are going to fire it you fire it before you go to all the trouble of building that stock....you know.....just in case it fails you haven't waisted your time.  But don't go believing just because it was obviously fired many times and hasn't failed doesn't mean it won't tomorrow.  Corrosion is a fickle mistress and she never sleeps.  This is an area that I agree with Dphariss on.....just don't shoot old barrels.....there is really no logical reason to....but if you want to, go ahead....health care is free in Canada, right?    J.D.

[hawknknife]

Longknife, Yes, it is the Charles Ingram 30 Barrel "Tiger Rifle"...Have you seen it?  Carl

[Longknife]

Carl, If its the one from the Guns INT. site, I saw it on there. Nice gun, fair price. I got another one from from the same site, its the Ohio rifle by Hosack, discussed an another thread, Can't buy 'e,m all, I guess....(but I try).....Ed

[Daryl]

If I were to fire it I'd start with a light load and a round ball but I'll have to build a stock for it first and that may not happen anytime soon.

How 'bout if you are going to fire it you fire it before you go to all the trouble of building that stock....you know.....just in case it fails you haven't waisted your time.  But don't go believing just because it was obviously fired many times and hasn't failed doesn't mean it won't tomorrow.  Corrosion is a fickle mistress and she never sleeps.  This is an area that I agree with Dphariss on.....just don't shoot old barrels.....there is really no logical reason to....but if you want to, go ahead....health care is free in Canada, right?    J.D.

Free everywhere, isn't it?

I'd re-barrel it. Bobby Hoyt.

[JDK]

Free everywhere, isn't it?

Not yet and I doubt it ever will be.  J.D.