Author Topic: Kibler's blog spot fowling gun.  (Read 21769 times)

Offline KLMoors

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 859
Re: Kibler's blog spot fowling gun.
« Reply #25 on: October 07, 2012, 08:41:53 PM »
Wow, what a beauty. It looks impressive enough, and then, as I read through the thread I discover that you made a lot of the parts too!

Lordie!



Offline Acer Saccharum

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19311
    • Thomas  A Curran
Re: Kibler's blog spot fowling gun.
« Reply #26 on: October 13, 2012, 06:01:35 AM »
Gesswein carries die sinker chisels, and Brownell's carries a more limited selection of the same brand. about 7" long, 5/16 diam HSS.
Tom Curran's web site : http://monstermachineshop.net
Ramrod scrapers are all sold out.

Offline smart dog

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7013
Re: Kibler's blog spot fowling gun.
« Reply #27 on: October 13, 2012, 07:08:45 PM »
Hi Jim,
I am sorry that I did not respond to your request sooner.  I am still working in the field and have only limited time and opportunity to connect on the internet.  I like to use 1/16-3/16" round-bottom die-sinkers chisels and chasing hammer for sculpting metal.  They are sharpened like round-bottomed gravers.  I also use flats of the same widths.  I find they work very well to shape the details in castings and to cut sharp crisp edges on those details.  I don't have access to investment casting equipment and my clay-cast non-ferous pieces are pretty good but need detailng and finishing.  I also have to cut steel parts out from scratch.  Hence, the die-sinkers chisels are critical for me.  When properly sharp, they cut smoothly.  I also find that even high quality castings still cannot duplicate the sharp crisp edges produced by cutting.  Anyway, I like and use the chisels a lot.

dave         
"The main accomplishment of modern economics is to make astrology look good."

Offline Acer Saccharum

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19311
    • Thomas  A Curran
Re: Kibler's blog spot fowling gun.
« Reply #28 on: October 13, 2012, 07:56:41 PM »
To my understanding investment cast steel/iron is a rather recent development. Iron furniture was chiseled from the solid 200 yrs ago, hence more expensive than silver or brass furniture that could be cast(and reproduced in quantity).

Jim, is the modeling foam you used called 'butterboard'? What machine shops use to proof out their CNC programs, jewelers use to carve models out of for casting patterns?
Tom Curran's web site : http://monstermachineshop.net
Ramrod scrapers are all sold out.

Offline Jim Kibler

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4473
    • Personal Website
Re: Kibler's blog spot fowling gun.
« Reply #29 on: October 14, 2012, 02:30:37 AM »
Sure, in the period iron / steel was cut or chiseled to shape for sculpted mounts etc.  As far as the pattern material goes, it is a high density polyurethane foam modeling board from Freeman Supply.  I have been using some Butterboard since and think it's a little better.  Seems to have a little finer grain.

Jim

Offline Acer Saccharum

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19311
    • Thomas  A Curran
Re: Kibler's blog spot fowling gun.
« Reply #30 on: October 14, 2012, 10:57:23 PM »
Great work, Jim.

Tom Curran's web site : http://monstermachineshop.net
Ramrod scrapers are all sold out.

Offline Yancey von Yeast

  • Starting Member
  • *
  • Posts: 45
    • Yancey von Yeast Antique Arms
Re: Kibler's blog spot fowling gun.
« Reply #31 on: October 19, 2012, 05:23:12 AM »
Can anyone give a link to Kibler's fowler on the blog spot?

Thanks!

Yancey

Offline Karl K.

  • Starting Member
  • *
  • Posts: 36

Offline Dphariss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9920
  • Kill a Commie for your Mommy
Re: Kibler's blog spot fowling gun.
« Reply #33 on: October 19, 2012, 03:56:11 PM »
That's the way an English Fowling gun is made!

For His Royal Highness!

Dan
He who dares not offend cannot be honest. Thomas Paine

Offline Dphariss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9920
  • Kill a Commie for your Mommy
Re: Kibler's blog spot fowling gun.
« Reply #34 on: October 19, 2012, 04:35:25 PM »
Seems like Mr Kelly posted that investment casting was very old. I doubt that if the gunsmiths of the 18th c. were casting such parts in iron/steel they would admit it. Being one of their secrets.

Dan
He who dares not offend cannot be honest. Thomas Paine

Offline Chuck Burrows

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1218
    • Wild Rose Trading Company
Re: Kibler's blog spot fowling gun.
« Reply #35 on: October 20, 2012, 12:01:54 AM »
To my understanding investment cast steel/iron is a rather recent development. Iron furniture was chiseled from the solid 200 yrs ago, hence more expensive than silver or brass furniture that could be cast(and reproduced in quantity).

Depends on what you mean by a recent development - investment cast steel/iron gun parts are at least as old as the 1st quarter of the 19th Century and the method was quite widely used by the 1840's - many of the Hawken Bros parts (butt plates, trigger guards and breeches, for instance were being cast in steel/iron by the mid to late 1840's and in England, Manton and other fine makers, were using the process at least 20 years earlier for casting lock parts such as hammers, frizzens, etc.. Being able to cast steel for parts (the investment cast process is far older) goes back at least to the 1750's or so - the Huntsman process for casting high quality steel was developed by 1745 and while early on it was used for producing steel ingots that were then forged to shape, it was used by some as early as the 1760's or so to cast parts in steel...
« Last Edit: October 20, 2012, 12:04:03 AM by Chuck Burrows »
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I,
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.

Offline Jim Kibler

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4473
    • Personal Website
Re: Kibler's blog spot fowling gun.
« Reply #36 on: October 20, 2012, 01:23:34 AM »
I don't believe investment casting was used to produce steel or iron gun parts in the 19th century.  I believe iron castings were produced and used for some gun parts using a sand casting process.  I don't believe the technology for investment casting STEEL was developed until the first part of the 20th century.  Steel casting in general is MUCH more difficult than iron casting.  Add investment casting to the mix and it becomes even more complicated.  As an industrial process, I understand imvestment casting in general didn't become widespread until the begining of the 20th century as well.  The size and bulkiness of some 19th century cast gun parts are indicative of the fact that they were made of iron.  This size is required for sufficient strength.  I'm not into these guns with these parts, but surely others who are can give a little better information.

Offline Chuck Burrows

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1218
    • Wild Rose Trading Company
Re: Kibler's blog spot fowling gun.
« Reply #37 on: October 20, 2012, 04:45:57 AM »
Jim - the common Euro method for casting steel was developed by Benjamin Huntsman in 1745 - as I noted it was originally used to cast ingots which were then forged into parts such as knife blades. This was also known as crucible steel and was originally developed for use in clock springs. Cast steel, although not cast into shape, was after widely used for knife blades, axe heads, and even gun barrels in the 1830's.
Cast steel was made by taking chunks of blister steel (wrought iron turned into steel via the cementation process), melting them down in a puddle type furnace, and that was then poured into special clay crucibles to form ingots of varying sizes. It was one of the three major methods used to make steel (blister, shear, and cast or crucible being the three), especially in England, prior to the 1860's when the Bessemer process was developed. Serendipitously Sheffield, England is one of the areas of the world that has natural clay deposits suitable for high temp casting of iron and steel.
The casting of steel itself though is much older - wootz steel for instance is just one type of cast steel.  

Investment aka lost wax casting was developed much earlier and was widely used for sculptures, jewelry and such, but a similar system was developed in Europe for casting iron gun gun barrels by the mid-16th Century. Later steel parts may have been cast in iron and then case hardened thus creating a product at least by the early 1800's called steel rather than iron (early 1830's Henry rifle mounts for instance were ordered as steel not iron). On the other hand both wrought iron and the simple unalloyed steels of the day melt at the same temps about 2600° F, so I'm not sure why you would think that simple steel would be harder to cast since there was no problem bringing wrought iron up to temp.
FWIW - I've cast a few mild steel and WI parts using simple back yard equipment and using a simple wax cast type molds using high temp ceramic type clay. As for the cast iron parts needing to be bulky - as I noted late 1840's and later Hawken rifle parts such as thin butt plates and trigger guards were cast in iron or steel - the parts I cast were copies of the Carson rifle butt plate and trigger guard whihc date from the early 1850's. The casting method and molds of that time were fine enough to show unmelted bits of brass used to braze the two parts of the butt plates together which were then used as patterns - that fineness is generally more indicative of a lost wax method than it is of sand casting.
It's been a while but IIRC some of the info I garnered on 19th century gun parts casting was in the book(s) on the Mantons, Feltwad my be able to offer more info. The info on the cast iron/steel Hawken parts came via John Baird and Tom Dawson.
« Last Edit: October 20, 2012, 05:27:24 AM by Chuck Burrows »
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I,
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.

Offline Jim Kibler

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4473
    • Personal Website
Re: Kibler's blog spot fowling gun.
« Reply #38 on: October 20, 2012, 05:33:51 AM »
In referencing "cast iron" I was refering to an iron / carbon alloy containing greater than 2.6% carbon.  Not a low carbon iron product.  In fact, as the carbon content decreases to very low levels in steel, casting becomes more difficult.  So, trying to melt and cast wrought iron would be more difficult than casting say a 1020 steel.  Yes, steel was melted in a crucible early on, but that is only one part of the equation.  It had to be cast into the desired shape to make the  type of parts you are referencing.   I'll repeat, on an industrial basis, investment casting wasn't used until around 1900.  Sure it was use much earlier to create some art objects, but I know of no serious evidence to suggest it was used to create either steel or iron (iron carbon alloy greater than 2.6% carbon) gun parts.  I'll stand by my statement that the ferrous parts cast in the 19th century for gun use were "cast iron" and were not cast by the investment process, but rather in sand molds. 

Offline Chuck Burrows

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1218
    • Wild Rose Trading Company
Re: Kibler's blog spot fowling gun.
« Reply #39 on: October 20, 2012, 06:44:28 AM »
Jim - first off no disrespect meant and also you made a fine piece that I highly admire..

But we will have to agree to disagree about cast iron/steel parts - FWIW I may not be a "big" name but I have lots of experience. I literally grew up in a machine shop and have been forging and casting a lot  period goods, mostly knives but a also lot of 19th century gun parts as well for over 40 years so I 'm not just talking through my hat. Also I agree that investment casting for iron or steel was highly industrialized until the late 1800's early 1900's but there is based on some of my reading some evidence it was done in small amounts that would have been typical of period gunshops.

Quote
Not a low carbon iron product.  In fact, as the carbon content decreases to very low levels in steel, casting becomes more difficult.  So, trying to melt and cast wrought iron would be more difficult than casting say a 1020 steel.
I fully understand the difference re: low/high carbon casting, but I disagree that wrought is necessarily harder to cast than say 1020 steel all other things considered. One of the "common knowledge" misconceptions is that all wrought was very low in carbon or no carbon at all - I've used better than a ton of wrought over the last 40 years and in most cases had it tested for content. 1020 steel si of course .20% carbon, much of the wrought has had close to that and some much higher - up to .60% and yes it was wrought iron and not steel - the difference in the two is easily discernible (the "stringy texture of WI for one) and that difference is not and IMO should not be just based on carbon content alone.
And it's not only my experience that WI can be high carbon (it was after all made from high carbon cast iron) - Ric Furrer is one of the most knowledgeable people and an acknowledged expert in the field of period iron and steel making (you can look him up) - he even holds classes on making both items and his experience is the same as mine that not all wrought iron is low carbon no matter what the "books" say.
Plus again I have cast both wrought and low carbon steels such as 1018/1020, as well as high carbon cast iron (and not all cast iron is high carbon, there are many different types) and while the high carbon cast did melt at a lower temp I had no problem reaching melting temps for wrought or low carbon steel - plus as noted the technology for melting and casting wrought (making it into high quality puddle iron) and steel was widely used by the late 1700's.
As for the few original period (mid 1800's) cast iron/steel parts I've examined and worked with at times they were not high carbon cast iron - they were fairly malleable even when worked cold or at a low heat and high carbon cast iron is just too brittle for working in such a manner (forging high carbon cast iron can be done but it can be a real nightmare due to the brittleness even at a proper heat).

As to the casting methods - again my comments are based on reading I did many years ago and on my own experiences (admittedly not an immense amount) with simple back yard casting methods - casting low carbon steel or carbon iron with such simple tools was and is completely feasible using a simple lost wax method (and based on period documentation, lost wax casting was quite widely used for certain items especially with brass and bronze by the early 1800's) as well as sand casting and with the latter I just never got the fineness of detail I saw on the originals. So IMO again with all due respect, further research is necessary before making any absolute/definitive statement - as always we continue to learn more of what happened in the past as new research is revealed.
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I,
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.

Offline Chuck Burrows

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1218
    • Wild Rose Trading Company
Re: Kibler's blog spot fowling gun.
« Reply #40 on: October 20, 2012, 02:53:05 PM »
Quote
As for the few original period (mid 1800's) cast iron/steel parts I've examined and worked with at times they were not high carbon cast iron - they were fairly malleable even when worked cold or at a low heat and high carbon cast iron is just too brittle for working in such a manner (forging high carbon cast iron can be done but it can be a real nightmare due to the brittleness even at a proper heat).
Jim I do have to backtrack a bit here since I was thinking in terms of the more brittle cast iron such as used for stoves - I frankly had "forgotten" about malleable cast iron which while high in carbon is still ductile with a hard surface. By the early 1800's it was being widely used in casting of small items such as horse harness parts including buckles - Seth Boyden was the first to produce it here in the USA circa 1826-1831 (dependent on the source). Prior to that it was being used for casting small parts in England from about the middle 1700's. This is the most likely iron used for casting the Hawken parts I examined.
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I,
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.

Offline Jim Kibler

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4473
    • Personal Website
Re: Kibler's blog spot fowling gun.
« Reply #41 on: October 20, 2012, 03:50:01 PM »
Yes,  we're together with the cast malleable iron.  This is or course in the family of "cast irons" with greater than 2.6% carbon.  Much easier to cast than steel.  Also lower in strength and other mechanical properties, hence the need to make parts bulkier in applications where strength was critical.   Now, give me some credible evidence that true investment casting was used rather than the widely practiced sand casting method ;)  "Could have" isn't enough to convince me.  From the little research I've done, investment casting related to ferrous metals and firearms is basically a spin off from WWII.  Also the research indicates that investment casting was "rediscovered" around 1900 by a dentist who developed the process for fixing teeth.  This is indicated to have been when the use of it in industrial applications began.  Some art objecs exist that were cast where an imvestment method was used much earlier, but from what I understand, it was not used on a manufacturing basis.  This is the commonly held belief at least.  True investment casting in a production setting is not necessarily a simple process.

When I talk of casting, my experience comes from being a metallurgist and working in a sand foundry for quite a number of years.  We cast anything from gray iron to some high temperature nickel based alloys.  And I always hate to mention it, but I did happen to graduate with a metallurgical engineering degree.  But that was a long time ago, I've forgotten a whole bunch and there's no need to turn this into a wee wee contest.
 
« Last Edit: October 20, 2012, 04:04:21 PM by Jim Kibler »

Offline Acer Saccharum

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19311
    • Thomas  A Curran
Re: Kibler's blog spot fowling gun.
« Reply #42 on: October 21, 2012, 06:13:14 AM »
I believe the investment cast steel parts we see today are from 20th Cent developments. The ability to cast detail such as relief modeling and engraving did not exist in the 19th Cent. I'm not trying to make this sound like fact, it's my simplistic understanding.
Tom Curran's web site : http://monstermachineshop.net
Ramrod scrapers are all sold out.

Offline Chuck Burrows

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1218
    • Wild Rose Trading Company
Re: Kibler's blog spot fowling gun.
« Reply #43 on: October 21, 2012, 10:52:41 PM »
Jim - thanks for understanding and keeping things civil and yep no wee wee from me  - I frankly despise such discussions, but do accept a good disagreement at times and offering ones credentials is never a problem with me.
As I noted the info I read was long ago and is just one of those "factoids" that bounces around in the back of my head but I don't remember the source which may have been via Harold Peterson or the Manton books, or???
I do agree that as an industrial application investment casting of iron/steel is mainly a 20th Century innovation, but I also believe that there is a difference between a widespread industrial/production application and what I would call a "craft" application.
example: Damascus aka pattern welded blades - the techniques were well known in Europe at least by the late 18th/early 19th Century to produce such blades (see L'Art du Coutelier dated 1787 and The Circle of Mechanical Arts dated 1813) and they were used enough that there were fake blades being made, but it was never a widely used Euro or American industrial application for blades, but rather a small craftsman one off/small production application. But yes until I can find the info or lack there of I can't and won't make a definitive statement  one way or the other as it applies to iron and steel without further study.

Quote
The ability to cast detail such as relief modeling and engraving did not exist in the 19th Cent.

That all depends on the material cast. When using the lost wax method of casting in gold, silver, bronze, and brass, there is plenty of documentation for relief modeling and fine detailing work on such items as jewelry and statues well before the 19th Century - Theophilus first mentioned the process of last wax casting in the 1,100's and there are older mentions than that dating back to the Greeks and Romans. In other parts of the world such as India the method is at least 5,000 years old.
In Europe many of the fine Renaissance artisans used lost wax casting for fine detail work when doing statues and jewelry. Leonardo used the method a lot for detail work and in particular Cellini whose statue of Perseus and the head of Medusa are two of the best examples and large ones at that.
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I,
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.

Offline Robby

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2655
  • NYSSR ―
Re: Kibler's blog spot fowling gun.
« Reply #44 on: October 21, 2012, 11:40:12 PM »
Chuck, If it were within my power, I would award you a PhD in Tact/Diplomacy, history, and the ability to make wonderful things! Thank you.
Robby
molon labe
We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution. A. Lincoln

Offline pathfinder

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 731
Re: Kibler's blog spot fowling gun.
« Reply #45 on: October 24, 2012, 02:47:18 AM »
I'll second that Robby!

I just went and looked at the gun that's being talked about,and,@!*%! That's one fine piece of work! I LOVE building guns and such,but what you guy's do here is beyond belief! What did ya'll do,make a deal with a soul taker to have the talent ya'll have? Where do I apply! LOL :D Truly inspirational.
Not all baby turtles make to the sea!  Darwinism. It’s works!

Offline Kopfjaeger

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 403
Re: Kibler's blog spot fowling gun.
« Reply #46 on: January 31, 2013, 02:33:47 PM »
Hi,
Wonderful gun.  Jim paid attention to every detail and got the look and feel of a mid-18th century English fowler exactly right (like your guns , Mike).  I certainly admire Jim's gunmaking skill, but it is that attention to detail that really draws me to his work.  That requires a great deal of research and astute observation.  It is a very beautiful gun.

dave
:-* :-* :-*
" A godly man and his rifle deprive sleep from the wicked, A christian man who prays is the defeater of evil, A praying man who will fight is the conqueror of nations and the hope of the oppressed "