coned or not

[ken]

 It was asked of me to try an experiment . Sight in a rifle get best group , then cone muzzle  and see if there has been any change in group size or point of impack. Anyone ever do this? If so what was your result  ken

[Pete G.]

Some swear by coned muzzles, others swear AT them. Stutzenberger did a three part test in "Muzzle Blasts", but his coning was larger than the groove diameter which resulted in burned and blown patches in every instance, and accuracy for the most part deteriorated. Theoretically if the cone were no deeper than the grooves accuracy should not be affected, but we all know how a perfectly good theory can be shattered by hard cold reality.

[albert]

If the muzzle had wear from the ramrod , coning would probably increase the accuracy.

[Kermit]

Seems there are a couple of fellows listed on this site who make muzzle coning devices. Should it not be incumbent upon one or both to do this "research" and report the results? Maybe they did and I missed it?

Wouldn't settle anything though. Folks would continue to flog the topic. Opinion trumps fact every time.
 

[Dphariss]

If the muzzle had wear from the ramrod , coning would probably increase the accuracy.

This is assuming that muzzle wear can be that extreme. People need to take a hickory rod and rub it on a gun barrel for a few hours or an old wagon tire if they think modern steel is too tough and see what the result is ( besides having tired arms) and measure it.
The only reports I have seen on coning have been negative, its just not possible for there to be another outcome unless the "freeing" at the muzzle is very slight as described in Baird's "Hawken Rifles". But doing it as this barrel was done is too much work so people just hog out the muzzle and think its "traditional".   And we have no idea how well this original barrel would have shot with a bore that was consistent from breech to muzzle.
 I did see many years ago at the Palmer AK gun show of all places a rifle that looked identical to a light fowler that was labeled "militia rifle". It was about 54 caliber and was bored smooth for about 4" at the muzzle but rifled from there to the breech. It had the small chisel erupted rear sight often found on trade guns. Food for thought... I had a friend with a modern rifle counterbored in this manner but I have no idea how it shot and I am not sure he did either this was late 1960s.

Dan

[WadePatton]

...but we all know how a perfectly good theory can be shattered by hard cold reality.

yup.

Seems there are a couple of fellows listed on this site who make muzzle coning devices. Should it not be incumbent upon one or both to do this "research" and report the results? ...
 

why do extra work if your market is established and you have more orders than you can fill?

and it's rarely ever prudent to listen to the word/research/data generated by folks with a financial interest in the success or failure of anything.  might be polite, but caveat emptor. 

[bob in the woods]

I believe that one of the manufacturers of black powder rifles [ T. C ? ] for a time did offer their rifles with a barrel that had a smooth bored portion/length at the muzzle . Maybe an inch ? I don't know if it affected accuracy but I don't expect much difference .
The main purpose of "coning" is to ease the ball patch into the barrel , so as to allow the use of a tighter ball patch combination without the use of a short starter.  What I have done on one rifle is to file grooves into the lands of the rifling, thereby doubling the # of grooves at the muzzle, which gives more relief for the patch to squeeze into as it transitions into the bore.
I hope I'm describing this adequately.  At any rate, I have not seen any adverse effects on the accuracy of the rifle, and I can load with just the ram rod. This is my hunting rifle, so I'm happy with the results.

[Candle Snuffer]

TC did make a coned Hawken, I have one.  However, I believe its main purpose was for easier of loading their Maxi-Ball more then any thing else.  It shoots patch & ball all right, but I really see no advantage to the coning.

[ken]

I know that some of the competition shooters would touch up there crown before heading to freindship to get best accurcy. and I have done the same to bring it back in line

[Kermit]

why do extra work if your market is established and you have more orders than you can fill?

Not the barrel makers! The folk who make the tools to do the coning!

[WadePatton]

why do extra work if your market is established and you have more orders than you can fill?

Not the barrel makers! The folk who make the tools to do the coning!

hey, i wasn't calling no bbl making names    But also i'm aware of other backlogged small mfgs.  It makes me feel good that they are busy, even if we have to plan ahead (i'm getting better at that).

I was making assumption based on lack of evidence to the "promotion of coning" by a toolmaker.  It might as easily be assumed that he/she doesn't find time to spend in that "marketing" direction.

Yes, I agree with those that say, establish the accuracy of a crowned bbl, then "cone" it and see what it will do.  If you don't like it, lop the end off and re-crown.  Shooters tend to have different accuracy "needs".  I tend toward "extreme" hunting/target accuracy which is slop for bench work.  Give me numbers and i can figger if i want to spend the time and effort and/or take the risk.  No one ever gives numbers (that i've read).  They say "accurate enough" or "no change in accuracy" or similar.

I've always loaded with a starter.  Now i load with a starter i made from scratch--now why would i give that up? 

[Bob Roller]

I know little about coning a barrel but never knew Bill Large to do it.Years ago,Ohio had a
smoothbore only deer season and some muzzle loaders were reamed smooth for
a few inches back from the muzzle to give the appearance of a smoothbore and as I
recall,most were military style reproductions.I don't know if it hurt accuracy or not
but I do remember reading about big Krupp CANNON that shot a projectile out to 75 miles
and it had a few feet of freebore at the muzzle. The target was Paris and it hit that size target
every thirty minutes or so.
One thing I do know is about being behind on orders for locks and triggers
but I am doing my best to get these parts made in a manner consistent with my ideas on
quality control.I refuse to shortcut that idea for the sake of expediency.This IS a cottage or shanty
industry and we do what we can.

Bob Roller

[Daryl]

I recall seeing an add for TC some years ago, in which they cross-section pictured a straight bored out section at the muzzle, which allowed the maxi ball to be inserted 1"(or more) into the bore before it contacted the rifling, supposedly for expediency or perhaps for alignment?  How they shot, I've no idea. That the bored out section was straight walled, not cone shaped.

 

[WadePatton]

...
One thing I do know is about being behind on orders for locks and triggers
but I am doing my best to get these parts made in a manner consistent with my ideas on
quality control.I refuse to shortcut that idea for the sake of expediency.This IS a cottage or shanty
industry and we do what we can.

Bob Roller

absolutotally!

i'll not complain ever.  anything worth having is worth waiting for.  It's not restricted to the gun-making endeavor either.  There are other small-production, high-quality items out there that require paying a deposit and waiting months, sometimes years (as many as 5) to get.   

[Bob Roller]

Wade,
I have a friend who did wait for a bit over 5 years for a long rifle.
He has the patience of a cigar store Indian but even that was wearing
thin.Local maker,good craftsman but when the deposit was gone then
the desire to work left as well so then the long wait set in.
I will not take any payment beyond the actual amount needed for a deposit
which on flintlocks is usually $75 to cover actual costs.
 
Bob Roller

[WadePatton]

Wade,
I have a friend who did wait for a bit over 5 years...

Patience is good. I'm speaking of norms of the other "small industry of hand-builders",  around 12 months is normal.  The wait-times are known and published and vary with all those things that happen in life.  But we're straying too far from topic at hand.  The only reason i bring it up is that there's always somebuddy around here pitching a hissie about everything not being available all the time to anyone who wants it...to illustrate to them that it's not limited to one single endeavor.

But i ramble.

back to funnel cakes cones!!! 

[Bob Roller]

My wife is grumbling about my long hours in the shop but they are normal hours
and the work is a bit tiring but as long as I feel good I plan to do it.She reminds me
that You're not 33 anymore and 78 draws near. We were 33 and 26 when we got hitched.
If I reach the place where the shop is a burden or a pain,I'll shut down and relax,maybe.

Bob Roller

[galamb]

If you take a look on the Colerain and Rice barrel websites neither recommend coning and neither will warranty a barrel that has been coned.

I'm in the (camp) that believe if it somehow made the product superior one of the builders would produce their barrels that way to gain the marketing edge.

[ken]

That is a point that I have never thought of!!! But we all are always trying to make things better

[smokinbuck]

Bob,
Aches and pains are one thing but we all hope it never becomes a burden. The product that you make available has been, and will always be, known as one of the best available. To say nothing of the advise we all look forward to.
Mark

[westerner]

If you had a cone shaped head, you could carry your coned rifle up there. That would be handy.  Look out for low branches, and make sure it's not loaded of course.

   Wes.

[Bob Roller]

Mark,
Right now my right wrist is hurting but I have the job I'm doing about 99% done.
I appreciate your comments.What you have seen is my every day standard of doing things
be it locks,triggers of some odd piece for an old car.I recently made steering box bushings
for a 1928 Chevrolet truck.
Getting back to cones,has anyone field tested a blunderbuss??

Bob Roller

[oldarcher]

I owned an early GRRW Hawken which had a Les Bauska .58 CONED (funneled) barrel that shot very very well. It was easy to load and I was able to print cloverleaf's from a rest at 50yd. I have a new unmolested .58 GRRW barrel that is exactly as it left the shop that is choked and the literature from GRRW clearly states that is the way it should be and if the barrel is shortened it should be from the breech end as cutting the muzzle will ruin the accuracy. When you push a cleaning jag down the barrel and then pull it out you can feel it tighten the last few inches reflecting the choke. I have other well shot GRRW barrels that I cannot feel the choke when drawing a patch through them so I don't know if all the barrels were choked when they left GRRW or not. Both of mine may just be kind of shot out
The point is that I really think that people like Doc White, Bill Large and very knowledgeable contemporary barrel makers would have coned barrels if they thought that it would improve accuracy. They do not and I do not think coning helps accuracy at all either.....now if you want to discuss choking then I believe that an argument could be made in favor of choking......>>>------------------> Old Archer<----------------<<<

[omark]

old archer, i have 3 old GRRW barrels, a 45, 40 and 62. i havent felt any choke in any of them. the guy i got them from had told me of choked barrels but i dont remember him ever claiming any of the GRRW barrels were choked. maybe they didnt do all of them that way. as far as coning barrels, my 40 and 62 are both hand coned by me and it helps loading and both rifles have won some shoots around here. i didnt ever bench them before and after coning so i cant say if it hurt or helped the accuracy. i just know if i do my part they do theirs. i also use them for hunting and informal shoots but never any big bench shoots or anything like that. i guess that means i havent really added anything of value to the topic, so i guess ill go to bed now.    mark