.50 cal 13/16" across the flats

[Gun_Nut_73]

Hi All,

I just received a Navy Arms mule ear half stock rifle.  The barrel was made by Pedersoli, and is .50 cal, but only 13/16" across the flats.  I intend to use it for target shooting, rather than hunting, but I have never seen a .50 cal with such a small barrel.  Assuming everything is good with the rifle, breech, nipple, etc, is it safe to keep shooting?

Thanks for the help.

PS, Powder load will probably be no more than 70 grains of 2F with a PRB.

[D. Taylor Sapergia]

Too thin for my liking, and historically...nope!

[smylee grouch]

I always thought a 15/16 barrel was about as thin as I would go for a cap lock. 13/16 sounds way too thin for my tastes.

[Mike Brooks]

I know John Getz has built 13/16 X .50 barrels for select customers. Nothing I would want , but they have been made.

[J Henry]

  Don't know just  asking,,Would the type/class of metal made a difference?? Modern rifles build a lot higher pressures and the barrels are much thinner... difference being modern rifle pressures are measured in C.U.P's and B/P measured in L.U.P.s,

[Bob Roller]

I know John Getz has built 13/16 X .50 barrels for select customers. Nothing I would want , but they have been made.

I recall a conversation with either John or Don Getz that they made bullet gun barrels like a long
range muzzle loader uses and these were made from 4150 or something similar.I would think that
a 13/16x50 in 12L14 would be rolling the dice.

Bob Roller

[hanshi]

I have two .45s; one with a 15/16" barrel and the other is a 13/16" barrel.  IMHO a .50 should have at least a 7/8" barrel and preferably a 15/16".

[Hungry Horse]

 With a 13/16th by .50 cal. barrel, how can you dovetail the barrel without it being paper thin? I had a 7/8ths .50 cal. years ago that made me uneasy with anything other than moderate loads.

  Hungry Horse

[Gun_Nut_73]

The only dovetail is the front sight, and yes, it does look like there isn't much left between bore and bottom of dovetail. 

The barrel has the David Pedersoli manufacturing and proof stamps, and that SHOULD satisfy me, but I still think "safety first" with all new firearms. 

Next question:  Who could I contact about making a replacement barrel or relining the current barrel to .32 or .36 cal?  I really like the idea of shooting a sidehammer.

[Candle Snuffer]

Heat mirage is going to be terrible off that 13/16x.50 barrel.  I have a Green Mnt Brl 13/16 x 42 x .45 caliber and on a hot day the mirage it gives off after some shots sure plays tricks with your accuracy. IMHO, I feel a 13/16 x .40 caliber is a happy marriage.

[Gun_Nut_73]

I already have .31, .32, and .36 cal rifles, so a replacement or relining to .32 or .36 would be my first choice. 

The breechplug looks like it would unscrew normally, so I am wondering if it would be possible to reline the barrel in .32 or .36 cal.  That would keep the rest of the barrel as it is, which is in good shape.

[Mike Brooks]

The only dovetail is the front sight, and yes, it does look like there isn't much left between bore and bottom of dovetail. 

The barrel has the David Pedersoli manufacturing and proof stamps, and that SHOULD satisfy me, but I still think "safety first" with all new firearms. 

Next question:  Who could I contact about making a replacement barrel or relining the current barrel to .32 or .36 cal?  I really like the idea of shooting a sidehammer.

Hoyt

[Gun_Nut_73]

Thank you, Mike.  Excuse my ignorance, but do you know Mr Hoyts' username, address, URL, or other method where I can get in touch with him?

[Squirrel pizza]

I've owned and shot several rifles, English and Amereican of .50 cal and larger with thin barrels. Or relatively thin as compaired to most muzzle loaders. Sharps buisness rifles for example. No problems if you don't count recoil. If I'm correct Navy is made in Italy and the barrel should have proof marks. Start small on charge and work up. 50gr should work for targets out to 100yds.

[Gun_Nut_73]

As I mentioned a few posts above, the barrel was made by David Pedersoli, and has the various proof marks.  I just have not seen a .50 cal in a barrel this small before, and question if this is/was a common thing, back when the rifle was made.

[D. Taylor Sapergia]

I'm sure Pedersoli made hundreds, if not thousands of them.  So yes, I suppose they were common when they came out.  I just don't like them - at all!  I would never build a rifle around such a barrel, when there are so many decent profiles to choose from.  Nope.

[David Rase]

I shot a 13/16" x .50 caliber Getz barrel in the mid 80's for several years.  It had a small Siler flintlock for ignition.  Never gave it a second thought.  It was a half stock and I could only afford to own one gun at the time so it was my cross stick, off hand, Seneca/Mountainman run and everything else gun.  All I did was punch paper with it and a few gongs.
David

[Gun_Nut_73]

For peace of mind, I will see if I can find a contact for Mr Hoyt, and maybe get it relined to a smaller caliber.

[Bob Roller]

I'm sure Pedersoli made hundreds, if not thousands of them.  So yes, I suppose they were common when they came out.  I just don't like them - at all!  I would never build a rifle around such a barrel, when there are so many decent profiles to choose from.  Nope.

I don't want to be carrying or shooting any rifle I'm uneasy about. To me a 13/16x 50 caliber would not
be anything I have confidence in.Like Taylor,I would never make up any kind of gun from such a thin
barrel.

Bob Roller

[Squirrel pizza]

Just curious Gun Nut, how or why you acquired this rifle. I agree that if you are uncomfortable with it, or feel there is a safety issue you shouldn't shoot it. But the Italians have been making gun barrels for a few hundred years and their proof houses are pretty good. I believe they're tested at 3times the recommended load. I'm fairly confident the gun would be safe to shoot. As long as there are no obvious flaws. You might be surprised. Judging a book by it's cover, you might miss out on a good story.

[Gun_Nut_73]

Just curious Gun Nut, how or why you acquired this rifle. I agree that if you are uncomfortable with it, or feel there is a safety issue you shouldn't shoot it. But the Italians have been making gun barrels for a few hundred years and their proof houses are pretty good. I believe they're tested at 3times the recommended load. I'm fairly confident the gun would be safe to shoot. As long as there are no obvious flaws. You might be surprised. Judging a book by it's cover, you might miss out on a good story.

I bought it because it is a side hammer lock.  It was an online auction, and did not state size of barrel.  Caliber was only added to auction at the last moment.  It has clearly been shot before, but as I stated earlier, I have never seen a .50 cal in such a small barrel, and wondered if this were a common practice in the past.

[moleeyes36]

Thank you, Mike.  Excuse my ignorance, but do you know Mr Hoyts' username, address, URL, or other method where I can get in touch with him?

The last posting I saw with his contact information was in March and it was:

Bob Hoyt (717) 642-6696
700 Fairfield Station Rd
Fairfiled, PA 17320

Mole Eyes

[hanshi]

Despite what I, myself, and others have said about .50 barrel thickness, After the first few inches the pressure drops dramatically.  A front sight dovetail wouldn't concern me as much as one close to the breech.  Fowler barrels are often quite thin, especially back in the old days, and are considered safe with both ball and shot.  Still, I don't like that caliber/thin barrel combo.

[Scota4570]

What are the exterior dimensions of an 1886 Winchester barrel in 50-90??  I think it is thinner than this.  I don't have one in my lap to measure though.  The pressure would be much higher than a patch ball muzzleloader.  Modern shotgun barrels are also very thin for the bore size.  The pressure is similar to a patch ball rifle.  Not trying to be a jerk, just throwing out some obvious cases were thinner barrels are safe. 

[Gun_Nut_73]

Thank you all for your help and advice.