Author Topic: So... barrel steel discussion here?  (Read 46697 times)

Offline Scota4570

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2393
Re: So... barrel steel discussion here?
« Reply #50 on: February 16, 2017, 06:01:31 PM »
" But what about the  forge welded skelp bbls of yesteryears and then a little  later on , steels or wrought iron  used for MLing bbls? "

They used what they had.  I would not knowingly shoot a barrel forge welded out of old horse shoe nails.  Such barrels forged welded out of scrap can work just fine though. 


What causes failures is unpredictable.  Sam Fadala made some test barrels out of electrical conduit and breech them in soup cans of cement.  They held a respictable amount of powder a patched ball without damage.  Seating off the powder took them out in one shot. 

The mass produced barrel I posted about a while back has a gap in front of the plug and the wall thickness in the area was only a little thicker than electrical conduit.  It is amazing to me that those barrels did not fail in mass.  Getting worked up over alloys may be over analyzing? 

Brass barrels were/are sometimes used.  How do they compare to 12L16?.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2017, 08:06:26 PM by Scota4570 »

Offline Eric Kettenburg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4178
    • Eric Kettenburg
Re: So... barrel steel discussion here?
« Reply #51 on: February 16, 2017, 06:47:50 PM »
Rich that does sum it up pretty well.  I was hoping there exists somewhere some documentation, and some good information has been posted.  BTW Mr. Kelly, I will send along a message as I'd like to take you up on that offer of the pdf file; I suspect it will be very interesting!

Rich:  one thing I would take a bit of issue with is "Those bringing a lawsuit should know the gunmaker has no assets worth having..."  I think that's casting a bit too general of a net!

Snapper - good information there, thanks.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2017, 06:49:36 PM by Eric Kettenburg »
Strange women lying in ponds, distributing swords, is no basis for a system of government!

Offline Mad Monk

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1033
Re: So... barrel steel discussion here?
« Reply #52 on: February 16, 2017, 08:22:54 PM »
" But what about the  forge welded skelp bbls of yesteryears and then a little  later on , steels or wrought iron  used for MLing bbls? "

They used what they had.  I would not knowingly shoot a barrel forge welded out of old horse shoe nails.  Such barrels forged welded out of scrap can work just fine though. 


History repeats itself.
The original wrought iron barrels were a mixed bag.
How good a particular barrel was depended on where the iron ore came from and how it was smelted in the iron furnace.  Then it went through at least two reheats and hammers in another forge to remove impurities.  Then when the skelp was hammer forged into a barrel it depended on how it was hammered.  By hand or a trip hammer.

Magnatite ore gave the best barrels.  That ore here in Berks County included a bit of manganese.  Most of which was removed during the ore smelting process but small amounts remained in the pig iron.   Hematite ore gave an iron that included a lot of slag inclusions in the finished skelp.  Barrels made here in Reading ended up on Hawken guns in St. Louis while there was an iron mine and furnace only about 80 miles from St. Louis.  But that mine was worked with a low grade hematite iron ore.  Then there was the scandal at Harpers Ferry when a manager quit buying barrel blanks out of Lancaster County, PA and bought a bunch from Bedford County, PA.  A greater percentage of which failed proof testing after being made up into breeched barrels.

Offline T*O*F

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5123
Re: So... barrel steel discussion here?
« Reply #53 on: February 16, 2017, 08:48:07 PM »
Quote
 If any body wants a 4140 muzzle loading barrel Somebody will make you one for a fee.

Just to set the record straight, I know for a fact that at least 3 of the popular barrel makers have made barrels from 4140.  Maybe others have as well.  We use them for building long range bullet guns.  Previously, Ernie at Badger barrels had the profiles for them, but that supply ended when he sold the company.  In the interim, we used Green Mountain's black powder cartridge barrels, but the lacked the proper profile.

When Rod England started producing the Alex Henry again, he had a run of 10 properly profiled barrels produced from 4140.  I bought the first two from him.  Contrary to what has been stated, they were priced at only $450 each, which is comparable to what Badger Barrels used to cost.

However, to have a single custom barrel in a special profile made would cost a great deal more.  I searched all over for someone who would make me a couple of barrels with Rigby flats machined in.  Many would make me a barrel blank, but wouldn't machine them in the Rigby profile.
Dave Kanger

If religion is opium for the masses, the internet is a crack, pixel-huffing orgy that deafens the brain, numbs the senses and scrambles our peer list to include every anonymous loser, twisted deviant, and freak as well as people we normally wouldn't give the time of day.
-S.M. Tomlinson

Offline Acer Saccharum

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 19311
    • Thomas  A Curran
Re: So... barrel steel discussion here?
« Reply #54 on: February 16, 2017, 10:40:28 PM »
I blew a Douglas barrel years ago.  Flint 1" X .50. Loaded it with 80gr 2ff then rammed the ball home then must have dumped 80grg 2ff again then short started the ball only. Blew her all to $#*!. The short started ball was still in the barrel, blew at the breech, never found the top flat, the stock was completely shattered.I got a singed eye brow and a new respect for paying attention to what you're doing when you're loading. :o I don't think it probably mattered much what the barrel was made of. Stupid is what stupid does.

I also blew out a muzzle on a rfile barrel. Had a .54 with 80 gr powder. Got distracted by someone talking, started another ball, and never rammed it home. When the gun fired, it made the strangest sound. Muzzle was blown out just like in the cartoons, but it wasn't funny. No one got hurt, which was a miracle.

It doesn't matter what the steel in the barrel is if you're going to load improperly.
Tom Curran's web site : http://monstermachineshop.net
Ramrod scrapers are all sold out.

Offline FlintFan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 249
Re: So... barrel steel discussion here?
« Reply #55 on: February 16, 2017, 11:09:07 PM »

Just to set the record straight, I know for a fact that at least 3 of the popular barrel makers have made barrels from 4140. 


Are any of them making 42"-46" tapered and flared octagon barrels?  That is where the lack of options seems to be.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2017, 11:11:18 PM by FlintFan »

Offline Flint62Smoothie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 482
Re: So... barrel steel discussion here?
« Reply #56 on: February 17, 2017, 12:35:03 AM »
Re: wrought iron barrels. When the 1819 Hall rifle, patented 1811 (flintlock breechloader) was submitted for US Army trials the proof loads were two 52-cal roundballs over 200-grains of powdah and one roundball over 327-grains of powdah. All barrels tested survived with no defects noted. That's a darn big charge for wrought iron!

Maybe it was more ductile? Sounds like some are alleging that some modern MZL steels can be brittle.
All of my muzzleloaders will shoot into one ragged hole ALL DAY LONG ... it's just the 2nd or 3rd & other shots that tend to open up my groups ... !

Offline Pennsylvania Dutchman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 341
Re: So... barrel steel discussion here?
« Reply #57 on: February 17, 2017, 04:14:31 AM »
Of the thousands of muzzle loading barrels made in the last 50 years from 12L14, what is the percentage of them that failed? Just guessing here, maybe a fraction of 1%? I would also guess that only a small percentage of those that did fail, failed from a material defect. The larger portion was operator error. The number of failures can't be very high as we would be hearing about it. With our culture that is antigun and all to anxious the sue over the least little problem, we would be seeing adverts on TV and in our magazines from law firms. Something like, If you have fired a muzzleloader recently with a, you add the name, barrel and felt any discomfort, we would like to help you get the big settlement you deserve. While 12L14 may not be the ideal barrel steel, it is a far cry better than the cast iron that was used for many years for cannon barrels. I believe it is probably safer to fire our guns with 12L14 barrels than it is to drive to work in the morning. Maybe we all should just stay home and shoot something.
Mark
Mark Poley

Offline Elnathan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1773
Re: So... barrel steel discussion here?
« Reply #58 on: February 17, 2017, 05:28:04 AM »

Maybe it was more ductile? Sounds like some are alleging that some modern MZL steels can be brittle.

Basically, yes. From what I gather reading online, talking to a number of different barrel-makers, and reading James Kelly's articles, there are basically three issues at play with 12L14:

1) Brittleness. Brittleness is actually a desireable trait in steel, at times, because when it is machined the chips break away from the piece being worked easily. 12L14 is easy to machine precisely because it is brittle, whereas 4140 is "gummy" (to quote a barrelmaker I talked to recently) which I interpret to mean that when machining 4140 the chips tend to bend and cling to the piece. Unfortunately the very properties that make 12L14 easy to machine reduce its utility as a barrel material.

2) Cold drawing. I don't know if modern 12L14 barrels are made from hot-rolled-cold drawn stock. Cold drawing steel to get a smooth finish does sometimes leave microscopic cracks in the surface of a piece of steel, and has been a problem in the past - this was the big issue with Douglas barrels back in the day. Don't know if that is a problem today.

One of my big takeways from Kelly's articles is that these cracks don't always cause immediate failure - a fissure can grow over time and the repeated shock of firing until the barrel fails under quite ordinary loads. He has details of several such failures.

3) Gunbarrel rating from the foundry. Material intended for gun barrels gets special treatment at the foundry to ensure that it is as close to specs as possible and that it is consistent throughout the batch. Otherwise, it is possible to the alloying elements may end up in clusters, and a barrel made from a bar containing a cluster may be weaker than its nominal rating. Luck of the draw...

Knowledgable people, feel free to correct me.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2017, 05:58:43 AM by Elnathan »
A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition -  Rudyard Kipling

Offline jerrywh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8885
    • Jerrywh-gunmaker- Master  Engraver FEGA.
Re: So... barrel steel discussion here?
« Reply #59 on: February 17, 2017, 07:05:50 AM »
 If 4140 muzzle loading barrels were mass produced how many more people do you think would soon assume they were safe to shoot smokeless powder in??
Nobody is always correct, Not even me.


Offline Joe S.

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1990
  • the other Joe S.
Re: So... barrel steel discussion here?
« Reply #61 on: February 17, 2017, 01:20:32 PM »
interesting thread,I done have anything of substance to add.I still building my first rifle.Its a green mountain barrel for what that's worth. All I can do is cut my dovetails correctly and trust the steel.I filed the bases of the lugs down to the same thickness as the copper base on the front site,pretty thin.This leaves plenty of meat in the barrel,again all you can do is trust the steel.Everyday you have faith somebody else did their part,hope the door don't fall off the hinges,railing holds up going down the steps.Your truck don't come apart going down the road, ect.ect.You start thinking about this stuff every time you pull the trigger, heck get outa bed in a the morning, still find these types of disscusions interesting and in formative

Offline WadePatton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5303
  • Tennessee
Re: So... barrel steel discussion here?
« Reply #62 on: February 17, 2017, 02:39:33 PM »
If 4140 muzzle loading barrels were mass produced how many more people do you think would soon assume they were safe to shoot smokeless powder in??

Isn't that the sort of thing that happened to Savage?  They used some form of Stainless in some of their ML's, and now they don't. 

Hold to the Wind

Offline Elnathan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1773
Re: So... barrel steel discussion here?
« Reply #63 on: February 17, 2017, 02:43:43 PM »
If 4140 muzzle loading barrels were mass produced how many more people do you think would soon assume they were safe to shoot smokeless powder in??

Isn't that the sort of thing that happened to Savage?  They used some form of Stainless in some of their ML's, and now they don't.

According to the court document linked above, the stainless barrels were intended to shoot both black and smokeless powder.
A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition -  Rudyard Kipling

Offline WadePatton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5303
  • Tennessee
Re: So... barrel steel discussion here?
« Reply #64 on: February 17, 2017, 03:05:09 PM »
If 4140 muzzle loading barrels were mass produced how many more people do you think would soon assume they were safe to shoot smokeless powder in??

Isn't that the sort of thing that happened to Savage?  They used some form of Stainless in some of their ML's, and now they don't.

According to the court document linked above, the stainless barrels were intended to shoot both black and smokeless powder.

Yes, and they failed too many times to keep in production.  I didn't see any powder discussion, but we all know that rates of nitro are all over the place for specific applications.  (That was my first personal response to hearing about SS ML using nitro--but the kids don't even understand nitro/black differences how in hades will they understand Bullseye vs. 4198! I never wanted any part of that mess.) 

Expert witness testimony says a hole was .007 too deep and that there was too much sulfur added to the stainless to improve machinability.  It was "out of spec." in both cases.   

I only glanced at the case linked above.  A full review would require reading each case cited by that case and I don't do that.

« Last Edit: February 17, 2017, 03:06:58 PM by WadePatton »
Hold to the Wind

Offline Bob Roller

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9687
Re: So... barrel steel discussion here?
« Reply #65 on: February 17, 2017, 03:36:34 PM »
Quote
If any body wants a 4140 muzzle loading barrel Somebody will make you one for a fee.

Just to set the record straight, I know for a fact that at least 3 of the popular barrel makers have made barrels from 4140.  Maybe others have as well.  We use them for building long range bullet guns.  Previously, Ernie at Badger barrels had the profiles for them, but that supply ended when he sold the company.  In the interim, we used Green Mountain's black powder cartridge barrels, but the lacked the proper profile.

When Rod England started producing the Alex Henry again, he had a run of 10 properly profiled barrels produced from 4140.  I bought the first two from him.  Contrary to what has been stated, they were priced at only $450 each, which is comparable to what Badger Barrels used to cost.

However, to have a single custom barrel in a special profile made would cost a great deal more.  I searched all over for someone who would make me a couple of barrels with Rigby flats machined in.  Many would make me a barrel blank, but wouldn't machine them in the Rigby profile.

These Alex Henry-Rigby-Gibbs types of rifle were never intended for the low end of the market and
I got $300 for the locks and a smaller version copied from a Whitworth boy's rifle was $400.
Sights are also factored into these rifles and they aren't cheap. I have made a few tang sights for them
and that is as labor intensive as a lock.

Bob Roller

Offline Gaeckle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1360
Re: So... barrel steel discussion here?
« Reply #66 on: February 17, 2017, 07:16:39 PM »
Fleener's post concerning tensil strength, PSI and what all is interesting and a good starting point. Okay, we have info on pressures.....how does that translate in laymens terms with regards to black powder loads? In other words, how much pressure is produced by a load of 75 grains of 2f under a patched 490 roundball (just using this as an example).

Seeing that we as shooters load each shot and though we try our best for consistancy, how much in actuality are we consistant? Let me put this way: if any of us hand load for those other known devices called guns that consume a brass tube that hold both powder and projectile (cartridges) we should be consistant, and to maintain the consistancy we use powder measures that should throw the same amount of powder for each shell loaded. To confirm this we can use a scale every 20 rounds or so to make sure we are accurate. The bullet is seated at a known depth, always the same unless moved. There are also books and data printed to help us determine wht sort of loads we want to use. This data shows the starting measure of powder and the maximum amount one should use.

Now lets jump to black powder....guy at a range loads up his gun and shoots, loads again, continues to shoot. Think about how much powder actually is being dumped into the bore. Is it always the same? Does some of the powder spill off as he pours, does the wind skiff off a small amount, is there some spillage? Now the patch and ball. Any voids in the ball? Is the patch consistant? How many times have we seen the new guy who decides to shoot 90 grains of 3f under a patched 490 round ball, then decides he wants to really make that sucker to move and loads in up with 100 grains? Is the ball really seated? Is this safe?

I can relate to what Fleener writes about a fear of 12L14 barrels having capabilities of failure, but if that steel is as bad as stated and due to explode and fail, we should by shear numbers have a lot of people going to the emergancy room on a weekly basis after going to the shooting range...there would be a national crisis, it would be all over the news. But it's not. There should be catastrophies happening every weekend when thousands of people go out and shoot.

I think that some barrels will fail, it may be due to the barrel, it may be due to the operator. I wonder what the stats are for it....betting it's low. How long have 12L14 been used for barrels? The 60's, how about the 70's.....how many are out there? Gotta be more than 20....We should by rights and by numbers alone see a bunch of barrel failures, failures that should range into more than 20. Let's say that there are 20,000 12L14 barrels of an assortment of calibers and the failure rate is 1 percent.....200 failures? If you have a car with air bags they may go off with such a force that it can kill you....13 people (could be more, could be less) have died so far and there's a national investigation with recalls and all sorts of legal proceedings.

As I said before, we dabble in a hobby that can have some potential and deadly issues if we are uneducated, ill informed, loose our train of thought and take unkown risks. Same can be said for race car drivers, lion tamers, daredevils and a whole host of others that do what they enjoy doing. Even cooking, sewing and gardening can have bad results that can result in some sort of injury.

Offline Eric Kettenburg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4178
    • Eric Kettenburg
Re: So... barrel steel discussion here?
« Reply #67 on: February 17, 2017, 07:30:33 PM »
Just want to insert a note, I am pretty sure there are a LOT more than 20K 12L14 barrels out there, and this is just going by the serial # on the last Getz barrel I obtained.  Then factor in Douglas, Paris, Rice, Colerain, and who knows who else is using 12L; it's got to be up in the six figures, without a doubt.

Actually now that I think about it, that is one heck of a lot of muzzleloading barrels!
Strange women lying in ponds, distributing swords, is no basis for a system of government!

Offline Elnathan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1773
Re: So... barrel steel discussion here?
« Reply #68 on: February 17, 2017, 08:09:07 PM »
Fleener's post concerning tensil strength, PSI and what all is interesting and a good starting point. Okay, we have info on pressures.....how does that translate in laymens terms with regards to black powder loads? In other words, how much pressure is produced by a load of 75 grains of 2f under a patched 490 roundball (just using this as an example).

80g FFg Goex behind a .49" ball was measured at 14,000 out of a clean bore, up to 22,000, according to a test cited by Mr. Kelly.

The issue with just looking at tensile strength is that while a piece of metal may be able to stand considerable tension exerted in one direction that is applied slowly and consistently, it may not be able to to handle the same force, or even much smaller forces, if suddenly applied and/or applied in a different direction. I think we are all aware of this phenomenon in other areas of life - a piece of string that can withstand a considerable amount of weight hung on it may snap if given a quick yank, etc., etc. Steel is much the same.

A lot of the question people are asking on this thread are answered, at least in part, in Mr. Kelly's articles. Given the very small percentage of 12L14 barrels that failed in use, I think that there is still room for honest disagreement, but I think that if folks will read them we are a lot more likely to reach some sort of useful conclusion, even if it is just to agree to disagree.
A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition -  Rudyard Kipling

Offline Eric Kettenburg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4178
    • Eric Kettenburg
Re: So... barrel steel discussion here?
« Reply #69 on: February 17, 2017, 08:31:32 PM »
I preliminarily went through the articles (thank you Mr. Kelly!) and they are extremely well-written.  And, more importantly, not speculative but backed with verifiable information.

I think the bottom line here is going to be that 12L and many other materials used (there were/are? still guys using seamless hydraulic tubing, or boring out naval brass rods etc) are *technically* not suitable for barrel steels, but practical application with blackpowder only seems to bear out the fact that something like 12L can be used, and will continue to be used.  However, it is a bit of a roulette, even if the odds are heavily in the shooters' favor.  That's how I interpret things thus far, anyway.  Perhaps I'm being over-simplistic.
Strange women lying in ponds, distributing swords, is no basis for a system of government!

Offline jerrywh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8885
    • Jerrywh-gunmaker- Master  Engraver FEGA.
Re: So... barrel steel discussion here?
« Reply #70 on: February 17, 2017, 08:59:45 PM »
  I have often stated that the tensile strength of 12L14 is 78,000 psi and the yield strength is 62,200 psi.  Several times  the reply has been that it is irrelevant.  For our enlightenment why is it irrelevant for one type of steel and not for another type of steel??
    Also how can it be said that if it takes 78,000 psi to pull a piece of steel into that it is brittle. Very few muzzle loading rifle pressures ever exceed 25,000 psi of chamber pressure. I am aware of hoop strength mathematics and I know how to figure chamber pressure and the application of it.
   The fact has been established by time and trial that firing the average modern made muzzle loading barrel made of 12L14 steel  loaded properly with black powder is at least as safe as modern aviation and a lot safer than going to the grocery store in your car.
  If tensile strength specs. are irrelevant why do we have them at all??
Nobody is always correct, Not even me.

Offline JTR

  • member 2
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4351
Re: So... barrel steel discussion here?
« Reply #71 on: February 17, 2017, 10:03:11 PM »
This argument (barrel steels) has been going on for a long time. Some of you might remember the Buckskin Report magazine that was put out of business due to issues with barrel steel. I don't know if JC Kellys' report was used in that case in some way, but would be interesting to know.

One thing I do know, is that living in this anti gun area that I do, if any kind of gun barrel was blowing up, it would be all over the news!

And when you get right down to it, no steel is impervious to incorrect loading. Just touch off a case full of Bullseye in the ol' -06, and I guarantee you won't like the result!

John
John Robbins

Joe S

  • Guest
Re: So... barrel steel discussion here?
« Reply #72 on: February 17, 2017, 11:34:28 PM »
Jerry-

Tensile strength is certainly relevant, but it’s only part of the picture.  Consider three pieces of 1095 spring steel, one annealed, one tempered and one hardened.  All have about the same tensile strength.  As you well know, the hardened piece is extremely brittle, the annealed piece is quite ductile, and the tempered spring is intermediate.   In the case of a gun barrel, a material must have a certain minimum tensile strength.  Beyond that, other properties must also be considered.

I’ve spent some time looking for information that would address Eric’s original question.  I have found basic tensile, stress/strain and fatigue information, but I find nothing at all on 12L14 tubes of any kind.  I doubt this data exists.  There is a good reason for this – 12L14 was designed to be easily machined, at the expense of some mechanical properties.  It is used in applications where other properties, such as wear, chemical resistance, fatigue resistance or ultimate strength are not primary considerations.  If someone wanted to design a pressure vessel (such as a gun barrel) they would look at other steels whose properties are more appropriate.  In this case, machinability would be a secondary consideration. 

About all that we can say now is that extensive empirical experiments have concussively shown the 12L14 is adequate for muzzleloader barrels.  This includes normal loading, and the occasional short started or doubled loaded barrels.   As we move away from normal loads, behavior of individual barrels becomes less predictable.  The same is true of any gun barrel.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2017, 01:21:30 AM by Jose Gordo »

Offline bob in the woods

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4555
Re: So... barrel steel discussion here?
« Reply #73 on: February 18, 2017, 01:16:15 AM »
I'm surprised that 12L14 would be described as "brittle".  I have read that very soft iron was desirable for rifle barrels, and I think 12L14 certainly falls in that realm. When in the process of upsetting dovetails , I've had encounters with other barrel materials that I found to be "brittle" for sure, but never 12L14  .  I would consider it safe for use as intended. Rice actually lists loading information for their barrels [ very conservative IMO ]   .  At what point can you consider that a precedent has been set for "off list " accepted usage of this material ?   With so many thousands in use, I think we are there.

Offline jerrywh

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8885
    • Jerrywh-gunmaker- Master  Engraver FEGA.
Re: So... barrel steel discussion here?
« Reply #74 on: February 18, 2017, 01:27:14 AM »
 I don't think of this topic as an argument. I try to learn all I can from any source even at my age. The simple topics become boring to me but topics like this are interesting.  In my opinion anybody with a minimal amount of knowledge knows that mild steels are not ideal. But that is really not the object of Eric's original question. He never got an answer. But most of us learned something. Ideal is perfect. Perfect includes the perfect shooter. I'm going to keep studying this subject for a while. 
Nobody is always correct, Not even me.