coning the muzzle

[yip]

  is using a tighter patch necessary? i shot high power for years and the last it that affects the bullet is the muzzle, it seems a little puzzling........yip   

[Blacktail]

I've been combing the board history on this topic as I'm on the verge of finishing my .58 and figured to cone it as a practical matter for its use as a hunting gun. For Daryl and other experienced hunters, what sort of patch/ball combos do you prefer and what sort of coning do you like? I was planning to purchase one of Mr. Woods' tools. FWIW, I just want a hunting gun and am open to suggestions.

[Turtle]

 Here's what I have learned about coned barrels. I lube with good lubricity helps loading. If you use a thin loading block, you can center the ball/patch by feel and ram it down through the block with the ramrod-slick. I use the tightest load I can use without a short starter. A hollow brass ramrod really works well.
                           Good luck, Turtle

[Torfinn]

For those unfamiliar with Joe Woods coning tool--- It is made of brass, is app 4" long, has a bore diameter "jag" at the tip and a constant slight cone from there to the muzzle The actual coning is done with sandpaper held to the cone with double stick tape. It is a tedious process turning it by hand,  cutting and changing progressively finer sandpaper, you need one for each caliber, but it is practically idiot proof. I have done app 40 muzzles with no complaints.

The two rifles I did were done with the Joe Woods coning tool.  The instructions given are easy to do, follow them just as given and you will have no problems.

[Torfinn]

I've been combing the board history on this topic as I'm on the verge of finishing my .58 and figured to cone it as a practical matter for its use as a hunting gun. For Daryl and other experienced hunters, what sort of patch/ball combos do you prefer and what sort of coning do you like? I was planning to purchase one of Mr. Woods' tools. FWIW, I just want a hunting gun and am open to suggestions.

I use the same load that I was using before coning the barrel. The advantage is not having to use a short start. thus eliminating one whole step in the loading process, as well as a now un-needed tool in the hunting pouch.

[yip]

 Torfinn; whats the email address of Joe Woods?

[Ray Barbarow]

Terry, here is the contact info you requested. The Firelock Shop, 5311 Briar St., Amarillo Texas 79109  (806) 352-3032. e-mail flintsteel@cox.net. Ray

[yip]

  Ray; thanks ole buddy!!!!................yip

[45-110]

all this discussion on coning and removing the lands had me think way back when i had 2 M1819 Hall rifles. these where a novel design for the obvious reasons, but one feature not so obvious was the fact that at the muzzle the bore had a cylindrical counter bore maybe 2 inches deep to remove the lands.  this was to facilitate a reload without a short starter, and allow one  to use the weapon as a muzzle loader. has anyone tried this idea now for patched round balls? i believe some of the current guns offered to fire sabots have used this idea also to get the plastic sabots in the bore.

[elkhorne]

Daryl,
is there any way you could show us what the rounded crown of one of your barrels looks like. I think earlier you said you and Taylor do all your barrels that way. It would be very interesting to see the results of what you do or possibly even a short tutorial on the technique. I have several barrels that are older Sharon or Douglas barrels that are sometimes a real hassle to load a tight ball in. Thanks.
elkhorne

[Daryl]

A short starter is needed to start balls & patches I use in the big bores.

In the small bores, like my .36, I can start a .022" denim patch (crushed hard, measurement) patch with a 350" pure (as pure as we can get- X-ray room wall sheeting) with just a choked up rod.

I have even loaded my .40 with the same patch and a ball that is .002" LARGER than the bore, without using that rifle's short starter. 

However, I've been using a short starter since 1972 & I see no reason to quit now.

I have 0 IE: ZERO problems loading with a short starter and dare say I can load faster with one than about 99% (OK maybe only 98%) of the lads on this site can with just using the rod & a thin patch.  I do not get accuracy that satisfies me, if I do not use the patches required to give me that accuracy. Those, in hunting calibres, requires the use of a short starter.

Some rifles, as in those with wide grooves and narrow lands, allow very tight combinations that do not NEED a short starter, just that using one is second nature to me, thus I use it with all rifles and my smoothbore.


About the combinations - we up here in the smokey North part of BC, like to use a ball that is approximately .005" smaller than the bore. With that ball, we use a denim or ticking patch, that runs .022" to .02235" compressed hard, in calipers. 10 ounce denim works well. I use 12 ounce in my .69 with a .684" ball. I measure 12 ounce at .030" compressed with the calipers and .025" with my Mitytoyu  micrometer. since I ran out of 12 ounce, a buddy gave me some 14 ounce he bought by mistake. I now use the thicker stuff - yes - you Have to WANT to make it fit & that means hitting the starter knob with a "heavy" hand.  If you use enough strength, it does not hurt. If you nave to hit it more than once to get it into the muzzle, you did not hit it hard enough the first time and you will wear yourself out, ie: sore hand.

We have found this "Formula" or combination shoots well in every rifle we've tried it in - those rifles will run close to 100 or perhaps over that figure- BUT- it is every one we've used it in.

I will also state, NO - it is not hard to load these - my daughter caught on loading her mom's .45 rifle with a .445" ball and .022" patch right off the bat after watching me load the first one as a demonstration. She had no trouble for the rest of the day's shooting, perhaps 50 shots all together.

[Dphariss]

  whats the advantages of coning the muzzle, easy loading, how about accuracy?

Most modern cones are far too extreme.
I don't see the point a properly done simple crown will load fine.
I did slightly cone a pistol I made for my son. But that's the only time. This is a "2 angle" crown done on a 58 caliber rifle. I have only done this once.
Dan

[Longknife]

Dan, I agree with your statement that most cones are far too extreme but they seem to work well. In studying original barrels I fine that most cones were no longer than 1/2 inch. That inspired me to develop my universal coning tool. This tool makes a shorter cone and the same tool will cone barrels from .32 to .75. Here is the "short" cone in a .58 cal. barrel.




Here is the tool,

[Daryl]

Thought I would resurrect this thread- about due to a re-hash on this topic, anyway.

Ed- about your tool. I have used a similar too, but is a tapered stone from the hardware store for chucking in an electric drill.
I find the stone holds the paper very well and is used by hand, rather than spun by the electric drill (I've done that as well) but that is very quick
and I feel lacks the precision I can do with my hand.  I use the same process as using my thumb - twist back and forth to cut and rotate the barrel,
 now and and then.

[flinchrocket]

Ed's tool is threaded to accept a jag and with a tight patch acts as a pilot.His coning tool worked great for me.

[Steve_Rose]

Here's another example of a cone made using Ed's tool. This now allows me to thumb seat a .570 patched ball to almost flush with the muzzle

[Scota4570]

all this discussion on coning and removing the lands had me think way back when i had 2 M1819 Hall rifles. these where a novel design for the obvious reasons, but one feature not so obvious was the fact that at the muzzle the bore had a cylindrical counter bore maybe 2 inches deep to remove the lands.  this was to facilitate a reload without a short starter, and allow one  to use the weapon as a muzzle loader. has anyone tried this idea now for patched round balls? i believe some of the current guns offered to fire sabots have used this idea also to get the plastic sabots in the bore.

Phil Sharpe in "Rifle in America" or Ned Roberts "Muzzleloading Caplock Rifle"  I can not remember which one, commented on this.  He wrote that is ruined the accuracy. 

[Longknife]

Here's another example of a cone made using Ed's tool. This now allows me to thumb seat a .570 patched ball to almost flush with the muzzle

Steve, That is a fine coning job!!!! Daryl,, I used to use those stones too, but found they lacked the precision I was looking for . That's when I started developing my coning tool, back in the early 90's. I'm still shooting the first barrel I coned!!! This tool makes a shorter cone than others on the market. I designed mine off of a one made by Don Getz. Here is the tool being inserted in the bore with a tightly patched jag to center it,,,Ed

[Longknife]

Ed's tool is threaded to accept a jag and with a tight patch acts as a pilot.His coning tool worked great for me.

That good to hear!!!!Ed

[Longknife]

BTW, Here are my complete instructions for coning a barrel using my universal tool,,,Ed

http://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=4375.0

[Daryl]

all this discussion on coning and removing the lands had me think way back when i had 2 M1819 Hall rifles. these where a novel design for the obvious reasons, but one feature not so obvious was the fact that at the muzzle the bore had a cylindrical counter bore maybe 2 inches deep to remove the lands.  this was to facilitate a reload without a short starter, and allow one  to use the weapon as a muzzle loader. has anyone tried this idea now for patched round balls? i believe some of the current guns offered to fire sabots have used this idea also to get the plastic sabots in the bore.

Phil Sharpe in "Rifle in America" or Ned Roberts "Muzzleloading Caplock Rifle"  I can not remember which one, commented on this.  He wrote that is ruined the accuracy.

I test-coned the muzzle in my .45 rifle GM bl. I did not do a "lot" of experimenting with it but I could no longer shoot 1/2" 5-shot groups at 50 yards, with groups opening up to 1 1/2" - pretty much every group. Before coning, it shot into 1/2" to about 3/4" for 5 shots. I cut the cone off and re-crowned and my accuracy was back.

This is not to say that coning will ruin YOUR accuracy - some guys on this forum love it. Much depends on what level of accuracy you want.  Of course to stack one ball on top of the other, you would need a false muzzle with a perfectly SQUARE muzzle - no crown whatsoever to deliver that patched ball or bullet perfectly.  As we want good accuracy, but easy starting, we put up with a rounded crown as this seems to deliver almost one of top of one another, yet allows us to use a nice snug load.
I just happen to be one who does not like coning, mind you, the shorter the cone, the better.  I have heard of some cones being 1 1/2" long. That cannot be good.  It will also be more difficult to load that barrel with a tight combination due to the long-friction-contact area of the bore's shape. We saw this with one of LB's coned .40's. Almost impossible to load a .022" patch and .400" ball, yet those loaded easily in my crowned muzzle.

[rick/pa]

Before T/C was bought out by S&W, they offered a model called the Pennsylvania Hunter featuring a deep groove 1 in 66" barrel for patched round ball made specially for Pa. muzzle loader season regulations. They also had a barrel called the QLA that featured a smooth section at the muzzle for about 3 inches.  My son in law at the time had one but we could never get any accuracy from it. He called T/C and asked if they could replace the barrel with a regular one, which they did. Accuracy was much better but he finally sold it. It loaded easier with no short starter but without accuracy, quick loading didn't mean doodly.

[Daryl]

I recall TC cutting the rifling from the barrel for an inch or so, to more easily seat slugs, according to their advertisement. I suspect that was a 48" twist button rifled barrel.
The 66" twist cut rifled barrels they put on rifles for a while were good shooters. I do not recall looking at the muzzle of one.

[Dan Fruth]

Of the existing Christian Oerter rifles where the bore size is recorded, 3 have coned muzzles, 2 do not. The Edward Marshall rifle and RCA #43, both attributed to Andreas Albrecht, have coned muzzles. Ken Netting told me that his rifle with a coned muzzle shoots better than he can shoot it. A friend of his who is a dead eye has shot several xs with this rifle.  To each his own.

[rich pierce]

We all have our preferences and “needs” for accuracy and speed of loading. I suspect some of Oerter’s customers were bench shooters and some were ready for war. One Oerter rifle was fitted for a bayonet.

I like to develop the skill of loading from the pouch. I’ve found I can do this with s rounded crown or with a coned bore (it came that way on an original).