barrel channels in antique rifle

[dave gross]

As one currently whittling away on a swamped barrel channel a question comes to mind. I have never had the chance to examine the inletting on a genuine"golden age" rifle and what those who have oserved barrel channel barrel inletting precsion on some old rifles have seen. Were the riflesmiths of old careful to mate barrel flats to the wood or did they rough the channel in except for mating of the sides of the channel. I have read that often the bottoms were sometimes roughed in with gouges without regard to a more precision fit. If you hiave been fortunate to carefully examine originals, what have you observied in this regard?

Dave Gross

Way down east in Maine

[Mike Brooks]

I have seen some with octagon barrels and round barrel channels. Most american work is pretty rough in barrel channels. English stuff is pretty precise.

[keweenaw]

Those with far more experience than I have with originals say that they typically are only fully octagon for 6" or so at the breech and again at the muzzle.  The rest will be rather U shaped, with the side flats vertical and in full contact  and the corners of the bottom flat bearing full length.  It's easy to put them in with a round bottomed plane.  I cut some targets for the bottom flat at various points appropriate for the swamp, remove the center of the channel with the plane, cut down the side flats with a wide chisel to the appropriate depth and then clear most of the rest of the channel to depth with the plane.  It's pretty easy to get the barrel to hit full length along the corners of the bottom flat.  In terms of time, working on the breech six inches and tang probably takes as much time as doing the entire rest of the barrel channel. With a bit of care the radius from the plane along the centers of the  bottom three flats will only be off of the metal by 0.010" or less.  I allow 5-6 hours for inletting a 44" swamped barrel.

Tom

[JTR]

Dave,
Barrel channels are pretty much as you’ve read.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen one with more than 50% contact between barrel and wood, probably more like 25%. As Mike points out, back at the breech the fit might be better, but the general channel is usually fairly rough with marks from the gouge still evident. Some have flats to match the barrel, but a lot, and already pointed out, seem to be U shaped with little or no attempt to actually form flats to match the barrel except on the vertical sides. 
Again, I don’t think I’ve ever seen one with any sign of stain or other finish in it either.
And this is generally the case under butt plates, under patchbox finales, etc, also.
Time was money, so I guess the old boys believed that if you couldn’t see it, it wasn’t worth the time to do a better job. Actually I enjoy seeing this rough work, as you're seeing the hand of the maker and can get a good idea of how he went about his job.
Now I haven’t seen the best of the best so maybe they were done better,,,,, but I somehow doubt it.
John

[Collector]

Nothing really new, but virtually no time was spent on finishing the bottom and side portions of the barrels and other metal pieces that weren't going to be seen either, even the shanks of their (*)bolts.  Very rough draw filing at best.  Most of the 18th C. pieces that I've seen, including English Ketland and German trade pieces exhibited these same building traits.  But, not so with their lock work.

(*) Note: prior posting said, "... shanks of their screws."  Sorry!

[Roger Fisher]

That was interesting thanks for posting!

[Acer Saccharum]

Here's one for you. Estimated Rev war period. Rust marks where the corners of the barrel rest in the channel up by the brech. The nosecap section is scraped/fitted to the stock more closely to conform to the octagon, because that's where it shows.

Acer

[T*O*F]

Again, I don’t think I’ve ever seen one with any sign of stain or other finish in it either. And this is generally the case under butt plates, under patchbox finales, etc, also.

So that fact would tend to indicate that they built the gun and then stained and finished it with the hardware in place?

[Acer Saccharum]

Note the mainspring cavity broke into the barrel channel. This old gun is pretty rough workmanship by today's standards. But it works.
Acer

[Acer Saccharum]

MythBusters: back in the old days, they always Drawfiled the underside of their barrels.......

[JTR]

Good picture Acer. That one might be done a bit better than others, and is a bit cleaner too. (The first time I took apart my Hawk swivel breech gun, I found a bunch of dead bugs under the brass along the barrels!)

As typical too, notice the precision inletting for the ramrod pipe and the barrel lug.  

TOF. I don't know that they finished them all put together, just that they didn't waste any finish where it wouldn't be seen.

John

[Collector]

TOF,  Good observation and a great point!!  If it was out of sight, it didn't receive anything of an early shops 'resources;' labor or material.  I think that the European makers, as firearms became more an entitlement of the upper-class, started to refine and treat every element of the firearm, as a value-added sales technique.  They still do it today, even with their leather, screwdrivers, cleaning rods and other accessories.  Fit and finish is beyond dispute, but there is no doubt that you're paying for it.  "Sir, this particularly exquisite Holland and Holland .600 that you're looking at is US$300,00.00.  Will that be cash or will you be paying with a certified check?"  (They can say it, in one breath.  )  

[keweenaw]

Lack of stain or finish in the barrel channel does not imply that the staining and finishing were done with the metal in place, just that they didn't slop finish in there.  I usually stain with brass mounts in place.  When everything is nice and dry, I pull them out before putting on the finish.

On a Sheetz rifle I have the bottom of the barrel shows both hammer marks and forge scale and very few file marks.

Tom

[Acer Saccharum]

The barrel pictured above I believe is an imported barrel, has a crown maker's mark stamped in it. Either German or Belgian, ca 1770-80. The marks look like grindstone made to me. Like a goodly sized barrel manufactory made the barrel. A few hammer marks are to be seen here and there, ones they didn't grind out.

[Dave Faletti]

Acer
I notice in that picture the lug for the pin has a regular hole with no elongation.  Is the pin the same diameter or undersized some?  Wondering if there is allowance for wood and metal not elongating/contracting the same for temp or other changes.

Looks like I put in a lot more effort on barrel channels.  I try for contact on all flats full length.  Not always successful though.

[rich pierce]

I don't see many originals with the underlugs slotted for elongation.  That's something we worry about more than they did.  And the cracked forestocks on many originals are a testament to that.

[Stophel]

If the wood is curly, it's best to slot them.  If the wood isn't curly, it don't really need it.

I think most people today think hand made muzzleloading rifles should all be like $50,000 English shotguns.   Well, they ain't.  A lot of folks would be absolutely APALLED to see the rough inletting, file marks, casting pits, scraper marks, etc of just about any 18th century gun.  (Just for an example, if you get to go to the Fraser Historical arms museum in Louisville, you can see the "Washington" gun by Beck.  There are several HUGE casting pits in the buttplate and sideplate.  Something most moderns just simply could not stand, but it didn't bother Beck one bit.)

Perfection is a modern ideal....of course I don't know where it really comes from.  Modern guns ain't generally all that great quality.

[alex e.]

I like to see evidence of hand tools work on a modern ML .Casting marks,file marks ,scraper marks are as PC  as it gets  & do not bother me in the least .If some on will just show me the documentation for an original 18th. cent. electric BUFFING WHEEL I'd  rest easier at night

[northmn]

One difference also between European, English and American builders is that the (in the early days) American firearms were built by one person or one plus an apprentice.  Most guns across the seas were touched by many hands.  I believe someone stated an English gun may have 28 different people doing different jobs.

DP

[Eric Kettenburg]

I think it mostly depends upon the maker.  I've seen a number of pieces w/ full length octagonal inletting.  Many upper Susquehanna rifles come to mind.  Also a rifle I did a little article on marked 'I OTTHO' was full octagon at least as far as a little after the entry pipe where the stock was cut (later).  Deshler's rifle is also pretty well-fitted octagonal for the 11-12" of the original inletting that remain.  W/ an octagonal barrel plane, or series of planes, or even sharp octagonal scrapers, it really doesn't take much longer to run an octagonal channel as opposed to a round one.

[Collector]

I don't know about what anyone else has seen and my observations are somewhat limited in scope, but I have noted that on the more common, garden variety, early Ketland  FL pistols (plain walnut stocks and brass barrels) had pins, were more like very thin pieces of stiff wire and they were drilled at a diagonal in the stock, in relation to the barrel.     A design feature?  A functional feature?    

[Don Getz]

For a lot of you new gunbuildeers out there, don't look at the barrel channel too much, but look closely at the amount of
wood left on the sides....pretty thin, isn't it?   This is a failure of a lot of new builders, they leave too much wood on the forends.  Years ago Dave Dodds was working for John in the barrel shop.   Whenever I was building a gun, I would take
it back to Dave for critique, his stock answer always was "take more wood off".............Don

[dave gross]

The observations and photos provided by the members are very much appreciated.  I am reminded of the level of perfection often desired by those who restore antique automobiles.  I have been pinstriping antique cars for 35 years and have inspected original factory striping so that I can duplicate the designs after the body has been painted.  The original stripes were in most cases just"OK" and done with more speed than pefection.  Often two stripers worked on opposite sides of the car so the meeting in the middle, usually under the rear window, wasn't real pretty, still the Model "A"s rolled off the line.   Nowadays every part is painted to a higher level than original and the owner wants those stripes perfectly straight.  The comparison with original and new long rifles is similar.

Dave Gross
Way down east in Maine

[Berks Liberty]

For a lot of you new gunbuildeers out there, don't look at the barrel channel too much, but look closely at the amount of
wood left on the sides....pretty thin, isn't it?   This is a failure of a lot of new builders, they leave too much wood on the forends.  Years ago Dave Dodds was working for John in the barrel shop.   Whenever I was building a gun, I would take
it back to Dave for critique, his stock answer always was "take more wood off".............Don

Don, I have a question....Why are today's builders so anal about inletting an octagon channel all the way?  It looks like they (Old Builders) were the smart ones by not wasting so much time for something you won't see.  Would you say the barrels back then were basically floating?  Would the rifle shoot any different if the center of the channel was rounded and the ends were octagon?  Hmmm....

Jason

[Don Getz]

Dave....when you talked about "striping" an automobile, I am assuming you mean "painting" that stripe on with a striping brush?  In the early 1900's, in the town of Beaver Springs, and about 1/4 mile from where Joe Long lived and worked, there was a wagon factory.   My dad did all the striping on the wagons.   It was fun to watch him lay that big flat brush in the paiint
to get it loaded and then lay a nice neat stripe on whatever he was painting.  He was also a good artist..............Don