modern methods and materials

[ron w]

with all of today's modern materials being out of place on a traditional gun, it it wrong to take advantage of them where they can be beneficial ?..... is it wrong to accra-glass a barrel channel for the sake of sealing the channel as good as can be done ?. consider that we think nothing of useing locks and other furniture that are cnc manufactured for their accuracy and reliability, barrels that are bored and rifled with modern equipment that makes them much better than an original barrel and synthetic powder and lubrications, why is there never any mention of doing something as beneficial, although non-PC, as glassing a barrel channel, or lock mortise ?. in my thinking, the original builders used as modern a method and materials as they could produce at the time, why is it that we are tying our hands of taking advantage of methods and materials that would keep our guns looking as traditional as always but much better on the inside where it really counts ?.

[Justin Urbantas]

I don't think you could glass bed a lock mortise. Too many moving parts. I know the breech area can benefit from some bedding to make sure there is a solid recoil surface.

[Mike Brooks]

I properly built gun needs no accraglass any where. I have had many old guns apart and the barrel channels look fine for a couple hundred years old. I'm not at all sure why you would need accraglass in a lock mortise. Accraglass anywhere on a muzzleloader seems to be a fix for a problem that doesn't exist. I have a gun here now I built in 1985. I haven't had the barrel out but the lock mortise looks the same as it did 35 years ago, with out accraglass.

How any of this relates to modern methods of making barrels and locks is a matter of economics.. I certainly don't want to pay anybody for a hand forged barrel and lock. If we had to depend on that this little hobby would be over.....or more than likely never would have existed after cartridge guns became available.
 

[smart dog]

Hi Ron,
Folks have asked this kind of question many, many times on this forum.  It is question that has no answer but plenty of opinions.  Often it is asked by folks who I suspect want to justify some decision they made or intend to make when making a gun.  No justification is needed.  Do what you want to do but don't misrepresent your work.  Don't go to a living history event and say your gun was made using all 18th century techniques.  Don't build a Kibler kit and sell it as a hand made rifle.  Don't sell a gun to someone without advising them that you used AcraGlas and why. 

dave

[tiswell]

ron w,
   All great replies to your question already. Here is another thought that I think I saw here recently. If you were to Acraglas a barrel channel and took the gun out in a down pour, would the moisture that gets trapped between acraglas and steel cause excessive rusting? (assuming that you don't pull the barrel after every rain) Where as with just wood to steel condition the wood will absorb the moisture fairly quickly thereby creating a condition where less rust would be created.

[Mike Brooks]

ron w,
   All great replies to your question already. Here is another thought that I think I saw here recently. If you were to Acraglas a barrel channel and took the gun out in a down pour, would the moisture that gets trapped between acraglas and steel cause excessive rusting? (assuming that you don't pull the barrel after every rain) Where as with just wood to steel condition the wood will absorb the moisture fairly quickly thereby creating a condition where less rust would be created.

The above is my own experience with glass bedded barrels. They are a moisture trap. The most rusted barrels I have seen come from glassed channels.
 I suspect ron w might be looking for justification for his use of glass bedding. Use it if you like, I did when I first started out but haven't for 35 years and never will again. If others think they should use it then that's fine with me.

[T*O*F]

Many attempt to cure perceived problems which don't exist in the first place. 

[ron w]

I haven't done any such thing. I ask simply out of curiosity knowing that these products are readily available and are used in high power building all the time. I have two high power rifles both full customs built on Mauser actions and both fully glass bedded. now,... bedding the action of a high power is for well know reasons and reasons that a black powder builder doesn't have to be concerned about. that said, sealing a barrel channel or a lock mortise with acra-glass certainly can have benefits. as for promoting rust,....a high power barrel will rust just as easily as a black powder barrel,.....the steel doesn't know which kind of gun it's on,.... and I have never had  any rust problems with my high
powers given proper after wet weather maintenance. as fa ars removing the barrel after wet weather hunting, there is much less potential that removing a black powder gun's barrel and lock, will have any detriment on accuracy as compared to doing the same with a high power. as far as sticking with tradition,....as  "in the originals were not bedded so a traditional reproduction shouldn't either",....holds no water with me.  the original builders built their rifles to the same most up to date for the period methodology and used the same most up to date materials that we are able to do now. if there are products and materials that are available today that better the gun, why not use it,.....the original builders would use whatever "modern" materials and methods they had at their disposal, just as well. as far as water being absorbed by the wood in a channel or mortise, I have been around wood work all my life, made a comfortable living with wood all my working career and I know without a doubt, that a piece of steel laying next to/on damp wood will rust just as sure as it gets dark at night,.....so that idea of the bare wood absorbing water and not causing rust is just plain silliness.

[smart dog]

Hi,
I paint my barrel channels with a varnish coat of AcraGlas all the time unless my objective for the gun precludes it.  I have 3 original English fowlers all of which have fore stocks cracked and chipped along the barrel channels where the wood is very thin. After experimentation, I learned that even a the thin coat added considerable strength to the wood on the sides of the barrel channel.  I build for re-enactors and living history folks all the time.  If they don't remove their barrels after a rainy weekend event and dry them, I urge them to give me back the gun and I will replace it with a pipe set in a 2 x 4.

dave

[Scota4570]

Nearly everyone uses modern methods or parts made using modern methods.  Buying parts means you used modern methods. Those parts were cast, machined, and finished using tools not available in 1770.  But, no need to apologize for it.  Building is good no matter how you get to the finish line. 

Only a very few can scratch out a gun as made in 1770. 

That said learning and trying historical methods and tools is a worthy pursuit in it's own right. 

[Mike Brooks]

I haven't done any such thing. I ask simply out of curiosity knowing that these products are readily available and are used in high power building all the time. I have two high power rifles both full customs built on Mauser actions and both fully glass bedded. now,... bedding the action of a high power is for well know reasons and reasons that a black powder builder doesn't have to be concerned about. that said, sealing a barrel channel or a lock mortise with acra-glass certainly can have benefits. as for promoting rust,....a high power barrel will rust just as easily as a black powder barrel,.....the steel doesn't know which kind of gun it's on,.... and I have never had  any rust problems with my high
powers given proper after wet weather maintenance. as fa ars removing the barrel after wet weather hunting, there is much less potential that removing a black powder gun's barrel and lock, will have any detriment on accuracy as compared to doing the same with a high power. as far as sticking with tradition,....as  "in the originals were not bedded so a traditional reproduction shouldn't either",....holds no water with me.  the original builders built their rifles to the same most up to date for the period methodology and used the same most up to date materials that we are able to do now. if there are products and materials that are available today that better the gun, why not use it,.....the original builders would use whatever "modern" materials and methods they had at their disposal, just as well. as far as water being absorbed by the wood in a channel or mortise, I have been around wood work all my life, made a comfortable living with wood all my working career and I know without a doubt, that a piece of steel laying next to/on damp wood will rust just as sure as it gets dark at night,.....so that idea of the bare wood absorbing water and not causing rust is just plain silliness.

I've built muzzleloaders exclusively for 39 years, 26 years of that my sole source of income. In my personal experience, Damp wood will rapidly dry out and the water will dissipate and be gone. Water that sits between barrel and plastic channel just sits there and creates rust. I have personally seen this with my own eyes. I see absolutely no advantage to glass bedding a ML anywhere unless you've botched the job and need some filer. As far as giving strength to the barrel channel, that's what the barrel does. If you don't want your forestock to break, don't take the barrel out.
 

the original builders built their rifles to the same most up to date for the period methodology and used the same most up to date materials that we are able to do now

Not that it makes any difference, but completely wrong. Locks with out inner or outer bridles were in common use in the flint period when they were available on better locks, but many gun makers persisted in their use. AND, flintlocks were used to build guns into the 1850's when caplocks had been in common use since 1830, hardly using cutting edge technology for the time period. I also have an original gun that has a round barrel channel and an octagon barrel....not very "up to date" for the time.
 What's your angle on this? We could use plastic or laminated stocks, fiber glass rods, stainless barrels , locks and triggers etc. but don't. Why all the fuss about glass bedding?
 

[jerrywh]

 The answer to this question is only a matter of opinion. Basically I agree with Smart dog. Personally I don't care what other people think. If for some reason I want to use any modern material I do it and it doesn't bother my conscience one bit. I proved to myself I could build a gun using 18th century methods over 60 years ago. No need to keep it up and condemn my self to poverty for the rest of my life. There is not a person alive today that built one without some modern convenience. Turn out the lights and get rid of the toilet paper. Take off your glasses, get rid of your optivisor. I could go on and on.
  On the other hand Accraglass is not necessary in most cases on a muzzle loading long rifle. It has been used on guns that cost over $200,000.00 and you know what? Nobody cares.

[oldtravler61]

  Here is my take from a friend. He built several guns. He would use a router to do his barrels. Being a novice ( still am ) I said they didn't have tools like that back then.
  He looked at me and said " If they'd had it they would have used it. " We have to remember that the ways they made things back then. We're their up to date methods and materials.
  But I do agree with Mike Brooks. You do your work right you don't need it.
  Oldtravler

[axelp]

If you want to use a modern composite or plastic stock or bed the barrel, or whatever, go ahead and do it. I don't see any problem with that.

Unless--- your intentions are to emulate or replicate a historical piece. I do not see any logic in allowing a plastic gun to be judged alongside a traditional gun at Dixon's for example. That would be silly. If I wanted to just have a gun to shoot, it would not matter so much. But what I am interested in, and what most of the folks on this message board are interested in are historical guns and gear. We like old guns exactly because they don't have plastic on them.

I think the primary reason that modern inline muzzleloaders exist is that some folks don't care about the history, they just want to shoot and hunt for a longer season and have their own kind of fun... which is perfectly fine. Just don't expect everyone to like what you like and of course, vise verse.

[Mike Brooks]

The answer to this question is only a matter of opinion. Basically I agree with Smart dog. Personally I don't care what other people think. If for some reason I want to use any modern material I do it and it doesn't bother my conscience one bit. I proved to myself I could build a gun using 18th century methods over 60 years ago. No need to keep it up and condemn my self to poverty for the rest of my life. There is not a person alive today that built one without some modern convenience. Turn out the lights and get rid of the toilet paper. Take off your glasses, get rid of your optivisor. I could go on and on.
  On the other hand Accraglass is not necessary in most cases on a muzzle loading long rifle. It has been used on guns that cost over $200,000.00 and you know what? Nobody cares.

When I was a young man I was all about building guns " the old timey way". These days not so much. They "look" old timey, but I'm getting all busted up and broke down now and use methods of construction that are more  realistic to my current physical abilities. I suspect there a bunch  of young up an comers that are  busting these guns out just like they did long ago. Weall gota do what we can do, and some can do more than others. It all works.

[Daryl]

This 20 bore gun has it's barrel bedded in Brownell's brown glass bedding, "Micro-Bed" I think it's called, trying to remember back to 1976 or 77 when I used it on a match rifle.
There is no rust on the bottom of the barrel, or anywhere else for that matter.  The barrel channel is perfectly fitted to the barrel.  It powders clay birds. I love it, glass bedding
and all.  The bedding is not visible unless you removed the barrel, as is done for cleaning, every time. I was surprised to see it first time I pulled the tube for cleaning, and quickly
 forgot about it. It is not important.





random baby names

[Daryl]

I think perhaps with heavily recoiling guns, bedding the tang and rear of the breech in glass might be a good preventative maintenance
measure, to prevent compression of the wood over time from the recoil and perhaps splitting that could happen.

[Old Ford2]

Everybody has an opinion, and they are entitled to it.
Thompson Center made many factory cut and fitted  muzzleloaders in the 80's & 90's, the are well known for the cracking problem from the rear of the barrel to he lock screw.
Those guns ran from .36 to .58 caliber. Many ( I cannot say most, as that would be untrue ) suffered that aggravating crack.
Remember they were well inlet.
Fred

[David Rase]

the original builders built their rifles to the same most up to date for the period methodology and used the same most up to date materials that we are able to do now. if there are products and materials that are available today that better the gun, why not use it,.....the original builders would use whatever "modern" materials and methods they had at their disposal, just as well.

With that mindset, I would suggest a Knight, Ruger, Remington or any of the other modern muzzleloaders that us an inline, bolt and/or 209  ignition.  That is the most up to date  and available muzzleloaders today.
David

[Goo]

All gun Smith's used modern parts, in 1759 the parts were modern.      If kuntz, Derringer or any gunsmith had access to cast locks, springs, Dremel tools or acraglass they would have used them.

[jerrywh]

the original builders built their rifles to the same most up to date for the period methodology and used the same most up to date materials that we are able to do now. if there are products and materials that are available today that better the gun, why not use it,.....the original builders would use whatever "modern" materials and methods they had at their disposal, just as well.

With that mindset, I would suggest a Knight, Ruger, Remington or any of the other modern muzzleloaders that us an inline, bolt and/or 209  ignition.  That is the most up to date  and available muzzleloaders today.
David4
 

Yeah Dave but we are building long rifles not inlines.  An inline is a modern gun with a birth defect.

[Wayne Holcombe]

Only time I've used Acuglass was repairing a broken wrist on a nice rifle.pulled the wrist together with acuglass,let it set,drilled a hole from the breech down through the middle of the wrist.Took a fiberglass ramrod roughed it up with a file,coated it with acuglass and drove it down the hole.we had to take a smaller diameter drill and drill another hole on top of the ramrod to act as a vent or else you'll have a tough time getting the ramrod down.Let it set foa a week,drilled out the top of the glass rod for about 1/2 inch,glued in a curly maple plug cut into the end grain so it looks the same as the breech.Put a little dark stain on it and 41 years later it's still together and you can't see the break.

[ron w]

   OK,....I guess I understand now,....it's not alright to use acra-glass to bed barrel and seal it or seal a lock mortise because it's not needed and/or not traditional, but it's perfectly fine to use a lock, a trigger ass'y and a barrel made with modern steels and CNC machining centers.………….. further you can't make a rifle outwardly traditional appearing because you used said materials to make your work more resistant to the weather and stabilized against moisture.

     come to think of it,....maybe I don't understand...….

[M. E. Pering]

I wouldn't say there is necessarily anything wrong with using modern materials such as Accraglass, but the question is why?  If you are worried about protecting the stock, then why not just seal it with a sealer like Permalyn?  I do use Permalyn to seal my stocks, and get it everywhere I can... Under inlays, barrel, lock and butt plate... Everywhere.  And Permalyn is a modern material.  I think this is especially important under inlays, since all are fitted tight enough to hold water with capillary force.  It makes me wonder if some of the ancient makers made round-bottomed barrel channels, just so the water would drain, and not be held there except at the corners of the barrel.  I am pretty certain though, that after a rainy hunt, the 18th century man didn't come home or to camp and remove his lock, barrel and inlays just to dry them. 

I think it is really more of your personal preference.  I use Permalyn sealer because it makes me feel like my stocks are better protected, but I have absolutely no empirical evidence of that.  I also use a bandsaw to profile my stocks.  I make use of lots of electric lighting when making a gun, and I even listen to the radio when doing it.  I even go so far as to use chisels and files made of modern steels, and drills that are have little in common with those they had in the 18th century. 

So where do we set the limits?  Where do historical correctness and modern methods intersect?  The plank of wood you are about to turn into a gunstock, I can almost guarantee, was not cut in a pit saw, but in a modern mill.  Are you going to go through the pains of a hand-rubbed BLO finish, or are you going to settle with something like Danish Oil?  I used BLO on my first few guns, and frankly, I find you can get modern finishes that look almost exactly the same, but are much more durable, so I choose to use those.  And after that, sacrilege of sacrileges, I hit the whole gun with a coat of SC Johnson paste wax after that.  Of course, they had waxes back in the day, but not petroleum-suspended SC Johnson.

IMHO, you should do what satisfies you if it is a gun for your personal use.  If it is a gun for sale, represent it accurately and honestly.  Accraglass is great, and has it's uses.  Smart dog mentioned he finds it useful in his work, and his is excellent.  Mike Brooks, on the other hand, who also does excellent work, has his very valid opinion too.  I guess it is like when you go to the grocery store, and the bag-boy asks you, "Paper or plastic?".

Matt

[BOB HILL]

I think the bottom line here is that no one's hands are tied. Build whatever you want to and use whatever materials you want. It's your work. You only have to please yourself.
Bob