Author Topic: Barrels?? (Read 3382 times)

Scota4570 · « **on:** January 17, 2021, 12:37:06 AM »

I am planning another Armstrong rifle. I want an A-weight 40 cal barrel with regular rifling. I see lots of round bottom rifling. I will never build with RB barrel again, it's a waste of time to make a rifle that will not shoot. Yes, barrels are tough right now. Who is the go-to vendor for and A weight 40 cal 42" barrel right now?

mark esterly · « **Reply #1 on:** January 17, 2021, 02:27:20 AM »

rice has square rifling too

Stoner creek · « **Reply #2 on:** January 17, 2021, 02:43:44 AM »

Quote from: Scota4570 on January 17, 2021, 12:37:06 AM

I am planning another Armstrong rifle. I want an A-weight 40 cal barrel with regular rifling. I see lots of round bottom rifling. I will never build with RB barrel again, it's a waste of time to make a rifle that will not shoot. Yes, barrels are tough right now. Who is the go-to vendor for and A weight 40 cal 42" barrel right now?

Interesting point of view. I’ve not had a problem with accuracy with round bottom rifling. My guess is that half the barrels being built now are round bottom. Oh well, to each his own! Good luck with your quest.

Bob McBride · « **Reply #3 on:** January 17, 2021, 02:59:34 AM »

Only thing I’ve seen with round bottom rifling is that it doesn’t work well with thin patching. But then neither does square rifling for that matter.... I use .020 or better with everything so it all works a peach for me.

Pukka Bundook · « **Reply #4 on:** January 17, 2021, 03:07:49 AM »

Must say I never used anything but round bottomed rifling, and all shot better than I can.

sdilts · « **Reply #5 on:** January 17, 2021, 03:25:17 AM »

Call Jason at Rice barrels. He can fix you up.

David R. Pennington · « **Reply #6 on:** January 17, 2021, 04:54:39 AM »

I like square rifling best too just because I like it best. I built a .60 with a RB rifled Colrain that would shoot where you aimed it. Last deer I kilt with it put a whole through the heart at 75 yards.

bob in the woods · « **Reply #7 on:** January 17, 2021, 06:11:46 AM »

My rifle has a Colerain .40 cal A weight barrel, and has shot extremely well for me. I prefer the round bottom rifling , but have nothing against flat bottom rifled barrels. I think that Rice or perhaps Long Hammock have them available. I know that Long Hammock made one for me many years ago.

Scota4570 · « **Reply #8 on:** January 17, 2021, 07:00:53 AM »

I bought a Colerain RB barrel from Track. It was 45 cal. IMHO, The depth of rifling was too great and the lands too wide to get a decent seal. Accuracy was no better than 3" at 50 yards. I tried dozens of loads. All testing was off the bench. Under similar conditions I have no trouble shooing under 1" with a regular barrel. I threw that barrel in the scrap bin and replaced it with a regular GM barrel. That barrel shoot tiny little groups.

This has been discussed in the past on this board. Speculation was the issue I described above makes sense. It seems worse with smaller calibers. It also seems that some individuals have very different accuracy expectation than I do.

Frankly, I have no confidence in RB barrel with deep rifling. That attitude issue can hamstring the results. I don't want to spend $250 on a barrel that I am not confident in, spend a couple of months making a rifle on the hopes that this barrel is better than the last one. Better to just use what I prefer and have confidence my efforts will be rewarded.

I would like to get a barrel made with Pope style rifling some day. That configuration appears to give maximum purchase on the patched ball with the minimum space to fill with a patch. Someday....

I'll check with Jason.

Daryl · « **Reply #9 on:** January 17, 2021, 07:50:29 AM »

Interesting concept, Pope style with patched balls, since his rifling was designed for minimal 'damage' to a slug and only .0015" depth in the corners and .000" depth in the middle of the wide groove. Might work, if the patched ball was tight enough.
Perhaps you meant Forsyth-type rifling, Scota4570? - shallow, wide grooves "knife-edge lands"(narrow) and slow twist. That is also what I would like to try out, in a 16 bore replacement barrel for my .69, but it shoots so well as-is, I don't want to change it.

wattlebuster · « **Reply #10 on:** January 17, 2021, 01:53:49 PM »

I would check with Bob Hoyt too and Charles Burton. My Burton barrels have RB grooves an so far zero problems. They put the ball where I put the sights

Ted Kramer · « **Reply #11 on:** January 17, 2021, 04:16:07 PM »

Call Jason @ Rice Barrels and ask about their ‘gun builder’s special’ barrel. It’ll have square bottom rifling.

MattB · « **Reply #12 on:** January 17, 2021, 05:52:54 PM »

In sept. I ordered a 36cal southern classic from rice. Hung up and realized I hadn't specified rifling. Called right back asked for square, reply was "oh ok". Didn't have one in stock so took about 8 weeks. Great people.

Scota4570 · « **Reply #13 on:** January 17, 2021, 09:01:09 PM »

Quote from: Daryl on January 17, 2021, 07:50:29 AM

Interesting concept, Pope style with patched balls, since his rifling was designed for minimal 'damage' to a slug and only .0015" depth in the corners and .000" depth in the middle of the wide groove. Might work, if the patched ball was tight enough.
Perhaps you meant Forsyth-type rifling, Scota4570? - shallow, wide grooves "knife-edge lands"(narrow) and slow twist. That is also what I would like to try out, in a 16 bore replacement barrel for my .69, but it shoots so well as-is, I don't want to change it.

I don't knife edge lands would last and might tend to cu the patch. I meant like below. Another here pointed out that is the lands are too thin they wear faster. I think lands that are wider than the picture would work well too.

Daryl · « **Reply #14 on:** January 17, 2021, 09:35:54 PM »

That's the style of Pope rifling, yes, with the bore touching the bottom of the groove in the middle of the groove. You could measure it out to get the .010" depth in the corners, I guess. I think Forsyth meant just narrow lands, not actual knife-edged as in sharp ones.
"since his rifling was designed for minimal 'damage' to a slug and only .0015" depth in the corners and .000" depth in the middle of the wide groove.
I\m quite sure they are not .010" deep in the corners. Could have been, but that would not have improved accuracy, which he was ALL about.

Scota4570 · « **Reply #15 on:** January 17, 2021, 10:25:54 PM »

Good catch, yes. My rusty math skills put the corners at 0.0035" deep.

It may be that a hexagon bore will give a little more depth. It should not hurt anything to run the rifling cutter in a little deeper to get taller "lands"

I would guess that the polygon bore would give excellent purchase on the bullet, and the corners would give insurance. There would be no need for the super deep narrow grooves and wide lands I see being used. IT should be a easier to load a combo that makes a good seal.

I have spoken to a barrel maker who said he would make me one. IT might be time.

Hungry Horse · « **Reply #16 on:** January 17, 2021, 10:34:53 PM »

I thought this rifling style was called Forsyth rifleing invented by the guy that invented percussion ignition in the early eighteen hundreds. Bill Large made a few of these barrels, and I believe they are the best shooting barrels he ever made.

Hungry Horse

mark esterly · « **Reply #17 on:** January 18, 2021, 01:30:54 AM »

seeing your picture raises another question in my mind and that's whether boring out your .45 $#@* barrel to .47 and leaving the rifling as is would give you a good shooter.

P.Bigham · « **Reply #18 on:** January 18, 2021, 02:21:22 AM »

I tend to agree with Scota4570. I like square vs round for accuracy. I have both and once figured out accuracy wise offhand I don’t think most can tell a significant difference. Offhand it’s more operator error. I think you would need to talk to over the log shooters to see what they prefer.

P.Bigham · « **Reply #19 on:** January 18, 2021, 03:34:04 AM »

Hope DGB. Chimes in.

smylee grouch · « **Reply #20 on:** January 18, 2021, 03:59:25 AM »

I have known several over the log, x-stix and bench rest shooters for over 25-30 years and almost with out fail they chose square cut groves. But as has been said for off hand type shooting the average guy won't notice the difference.

Daryl · « **Reply #21 on:** January 18, 2021, 04:01:50 AM »

I also prefer square rifling. I have no rifles at this time with round bottomed grooves.
If the grooves were roundish, not round, that would improve the shooting, however, if round deep grooves shot better than square or flat bottomed
you can bet that EVERY match (chunk or plank) & bench rest muzzleloading rifle would have that deep round rifling. As far as I know, none do. Will a
round bottomed rifled barrel shoot OK for you? Quite likely, but I will not have one. I've shot some good groups with rounded rifling, but I prefer .010"
to .012" depth square(ish) rifling and that's it.

Scota4570, the shallower the rifling,(ie: .035") I would suggest the slower the rate of twist. giving the ball and better, easier opportunity to follow it.
Yes - the hexagonal or octagonal inner shape of the bore will also help, I am sure. Many originals appear to have this, accidentally or otherwise, it
would certainly help. I see the deep grooves in the corners as just being a place for blow-by to ignite loose fitting patches.

Bob Roller · « **Reply #22 on:** January 18, 2021, 05:27:28 PM »

Quote from: Daryl on January 17, 2021, 09:35:54 PM

That's the style of Pope rifling, yes, with the bore touching the bottom of the groove in the middle of the groove. You could measure it out to get the .010" depth in the corners, I guess. I think Forsyth meant just narrow lands, not actual knife-edged as in sharp ones.
"since his rifling was designed for minimal 'damage' to a slug and only .0015" depth in the corners and .000" depth in the middle of the wide groove.
I\m quite sure they are not .010" deep in the corners. Could have been, but that would not have improved accuracy, which he was ALL about.

Neither Pope,Zischang.Oberlies or any of the Schuetzen rifle makers were thinking of close range shooting with a round ball
when they were making barrels.Ditto for the Brits with the Whitworth and Henry with their rifling systems from the mid 19th
century.
Bob Roller

flehto · « **Reply #23 on:** January 18, 2021, 08:45:41 PM »

Whether a bore is rifled flat or round hasn't made much of a difference to me, if in fact there is a difference. My objection isn't concerned w/ w the groove type, but w/ the groove depth. When the groove depth is .016 deep, a very thick, hard loading patch is req'd in an attempt seal the bore and most of the thicker patches don't . I'm puzzled as to why the bbl makers go so deep w/ the grooves....less depth would be more economical.

My very accurate squirrel LR has a Douglas bbl and it has at the most .006 deep grooves and is easy to load because of a thinner patch that still seals the bore.

I'm puzzled as to why the grooves on modern black powder bbls are so deep... is .this historically correct or just someone/s idea that it is. I think that a groove depth of .008-.010 could be truly sealed w/ a reasonably thick patch and be much easier to load......Fred

Marcruger · « **Reply #24 on:** January 18, 2021, 08:55:18 PM »

I couldn't agree more with what Fred said below. I've been told that the selling point with deep round-bottomed grooves is that they "look impressive". I don't give a rat's backside what my grooves look like, just so long as they load reasonably and shoot accurately.

Best wishes, Marc

I'm puzzled as to why the bbl makers go so deep w/ the grooves....less depth would be more economical.

My very accurate squirrel LR has a Douglas bbl and it has at the most .006 deep grooves and is easy to load because of a thinner patch that still seals the bore.

I'm puzzled as to why the grooves on modern black powder bbls are so deep... is .this historically correct or just someone/s idea that it is. I think that a groove depth of .008-.010 could be truly sealed w/ a reasonably thick patch and be much easier to load......Fred"

News:

Author Topic: Barrels?? (Read 3382 times)