William Bailes double barrel replica

[bobw]

Hank, no, never measured it, never felt it was necessary I guess because it was so far off. 

On another subject…..does the Bailes gun have an offset stock, for a left eye dominant person, shooting right handed?  What can be seen in the picture shows what looks like lots of cast off.
Bob

[Mike Brooks]

What can be seen in the picture shows what looks like lots of cast off

Boy, I'll say. I wasn't going to say anything untill he got through all of this barrel stuff and then the great adventures in making a left and right hand lock. I figure after all that the stock will be the easy part.
 Just thinking  aloud here, but in the old days it would have taken a small army of talented artisans to produce a gun like this. Bailes probably did nothing more than act as the contractor that pulled all of this together to satisfy a client. I doubt he laid a hand on it.

[Jim Kibler]

"Given the physical properties of 1020 steel, 0.010" wall thickness is the absolute minimum to assure a safe, functional barrel. This does not mean they will be made that thin. The step at the band is the thinnest part of the barrel and falls nearly 13" from the breech. Bore gauge says inside diameter of both barrels is 0.7495" and 0.7500" at 13" with negligible difference at 12" and 14". Indicated outside diameter TIR at 13" is -0.0000", +0.0005 and -0.0005, +0.0000" Hence, outside diameter of each barrel is concentric to the bore within 0.0005". Not even worth worrying about."

You are assuming the bore is straight and concentric with both ends...  That is, it's a true cylinder.  Not necessarily a good assumption if you are dealing with thinner wall thicknesses.

[Mike Brooks]

I shot a Griffin SXS of this same era and coincidentally it was an 11 bore too. Doc Baker had just bought it and had it up on the skeet range at friendship. He asked if anybody want to shoot it and of course I stepped right up, and I got another turn later  too. It Handled just like a modern SXS.
 It was far more conservative than this Bailes gun.

[Hank01]

Hank, no, never measured it, never felt it was necessary I guess because it was so far off. 

On another subject…..does the Bailes gun have an offset stock, for a left eye dominant person, shooting right handed?  What can be seen in the picture shows what looks like lots of cast off.
Bob

Boy, I'll say. I wasn't going to say anything untill he got through all of this barrel stuff and then the great adventures in making a left and right hand lock. I figure after all that the stock will be the easy part.
 Just thinking  aloud here, but in the old days it would have taken a small army of talented artisans to produce a gun like this. Bailes probably did nothing more than act as the contractor that pulled all of this together to satisfy a client. I doubt he laid a hand on it.

Bob, Mike, that stock imo has a ridiculous amount of cast. Here's what Keith Neal says about it: "The butt is cast for use from the left shoulder, with left eye master" ( Messrs Griffin & Tow and W. Bailes p. 156). The project gun is being built to shoot. Since i'm right eye dominant it will not have cast as displayed by the original. Does this mean it will not be a true reproduction? In the purest sense, yes. If i were to build an exact copy for display only then it would definitely have the same cast feature.

Mike, you're quite fortunate to have the opportunity to hold and shoot one of these early doubles. Could say i'm jealous but would it do any good?

...You are assuming the bore is straight and concentric with both ends...  That is, it's a true cylinder.  Not necessarily a good assumption if you are dealing with thinner wall thicknesses.

I agree Jim -that's not a good assumption. Not trying to come across as a smarty pants or know it all but we're not making assumptions. There's too much at stake and the risk of personal danger is too real to assume anything. Only a fool or idiot would do that. We're paying painstaking attention to detail throughout this barrel making process to assure not only the quality but also safety of the finished product.

Hank

[Bob Roller]

What can be seen in the picture shows what looks like lots of cast off

Boy, I'll say. I wasn't going to say anything untill he got through all of this barrel stuff and then the great adventures in making a left and right hand lock. I figure after all that the stock will be the easy part.
 Just thinking  aloud here, but in the old days it would have taken a small army of talented artisans to produce a gun like this. Bailes probably did nothing more than act as the contractor that pulled all of this together to satisfy a client. I doubt he laid a hand on it.

The great adventures of making left and right hand locks is called Schmerzen im Arsch in the old Chicago neighborhood I lived in as a brat.
Barrel makers,lock filers,engravers and gun stockers all had a hand.I have made several sets of left and right locks including one set for a Rigby copy that are still unused as far as I now know.They were "4 pin"style and I got around $800 for that job years ago.
I used L&R externals on several sets for different makers but some of these were were separated and made into 2 different guns.
Bob Roller

[Mike Brooks]

I've been lucky enough to stumble into quite a bit of Kieth Neal's collection. I got to handle everything I saw, quite a treat to handle all of the stuff I had been studying in books for years. I was also fortunate enough to own the 12 bore breech loading doglock rifle  that was in the collection.
I also live close to rock island auction Co. And make it a point to go over on viewing day to look at all the British guns
 I'll eventually own one of the sxs flint Manton guns that go through there....I just need to figure out where to hide it when I get it home.
.

[Hank01]

Mike, i hope you get that Manton. As for somewhere to hide it? Bring it to my place. Your significant other will never find it here.

Been a shift in priority here on the farm. It's the busy season but we did manage to get one 19 bore barrel turned to finished dimensions. Finally got the band detail ironed out. Really happy with how it finished up:



Length of the barrel round is 22 3/4" including the bands. Barrel outside diameter expands 0.002" per inch consistent to 16 3/4" as measured from the bands. Last 6" expands 0.0032" per inch to form the flare at the muzzle:



Barrel wall thickness at the muzzle looks heavy but this is due to the relatively small bore size:



Actual wall thickness at the muzzle measures 0.125" which is only 0.002" off specified dimension. Overall i'm quite pleased with this barrel. It's a keeper. We'll get the other 19 bore barrel tuned next before milling in the octagon of each barrel. Then it's time for breeching and proof testing.

Hank

[Hank01]

Spent some time today working on the second 19 bore barrel. How’d it finish up? It’s junk. Was hoping to get it turned to finished diameter but in my incessant lack of patience i tried to rush the finish cut. Barrel jumped the cutter and left this nasty gouge:



Stupid me. It can still be worked into a usable barrel but as a mate for the already turned 19 bore barrel? Forget it. The damage is too severe. First major setback of the project but what the hey? I’m sure there will be other setbacks. We still have the 11 bore barrels to finish up and we’ll concentrate on them to build the Bailes double. Was really hoping (more like planning) to build it as a 19 bore but once again what the hey? We’ll press on, order more 19 bore blanks and probably build a second Bailes double as a 19 bore. 

I must be nuts!

Hank

[Daryl]

Did that bend the blank, Hank?

[Hank01]

No, didn't bend it Daryl. That gouge can be worked away to salvage the barrel but doing so will change the taper and outside diameter in that area. It would look absolutely horrible if joined to the other barrel with a top rib. But, it could make a decent barrel for a single if the flub is worked away.

Hank 

[Daryl]

That's good. Gouges are most unfortunate.

[Hank01]

...Gouges are most unfortunate.

Unfortunate indeed Daryl but it's my own dumb fault. Some lessons must be learned over and over.

We have both 11 bore barrels turned to finish diameter, breeches drilled and tapped and temporary breech plugs installed. Both barrels were proof tested to CIP load standards for the "definitive proof load". According to the rules of 1887 each barrel was loaded with 190 grains of powder and 1 ¾ ounces of shot then test fired. Prior to test firing each barrel was marked at three inch intervals beginning at the bands. Outside diameter was measured and recorded accordingly. Measurements were repeated after test firing to find any change in outside diameter along the length of each barrel. Neither barrel exhibited any change. Breech plugs remained tight after firing and there are no signs of damage to the breech threads or bore of the barrels. We have a set of sound, workable barrels. All that’s left to do with the barrels is carve the band detail, mill the flats, make and install the permanent breech plugs then join and regulate them. All easily accomplished in one afternoon right? Right!

Here’s the proof test video:



Hank

[runastav]

Thats nice Hank! I got your book today and I like it very much 
Runar

[Hank01]

Thats nice Hank! I got your book today and I like it very much 
Runar

Thanks Runar. Happy to hear you like the book. Hope you find it quite useful.

Hank

[Cody Tetachuk]

I've been lucky enough to stumble into quite a bit of Kieth Neal's collection. I got to handle everything I saw, quite a treat to handle all of the stuff I had been studying in books for years.

That would have been quite the treat. I have a copy of the auction catalog when the Neal collection was sold off. Pretty spectacular stuff.

[Hank01]

Spent time working on the Bailes 11 bore barrels. Flats now on both barrels and looking pretty good imo :









Need to follow up with a draw file to work away grinder marks. With top flats already identified it’s a simple matter of working adjoining flats to near parallel in preparation for joining and regulating.

An angle grinder and custom built holding jig made short work of grinding the flats as both were ground to shape in one afternoon:



The jig was built from scrap material found scattered about here on the farm. Steel top rails have a slight amount of swamp, which was easy for the grinder to transfer to the flats. The amount of swamp is barely noticeable just looking at a barrel but is blatantly apparent when both are placed side by side. A scrap octagon barrel held in place by the clamp and a full length mandrel serves as the index to grind the flats. The jig was designed to include an adjustment feature on each end under the clamp to allow the barrel to sit at an angle in the jig to grind in the proper amount of taper:



Other news: We have the breech plugs turned, chambers milled and polished:



We’ll install and fit the breech plugs and shape the hooks after the barrels are joined. But, the band detail on both barrels needs chiseled in before joining the barrels. Is there a talented individual here willing to take on this task? I could do it. Maybe. If Neanderthal cave art was the order of the day then i would definitely do it myself. Such is not the case and it’s best to let someone that knows what they’re doing handle it.

Hank 

[Hank01]

We have the barrels ready to join. Two adjoining flats first had to be worked into a near parallel condition. After filing both flats, one was painted with makeshift tool maker’s dye:



Makeshift tool maker’s dye:



Barrels were then clamped together and tapped lightly with a no-mar hammer to locate high spots on the flat:



A high spot appears shiny against the painted surface:



High spots were then worked away using either a small file or sanding block dependent upon the size of the spot. It took a few hours to get both barrels ready to join. But, this step is critical to achieve a good weld seam. Barrels will be brazed together full length of the flat. To have a strong joint it’s recommended to have a 0.001” to 0.005” gap for a brazed seam. The only way I know of to do this is by hand fitting the adjoining parts. Gap width was checked using a feeler gauge as fitting progressed to reach the necessary gap requirement.

After fitting, each barrel was placed into the shaping jig then draw filed and rough sanded using a sanding block:



Here’s all of the parts needed to build the barrel set:



False (standing) breech blank is a chunk of I beam with three legs removed, top rib blank is 1/2” x 0.132” strip steel, breech plugs fabricated from 7/8” x 14 AISI 4130 steel threaded rod.

All we need now is to get the band detail chiseled in so we can slap this stuff together to make the barrel set.

Hank

[Hank01]

Thought i’d jump ahead a bit and fit the breech plugs to the barrels. Glad i did. As it turned out the right barrel is tapped slightly off center. Lost the bore scope image of the plug’s crooked fit so you’ll have to take my word for it -it was ugly. It took considerable effort to get the face of the breech plug to mate to the step to make the seal complete. But, we finally got it. Bore scope image shows complete and full contact with the step:



How was this accomplished? By filing the face of the breech plug to make it match the step angle created by the “crooked” threads. It wasn’t off by much but just enough to create a lot of extra work. Had i waited to fit the breech plugs until after joining the barrels it would have been a mega pita trying to get this plug fit properly. Working with a single barrel greatly simplified the matter. Fitting a breech plug can be a challenge in itself let alone fitting one with threads tapped off center. Left barrel posed no problem:



Overemphasis of the importance of breech plug fit does not exist. As many will attest a breech plug fit poorly leads to problems later on. Fouling build up that can not be cleaned away by usual methods, accelerated corrosion and decreased performance are but three of the conditions created by a poorly fit breech plug. Feel free to add to the list.

Being already there, i went further ahead and shaped the breech plug hooks. The amount of offset of the right plug was lost entirely in the hook:



Shaping was accomplished with just a hack saw and files. Took about two hours to do both. Pint of lager in the background is optional. Final shaping takes place while fitting to the false breech.

Oh, about the chiseled bands? Dropped the idea in favor of a single wedding band design:



In the next posting we’ll get the barrels set up for regulating then weld (braze) them together.

Hank

[Hank01]

Thus enters the regulator to mess things up. Maybe? The barrels, as they sit now, can not be regulated to standard distance. What’s standard distance? Generally between 25 and 30 yards is the point at which the shot column from both barrels converge. Beyond that a shot column crosses the line of sight meaning the left shot column will impact to the right of POA, right shot column to the left. Standard distance is a relatively modern normal. Relatively modern meaning it was adopted a couple centuries ago give or take a few years. 

So what’s the problem? To regulate a set of barrels they must be positioned so the center line of each bore inclines slightly toward the line of sight. Degree of inclination sets the convergent (standard) distance. Decreasing incline increases distance, increasing incline decreases distance. Both barrels must be aligned precisely to achieve standard distance. And the problem is: Difference between barrel breech width and muzzle width is too great to allow regulating to standard distance. In other words, the width across the flats at the breech is much bigger than the width of both barrels at the muzzle. This creates excessive incline setting the convergent point at less than 7 yards as determined by laser bore sighting:




This places the point of impact at 25 yards nearly a foot to the left and right of the line of sight. Totally unacceptable by today’s standard.

But, that is today’s standard using precisely machined round barrels. We’re building this barrel set using replica octagon/round swamped barrels, a design far removed from today’s standard. It’s common knowledge that early English doubles had technical and mechanical issues. Have i replicated one of these issues? The issue being extremely short distance shot column convergent point? Now i wonder at what distance does the shot column(s) of the Bailes 1760 barrels converge?

More material can be removed from adjoining flats to decrease incline but this would thin the barrel wall at the breech to provide minimal gain in distance. We won’t do that but do have options: (1) leave the barrels as is and learn how to shoot it with non standard shot column convergence; (2) start over with new barrel blanks and change the barrel finish dimensions to remove the issue completely; (3) scrap the project, sit on the porch and drink beer.

Decisions, decisions.

Hank

[Mike Brooks]

I can tell you I had no trouble smashing skeets with the 1760 era Griffin I had the chance to shoot. I would assume they need to be pinched together somewhere around the midway point so the bores are parallel for a short distance. If you have to remove some material in that area I'd do it. (with a file)
 All my old SXS flint shotguns shot to point of aim.

[Bob Roller]

I think Mike Brooks opinion from a month ago about a whole herd of craftspeople is probably right and Mr.Bailes was an agent/contractor.
A pair of locks then would have probably been expensive but I have no idea about real cost.Lynton McKenzie told me that a pair of high end flintlocks could take the entire salary of a degreed teacher at a university.THAT would never be accepted here in the "colonies"at any point in time.I used to get requests from time to time for pairs of locks and used the L&R externals and 2 sets of Mantons which were made in moulds using the antique locks as masters and it took a good bit of time to get the Mantons to the point where locks could be started and
the mechanisms that make them useful had to be fabricated and that was labor intensive and I hope good locks can be found or made for this job.
Bob Roller

[bobw]

Hank,  if my math is correct, using a 30 inch sight radius you need .400 correction total!  That’s a bunch!  How thick is the beech wall in the chamber area?  I want to stress again that wall thickness must measured and not calculated from OD - ID divided by 2.  Anyway, it looks to me like you will need a smaller breech along with spacing between the barrels at the muzzle to gain that much correction.
Bob

[bobw]

Hank, another way to look at this is the center bore to center bore, setup so they are exactly the same at the breech and muzzle, in theory should hit at that point and spread at 25 yards.  If that is 2 inches you need 1 inch correction at 25 yard on each barrel.  Thats .062 total or .031 on each barrel.  If I’m thinking correctly on this, it should have been fairly easy to calculate while making the barrels.

[Hank01]

I can tell you I had no trouble smashing skeets with the 1760 era Griffin I had the chance to shoot. I would assume they need to be pinched together somewhere around the midway point so the bores are parallel for a short distance. If you have to remove some material in that area I'd do it. (with a file)
 All my old SXS flint shotguns shot to point of aim.

There will be no problem busting clays with it now Mike. I did file the flats. Read on to hear all about it.

As mentioned in the previous post it was stated that, “as they sit now the barrels can not be regulated to standard distance” and that i would not file adjoining flats more to make ‘em fit closer. While the first part was a true statement, i made myself a liar concerning the second part. After much deliberation it was back to the shaping jig for some judicious hand filing and fitting. An additional 0.005” was removed from each flat then it was back to bore sighting. Knowing a total 0.010” was not enough to make up the difference, a tapered wood shim was inserted between the barrels at the muzzle:



Gap between barrels was adjusted by moving the shim up and down. Convergent point was checked at 12 and 25 yards by trial and error until there was convergence at 25 yards. Final shim setting at 12 yards:



And at 25 yards:



Weak batteries in the bore sights and broad daylight make for a less than perfect image but still it’s not a good idea to look the lasers in the eye even at 25 yards:



Gap between the barrels was measured and as it turned out, we need a 0.062” shim at the muzzle to attain convergence at 25 yards. Armed with this new data, it was back to the shop to make the shim but not sure i will use this particular part:



It fits between the barrels at the muzzle like this:



It also functions as the loading rod keeper:



So, it took 0.072” total correction to make the barrels converge at 25 yards, which is pretty dang close to Bob W’s calculated 0.062” correction:
 

Hank, another way to look at this is the center bore to center bore, setup so they are exactly the same at the breech and muzzle, in theory should hit at that point and spread at 25 yards.  If that is 2 inches you need 1 inch correction at 25 yard on each barrel.  Thats .062 total or .031 on each barrel.  If I’m thinking correctly on this, it should have been fairly easy to calculate while making the barrels.

Bob, it was calculated prior to making the barrels using bore center line reference. Had the barrels been made to exact specifications regulating would have been much simpler. However, much of the shaping was done by hand causing considerable deviation from specified dimensions. Oh, wall thickness at the breech after removing the additional 0.005” measures 0.206” left, 0.200” right at the minimum of both barrels.

I think Mike Brooks opinion from a month ago about a whole herd of craftspeople is probably right and Mr.Bailes was an agent/contractor.
A pair of locks then would have probably been expensive but I have no idea about real cost.Lynton McKenzie told me that a pair of high end flintlocks could take the entire salary of a degreed teacher at a university.THAT would never be accepted here in the "colonies"at any point in time.I used to get requests from time to time for pairs of locks and used the L&R externals and 2 sets of Mantons which were made in moulds using the antique locks as masters and it took a good bit of time to get the Mantons to the point where locks could be started and
the mechanisms that make them useful had to be fabricated and that was labor intensive and I hope good locks can be found or made for this job.
Bob Roller

Not to worry Bob. We'll use only the best parts to make the locks no matter if store bought or hand made. Too much pride in quality and workmanship to let anything else happen.

This is new territory to me -first time making barrels, first time joining and regulating barrels to make a set. I have built many SxS double flints but with barrels from junk breech loaders that were already joined, and presumably, properly regulated. I’m learning a lot and still have a lot yet to learn but i’m having tons of fun with this project in the meantime. We're gonna build it!

Hank