William Bailes double barrel replica

[Stoner creek]

I’m guessing that this thread might last for years.

[Mike Brooks]

I wouldn't have the lathe on when filing in the bands.

[Hank01]

I’m guessing that this thread might last for years.

It might. Then again it might not. Went from a pile of scrap metal and repurposed machine parts to functional lathe to partially finished barrel blank in just over two months. I'd say it's moving along at a right smart clip.

I wouldn't have the lathe on when filing in the bands.

Been thinking about that Mike. Area to work is pretty close to the chuck. Chuck has really sharp edges too. One bump in to it while spinning could do serious bodily harm. Who needs (or wants) that?

Hank

[Bob Roller]

Make an internally expanding mandrel or collet.Stay away from a spinning chuck.These can be made easily from common material in the shop.
Bob Roller

[Stoner creek]

Maybe I’m short on attention span but pictures of steel chucked up in a lathe is getting a little bit old. Have you considered posting your progress on a platform like rumble or whatever Bill Raby uses? I laud you ambition with the project but there’s not much old school gun making happening here. This might as well be a model 1100 upgrade.

[Hank01]

Make an internally expanding mandrel or collet.Stay away from a spinning chuck.These can be made easily from common material in the shop.
Bob Roller

Good idea. Thanks Bob!

Maybe I’m short on attention span but pictures of steel chucked up in a lathe is getting a little bit old. Have you considered posting your progress on a platform like rumble or whatever Bill Raby uses? I laud you ambition with the project but there’s not much old school gun making happening here. This might as well be a model 1100 upgrade.

Now i must ask the many others here on the board: do you see it this way? Perhaps it would be better posted elsewhere?

Hank

[snapper]

Hank

I am enjoying the topic. 

It is a mixture of awe and "lets see what that crazy guy is doing today."

I do not have any experience with running a metal lathe and it is fascinating to see what you are doing.

There are a lot of topics that I am not interested in and that is OK, I don't click on them to read.  Simple.

Fleener

[Hank01]

Thanks for the feedback Fleener. Good to know you're enjoying this thread.

Anyone else care to comment?

Hank 

[rich pierce]

If the discussion here stays civil, there’s no harm being done, except precedent-setting. Though English doubles are of interest to many, it’s a gray area as far as relatedness to the longrifle. 

I personally prefer it when members report a post to the moderators for consideration regarding suitability or adherence to the rules, but maybe that’s me being territorial.

[galudwig]

Seeing as the evolution of the English double and the American Longrifle are unrelated topics, I have no interest in this particular thread other than as a moderator. Like Fleener alluded to, the title of the thread told me right off it wasn’t something I’d be interested in, so I moved on. Keep the conversation about relaying information and and experiences and away from choosing sides, and we’ll all get along just fine.

[Jim Kibler]

Why get worked up?  If you don't like it, don't look at the thread.  Again, problems arise when you believe your viewpoint is right or correct and it's imposed on others.  There's always ways to attempt to justify a position like this, but it's often as simple as thinking you know better and others should as well.

The line between traditionally made and using equipment is basically non-existent in the muzzleloading world when you dig into it.  Also, I don't understand why it being an 18th century British gun would influence whether it's okay or not.  British guns of this period have been a pretty big part of the site for a LONG time.  I've posted many, Dave Person has posted lots and I'm sure there are MANY more.

I personally might not understand or fully agree with some of the approaches in this thread, but still find it interesting and am sure others do as well.  He should certainly have the chance to share what he's working on. 

Jim

[Cody Tetachuk]

Why get worked up?  If you don't like it, don't look at the thread.  Again, problems arise when you believe your viewpoint is right or correct and it's imposed on others.  There's always ways to attempt to justify a position like this, but it's often as simple as thinking you know better and others should as well.

The line between traditionally made and using equipment is basically non-existent in the muzzleloading world when you dig into it.  Also, I don't understand why it being an 18th century British gun would influence whether it's okay or not.  British guns of this period have been a pretty big part of the site for a LONG time.  I've posted many, Dave Person has posted lots and I'm sure there are MANY more.

I personally might not understand or fully agree with some of the approaches in this thread, but still find it interesting and am sure others do as well.  He should certainly have the chance to share what he's working on. 

Jim

VERY well said. Thanks Jim.

[bama]

Don't look Ethel, too late, she done been mooned!

I am enjoying the tread. There are not many of us that can make what we need to do a job. Hank, I remember from Bowling Green you always were pushing the envelope so to speak, I always admired guys that would walk where others feared to tread. Carry on Brother 

[Dave Marsh]

Why get worked up?  If you don't like it, don't look at the thread.  Again, problems arise when you believe your viewpoint is right or correct and it's imposed on others.  There's always ways to attempt to justify a position like this, but it's often as simple as thinking you know better and others should as well.

The line between traditionally made and using equipment is basically non-existent in the muzzleloading world when you dig into it.  Also, I don't understand why it being an 18th century British gun would influence whether it's okay or not.  British guns of this period have been a pretty big part of the site for a LONG time.  I've posted many, Dave Person has posted lots and I'm sure there are MANY more.

I personally might not understand or fully agree with some of the approaches in this thread, but still find it interesting and am sure others do as well.  He should certainly have the chance to share what he's working on. 

Jim

I agree with you and second the well said comment. 

[smart dog]

Hi Hank,
You are on an historical adventure like some of us do regardless of efficiency and making any sense.  Crack on buddy!

Senseless in Vermont

[davec2]

Hank,

I for one am enjoying the adventure you are embarked upon.  And I agree with Smart Dog, Jim K, and others.  I have personally had a great run of making and building things that many (or should I say "most") others think are crazy and a waste of my time.....kind of like what all my modern gun shooting friends think about me building and shooting flintlocks....and shooting one muzzle stuffed round ball at a time.  I just smile and carry on.  I think Smart Dog put it eloquently..... "Crack on !"

Even more senseless in California

[flatsguide]

Don’t stop and keep plugging away...
Cheers Richard

[RossN]

Put me in the please keep on keeping on camp - I'm enjoying following this thread.

[Hank01]

Thanks for all of the positive feedback guys. Early on, first post actually, it was stated that if this project is site inappropriate then it would gladly be removed. I still hold that true. But, it was given the blessing of several members and we proceeded. A couple days ago I began to think it shouldn’t be on here and if the consensus agreed then it would be removed. Your valued input canceled that doubt. We will continue and that’s the end of that. Let’s build a gun!

We have the first barrel profiled:



Muzzle flare in this pic is somewhat pronounced due to camera angle. Actual taper is barely visible just looking at it. Taper from bands to muzzle totals 0.080” with 0.020” of that being the last 4” to form the flare at the muzzle. Round part overall length is 21 1/16”.

First attempt at adding wedding bands didn't turn out so good:



Totally unacceptable. Grooves are too wide, minor bands off location in relation to major bands due to groove width. It’s a do over for sure.

Here’s the original:



Hank

[Jim Kibler]

I think it's safe to say most original fowling piece barrels had the bands filed in by hand.  In my experience they often don't extend to the bottom of the barrel, but are only present in the area you can see. 

You may find this easier.  Sometimes using a basic method can be faster in the end and as a benefit, can create a product that more accurately represents the feel of original work.

Jim

[Mike Brooks]

The Spanish barrels I have had are the only ones that the the bands went all the way around and were decorated with foliage like those pictured above. I would assume these Bailes barrels are Spanish as well.

[James Rogers]

Yes from what I know the Spanish and Portuguese barrels were turned all the way around. All the others I've had apart were filed in affairs.  The picture of the barrels on the original that was pictured looks Spanish to me.

[JH Ehlers]

I did these with a jewelers saw and needle files (Swiss made) I wouldn't attempt it with junk files. Some originals clearly just go half way around and others just look so perfect as if done by a lathe.


lradac

[JH Ehlers]

And I could not have done it without 10X Optivisor

[Hank01]

I think it's safe to say most original fowling piece barrels had the bands filed in by hand.  In my experience they often don't extend to the bottom of the barrel, but are only present in the area you can see. 

You may find this easier.  Sometimes using a basic method can be faster in the end and as a benefit, can create a product that more accurately represents the feel of original work.

Jim

I agree with hand filing Jim. Biggest problem in my case is technique. The miserable looking attempt above is the result of a bad method. It started out ok by scoring the outlines on the lathe but where it got messed up was trying to file them in by hand. We'll give it another try.

The Spanish barrels I have had are the only ones that the the bands went all the way around and were decorated with foliage like those pictured above. I would assume these Bailes barrels are Spanish as well.

Yes from what I know the Spanish and Portuguese barrels were turned all the way around. All the others I've had apart were filed in affairs.  The picture of the barrels on the original that was pictured looks Spanish to me.

Mike, James -yes the Bailes 1760 barrels did come from Spain. Bands wrap around the barrels as the fore stock ends just before the octagon to round transition. Bottom view of the original:

I did these with a jewelers saw and needle files (Swiss made) I wouldn't attempt it with junk files. Some originals clearly just go half way around and others just look so perfect as if done by a lathe.

JH, those are good looking bands. Obviously not your first time "around the block". Funny you should mention junk files. The ones i have are junk and, well, you've seen the result. Thanks for sharing your work. It gives me a little more to go on in the next attempt.

Thanks for the input guys. It is appreciated.

Hank