Antique Longrifle with Straight Rifling

[BigSkyRambler]

This is something new to me: an antique longrifle with straight rifling. The 40"x7/8" mics .562/.580. Round bottom rifling.  Bore is roachy, but I can get it in shooting condition. It was loaded with old black powder and wadding, but no ball or shot. It has a Ketland lock that has been reconverted to flint(?). I can't tell if stock is modern replacement or just well cared for.  I have seen European guns with straight rifling, but not American.  Any ideas?

[Carl Young]

I straight-rifled a barrel as an experiment while working in the gunshop at Tannehill State Park in AL. Slightly modified the cutter for proper geometry. Did not see any particular advantage in shooting, but it was easier and faster to rifle the barrel! 

Carl

[Joe Stein]

They are out there. I have a James Marker percussion rifle with straight rifling.
Joe Stein

[Buck]

A swivel rifle I owned had straight rifling in one barrel and a twist in the other.

Buck

[BigSkyRambler]

When Sweden passed a law in the late 19th century (?) requiring only rifled guns for big game, economy minded hunters could purchase single shot gauge guns with straight rifling.  This also allowed the use of shot without blowing the pattern.

[Seth Isaacson]

A swivel rifle I owned had straight rifling in one barrel and a twist in the other.

Buck

That was a fairly common arrangement from the examples I've seen. You'll find that on German combination muzzleloaders sometimes as well. A lot of the time both barrels are the same caliber. Is yours two different calibers or one?

[rich pierce]

From the pictures I am seeing, it looks like a restock at some point.

There’s a JP Beck with straight rifling in the barrel.

[Bill Paton]

This post is from a long thread about straight rifling on this site in March of 2014. It’s pertinent to this discussion.
Bill Paton   


Sr. Member
****
Posts: 421
MSN Messenger - wapaton.sr@gmail.com
View Profile  Email  Personal Message (Online)

Re: Straight rifling
« Reply #9 on: March 16, 2014, 09:29:40 PM »
QuoteModifyRemove

Dillin writes that straight rifling was probably for better patched ball accuracy than a smooth bore would produce, and therefore done to make a combination gun. He also states that straight rifled barrels comprised about 15% of all American rifles (seems too high to me), and those he had examined were made before 1800 (many original percussion double rifles exist with one straight rifled barrel). He reports a shooting trial between smooth bore, straight rifle, and twist rifle at 100, 200, and 300 yards at a man sized target in which the straight rifle performed slightly better than the smooth rifle.

A modern maker of swivel rifles told me several years ago that he used straight rifled barrels to shoot shot better than a smooth bore, but they were touchy in that respect and needed very careful load workup to get the tightest pattern, which was better than a cylinder bore.

However, I have examined two flint swivel breeches (one early Reading and one jaeger) with one smooth barrel and one straight rifled barrel. Given the great accuracy advantage of spiral rifling, I think the makers of those two swivels intended them to be combination barrels for shot or more accurate ball shooting than a smooth bore would deliver. If they hadn't intended for shot use, they likely would have spiral rifled the rifle barrel for better accuracy.

Dan mentioned a friend who reported more accurate shooting with straight rifling than a smooth bore. I would like some of you shooters to do an experiment to compare straight and smooth rifle accuracy, working up the most accurate patched ball load possible. Maybe Dan's friend already has the data I am after and could report it to us.

My take is that straight rifled barrels were intended to shoot shot, and also a patched ball more accurately than a smooth bore could.
Maybe some data from you modern shooters could shed light on this issue. I am eager for the materials and methods, and the results to be reported.

I think the European 16 ga straight rifled rolling block Dan mentioned is like my fancy German double SXS pin fire with one spiral and one straight barrel, likely intended for shooting balls at red deer and boars in the woods, and hares and birds as well.

Bill Paton
Modify message
Report to moderator     72.42.144.176
Kentucky double rifle student
wapaton.sr@gmail.com
Sr. Member
****

[BigSkyRambler]

Great information, Bill. Thanks for repost.

[Avlrc]

I saw a large/target American-made rifle with straight rifling, which seemed strange for a target rifle. That barrel was forged and had hammer marks all over it.  I owned a Jaeger made in 1730, and it had straight rifling.  I think that was more common on European rifles than American guns.

[JV Puleo]

They aren't common but they are out there. I have a NE rifle with a barrel made by Hitchcock & Muzzey, a pretty well-known barrel maker. It's percussion, converted from flint and by brother-in-law took a deer with it about a week after I got it.

[Avlrc]

straight rifled. Indiana rifle
https://www.liveauctioneers.com/item/180506173_kentucky-heavy-barrel-flintlock-rifle-71-l-austin-tx

[BigSkyRambler]

The bore is cleaning up nicely. An overnight soak with Evaporust and a robust scrubbing removed the burrs. Just shallow pits left. Don't think that will snag patches.

[Daryl]

The thicker the "tough" patch, the happier it will be. If having to reduce the ball diameter, I would most assuredly do that, however, a snug combination is still needed as it benefits accuracy.

[Bob Roller]

I call that system "Splines"like the input shaft of a transmission.Think I saw an old article saying it was a place for powder fouling to be caught.
Bob Roller

[Daryl]

Straight rifling will throw a round ball probably like a baseball  knuckle ball - probably. We've found the heavier the charge in a round ball smoothbore, long longer the range before the ball spins off in a curve from the line of departure.
Of course such a load is likely not recommended in such an old gun.

[Habu]

This post is from a long thread about straight rifling on this site in March of 2014. It’s pertinent to this discussion.
Bill Paton   

« Reply #9 on: March 16, 2014, 09:29:40 PM »
QuoteModifyRemove

My take is that straight rifled barrels were intended to shoot shot, and also a patched ball more accurately than a smooth bore could.
Maybe some data from you modern shooters could shed light on this issue. I am eager for the materials and methods, and the results to be reported.

****

Bill-

I played with it some beginning back in the early '80s (started the experiment my sophomore year of high school), finishing in '98 or so.  The only advantages I saw were that 1)the rifling allowed "loading like a rifle" (the tight patch giving increased range and better accuracy when heavy charges were used--tight loads were difficult to load in the smooth barrel), and 2) it doesn't take long to make a straight rifling guide and cutter!

With shot, the straight-rifled barrel averaged about 5% fewer shot hitting a 36" circle at 35 yards; this was consistent with all charges, wad columns, and shot sizes.  The same loads shot in a conventionally-rifled barrel averaged <50% of the shot hitting the pattern board (but I got real good at scrubbing leading out of the conventional rifling). 

Shooting a typical ball size of the day (.58 caliber barrel, so I used a .530" ball to provide windage about equal to reported musket loads) using wads or any of the 3 thicknesses of patches I tried, there was no significant difference in groups.  Going to a larger (.570") ball resulted in improved accuracy for both, but 100 yard groups from the straight-rifled barrel were usually the same size or smaller than 50 yard groups from the smooth barrel; this was consistent across the 3 thicknesses of patching but only when heavier charges were used.   

It was an entertaining experiment.  I learned a lot of stuff that played into load development for other smoothbores.

But I'd never waste my time doing it again, or selecting a straight-rifled barrel for a rifle, and if I want to shoot shot I'll use a smoothbore. 

[Daryl]

Good information, thanks.
The straight rifled 16(13 actual) I had, made better patterns at 25 yards than a cylinder choked smoothbore. Probably due to the use of a shot-cup in the straight rifled barrel.

[Bill Paton]

Habu,

Thanks for sharing your experiments with straight vs smooth and twist rifled barrels.  Your results do show improvement in patched round ball groups using straight rifling compared to smoothbores, as well as the effectiveness of the straight rifled barrel when shooting shot. The great advantage of twist rifling is really obvious, of course, and not in question. And your experiments were much more applicable to the needs of American pioneers and farmers of the muzzleloader era (and 21st century black powder enthusiasts) than Dillin's quasi military experiments were.

On page 70 of The Kentucky Rifle, Capt. John Dillin reports  experiments that he and Walter Cline did using your same bore configurations but in calibers of 45 to 50. They used grease- patched round balls and full powder charges. Their tests were directed at determining the military effectiveness of the arms, so they used man-sized silhouette targets at 100, 200, and 300 yards, scoring any hit. Unlike your tests, those targets and ranges make it difficult to interpret group sizes applicable to eastern woodland hunting conditions.Their results with straight rifled barrels shooting patched round balls weren't quite as good as yours, but were an improvement over a smooth bore. 

I agree with you that I would rather hunt deer with a twist rifle and hunt birds and small game with a shot-loaded smooth bore, assuming I could afford two guns. I also agree with Dillin's assessment on pages 40 and 41 that the straight cut rifle was used as a combination gun by people who couldn't afford two ideal arms, but could own one gun for both purposes, getting better-than-smoothbore accuracy shooting larger game with a patched ball (or two) at relatively short distances , and small game with shot out of the same gun. And if your needs changed during your hunt for food,  you could change your straight-rifled gun load without the need to go home to get your other firearm.

So from my perspective, your time wasn't wasted at all in carrying out your experiments in a better way for most of our needs than Dillin did at ranges outside our needs. Thanks for sharing your 30+ year old results with us.

Gratefully,
Bill Paton