India-Made, With A Flair

Did a dog-n-pony show recently. A kid with Brown Bess jammed a ball in it so hard it had to have the breech unscrewed and ball hammered out the next day. To keep the kid in action as well as the 18th C. represented (the show must go on) I lent him a fairly new India-made late doglock of that era I had with me from one of the US sellers. The seller had proofed it but the kid said it wouldn't work so I set up the lock for him and test fired it with powder only -- ka-boom.

I hadn't shot the gun myself but had ball for it with me I use dry in a .69 matchlock and .69 1704 English military gun. I pushed a less-than-.69 sprue-free ball flush into the bore horizontally, it fit well, and it rolled back out. The kid was good to go! But in his first demo he jammed the ball about 7" down the tube. What? kid?

An experienced coordinator on the spot trying to be helpful broke my ramrod trying to ram the ball home for the kid. I borrowed a 19th C. steel ramrod and we were able to pound the ball down with quite an effort including using its momentum like a pile driver at the breech of the much longer flintlock's tube. The kid was too scared to fire it so we did...

I contacted the seller and asked him what ball he usually recommends for this particular gun both with a wad and for PRB. He would not answer but instead asked me what the chart on the Owner's Manual said. I told him I have no idea but that shouldn't matter -- just looking for his experience with his products. He asked for the serial number to look it up. Nice of him, but I said there was no need and changed the question...

"Do the barrels on all these [particular model] guns flair open at the muzzle"? His answer!? "They will all flare out a bit towards the breech but they don't always flare toward the muzzle. Fluctuations like that have to do with the bore being honed to remove any chatter marks from when the tubing is made." Holy carp. He went on to explain that won't effect accuracy, accused me of losing the manual, and told me how long the flint should be and how many grains of what powder to load, LOL. OK, he was trying.

I responded that if there was a manual in English I read it at the time and there were obviously no surprises. I explained that mine was a general question on the particular model he sells, about his experience and personal recommendations. I also pointed out that his using a micrometer caliper on a muzzle that flairs due to honing away imperfections [and tbe seams!?] where they're visible to the naked eye to jot them down means a manual's information wouldn't be particularly helpful, no less especially accurate, nor would such contribute to the gun's accuracy.

I told him to rest assured that it was a short French flint (bevel down if he must know, wrapped in thin lead and perfectly tight as well as squared to the face of the frizzen) with 70 grains of FFg down the bore and 5 grains of FFFFg in the pan. I also told him ignition wasn't a problem and then told HIM what had happened loading it with a less-than-.69 diameter ball, and that I'd never seen such an inherent dimensional problem before.

Though he resented my dismissal of his bore measurements if the barrels are flaired he then conceded they were useless. He had measured it at .683. The median bore on this .69 gun is under .680. The seller then recommended .630 to .678, LOL, as well as trial and error. Duh, gee, thanks for all the help!

"Satyameva Jayate" is the motto of India.

Hummm. I think of the oft quoted remarks about tha accuracy of the Kings muskets. That if not illy bored, as many are,ect. Maybe you have a more hc musket. Show it to people who comment on your trade gun slings :haha:

Alden, I have some questions about this problem you encountered. Did the lad patch the ball when he loaded the ball and after you tried the ball that fit loosely in the muzzle? Did you happen to measure the muzzle and ball with a pair of precision micrometers? I do not mean to be critical if you didn’t because in the time period, they would have had a mold that was made for the gun and would not have had to worry about such things. Today we do it “backwards” from how they did it by starting with a barrel and having to find a mold that cast balls that fit. Of course there were times in the period when barrels of cast balls were used in trade and people had to pick out the size that fit their guns basically the same way you did it.

During the 17th and most of the 18th century, British Military musket barrels were made by welding up the barrel around a mandrel and then reaming, honing and polishing the interior to remove welding humps, chatter marks and rough bore interior to get it to final dimension, as well. Though no period “GO” (Minimum bore diameter) and “NO GO” (Maximum interior diameter) are generally known to still exist, it has been documented the London Gunmakers Guild made such gages for Government Use to inspect the barrels for Government muskets. However, such gages would not have shown in a precision manner how much flair there was at the barrel and/or breech and there is no record of how stringent their inspections with these gages were. Sure, they would have noticed if a NO GO Gage entered the barrel muzzle and would not pass further down the bore, be we don’t know how much flair at the muzzle was cause for barrel rejection and especially during emergencies or war time.

Since the size musket balls used in .76 caliber British Muskets normally ran from .690” to a surprisingly large sample that ran as large as .710,” as found in excavated British Sites here in the Colonies; there was never a problem in the period with the issued size balls not fitting issued British Ordnance approved muskets. Other British Issued Arms were also issued with what we would call much undersize balls for other calibers as well.

We also know that gunsmiths in the period could tell if there were tight spots in the middle of barrels and depending on the quality of the smith/s and guns, could ream the bores pretty straight or at least tapering down towards the muzzle to within .001-.003” tolerances if they wanted to. Prior to his untimely passing, this was verified by Gary Brumfield, the long time worker and Master of the Gunsmithing shop at Colonial Williamsburg.

Having noted historic facts on the original guns, I also have to say I would be concerned and distressed to find a severe tight spot down the bore in a modern reproduction of a musket barrel as well. The very best that most black powder shooters can do to measure their bore size is to use a set of precision dial calipers at the muzzle of the gun. Even most gunsmiths do not have precision deep hole calipers as they are extremely expensive, though some folks working on really high dollar shotguns do have them. So even most gunsmiths would use precision dial calipers at the muzzle of the barrel and expect there would be no serious tight spots further down the bore. So MOST folks are not going to find a tight spot in a barrel until something similar to how Alden found it.

As to whether or not a tight spot down the bore will affect accuracy, that all depends on where the tight spot is. Special kinds of tight spots close to the muzzle are also called "choke" and are good things for a gun primarily designed to be fired with shot rather than ball. Some smooth bores taper very slightly in bore diameter from the rear DOWN to a slightly smaller diameter in the front/muzzle and that can be OK to good to great, depending on the amount of taper. However, a tight spot in the location on Alden’s barrel is not a good thing and should be repaired or the barrel/gun replaced, if one is going to fire round ball in it. For most people the best option is to return the gun and have the seller get the gunsmithing done at their cost or replace it.

I, for one, am glad Alden brought this criticism to the forum and explained what they went through in firing that gun for the first time. I do not know how prevalent this is on the India Made guns, but it would be a good thing to check the barrels when one first gets one’s new gun at a range or if the person has the skill and tools to dismount the barrel and breech and push close to bore diameter balls wrapped in thin to thicker patches through the bore.

I would certainly not expect to have to do this with barrels by most American barrel makers, though.

Gus

:rotf: Great story Alden.......
I didn't know that Ringling Bros. did 18th century reenactments. :thumbsup:

Artificer said:

[1]Did the lad patch the ball when he loaded the ball and after you tried the ball that fit loosely in the muzzle?

[2]Did you happen to measure the muzzle and ball with a pair of precision micrometers?

Click to expand...

[1]The lad did NOT patch the ball, no wad, no nothin'... As he was instructed.

[2]I did not measure the muzzle nor the ball (the latter of which, again, went in flush at the muzzle and then rolled out). The seller's guage that measured .683 goes down a depth of 3" and presumably that's where he measured it from. When I do I'll use my Mitutoyo dial caliper micrometer...

Yes, I'd be happier if the barrel tapered a fraction towards the muzzle. Sadly, it's the other way around in this India-made gun -- it was tighter seemingly all the way down past seven inches. That said, I was not using 18th C. "loose fit" standards for dirty military musketry either. I'm sure an unpatched .630 lead ball would have dropped down to the breech like a... lead ball. LOL

It read like the ball you used was closer to bore size than the original much smaller size balls for muskets. Not sure why, but I had assumed that when I first read it.

That is really bad that the bore tapers down even further towards the breech and below the point the ball got stuck. Even for smoothbore accuracy, there is no way that gun will ever be accurate unless the barrel is properly reamed or replaced.

Gus

Excerpts from our correspondence...


Alden:
"...(it was a half a year ago) but if there was an owners manual in English I'm sure I have it and read it at the time -- there obviously weren't any surprises. Mine was a general question on this model, about your experience and personal recommendation for it; using a micrometer caliper on a muzzle that flairs due to honing away imperfections where they're visible to the naked eye and jotting them down means a manual's [specific] information wouldn't be particularly helpful (no less especially accurate, nor would such contribute to the gun's accuracy)."

US Seller of India-made Gun:
"Flaring shouldn't affect anything, accuracy wise, ESPECIALLY in a barrel that long. It is a smoothbore musket and they are very forgiving. Once you figure out the right load, it is all about the shooter after that."


Oh, well then, maybe I should have payed a premium for this New England Fowler with the India-made micro-blunder-buss-crown feature.

LOL Thoughts!?

I think I see the problem......"India Made Gun"

Solution....use it for show and buy a decent gun to shoot.

As you can surmise, I am not a fan of India made guns. They may be okay for playing dress up or shooting blanks at a reenactment but on the range.....IMHO, they are junk.

I think I see the problem......"India Made Gun"

Not in my book!

I would never hand an untested an uninspected gun to a novice.
Despite any shortcomings of the gun itself it never should have found its way into service.

colorado clyde said:

I think I see the problem......"India Made Gun"

Not in my book!

I would never hand an untested an uninspected gun to a novice.
Despite any shortcomings of the gun itself it never should have found its way into service.

Click to expand...

Huh? 'rado, reading is fundamental -- for the last time, please take your time and read the posts fully and carefully before you comment on every-thing! The gun was tested and inspected, proofed and measured.

"The gun was tested and inspected, proofed and measured."

There is more to a gun being a quality piece of gear than simply passing these tests.

Having four India Made guns, none of which had the problem described, why don't you do the muzzle loading world and the better quality India makers a great service and state the name and date found on the barrel. Yes the maker's name and date of manufacturer are there under the stock. Every india gun I have has that information on them. It is a simple matter for this maker of low quality manure to be identified. (Or is this just another made up story about foreign guns.)

Well that's the whole point isn't it Bill. In fact, one of them was misleading. And then, after shifting blame failed, the issue was rather dismissed by the seller (and now a defensive India-made gun owner hoping to misdirect members).

Yes, it was a latent defect and speaks to the issue of poor quality which is why I shared as much as I am going to. No, Chicken Little didn't keep up with the story; the gun wasn't an imminent danger as operated and then managed by safe shooters (any more than any India-made gun may be vs. one of quality).

My reading is just fine...
I was referring to you......you should have shot it before you gave it to someone.....and blanks don't count.

The seller had proofed it but the kid said it wouldn't work so I set up the lock for him and test fired it with powder only -- ka-boom.

Click to expand...

I hadn't shot the gun myself

Click to expand...

Yes by the end of the day you had tested it.

My reading is just fine.
I'm sorry for your misfortune, but it could have been prevented.

P.S. I would have thought that you would have detected the muzzle flare when you cleaned the gun prior to shooting it......assuming you cleaned it.

Well it was very nice for Alden to have assisted him as he did. I think so anyway. As per usual no good deed went unpunished and Alden has lost a ramrod and now suffers further here. :surrender:

Clyde, you're making little sense and no point. WHAT could have been prevented?

My gun, my powder, my ball, which I seated, and I fired the gun. Again, WHAT "misfortune" "could have been prevented"? The gun has a flaired muzzle! What don't you get -- are you completely missing the point!? You might start with the title itself.

It may be lead in these forums but please try to follow the bouncing ball before you post; for God's sake already.

Oh, and, though I'm glad you found it comical, in the reenacting community public demonstrations are often referred to as "dog-n-pony shows."

No Arizona, better than that, I lent the gun to someone else because we had a day of scheduled shooting demos for the public and this kid jammed his Bess with the wrong ball right out of the gate and would have put the 18th C. out of action if I didn't come to his rescue.

what you wrote reads very differently than what your saying...

Did a dog-n-pony show recently. A kid with Brown Bess jammed a ball in it so hard it had to have the breech unscrewed and ball hammered out the next day. To keep the kid in action as well as the 18th C. represented (the show must go on) I lent him a fairly new India-made late doglock of that era I had with me from one of the US sellers. The seller had proofed it but the kid said it wouldn't work so I set up the lock for him and test fired it with powder only -- ka-boom.

I hadn't shot the gun myself but had ball for it with me I use dry in a .69 matchlock and .69 1704 English military gun. I pushed a less-than-.69 sprue-free ball flush into the bore horizontally, it fit well, and it rolled back out. The kid was good to go! But in his first demo he jammed the ball about 7" down the tube. What? kid?

An experienced coordinator on the spot trying to be helpful broke my ramrod trying to ram the ball home for the kid. I borrowed a 19th C. steel ramrod and we were able to pound the ball down with quite an effort including using its momentum like a pile driver at the breech of the much longer flintlock's tube. The kid was too scared to fire it so we did...

Click to expand...

I'm beginning to think the whole thing is a ruse..... a Monte Python skit. :youcrazy:

You've got a big nose tooo! :rotf: :rotf:

bicisdicus :blah:

So, no "misfortune" "could have been prevented" I guess...

colorado clyde said:

P.S. I would have thought that you would have detected the muzzle flare when you cleaned the gun prior to shooting it......assuming you cleaned it.

Click to expand...

Clyde, if you don't understand the differences between loading a gun to shoot and cleaning one please leave the forum to serious members.