Experimental Muzzle-loading Percussion Rifle??

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Looks similar to the rifle CVA called the Blazer. Might have been their inspiration for the design. During the transition from traditional side lock guns to eventually cartridge breech loaders there were thousands of strange and even bizarre "experimental" models. An acquaintance has a very strange gun that loads a paper cartridge from the underside of the barrel and a plunger pushed the paper cartridge forward into position next to the percussion nipple and sealed the bore.. I'm guessing that was too keep escaping gas out of the shooter's eyes.
 
It certainly gives credit to the early foundation of an inline rifle??!! Or should I say an unmentionable.

No, it really doesn't.
"Inline" designs were nothing new ( think of the Hall rifle). It's also worth noting that this design never caught on, never became successful. That should say something. All inline designs failed to gain popularity until the metallic cartridge was introduced. The one exception would be the revolver and it was quickly converted.
 
Very interesting. Would most certainly be a faster ignition time than conventional drums/snails. I wonder if the hammer was an issue with sighting?

Maybe a bit faster. In my experience side drums with tiny flame passages are the worst both in speed and reliability. Under-hammer, side hammers, and revolvers are the fastest and most reliable. Having the bottom of the nipple resting on the main charge is definitely the best possible situation.
 
I don't want to be the guy who experiences a catastrophic failure with an inline nippled gun like the one above. Side and under hammers deflect the failure away from the shooter.
I suspect this is one reason why the design never caught on.
 
That experimental gun is similar to the H&R Huntsman. It was based on the H&R break open shotgun with the nipple in the breech plug. It was loaded from the muzzle. There were issues with blow back and the gun isn't seen much any more.
 
Carbon, can you point to any particular instance of a catastrophic failure of one of these style inlines?
 
Carbon, can you point to any particular instance of a catastrophic failure of one of these style inlines?

No, I can't off the top of my head. Is an actual instance necessary for you to realize the potential hazard ?
Let's face it, these were shoddy desperate war time conversions.
I've have seen nipples blown out on percussion guns, and I did have a breech explosion on a modern inline, and I've seen all kinds of catastrophic failures on modern guns.
But, as far as seeing a catastrophic failure on 150+ year old gun of that few were made and less than a hand full remain today goes, Nope! I can't say that I have.
 
No, I can't off the top of my head. Is an actual instance necessary for you to realize the potential hazard ?
Let's face it, these were shoddy desperate war time conversions.
I've have seen nipples blown out on percussion guns, and I did have a breech explosion on a modern inline, and I've seen all kinds of catastrophic failures on modern guns.
But, as far as seeing a catastrophic failure on 150+ year old gun of that few were made and less than a hand full remain today goes, Nope! I can't say that I have.

I really dont think the rifle the OP was about was a conversion, let alone shoddy. And as to your snide remark about having to see something happen before realizing danger, well what are you doing in the shooting sports at all, as there’s obviously danger to you. You said you have had breeches blow out while shooting.
 
I don't know if there were catastrophic failures of the H&R Huntsman, but there were breech plug failures.

The H&R Huntsman 58 caliber version had an issue with O-ring blow out at the breech plug. The Huntsman is a modern firearm and I only mention it here to compare with the unique historical firearm. Perhaps there may be more input on our sister site?
 
I really dont think the rifle the OP was about was a conversion, let alone shoddy. And as to your snide remark about having to see something happen before realizing danger, well what are you doing in the shooting sports at all, as there’s obviously danger to you. You said you have had breeches blow out while shooting.

Paraphrase all you want, it doesn't change the substance of point.
Now ask yourself, "what are we really arguing about" ? :dunno:
 
Im not arguing with you at all. More like I really am tired of the ‘safety cop’ bs everywhere you look.
I certainly realize there can be failures with anything period, but that doesn’t stop my using them. Nor do I point out or dwell on what might happen. If I did, Id never get anything done.
 
Many, many gun designs have been abandoned because of their inherent failures.
I simply posed it as a possibility.
 
I don't know if there were catastrophic failures of the H&R Huntsman, but there were breech plug failures.

The H&R Huntsman 58 caliber version had an issue with O-ring blow out at the breech plug. The Huntsman is a modern firearm and I only mention it here to compare with the unique historical firearm. Perhaps there may be more input on our sister site?

There were 2 Huntsmans, one with a threaded breech plug and one with the plug pressed in and sealed with 0-rings. There was a fatality with the 0-ring version where the shooter had a hangfire and opened the gun. It went off and the plug struck his forehead.
 
As far as I'm concerned, the H&R Huntsman is a modern cartridge gun that has been modified to become a muzzle loading gun.

As such, it is a modern in-line and the forum rules say we don't talk about it.

Further discussion of this type of gun will cause me to close this topic.
 
Many, many gun designs have been abandoned because of their inherent failures.
I simply posed it as a possibility.
It does look like a possibility. Probably because it’s impossible to see the safety mechanism which was designed to prevent hammer blowback. If that’s stout enough and the cup on the face of the hammer completely encases the nipple it looks like a minor concern. Whatever, the gun likely came along too late to have a chance at viability. Things changed pretty quickly once percussion caps came on the scene. I no longer use my old 8-track tapes either.
 
I see little or no special danger that did not exist with civil war Enfields and Springfields. If the nipple cut loose on firing, it was pointed at the shooter's head. For many guns proposed and tested for military use, personal favoritism and or bribery played a big part in which designs were adopted by committees for military use. Some because of the rough treatment by soldiers, or the crude ability of the average soldier to even strip and clean the arm.
 
Bayonet lug near the muzzle. I’d say it’s likelt it was an attempt at a military contract.
 
Hi,
It certainly gives credit to the early foundation of an inline rifle??!! Or should I say an unmentionable.
Unfortunately, the vast majority of the ignition systems are not so similar to the rifle that is the subject of this thread, otherwise there would likely be less negative feelings for them. BUT since the muzzle loading rifles that are not discussed here are based on modern bolt action designs, which are re-engineered to fit a legal definition, they would still be Subjecta non grata. Unless one was comparing the Thompson Center Scout to the rifle of this thread...
THOMPSON CENTER SCOUT.JPG


The Scout is the "exception that proves the rule" (imho). 😌

LD
 
Zimmer-- I have a .452" Cooper & Goodman which also loads with a paper case. This one from the top and a plunger to push the case forward under the flash hole from the nipple on top of the barrel. It is set up as a Long Range Match and shoots O.K. out to 1000. Unusual Ratchet rifling. There was a 577 Enfield with a bayonet lug right at the muzzle. It was attached to the outer Barrel band. 3 grove and 5 grove. Very sought after. OLD DOG.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top