Ferguson rifle

[Felix the Cat]

I have just been to Edinburgh Castle to have a look at their Ferguson. It is clearly a ten thread sporting one by Durs Egg.. photos attached..

I like the hatch and dot chequering...! What I am still curious about is a. Is the lock screwed directly to the barrel? and b. Is the touchhole angled to miss the breech screw..? Any ideas?

 

[Straekat]

Hi,
Bailey and other authors did not find any documentation on the lube but it apparently was considered important by Ferguson. Ernie Cowan, Bryan Brown, and Ricky Roberts suggest the lube was beeswax mixed with mutton tallow.
dave

Ernie died this past summer, and his workshop and related materials are currently being disposed of by his partner, Rick Keller. I visited Rick a month ago, and he's currently handling the estate for -another- long time friend and partner that died within a month of Ernie. It will be a little while before everything is liquidated, so if anyone wants information about any of Ernie and Rick's other past projects, do it soon.

Ernie was never one to shy away from defending his views, and had no doubts once he decided his view was the right one. When he was demonstrating the Ferguson, I asked him if he considered the quality of powder in the 18th century vs the stuff sold now, and whether military supplies available to British rifleman in the Americas (and on campaign) were dealing with lesser grade materials (compared to today), and how that might affect accuracy and loads (then versus now). I got a blank look, and no real answer. We can be relatively certain modern powders are relatively consistent and we can get consistent results, however, back then....powder could be less refined, and had to have some effect on use.

 

[dave_person]

Hi Straekat,
Actually, they had good consistent powder available, which is why Ferguson requested "superfine double strength" grade of powder for his rifles. Ernie Cowan wrote he though that a mix of modern 3f and 4f would be about the same. I believe the key to understanding the strengths and weaknesses of Ferguson rifles is to shoot a good copy or example of one. That eliminates a lot of the speculation about them.

dave

 

[dave_person]

I have just been to Edinburgh Castle to have a look at their Ferguson. It is clearly a ten thread sporting one by Durs Egg.. photos attached..
View attachment 1644 View attachment 1646

I like the hatch and dot chequering...! What I am still curious about is a. Is the lock screwed directly to the barrel? and b. Is the touchhole angled to miss the breech screw..? Any ideas?

Hi Felox,
I am sorry that I did not see your posts a while ago. First, you do not need the leather washer on the bottom. If you mount the breech such that bottom of it is just proud of the bottom of the stock, the trigger guard will not rub on the stock. There is no need for a washer to seal the threads at the bottom either. Any gas escape occurs out the top. The screw plug has a flat notch in it that is positioned in front of the vent hole when the breech is closed. It is designed to allow the hole to clear the plug but you may find that you still have to drill the vent hole angled forward a little. The lock is held in place by the screw behind the pan threaded into the breech and (on most Fergusons at least) a lug on the front of the lock plate that hooks into the head of the wood screw located in the lock mortice. I installed one of Jim Chambers "white lightning" vent liners on my Ferguson. I am sure some of the higher grade sporting Fergusons had vent liners but the ordnance versions did not. The liner is heavily coned on the inside, which speeds up ignition considerably. Without a liner, the Ferguson has a long vent hole channel and some of my friends shooting older Narragansett Arms Fergusons (which do not have liners) often talk about hang and slow fires. I never have that issue with mine.

dave

 

[Felix the Cat]

Hi Felox,
I am sorry that I did not see your posts a while ago. First, you do not need the leather washer on the bottom. If you mount the breech such that bottom of it is just proud of the bottom of the stock, the trigger guard will not rub on the stock. There is no need for a washer to seal the threads at the bottom either. Any gas escape occurs out the top. The screw plug has a flat notch in it that is positioned in front of the vent hole when the breech is closed. It is designed to allow the hole to clear the plug but you may find that you still have to drill the vent hole angled forward a little. The lock is held in place by the screw behind the pan threaded into the breech and (on most Fergusons at least) a lug on the front of the lock plate that hooks into the head of the wood screw located in the lock mortice. I installed one of Jim Chambers "white lightning" vent liners on my Ferguson. I am sure some of the higher grade sporting Fergusons had vent liners but the ordnance versions did not. The liner is heavily coned on the inside, which speeds up ignition considerably. Without a liner, the Ferguson has a long vent hole channel and some of my friends shooting older Narragansett Arms Fergusons (which do not have liners) often talk about hang and slow fires. I never have that issue with mine.

dave

Thanks Dave, very helpful!
Just to clarify, does the screw that goes through the lock plate behind the pan fence tap into the back of the barrel behind the breech screw or into the tang at the back of the breech plug? I have not yet inletted the barrel, and the TRS drawing shows no detail of the lock! When you say the "front of the lock plate" do you mean the muzzle end? I can't see any sign of a lug on the blank lock plate I have and I don't know which screw in the lock mortice you are referring to! A picture would be gratefully received..! I should probably have gone for a built lock, but there you go!

I had thought about putting in a vent liner for the reasons you describe. That said, the Egg carbine in Edinburgh Castle does not have one..! Did you angle the liner when you drilled it?

 

[dave_person]

Hi Felix,
I built my rifle from a plank of English walnut. I did use the plans supplied by TRS but I also was guided by the original ordnance rifle in the Morristown Historical Museum in New Jersey. In fact, I am reworking the stock a little after viewing the original gun up close and personal. Mostly, I am thinning the wood a little along the forestock. The lock bolt is threaded into the breech not into the bolster of the actual breech plug. Your lock position should be far enough forward to allow that. Don't be fooled into thinking that the back of the pan has to sit against that little shoulder of stock shown in the plans. There is quite a gap between that shoulder of wood and the back of the pan. That is how it is on the original ordnance guns as well. I did not angle the liner on my gun because the cone inside the liner is so large that it assures clearance in front of the screw plug. Attached are some photos of the gun I made before I started to rework it. They may help you.
dave

 

[Felix the Cat]

Dave, Thank you very much indeed for those photos, and for clarifying the lock screw issue.. You have made an excellent job of that rifle.. if I can achieve anything as good I will be well pleased.

I have had a look at Chambers web site.. did you use the 5/15" liner?

If you take any more photos of the Mk2 version, can you remember to do a couple of the inside of the lock.. I am still trying to get my head around what you said about a lug on the lock plate!

Yours Aye,

Felix

 

[dave_person]

Hi Felix,
You are very welcome and I am glad that I (on this side of the big pond) can help. I will post some photos very soon showing the same lock attachment on an English sporting rifle I am building for a client. My Ferguson is currently in pieces as I rework it and I don't have time right now to photograph it but the photos from the sporting rifle will make it clear. I apologize for my hubris presuming I can build a proper English rifle but I love British flintlock fowlers, rifles, and dueling pistols from the 18th and early 19th centuries very much and I try to live up to standards of the time. I attached photos of an English fowler I built based on 2 originals that I own. It is my favorite gun to shoot and shows that I do try to get it right.

dave

 

[Felix the Cat]

Hi Felix,
You are very welcome and I am glad that I (on this side of the big pond) can help. I will post some photos very soon showing the same lock attachment on an English sporting rifle I am building for a client. My Ferguson is currently in pieces as I rework it and I don't have time right now to photograph it but the photos from the sporting rifle will make it clear. I apologize for my hubris presuming I can build a proper English rifle but I love British flintlock fowlers, rifles, and dueling pistols from the 18th and early 19th centuries very much and I try to live up to standards of the time. I attached photos of an English fowler I built based on 2 originals that I own. It is my favorite gun to shoot and shows that I do try to get it right.

Dave, that is quite magnificent work! Well done.. As I said, if I can simply get the fit you have achieved on those guns, I will be very happy. As for the carving, engraving and inletting.. words fail me!

I have not managed to produce anything close to that.. the best gun that I have restored is a percussion fowler by Dickson of Edinburgh which was made for Charles Gordon in the 1880s It is very plain in comparison to yours..

 

[Straekat]

Hi Straekat,
Actually, they had good consistent powder available, which is why Ferguson requested "superfine double strength" grade of powder for his rifles. Ernie Cowan wrote he though that a mix of modern 3f and 4f would be about the same. I believe the key to understanding the strengths and weaknesses of Ferguson rifles is to shoot a good copy or example of one. That eliminates a lot of the speculation about them.

dave

That "mix" thing is the subject of another thread at this moment, and what happens when different grain sizes of powder are present. The larger and smaller grains will separate out if the mix is being carried and then used for loading, presumably from a flask or horn. Perhaps one way to be able to use a Fergie and the mix Ernie speculates on, would be to use ready to use cartridges so separation won't effect the load if everything in the mix goes down the barrel?

I agree with you about shooting and using an example to understand most, probably not all of the strengths and weaknesses. Modern metals and manufacturing methods are much better than what was available at the time. That subject is best handled in another thread.

When I asked Ernie the question (in person) I wanted to see if he'd considered the matter. That was because previously I'd owned something that I had tested for metal content, and knew the item was bronze gilt. Ernie insisted it was gold on the basis of it's color despite my having actual assay results. Once he made up his mind, that was it.

 

[Felix the Cat]

That "mix" thing is the subject of another thread at this moment, and what happens when different grain sizes of powder are present. The larger and smaller grains will separate out if the mix is being carried and then used for loading, presumably from a flask or horn. Perhaps one way to be able to use a Fergie and the mix Ernie speculates on, would be to use ready to use cartridges so separation won't effect the load if everything in the mix goes down the barrel?

I agree with you about shooting and using an example to understand most, probably not all of the strengths and weaknesses. Modern metals and manufacturing methods are much better than what was available at the time. That subject is best handled in another thread.

When I asked Ernie the question (in person) I wanted to see if he'd considered the matter. That was because previously I'd owned something that I had tested for metal content, and knew the item was bronze gilt. Ernie insisted it was gold on the basis of it's color despite my having actual assay results. Once he made up his mind, that was it.

The density of gold is significantly more than any of the bronzes.. easy to tell the difference - this was what Archimedes was trying to do in the bath in the first place!

I would not have thought that gunpowder of different grain sizes would separate out that much, again from the point of view that they are all the same density. there is a significant spread of grain size within a grade anyway which will depend on the competence of the miller and the state of the grading screens. Mixing adjacent grades would result in a pretty consistent outcome I would think..

 

[dave_person]

Hi Straekat,
I am a scientist and had a long career doing science and publishing over 55 papers and book chapters. I knew folks like Ernie Cowan and Richard Keller my entire career. They were smart and experienced but they could never recognize their own biases and flaws in reasoning because they never accepted peer review or constructive criticism. To them everybody who disagreed was wrong. They sometimes provided great insight but just as often offered red herrings. I admired them but never view them as definitive. They provided one perspective that should be considered and nothing more.

dave

 

[Herman Karl]

Amen!

I'm a retired scientist also with many peer-reviewed papers over four decades.

 

[Felix the Cat]

... and just to square the circle, I am a retired Army Ammunition Technical Officer! I have also published, but not much in open fora! I have had a lifetime interest in ammunition design, manufacture and use. I am particularly interested in early firearms development, associated engineering and materials science and the socio-technical-political aspects of military small arms development.

I find guns such as the Ferguson fascinating as it is one of the "could have beens" of firearms development. It illustrates many of the problems that always seem to hit military small arms development..

Achieving a break-in to established orthodoxy/technology.
Exploiting the technical advantages in tactics and strategy.
Coping with short and long term technical problems.
Managing the required changes to the infrastructure..
Avoiding attack from political jealousies.

You can see the same issues with the Martini-Henry, Lee Metford, Krag, Garand (M1 and M14), EM2 and the M16..!

Some of the developments were blind alleys, but I find the Ferguson was better than this. It truly was a quantum leap in capability, and although in need of more development, could and should have been better exploited. I tend to believe it was killed off by political jealousy, much like the EM2..!

 

[Herman Karl]

... and just to square the circle, I am a retired Army Ammunition Technical Officer! I have also published, but not much in open fora! I have had a lifetime interest in ammunition design, manufacture and use. I am particularly interested in early firearms development, associated engineering and materials science and the socio-technical-political aspects of military small arms development.

I find guns such as the Ferguson fascinating as it is one of the "could have beens" of firearms development. It illustrates many of the problems that always seem to hit military small arms development..

Achieving a break-in to established orthodoxy/technology.
Exploiting the technical advantages in tactics and strategy.
Coping with short and long term technical problems.
Managing the required changes to the infrastructure..
Avoiding attack from political jealousies.

You can see the same issues with the Martini-Henry, Lee Metford, Krag, Garand (M1 and M14), EM2 and the M16..!

Some of the developments were blind alleys, but I find the Ferguson was better than this. It truly was a quantum leap in capability, and although in need of more development, could and should have been better exploited. I tend to believe it was killed off by political jealousy, much like the EM2..!

Your comments are well taken. For clarification: A friend pointed me to this thread not because of the Ferguson rifle, but because of comments on mixed powder charges. I have recently completed an experiment that compares the strength of 18th century gunpowder to contemporary black powder (see, https://www.scribd.com/document/394...of-18th-Century-and-Contemporary-Black-Powder) and he thought it would be of interest to me. My comment on Dave’s post is with respect to using data to better inform discussions. As an example, a recent discussion on the Rev War reenactors Face Book page concluded the maximum safe charge for a blank load is 120 grains of black powder (they did not specify the granulation, but FFG is the usual used for blanks) and that anyone who would use more is irresponsible and dangerous (see, https://www.facebook.com/groups/217402738422205/scroll down to John Rees discussion July 13, 2018). Discussants offered opinions none, however, based on actual pressure data. The absence of data did not deter the group from arbitrarily reaching a consensus that 120 grains is the maximum safe blank black powder charge for a .69 to .75-caliber musket. I have searched diligently for pressure data for blank black powder loads, but have not been able to find any. So, I decided to collect some.(see, https://www.scribd.com/document/394...-charge-pressure-Are-double-charges-dangerous). Opinions are fine – we all hold them. Assertions and interpretations ought to be based on data. That’s what I identified with and responded to in the post.

 

[dave_person]

Hi Felix and Herman,
Your comments are music to my ears. I will add that unambiguous data and documentation often are missing with respect to history so there is room for speculation, but it must follow a logical and plausible chain of reasoning and be honest about the uncertainty. Felix, that is a very nice fowler. Thank you for sharing the photo. I too enjoy thinking about those technological details and how often most of the pieces come together at a time to revolutionize a technology, but a key piece remains unsolved causing the technological advancement to fail despite being brilliant. The Ferguson rifle is a good example. Patrick Ferguson actually copied earlier designs, made a few modifications and created a gun with potential. But he failed to appreciate how weak the gun stock would be under field conditions. If he made the breech and flintlock mechanism within an iron frame like the turn-off pistols of the time and like the screw plug pistols by La Chaumette and Clarkson, the Ferguson rifle might have been a success as a military weapon. Of course, it might also have been way too expensive to produce in quantity.

dave

 

[Felix the Cat]

Your comments are well taken. For clarification: A friend pointed me to this thread not because of the Ferguson rifle, but because of comments on mixed powder charges. I have recently completed an experiment that compares the strength of 18th century gunpowder to contemporary black powder (see, https://www.scribd.com/document/394...of-18th-Century-and-Contemporary-Black-Powder) and he thought it would be of interest to me. My comment on Dave’s post is with respect to using data to better inform discussions. As an example, a recent discussion on the Rev War reenactors Face Book page concluded the maximum safe charge for a blank load is 120 grains of black powder (they did not specify the granulation, but FFG is the usual used for blanks) and that anyone who would use more is irresponsible and dangerous (see, https://www.facebook.com/groups/217402738422205/scroll down to John Rees discussion July 13, 2018). Discussants offered opinions none, however, based on actual pressure data. The absence of data did not deter the group from arbitrarily reaching a consensus that 120 grains is the maximum safe blank black powder charge for a .69 to .75-caliber musket. I have searched diligently for pressure data for blank black powder loads, but have not been able to find any. So, I decided to collect some.(see, https://www.scribd.com/document/394...-charge-pressure-Are-double-charges-dangerous). Opinions are fine – we all hold them. Assertions and interpretations ought to be based on data. That’s what I identified with and responded to in the post.

Those are interesting articles..
I would concur with your views regarding blanks. Designing blanks is a bit of black (sorry!) art. GP blank seems only to need enough wadding to keep the charge in the breech area. Nitro blanks need significantly more wadding/crimping to get the burn rate up. One interesting effect you can get with muzzle loading blanks is when loose powder is loaded into an oily barrel and coats the bore. The effect is akin to quickmatch and seems to generate a significant shock wave.. nothing like detonation, but seems much more energetic than a normal discharge. I suspect that more oxygen from the air is involved and creates a more efficient burn. But interesting numbers in your paper!

Have you ever tried the gapped charge experiment with copper tubing? You can use copper tubing as an analogue to demonstrate the effect of air gaps in a BP charge at relatively low pressures. You MUST fire them remotely, but you can get some lovely ringed barrels!

Gunpowder is seriously odd stuff! 19th C documents from the Royal Gunpowder Factory at Waltham Abbey seem to indicate that it is the charcoal that is the major performance factor. All British musket powder was made from Alder Buckthorn (Frangula alnus) charcoal. I think this is what they use in Aubonne for making Swiss powder, which I think is the closest to 18th C powder..

...but yes! I have fought "old wives tales" all my working life! Ammunition science is seriously non intuitive and it is far too easy to get the wrong end of the stick! I had an interesting discussion on the Damascus thread a week or so ago...!

 

[Herman Karl]

Thanks for reading the articles. I grew up on the “damascus barrel myth.” Here’s my essay on it: https://www.scribd.com/document/333570380/Damascus-Barrel-Myth. My favorite upland shotguns were made in the 19th century and all have damascus barrels in excellent condition made by the best makers (Joe Manton, Thomas Boss, Westley Richards, Purdey).

Here’s another essay on forging a barrel: https://www.scribd.com/document/333570624/How-a-Gun-Barrel-Was-Made. An ambition some day is to forge and rifle a muzzle loading barrel with a couple of my buddies. Maybe someday....

Sherman Bell had a very interesting series of articles, “Finding Out for Myself,” in the Double Gun Journal. In one article he wrote, “To paraphrase a popular slang expression: Facts talk: opinions walk. In my dictionary the definition of ‘opinion’ is as follows: Belief stronger than impression and less strong that positive knowledge. We have already seen that some strongly held opinions about guns and shooting are notbased on positive knowledge. One domain that generates more than its share of opinion, is the study of internal ballistics.”

Thanks for the information on the blanks and charcoal. I don't think I'll attempt the gapped charge experiment! I wish more discussions were so data based and well researched. Because many are not, I rarely contribute to forum discussions. Sometimes though I can’t help myself.

You should write some articles and publish them on scribd.com and some of the popular magazines. Of course, many of the popular mags aren't to0 interested in seriously technical articles. The more data available the better.

Now that I know you are out there don’t be surprised if I consult you upon occasion. Have you checked out the thread on the discussion positing that greater velocity is produced from a smooth barrel than a rifled barrel? One assertion is that the spin causes greater drag. Perhaps you can interject some factual information?

I really need to do more shooting and less experimenting!

 

[Herman Karl]

One more thought -- it's most important to know what you don't know and to be humble in what you do know.

 

[Felix the Cat]

One more thought -- it's most important to know what you don't know and to be humble in what you do know.

Amen to that!