For anyone considering an Indian manufactured Flintlock

[sturmkatze]

What is the risk of burst on any reproduction gun? I was told blanks can spike if not rammed properly.
Do these makers proof?

They don’t let you even use a ram rod in the US. What happens is the powder builds up and then a mass of it might touch off.

 

[Indy Durtdigger]

 

[wiscoaster]

.....
Do these makers proof?

Only random sample barrels are proofed by and at the Indian manufacturer. Individual firearms are expected to be proofed by the purchasing end user, if they choose to do so. Loyalist Arms gave me detailed instructions for proofing my Sea Service pistol barrel, and supplied a fuse to do it with. But I elected to skip proofing, relying on the fact that I'll never, ever load that gun with the charge needed to proof it anyway.

 

[tenngun]

All hand made anything is not going to be perfect, that’s a given. At what point did barrels start to be bored from a solid? It was a long number of years before the US had the technology to stop forming wrought iron around a mandrel. Even the highly advanced French gunmakers had problems holding anything under .040” tolerances on gun barrels. So comparing 260 year old tech against correct DOM metal tube practice is silly.

I do not disagree with the part about being a farb at some point. But to knowingly linger at that part is a failure to do your best. I will always look in pity at those who purposely stagnate themselves.

So you can’t play until your 100% correct
What bull!
I’ve been doing this for almost fifty years, each year I’m a little better.
I recall things we all thought was correct in the 1970s and 80s that are snickered at now.
My SMR has a German style lock, I thought that proper when I built it, research in the before computer was what you could find in buckskin report and local library
So, I should be looked down on when I’m doing early nineteenth century stuff because the locks incorrect
No one with an Indian or a perdisoli is ‘lingering in failure or stagnated
We’re all doing our best, or we’re doing what makes us happy
Your snobbery is disquieting and does little to expand our hobby

 

[Tumbledown]

What is the risk of burst on any reproduction gun? I was told blanks can spike if not rammed properly.
Do these makers proof?

It's a blank. There's nothing to obstruct the barrel, and nothing to cause a spike. Yes, there's the paper from the cartridge *if* that's rammed down, but that is not going to offer any resistance.

 

[Tumbledown]

But I elected to skip proofing, relying on the fact that I'll never, ever load that gun with the charge needed to proof it anyway.

Your logic is flawed. Proofing is to ensure it is safe at a *normal* charge. If the barrel can withstand a double load, it is safe at normal levels. You're assuming it's safe from the start.

 

[wiscoaster]

Your logic is flawed ...... You're assuming it's safe from the start.

I'm assuming there are no manufacturing defects. I'm assuming proofing the sample barrels validates the manufacturing process, a process which does not produce inherently flawed barrels. That's my logic and there's no flaw in my logic I use to choose to not proof my barrel. The only possible flaw in the outcome is not in not assuring the barrel is safe to shoot because I've proofed it myself, but rather it's in trusting the manufacturer to not produce a flawed barrel. There is a small but not zero probability my decision logic leads to a bad experience with a defective barrel. But, frankly, I think the probability is so small that it can be ignored; at least I'm willing to do so given the constraints I operate within. And I recommend anyone else make their own decision whether to proof or not to proof. I'm not advocating one way or the other.

As a former professional pilot, I have quite a bit of experience dealing with weighing the probabilities of undesirable outcomes vs. the desired outcome and deciding on a course of action that produces the desired outcome when eliminating all protential undesirable outcomes could only be done by not achieving the desired outcome at all.

No one is or can ever be perfectly safe at all times and in all circumstances.

 

[Clark Badgett]

So you can’t play until your 100% correct
What bull!
I’ve been doing this for almost fifty years, each year I’m a little better.
I recall things we all thought was correct in the 1970s and 80s that are snickered at now.
My SMR has a German style lock, I thought that proper when I built it, research in the before computer was what you could find in buckskin report and local library
So, I should be looked down on when I’m doing early nineteenth century stuff because the locks incorrect
No one with an Indian or a perdisoli is ‘lingering in failure or stagnated
We’re all doing our best, or we’re doing what makes us happy
Your snobbery is disquieting and does little to expand our hobby

Where did I say anything resembling your first assumption? 50years and your musket still isn’t correct? My musket was correct the first year, my uniform the second, my gear the 3rd. And I AM NOT INVOLVED IN YOUR HOBBY. The maximum effective range of an excuse is zero meters.

 

[bpd303]

I think this thread has run it's course and devolved into petty bickering and we haven't even touched on the Japan replicas. I have a brace of 1777 Sea Service Tower flintlock pistols that will hold their own against any original, made by Miroku in Japan. I know, I know the subject is India made guns, just tired of hearing the over and over remarks... see ya.

 

[tenngun]

Where did I say anything resembling your first assumption? 50years and your musket still isn’t correct? My musket was correct the first year, my uniform the second, my gear the 3rd. And I AM NOT INVOLVED IN YOUR HOBBY. The maximum effective range of an excuse is zero meters.

Well ain’t you special

 

[sturmkatze]

Where did I say anything resembling your first assumption? 50years and your musket still isn’t correct? My musket was correct the first year, my uniform the second, my gear the 3rd. And I AM NOT INVOLVED IN YOUR HOBBY. The maximum effective range of an excuse is zero meters.

You seem to be involved. As long as one tries to improve at every event, one is not a farb.

 

[tenngun]

I'm assuming there are no manufacturing defects. I'm assuming proofing the sample barrels validates the manufacturing process, a process which does not produce inherently flawed barrels. That's my logic and there's no flaw in my logic I use to choose to not proof my barrel. The only possible flaw in the outcome is not in not assuring the barrel is safe to shoot because I've proofed it myself, but rather it's in trusting the manufacturer to not produce a flawed barrel. There is a small but not zero probability my decision logic leads to a bad experience with a defective barrel. But, frankly, I think the probability is so small that it can be ignored; at least I'm willing to do so given the constraints I operate within. And I recommend anyone else make their own decision whether to proof or not to proof. I'm not advocating one way or the other.

As a former professional pilot, I have quite a bit of experience dealing with weighing the probabilities of undesirable outcomes vs. the desired outcome and deciding on a course of action that produces the desired outcome when eliminating all protential undesirable outcomes could only be done by not achieving the desired outcome at all.

No one is or can ever be perfectly safe at all times and in all circumstances.

I’ve had Green River Green Mountian, CVA, TC, track of wolf house brand, sitting Fox house brand navy arms and Indian made. And never ‘proofed’ a barrel
I have shot pvc pipe and it stood rifle charges of 70 grains before it failed after three shots.

 

[tenngun]

Not trying to speak for someone else but the point he was making that if he doesn’t know he asks, he doesn’t just throw conjecture and assumptions out there like …. A regular person coudln't pick out an original Bess from a line up of 10 Indian repro’s.

Not what I said, an Indian and an Italian put in with ten ordinals and photographed in black and white so one couldn’t see age well, 90% wouldn’t be able to pick the out of place guns

 

[Mle1822]

What is the risk of burst on any reproduction gun? I was told blanks can spike if not rammed properly.
Do these makers proof?

All Italian made firearms are proofed for live fire by the manufacturer of the barrels. I believe some of the barrels are made by Beretta along with all the revolvers, lever-actions, sharps, hawkens and whatnot so thats a standard procedure. The PN marking on the barrel indicates the proofing for Black Powder. Indian products arent firearms so they are not proofed. Some importers to EU have converted them to firearms and have proofed them, which is not a cheap process. And yes I know one occasion where the Indian made barrel bursted during proofing. Also a sidenote, over here in the EU, if your barrel is not proofed and You use it to shoot, your looking at some troubble with the law, after all its not just about You, but also about people AROUND You.

 

[sussexmuzllodr]

Some of the more interesting pieces on here have been those rifles that are "franken" Guns.
While not P/C H/C they are well put together and function as intended.
After all it,s about getting out and shooting is it not?

Just my opinion.

 

[FlinterNick]

Only random sample barrels are proofed by and at the Indian manufacturer. Individual firearms are expected to be proofed by the purchasing end user, if they choose to do so. Loyalist Arms gave me detailed instructions for proofing my Sea Service pistol barrel, and supplied a fuse to do it with. But I elected to skip proofing, relying on the fact that I'll never, ever load that gun with the charge needed to proof it anyway.

A random sample of barrels are proofed by Indian manufactures ? How’s that possible they don’t even vent their guns,

If they proof any barrels in Indian they can’t leave India because of their laws, so that would mean 100% of their exports are not proofed, there is no random sample… furthermore what value would a random sample prove legally ?

I can’t wait to hear this.

 

[FlinterNick]

Your logic is flawed. Proofing is to ensure it is safe at a *normal* charge. If the barrel can withstand a double load, it is safe at normal levels. You're assuming it's safe from the start.

You’re quoting someone on logic, yet you feel it’s logical to proof your own barrel in a country where there are no proof laws or even any recognized proofing standards.

By all means tell people you proof your own barrels, you’re now 100% legally liable for that barrel no matter how many times it’s sold and or traded… hope. You have insurance.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

What is the risk of burst on any reproduction gun? I was told blanks can spike if not rammed properly.
Do these makers proof?

You cannot know, because the dirty little secret is that "Proof" means the barrel met the standard (and ALL proofing houses set their own Black Powder standard. The test is only at a universal pressure for modern cartridges), when it left the proofing house. IF the barrel is not properly cared for, it can develop a fatal flaw and still burst, even if properly loaded because it has been weakened over years of abuse. There is no proofing house in The United States, either.

Blanks without a wad generate very little pressure, all other things being equal. A properly cleaned rifle or musket and a blank has no barrel failure risk.

LD