Indian Muskets

[Mac79]

Maybe I could make enough selling " de-farbed" hand mirrors to reenactors to quit plumbing...

 

[Dphar1950]

Recently just read a forum post here and tons of people are trashing on Indian guns.

Personally, l don’t understand lt. Their ls no way muskets that were hand made 250 years ago are “better” or higher quality than Indian reproductions today. l got a Brown Bess from VeteranArms and lt ls awesome. Does everything l need lt to do. For anyone out their contemplating lt, don’t spend over a thousand dollars on a reproduction musket. You don’t need lt. l can not say anything about Indian manufactures other than VeteranArms because they’re the only ones lve used. But VA muskets are great.

My rant has ended.

Well you have people that were making the best thing they could for military service. And please note the IRON used at the time, if good quality, for the purpose was almost surely superior to what ever is being used in India. Note that all the Rifle Muskets used made in the US for the Civil War had iron barrels. Steel was not all that reliable at the time. AND the Muskets were inspected, the barrels proved and inspected> Note that the English proof was pretty rigorous compared to most if not all of Europe. Now lets compare a gun that was made to be a cheap non-firing wall hanger. I doubt there is much for inspection, no proof since if they were they would have PROOF MARKS. Now think about it. Does this help?

 

[Rudyard]

So your an expert on the steel industry and capacity of manufacturing in India ? As well as the state of the art in the mid 19c America. As one correspondent states they routinely pass Birmingham proof .despite coming in as wall hanger, prop status . Doe s this help?. Well not really . I've been involved with them at both ends well all three ends never had one go at Proof if you don't like them don't buy one plenty Do like them .Its the buyers choice . Rudyard

 

[tenngun]

Just a thought. India was working iron before Europeans, making steel likewise mush easier. They were suppling rifles to Afghanistan before rifles were popular in England.
Although primitive they have long experience in metallurgy.

 

[KingOfTheRats]

Well you have people that were making the best thing they could for military service. And please note the IRON used at the time, if good quality, for the purpose was almost surely superior to what ever is being used in India. Note that all the Rifle Muskets used made in the US for the Civil War had iron barrels. Steel was not all that reliable at the time. AND the Muskets were inspected, the barrels proved and inspected> Note that the English proof was pretty rigorous compared to most if not all of Europe. Now lets compare a gun that was made to be a cheap non-firing wall hanger. I doubt there is much for inspection, no proof since if they were they would have PROOF MARKS. Now think about it. Does this help?

The worst steel of today is better than the best iron of yesterday.

 

[Rudyard]

Well when the newly made Mk 3 Sniders with thier steel barrels were found to give poorer accuracy than the wrought iron barrels formally used . Not that Govt changed . But civilian riflemen Volunteers in some cases had new Iron barrels fitted for better accuracy . People persist in thinking steel must some how be best but give me twist or Damascus barrels any day .An observation that will doubtless bring out a hoard of FMEs But I care not. Rudyard

 

[RAEDWALD]

Well when the newly made Mk 3 Sniders with thier steel barrels were found to give poorer accuracy than the wrought iron barrels formally used . Not that Govt changed . But civilian riflemen Volunteers in some cases had new Iron barrels fitted for better accuracy . People persist in thinking steel must some how be best but give me twist or Damascus barrels any day .An observation that will doubtless bring out a hoard of FMEs But I care not. Rudyard

Was this not an issue with barrel harmonics? Crudely the steel was more springy and the iron soft and 'dead'?

 

[springfield art]

No certified organization was necessary. Photos of barrels split open and the witnesses description are enough to "verify" that it happened.

OK, yes. I just wonder how they were maintained? The pictures do present a shocking and dangerous scenario. Also, toward the next guy in ranks! Many must wonder about the cleaning regimen, if any, practiced by the owners. Good that this info is posted, just to help people make decisions. Thanks.

 

[springfield art]

Was this not an issue with barrel harmonics? Crudely the steel was more springy and the iron soft and 'dead'?

Alas! Anyone with the time-honored name of Rudyard is not likely to be swayed in his opinions by those of us present in the 21st Century! Best of luck!

 

[springfield art]

Indian muskets priced themselves out of the market.......$700 for an Indian 1842 Springfield ?? Just get a Chiappa , at least you know it has spare parts support.

I noticed the prices, too. One would wonder, it must be a major state secret, what the WHOLESALE price is on these. But that shall remain a mystery to all but the most sworn denizens of the Inner Sanctum!

 

[Rudyard]

Springfield When you've shot & made muzzle loaders since 1960 you do form opinions based on experience and tastes . You are entitled to your views as I am to mine . Kind regards Rudyard
Barrel Harmonics yes Ide go with that as a likely cause . Always listen to Reawalde, He knows his Onions . R

 

[Dphar1950]

The worst steel of today is better than the best iron of yesterday.

You REALLY need to do more research. Like I said the barrels of the US Rifle Muskets were "best iron" skelp welded (forge welded into a tube) and rolled to contour and length after welding. When finished they were then proved with 200 gr of musket powder and a 500 gr minie spaced 2" off the powder. In the 1960s or perhaps before its been perhaps 50 years since I read it, some moderns tried blowing one up. They could not with any charge/loading of BP including filling the barrel completely. But of course you knew all that, right? And of course you read all the barrel steel articles in the old Buckskin Report. 2 of which were written by a metallurgist who shoots MLs and made a career of failure analysis. Then the comments made to a friend of mine by a major maker of premium rifle barrels for brass suppository guns who told him he would rather shoot an iron barrel than one made of the leaded screw stock used by most makers of "custom" ML barrels in the US. I have no idea what is used in the indian guns but what they are made off can be offset by the form it is made into. I have read that they used seamless tubing. A no-no as is cold rolled steel since it can fail are far lower pressure than its "tensile" since it has very poor shock resistance, "Free machining" steels are bad due to cold rolling (it makes them machine easier and allows higher speeds) all the inclusions they contain for the lubricating metal added. Usually lead, phosphorus etc. But of course you surely know all this right? THEN of course you remember the American made "Hawkens" that had barrel failures in the first years of production. John Baird (Buckskin Report) got several a year until they apparently stopped using low grade steel. The only thing that saved them in one case was a dump attorney representing the victim. The Italians who PROOF the guns use a quality European grade gun barrel steel. According to the metallurgist... No I did not just fall off a turnip truck and shoot off my mouth. Newer is NOT always "better". I can also furnish documentation in the form of a copy of a letter from LaSalle Steel stating the cold rolled steels are not suitable for gun barrels regardless of alloy.

 

[FlinterNick]

Springfield When you've shot & made muzzle loaders since 1960 you do form opinions based on experience and tastes . You are entitled to your views as I am to mine . Kind regards Rudyard
Barrel Harmonics yes Ide go with that as a likely cause . Always listen to Reawalde, He knows his Onions . R

Same here Rubyyard. I’ve seen some high quality made guns by John Bosh, and even some made by beginner kit makers that are much higher quality than Indian made guns.

What I never understoood is that someone will spend say $600-700 for an Indian made musket, and then have it altered for another 200-400. At the end of the day they’ve spent just as much for a say a Track of the Wolf Brown Bess or Pedersoli Brown Bess... and were convinced that cheaper was the better option.

 

[FlinterNick]

You REALLY need to do more research. Like I said the barrels of the US Rifle Muskets were "best iron" skelp welded (forge welded into a tube) and rolled to contour and length after welding. When finished they were then proved with 200 gr of musket powder and a 500 gr minie spaced 2" off the powder. In the 1960s or perhaps before its been perhaps 50 years since I read it, some moderns tried blowing one up. They could not with any charge/loading of BP including filling the barrel completely. But of course you knew all that, right? And of course you read all the barrel steel articles in the old Buckskin Report. 2 of which were written by a metallurgist who shoots MLs and made a career of failure analysis. Then the comments made to a friend of mine by a major maker of premium rifle barrels for brass suppository guns who told him he would rather shoot an iron barrel than one made of the leaded screw stock used by most makers of "custom" ML barrels in the US. I have no idea what is used in the indian guns but what they are made off can be offset by the form it is made into. I have read that they used seamless tubing. A no-no as is cold rolled steel since it can fail are far lower pressure than its "tensile" since it has very poor shock resistance, "Free machining" steels are bad due to cold rolling (it makes them machine easier and allows higher speeds) all the inclusions they contain for the lubricating metal added. Usually lead, phosphorus etc. But of course you surely know all this right? THEN of course you remember the American made "Hawkens" that had barrel failures in the first years of production. John Baird (Buckskin Report) got several a year until they apparently stopped using low grade steel. The only thing that saved them in one case was a dump attorney representing the victim. The Italians who PROOF the guns use a quality European grade gun barrel steel. According to the metallurgist... No I did not just fall off a turnip truck and shoot off my mouth. Newer is NOT always "better". I can also furnish documentation in the form of a copy of a letter from LaSalle Steel stating the cold rolled steels are not suitable for gun barrels regardless of alloy.

if you’re inferring that Indian made guns are made by the same standards of an 18th century Springfield gun shop or Tower Gun shop I think you’re very misguided.

While 18th century guns were made of welded steel tubes, the process for which they were made was much more qualifying for military standard arms ... Indian made guns are replicas.... original Springfields were made according to military specifications and were made under extreme care and caution and due diligence.. which meant they were given contracts for the highest quality and durability and safety, if they made replica like Indian made muskets they would have lost their contracts. Indian made guns do not follow any set of standards, they’re simply made to look authentic.... anything in regards to the guns shooting quality are not regarded.

Now there are some gun shops in the USA and Canada that distribute Indian made guns and sell them with a quality guarantee, however this still does not mitigate the basically qualities of the guns, such as the steel used for the barrels, Locks and funtirue and quality of the wood grades.

You get what you pay for, bottom line.

 

[zimmerstutzen]

It got me a new barrel assembly. And, yer complaint with TC is???????????

you are joking right. They disavowed all warranties for side lock guns 3 or 4 years ago. You life time warranty isn't worth the paper it is printed on. They refused warranty claims on the Patriot pistol almost 30 years ago already. My spring broke. They wouldn't do ****. I sued them under the state's consumer law and won.

 

[Dphar1950]

if you’re inferring that Indian made guns are made by the same standards of an 18th century Springfield gun shop or Tower Gun shop I think you’re very misguided.

While 18th century guns were made of welded steel tubes, the process for which they were made was much more qualifying for military standard arms ... Indian made guns are replicas.... original Springfields were made according to military specifications and were made under extreme care and caution and due diligence.. which meant they were given contracts for the highest quality and durability and safety, if they made replica like Indian made muskets they would have lost their contracts. Indian made guns do not follow any set of standards, they’re simply made to look authentic.... anything in regards to the guns shooting quality are not regarded.

Now there are some gun shops in the USA and Canada that distribute Indian made guns and sell them with a quality guarantee, however this still does not mitigate the basically qualities of the guns, such as the steel used for the barrels, Locks and funtirue and quality of the wood grades.

You get what you pay for, bottom line.

if you’re inferring that Indian made guns are made by the same standards of an 18th century Springfield gun shop or Tower Gun shop I think you’re very misguided.

While 18th century guns were made of welded steel tubes, the process for which they were made was much more qualifying for military standard arms ... Indian made guns are replicas.... original Springfields were made according to military specifications and were made under extreme care and caution and due diligence.. which meant they were given contracts for the highest quality and durability and safety, if they made replica like Indian made muskets they would have lost their contracts. Indian made guns do not follow any set of standards, they’re simply made to look authentic.... anything in regards to the guns shooting quality are not regarded.

Now there are some gun shops in the USA and Canada that distribute Indian made guns and sell them with a quality guarantee, however this still does not mitigate the basically qualities of the guns, such as the steel used for the barrels, Locks and funtirue and quality of the wood grades.

You get what you pay for, bottom line.

If you are addressing me with the "same standards" thing you need to read my previous post. In the 18th c other than Damascus were not welded steel, they were iron. And Springfield was not making muskets in the 18th c.

 

[Stantheman86]

My short opinion , I tried an Indian P53 Enfield, it's a good range shooter, relatively cheap to shoot and punches paper or bowling pins out to 50 yards.

I am in no hurry to try any more. I'm trying to move "up" on the workmanship ladder and get something semi-custom.

 

[Dphar1950]

if you’re inferring that Indian made guns are made by the same standards of an 18th century Springfield gun shop or Tower Gun shop I think you’re very misguided.

While 18th century guns were made of welded steel tubes, the process for which they were made was much more qualifying for military standard arms ... Indian made guns are replicas.... original Springfields were made according to military specifications and were made under extreme care and caution and due diligence.. which meant they were given contracts for the highest quality and durability and safety, if they made replica like Indian made muskets they would have lost their contracts. Indian made guns do not follow any set of standards, they’re simply made to look authentic.... anything in regards to the guns shooting quality are not regarded.

Now there are some gun shops in the USA and Canada that distribute Indian made guns and sell them with a quality guarantee, however this still does not mitigate the basically qualities of the guns, such as the steel used for the barrels, Locks and funtirue and quality of the wood grades.

You get what you pay for, bottom line.

I KNOW they are not made to any standard and are made without vents to avoid having the barrels proved.
You are correct, cheap guns are never a bargain. There is invariably short cuts be it a ML or a current production unmentionable.
The guarantee will (may) be honored right up to the time the barrel fails then it will be "a loading error". Since all ML arms are "handloaded" the "handloader" defense is always there and its used successfully and the people selling this stuff know this. Since barrel failure are rare, especially in the larger bores where the pressures are lower they can show their barrels don't fail by proving one. If it happens to be one with no serious flaws it will likely stand very serious overloads. Then the jury will side with them. You simply cannot prove it was properly loaded. There was a case where a chemical test proved the load used contained smokeless. A friend of mine knowledgeable in such things recreated the test sometime later (it took time for the story to filter out to the general public) and powder from a brand new can of Moosic GOEX bought for the test also showed smokeless. But a barrel made of GB quality 4150 or similar will not fail with BP no matter how is loaded. It might bulge from a short started ball but thats as bad as its going to get. It simply will not fail in a brittle manner with BP since BP cannot produce a burn rate high enough to produce a brittle failure in a hot rolled GB quality steel barrel of an alloy such as the military uses for small arms barrels, 4150/41v50 or even 1137 as Green Mountain uses for ML barrels. While not 4140/4150 it will stand pressures of 50K psi (Hp White Labs did the testing but not with BP and it was not a ML) with no issue. 45 caliber 1" across the flats. Remember Douglas used to make ML barrels from cold rolled leaded screw stock and had some failures in the late 1960s or early 70s and eventually stopped making ML barrels all together as a result. I saw one Douglas with a split up the top flat from the face of the breech to the rear sight dovetail in a friends shop in 1969. No bulge it just split, brittle fracture. Roy Keelor described one failure in Muzzle Blasts and even though he was a supplier of ML parts Douglas would no longer sell him barrels.

 

[FlinterNick]

I KNOW they are not made to any standard and are made without vents to avoid having the barrels proved.
You are correct, cheap guns are never a bargain. There is invariably short cuts be it a ML or a current production unmentionable.
The guarantee will (may) be honored right up to the time the barrel fails then it will be "a loading error". Since all ML arms are "handloaded" the "handloader" defense is always there and its used successfully and the people selling this stuff know this. Since barrel failure are rare, especially in the larger bores where the pressures are lower they can show their barrels don't fail by proving one. If it happens to be one with no serious flaws it will likely stand very serious overloads. Then the jury will side with them. You simply cannot prove it was properly loaded. There was a case where a chemical test proved the load used contained smokeless. A friend of mine knowledgeable in such things recreated the test sometime later (it took time for the story to filter out to the general public) and powder from a brand new can of Moosic GOEX bought for the test also showed smokeless. But a barrel made of GB quality 4150 or similar will not fail with BP no matter how is loaded. It might bulge from a short started ball but thats as bad as its going to get. It simply will not fail in a brittle manner with BP since BP cannot produce a burn rate high enough to produce a brittle failure in a hot rolled GB quality steel barrel of an alloy such as the military uses for small arms barrels, 4150/41v50 or even 1137 as Green Mountain uses for ML barrels. While not 4140/4150 it will stand pressures of 50K psi (Hp White Labs did the testing but not with BP and it was not a ML) with no issue. 45 caliber 1" across the flats. Remember Douglas used to make ML barrels from cold rolled leaded screw stock and had some failures in the late 1960s or early 70s and eventually stopped making ML barrels all together as a result. I saw one Douglas with a split up the top flat from the face of the breech to the rear sight dovetail in a friends shop in 1969. No bulge it just split, brittle fracture. Roy Keelor described one failure in Muzzle Blasts and even though he was a supplier of ML parts Douglas would no longer sell him barrels.

In the end it always comes down to what you spend on.

I want high quality guns for both re-enacting and shooting and hunting. A good barrel by Pedersoli, or American makers or even some hard to find British, German and Swiss makers are always going to stand the tests of use.

And most importantly ReSale if you ever want to trade your gun for something new, you’ll get above market price.

Indian made guns will NEVER yield positive returns on trade in or auction.

example Miruko’s Charlevilles and Brown Bess’s and Springfields, were once called the junk guns of the 1970’s and 80’s simply because they were stamped made in Japan.

After extensive market reach, it was determined that both the locks and barrels of those Japanese made guns were far superior to some of the highest quality guns made by pedersoli and even american gun makers, while the stocks were not best quality or even historically accurate, the rest of the gun was.

 

[Dphar1950]

In the end it always comes down to what you spend on.

I want high quality guns for both re-enacting and shooting and hunting. A good barrel by Pedersoli, or American makers or even some hard to find British, German and Swiss makers are always going to stand the tests of use.

And most importantly ReSale if you ever want to trade your gun for something new, you’ll get above market price.

Indian made guns will NEVER yield positive returns on trade in or auction.

example Miruko’s Charlevilles and Brown Bess’s and Springfields, were once called the junk guns of the 1970’s and 80’s simply because they were stamped made in Japan.

After extensive market reach, it was determined that both the locks and barrels of those Japanese made guns were far superior to some of the highest quality guns made by pedersoli and even american gun makers, while the stocks were not best quality or even historically accurate, the rest of the gun was.

The problem with Miroku from my stand point was the stuff they were putting out in the 1970s under "Ultra-Hi". Little better than pipe bombs. The 1/2 octagaonal barreled one had a barrel made in two pieces with the round section screwed into the octagonal one and the bores were not exactly in line. Shooters could not load them because trying to wipe the bore dry would trap patches and jags at the misalignment. I would have to dig out the articles from the old Buckskin Report to detail all of it, photos of the barrels with the "joint milled away etc. That a firm like Miroku would do this is astounding. But they did. There was a percussion rifle that had serious issues at the time too maybe Miroku but not going to look it up. So some of them really were JUNK. I would trust Pedersoli if I were buying such things, military stuff and factory reproductions I have no interest in seen too much over the years, since they at least use good barrel steels or so I have read. Many here do not and I am sure the Indian/Pakistan etc stuff does not. Who did the market research? Did they actually take stuff apart? Did they check the alloys used and such? Just asking. Its possible to cut off a piece of steel, put it in the right equipment turn it on and get a print out of the alloy. Unless this is done there is now real assurance as to the alloy. I had a metallurgist and ML shooter/builder tell me that the Italian barrel steels were good.