Please tell me that I didn't ruin my gun!

[Dithsoer]

While assembling a J. P. Beck kit from Track of the Wolf I fear that I may have inadvertently ruined the barrel. I stupidly removed too much metal for the front sight dovetail, leaving the barrel wall thickness in this area around 1/16 to 3/32 inch thick. Is this too thin, thin enough where there could be a problem with higher-pressure loads such as 75 to 100 grains with a P. R. B.? I was building the gun with shooting accuracy as one of my main goals, could this somehow negatively affect the finished gun's (potential) accuracy? The barrel is a Rice .50 caliber “C” profile swamped barrel.

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

Have you accurately measured the thickness left in the dovetail? 1/16th is .0625" which is thin, 3/32nds is half again as thick, and while I'd want more metal out there, you may be O.K. with it at that thickness.

 

[Roy]

You can always make it shorter... any chances of a pic?? I have intentionally shortened a lot of swamped barrels just to get rid of some of that extra flare that they have at the muzzle.. :v

 

[rich pierce]

1/16" could be plenty- look at your old cartridge 12 ga shotgun muzzle (not the one with the screw in choke), but it's the presence of a sharp-edged cut in the barrel that makes it chancy.

 

[Mike Brooks]

Probably be fine. I've shot old damascus shot guns with soldered on patches out by the muzzle, no problemo. You have very little pressure left by the time you get out to the front sight. No worries in my opinion. :thumbsup:

 

[Dithsoer]

The best measurement that I can get seems to be about 5/64 inch, .085 or so. A gentleman that I spoke to at Track of the Wolf said that as long as I had at least fifty thousands of an inch thickness left it would be fine. That seems awfully thin but he confirmed it, as long as there was at least fifty thousands of an inch from the bottom of a dovetail, cut or drill hole to the top of the rifling grove it would be fine. I don't mean to disagree with him because he obviously knows more about it than I do, but doesn't that seem a little too thin?

 

[paulvallandigham]

With modern steel, and with that being at the front of the barrel, where pressures are reduced, you are okay. Get out the micrometer, and set it at .050". See how much that looks like. Now, measure the thickness of notebook paper. Figure out how many sheets of paper it will take to equal .050". Now you have a real idea of how thick that metal is between the bore and the bottom of the dovetail. Often, its easier to visualize these things, rather than to think of them abstractly.

 

[44-henry]

I have an original 14 ga. percussion English double that has almost paper thin barrels at the muzzle end.

 

[Dane]

Mr Brooks and Mr Vallandigham,

You two have just got to stop this. I've counted four, yes four times where the two of you have AGREED with each other in the past few days.

This nonsense just has to stop. :blah:

 

[FPDoc]

It boggles the mind. The end must be near!!

 

[brubincam]

-----I have a marlin 1895 CB 4570 & you wouldn't believe how little metal is left where the front sight is dovetailed into the barrel--but it works just fine-----

 

[mazo kid]

I have an original 14 ga. percussion English double that has almost paper thin barrels at the muzzle end.

I agree (FWIW), that the barrel should be just fine. BUT, the comparison of a shotgun barrel with a rifle barrel is really like comparing apples and oranges, in my opinion at least. The shot gun will have much lower pressures than a rifle barrel.