smoothbore barrel?

[chuck-ia]

What are yur thoughts on hydraulic steel tubing barrels? I see some manufacturers are using this on there barrels. These barrels are quite a bit cheaper in price than say a colerain barrel. thanks, flinch

 

[pathfinderifh]

Years ago there was a guy doing these types of barrels,looked pretty good,didn't shoot worth a damn,no matter what we tried. Perhaps lapping the tube or maybe choking it may have helped,who knows. If you get one PLEASE proof it with twice the powder and double ball[@170grs 3f],secured in an old tire set off with a string on the trigger from behind a tree with no else around. It should then be o.k. to shoot. :results: Also make sure its seamless

 

[crgabel]

That's sort of like buying a VW bug and using it for a pick up truck isn't it?? And where did the method of proofing come from. Was it from the days when barrels use to be hammerforged?
I'm not trying to be snide here, but it would seem to me that if a person must proof a barrel maybe the material should not be used for a gun. I've heard people say about proofing a barrel many times over the last 3 years. I would be just as concerned with what damage you may do to the steel by going it.
Not knowing all there is to know about ML please help me understand this test.
Craig

 

[Chuck Thom]

I and a friend have used DOM tubing 1" outside and 9/16" inside about 62 cal or 1"x 11/16" 69 cal. proofed to 300grs. 2ffg and 2 round balls held up fine. I shoot 70 grs.2ffg in both I have a matchlock that costs me about $20 and works great am building a hudson bay style trade gun with a 69 cal. straight tube and have no problems with my choice of barrel.

 

[pathfinderifh]

That's sort of like buying a VW bug and using it for a pick up truck isn't it?? And where did the method of proofing come from. Was it from the days when barrels use to be hammerforged?
I'm not trying to be snide here, but it would seem to me that if a person must proof a barrel maybe the material should not be used for a gun. I've heard people say about proofing a barrel many times over the last 3 years. I would be just as concerned with what damage you may do to the steel by going it.
Not knowing all there is to know about ML please help me understand this test.
Craig

This method was told to me from Bill Large many many years ago. I don't have an x-ray machine or any type of anilyzer, this method works just fine, and yes, it is from the days when they were forged. works as good today as it did then. I proof ALL my barrels in the guns I build,[18 so far] The stress and pressure put upon the barrel is more than a lifetime of shooting will subject it to, better to be safe than sorry. I hope this helped and let me know how it turns out! eace:

 

[big bore 75]

are you proof testing barrels from companies with good repitation, like gmb, colrain, rayl , and others and proof testing them? seems like a waste of time to me, yes if I had a questionable barrel I would proof test , but a known tube that is industy tested at 4x's the psi that muzzleloadersproduce, hydrloic tubing is quite safe to me, the cost saved is tremendous, and I'll use them again, the only bad part is the machining aspect, I have to wait untill, I get my budddy to lat me use his smithy. bb75

 

[TFoley]

:m2c: Looking at your scientific methods of 'proving' a device that just might explode an inch away from your eye trumpet the next time you shoot it gives me slight pause for concern, I have to admit. Seems to me that over here in UK we had a really good idea when Henry VIII ordered the establishment of the proof houses way back in the mid-1500's.

With the exception of nations whose proof we trust in certain firearms, but not all by any means, EVERY weapon used for live firing here in UK has to be subjected to proof of various kinds before it can be sold commercially. Needless to say, every military weapon has to be be proofed as well...

Every US-made weapon I ever had, and at one time I had a great many, had been proofed in the Birmingham Proof House. Where revolvers were concerned, and I had a great many revolvers, this meant that each chamber had to be proofed as well, and marked accordingly... :hmm:

Shade-tree gunsmith methods do not count over here, and a few of us live longer as a result, I'm sure. :imo:


Good luck, and use a long piece of string. ::

tac :grey:

 

[TANSTAAFL]

When it comes to a nations standards for proof testing, as I recall Belgium had some of the strictest for BP. It is for that reason when I find a Belgian proofed smoothbore, is if it checks out and looks sound, it usually is.

I know the Brits had some tough standards also, but, once the barrel was proofed and returned to the maker, things thereafter were not always what they seemed. Some English gun makers (not all, by any means) had the unsettling habit of taking proofed stamped barrels, and then turning them down to obtain a lighter gun.

 

[pathfinderifh]

are you proof testing barrels from companies with good repitation, like gmb, colrain, rayl , and others and proof testing them? seems like a waste of time to me, yes if I had a questionable barrel I would proof test , but a known tube that is industy tested at 4x's the psi that muzzleloadersproduce, hydrloic tubing is quite safe to me, the cost saved is tremendous, and I'll use them again, the only bad part is the machining aspect, I have to wait untill, I get my budddy to lat me use his smithy. bb75

Yes, I test all barrels that I purchase. Doesn't take a lot of time and effort to do, a lot less than re-building a stock, searching for the lock, and possably fingers! :shocking: Maybe a little anal, but the peace of mind it brings is worth it[since I only have a small piece of mind left ! ]

Pathfinder