swamped barrel accuracy

[matt denison]

Lighter weight, superior balance.

They are certainly not easier to make or to inlet into a stock.

Harmonics? I do believe in harmonics in modern guns and mzzldrs. too. I don't know if swamping a barrel would help or hinder, I don't think they were originally designed for that reason. Bench rest shooters use heavy - really heavy barrels to combat harmonics, not swamped.

 

[hanshi]

when it generally boils down to most target shooters want heavy barrels for their part of this sport, and swamped barrels are more for balance and aesthetics of the style of gun.



I shoot straight, muzzle heavy barrels better off hand than any other type. But I really can't handle that weight now. Since I am a hunter and recreational shooter more than a target shooter I like the swamped barrels for the reasons you mention. I guess I agree. :thumbsup:

 

[LRB]

Come on now! How can you argue against the knowledge of a bunch of old timers around a campfire?? Who in all this world would know better?

 

[M. De Land]

I have a close friend that competes regularly, often winning or placing high at Friendship and Phoenix and he was the one that told me that the best shots don't use swamped barrels.
He could be wrong but as he knows his stuff, I doubt it and is not given to hyperbole.
I would think having a narrowing 2/3rds up the barrel length toward the muzzle which is heavier, would encourage muzzle oscillation not lesson it.MD

 

[tg]

"Beautiful benefits of swamping (aside from the harmonics thing) "

Have we came to the past about evidence of the harmonics in swamped barrels yet or still just tossing the puck around?

 

[Bob J]

My swamped Green Mountain 42" barrel (in .54) shoots more accurately than me, not saying that in itself means a whole lot :haha: But last two range trips I shot 3-shot and 4-shot cloverleafs at 50 yards, from the bench. That's with my hunting charge of 85 grains 2f Goex. And, offhand, it is balanced so well that a straight barrel just doesn't compare...IMHO.

 

[Larry Pletcher]

I think as TG says we're still tossing the puck around, so I'd add a few isolated random comments:

Wallace Gusler, Colonial Williamsburg, said regarding swamp a barrel no particular reason, "It's just style."

A friend of mine is a great off hand shooter. At Friendship he shoots a straight barrel. Gun weighing 13.5 lbs. Too heavy for me.

A swamped barrel means I can have a heavy breech and still
have a gun light enough to handle. A tapered barrel might work the same way.

The reason I think barrels were historically swamped, was to taper the barrel, but that might mean a very tall front sight. Perhaps the flair at the muzzle was to allow a tapered barrel to have a front sight of normal height.

I don't feel that barrel harmonics was the reason for swamping. If I wanted to minimize harmonics I wouldn't take metal away. I'd want a heavy short barrel as the bench and slug shooters do.

And last, from a scientific point of view, I think this would be a tough one to test. It might take a straight barrel thoroughly rung out - then back to the barrel maker to plane a swamp and retest. Even then you could only say the result was from one barrel only. Not something I want to do.

 

[Zonie]

I can say without a doubt that all barrels resonate or vibrate at several frequencies, thus they all have harmonics.

Many believe (including myself) that it is these vibrations that cause barrels to seem to have "favorite loads" which are different from a seemingly similar barrel mounted on a similar stock.

I also know for certain that a barrel with less material in it will have a higher pitched frequency than one with more material in it thus a swamped barrel will have a higher pitched frequency than a straight barrel of equal length.

Lengths more than any other factor will change the frequency of an object like a barrel.

Now, I don't have any idea at all if any of this means anything at all when it comes to comparing a straight barrel against a swamped barrel except to say the worlds most accurate barrels won't shoot worth a damn without the proper load and some pretty crummy barrels with the proper load can be very accurate. :grin:

 

[Rifleman1776]

Here are some starters showing others subscribe to the harmonics dampening belief in swamped barrels as it was passed to me by knowledgable older old timers than myself.
It only took a few seconds of Googling to find this corroboration. More time would bring up even more in-depth results.
I think it is a sad, and self imposed ignorance, some here show for those who came centuries before us believing they were incapable of critical thinking and scientific observations. http://www.trackofthewolf.com/cate...2&styleid=1187&partnum=rice-golden-age-barrel http://www.dixiegunworks.com/dixiegunworks-clearance-flyer.pdf (about half way down) http://www.shilohrifle.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=17701&start=15 (again about half way down, a post signed by an "MD". Isn't that interesting?) http://user.xmission.com/pub/lists/hist_text/archive/v01.n515 (last one I'll post today, I'm sure much-much more could be found. Interestingly, up came a post I made in year 2000 on this subject. So, I guess, since it is on a "link" it must be valid.)

 

[Coot]

Sorry, but I do not see any of the sources you cited showing any reference to 18th c knowledge & practice relating to harmonics in swamped barrels. Three are sales pitches for modern made steel barrels, all made using techniques not available in the 18th c. The post citing 'conversations with old timers' is repeating 20th c stories/tales and not providing evidence of historic thinking/knowledge on the subject. No one is denying that people in the past were smart - but smart and knowledgeable are two different things. If any 18th c references to harmonics being a factor in barrel design are ever found I would love to see them.

 

[tg]

" If any 18th c references to harmonics being a factor in barrel design are ever found I would love to see them."


I would not hold my breath based on the direction this thread is moving Coot :hmm:

 

[LRB]

I saw in one of his links that the soft iron absobed the harmonics better than modern steels. This is what I have always understood to be true, and contradics one of his statements, however, at the end of the day, it just isn't that important, either way. I'd say, let it go unless someone wants to run some contolled testing to prove it. Even then there may remain some that would doubt the testing. I can suggest this. Hang a piece of wrought iron rod on a wire, and then one of high or medium carbon steel, and ring them both with a small hammer. I believe you will find much more ring in the steel rod. Sizes being equal.

 

[LaBonte]

Wick is right -
Wrought iron tends to dampen (the correct term for the phenomenen not absorb) the harmonics not increase them since it is what the old timers such as Bill Large, the Barrel Maker, called dead iron. It's also the reason you won't find tuning forks made of wrought iron only good steel.

As Zonie noted everything metal does have harmonics and the best absorbera in so far as barrels are concerned is short and stiff - whether it be a BP or a centerfire. In both cases just look at what the accuracy folks i.e. Benchresters use - short and usually very thick barrels. Hog rifles shooters often go to a longerr barrel, but in all cases they go with as heavy/thick as possible.

And I also agree with Pletch that in part at least the early barrels with their thick breeches used the swamp to help aid in keeping the front sight shorter.

 

[Frank Savage]

The swamping might have some influence on barrel harmonics-for very small number of loads. BUT, when you count in other variables and forces coming from three pinning locations in a fullstock, with not-so-much sealed BBL and RR chanels/holes, thus somehow working with temperature and humidity, the swamp has no real influence.

As far as I know about what the swamp is good for:
Swamped barrels are originaly wrought iron, yes?
Wrought iron darn soft, yes?
Starting an accurate hunting load (not loose combat one), or tightly fitting and sealing load you can carry few days/weeks throug harsh weather or in the canoe and still being shootable if pan is well sealed, so starting such a load needs a starter or pretty stiff push on the rod, yes?
Now, when starting such a load, the forces during forming the patch are quite damn significant. So, in a soft material, no swamp means you end up with rifled small bore blunderbuss. With swamp, there´s enought material to not let the muzzle be stretched out during starting over number of loadings.

Proof from nowdays: get some Ardessa/Traditions PPB 1" full octg barrel. Get muzzle measurements (by true inner dia micrometer, not calipers-no matter about kind). Shoot the best tight fitting load. After 1200-1800 rounds for 45 cal, sometimes even as little as 600 for 50 cal, when having serious accuracy problem (60yds 10 shot clover leaf opens up to 2" and no way to shrink it), get the mauserements again. 0,005" or even more in the last inch of the barrel is the most probable you will read. Seen this few times, repeated after shortening the tube, albeit you can end up with surprisingly lasting barrel from Ardesa. What´s the outer distinctive feature I don´t know.

 

[LRB]

I find that very hard to believe. Even wrought iron isn't THAT soft as to stretch from tight loading. Wear down maybe one or two thousandths from a polishing effect, but not acually stretch from loading.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

GEESH! :haha:

Folks..., sometimes an action causes additional, unintentional, advantages. The only obvious advantage of a swamped barrel is weight reduction to provide better balance, and easy of carry. IF folks in the 20th century figured out that for some barrels and some loads the "harmonics" or "barrel whip" or "barrel lash" was reduced, then the folks swamping the antique barrels got lucky.

Heck, modern Mauser barrels from WWII are "stepped" in that they are reduced in size by sections from breech to muzzle which does reduce "lash", and many claim that this was intentional, but in fact it wasn't done to eliminate as much lash as they could've eliminated..., it was done to reduce weight, and they got lucky.., today the Germans claim "Uh..., We meant to do that". :haha:

For some reason folks like to assume that "they must've known" some fact backed up by modern science for the same reasons that modern science knows. TRUE..., folks of the 18th century seem to have been better at observing and accepting cause-and-effect relationships in the physical world..., but that's not having the same knowledge that we do today.

So they lightened a barrel by swamping, and it was more accurate, they probably thought the rifle was better balanced and that was the cause..., and had ZERO idea about "harmonics". It worked better, keep doing it. Just as they knew that folks were healthier if they drank small beer that had been stirred before drawing a pitcher (we know now this added raw yeast and B vitamins to their diet), or if they drank spruce beer, or ate sauerkraut, or drank unboiled citrus juice, in winter or at sea they didn't get scurvy..., they had no idea that it was a vitamin C deficiency. :grin: Heck NOBODY knew scurvy was a Vitamin C deficiency until after 1907 when the vitamin was isolated.

So lets not get our breeches in a twist over whether or not they "knew" our modern reason. It doesn't matter, and it's not saying we are smarter or they were stupid. Considering the lack of scientific knowledge, they actually did very well indeed.

LD

 

[roundball]

Wick Ellerbe:
I find that very hard to believe. Even wrought iron isn't THAT soft as to stretch from tight loading. Wear down maybe one or two thousandths from a polishing effect, but not acually stretch from loading.

Thank you. In my entire lifetime on the planet I’ve never seen another endeavor that comes close to having so much unsubstantiated old wives tales and pure speculation set forth as facts, as there constantly seems to be in the world of traditional muzzleloading.

 

[matt denison]

" The only obvious advantage of a swamped barrel is weight reduction to provide better balance."

Take it from a dedicated off hand shooter this is true. (if you recall the OP was asking about off hand shooting)

If Roundball or others need scientific proof found in a book or somewhere then go find it yourself. Or you can spend half a lifetime shooting off hand with various barrels and see which one you settle on. Betcha' it will be swamped.

 

[Frank Savage]

"In my entire lifetime on the planet I’ve never seen another endeavor that comes close to having so much unsubstantiated old wives tales and pure speculation set forth as facts, as there constantly seems to be in the world of traditional muzzleloading."


I have seen such enviroment-hogo fogo hobby horse trainers and riders, esp. those "english stylish". Maybe not so much observeable in AM. Sorry, canot helped myself

 

[hanshi]

I know I'm an OF. No doubt about it; swamped barrels make the best handling guns for toting and for shooting. That and looks and maybe it somehow makes it easier to build a nicer barrel. Works for me.

And anyone who's ever had their head smacked into an 18th or 19th century iron fence knows wrought iron ain't soft. :wink: