• Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

Truth about DOM tubing barrels

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Joined
Aug 4, 2004
Messages
8,748
Reaction score
3,805
Location
The Land of Enchantment
Not sure if this is the right forum, but I would like to know what the current thinking is regarding DOM tubing for barrels. I am considering a smoothbore made with this type of barrel, properly breached, in .75 caliber. I know some say they are unsafe under any condition even at typical BP pressures, and others who say they are fine if made of the right alloy and of a sensible thickness.
 
I'd rather send the extra money and buy a barrel from Getz, Rice, Green Mt., Rayl, etc. Then trust my life or the life of the guy standing next to me on the shooting line to any thing else.
 
i'm not a metalurgist or an engineer, but i'm more than a little bit inclined to come down on ehoff's side on this point. i'd save up the extra soda cans or do whatever it takes and get a well made barrel from a reputable maker, rather than risk giving myself (or the innocent person at the next firing point) a free but messy prefrontal lobotomy.

what do you think you'd see on the six o'clock news? the eleven year old kid in colorado who shot two home invaders (one of whom was in posession af a Model1911 taken from a murder scene days before) or a guy who blew himself to his Maker with a home- made gun?

i'm not trying to be preachy, but i just don't think the few bucks you save is worth the risk.
 
It is hard to say considering all the opinions presented by both sides by engineers and metalurgists, I had one and it worked Ok but I always shoot moderate loads, the biggest negative thing I have seen with them is the lack of any taper in the oct section of an oct/rd barrel which gives a funky sight plane/picture for me, if the breech was of proper thickness and they were from a recognized source I do not think I would be afraid of them but I would not load them supper heavy, I have seen some that only allow a turn and a half of liner threads which was kind of scary but I don't use liners anymore so that is a non issue.I don't think there will ever be a concensus on this one each will have to make up their own minds.
 
Do you really want to risk it? I can afford to stay healthy much cheaper than I can pay to get well and the same goes for a lawsuit that may take place. Buy a good barrel and do yourself and those around you a margin of safety. JMHO
 
Well, before I came to this forum, I worked at a machine shop and talked to my boss about what it would take to "whip out" a smoothbore muzzleloader barrel. He suggested using a DOM tube as a starter, but I never could make the leap of faith to trust myself with my own engeneering ability, or the intregrity of piece of metal used for purposes other than its original intention. I figure there are companies out there that do this for a living, possesing the proper slide rules, calculators, and smarts to keep me from blowing myself up. Besides, if I had a accident with a homemade barrel, who would I sue? :idunno: Bill
 
I know of a reputable seller of muzzleloader parts and rifles who used to sell barrels made from DOM. I'm not sure if they still do or not. As far as I know, they weren't sued out of existance because of any failures. In fact they are still in business. My guess is they quit selling them because of all of the bad press that they have gotten on muzzleloading forums such as this. I seem to remember someone saying that they tested their barrels and were not able to blow them up no matter how large of a load they used.

Without objective testing, who is to say that these manufactured DOM barrels are any worse or better than the ones made by Getz, Rice, or Green Mountain? Have these other manufacturers tested their barrels to failure to see how much powder it takes to blow them up?
 
BillinOregon said:
I know some say they are unsafe under any condition even at typical BP pressures, and others who say they are fine if made of the right alloy and of a sensible thickness.
I hesitate to get into this discussion because I'll be odd man out, but you ask for information, and I have some. I've been using a DOM barrel since 1997 for the majority of my shooting and have no complaints. It's on a Jackie Brown 20 ga. smoothbore. I worked up a turkey load of 80 grains FFFg and 2 oz. #6 shot and asked Jackie if I needed to worry about the load. He replied. "The 80 grains of fffg won't hurt the smoothbore. I proofed with 250 grains of 3F and 6 balls several times in a smoothbore barrel with 15/16 across the flats instead of the 1 inch in your barrel. My barrels are made of 1026 cold rolled drawn on mandrel tubing. The tube is basically forged around a smooth mandrel so the process in effect makes a forged barrel. That's where they get their strength over a drilled barrel."

I don't know about 1026 cold rolled steel, maybe that will mean something to the machinists in the group. I don't know about any other manufacturer, don't recommend any of them, I can only say what Jackie says about his barrels and what my experience has been with one of them.

Spence
 
DOM tubing is sometimes called "seamless" tubing but it is not seamless.
DOM tubing is also not a forged steel product.


DOM tubing is a butt welded tube made on an automatic welding machine which forms flat stock into a tube with the ends meeting. The welding fuses the two ends together. Following welding, it is draw over a die and a mandral to size the tube and to remove the visual and measurable weld bead resulting in a smooth uniform appearance with its size controlled to the tubing specification requirements.

This sizing is important because many fittings require a accurate, smooth diameter in order to seal with conventional fittings.

Most DOM tubing is made from low carbon 1020 or 1026 steel or a 300 series stainless steel.
The most common alloy steel tubing is made from 4130 steel which some refer to as chrome-moly tubing.

While 4130 can be a very strong steel it must be heat treated to obtain high strengths. The condition usually supplied as tubing is in its annealed condition which is about 60 percent stronger than 1020 steel. (98KSI vs 61KSI).

The potential problem with trying to build a gun with 4130 tubing is getting reliable certifications for the material. Without these certs, it is almost impossible for the average person to know if it really is 1020 or 4130.

On the question of using DOM tubing as the basis for a gun barrel one must realize that the published numbers for pressure ratings for tubing is referring to room temperature static pressures.

I've heard form numberless folks who say things like, "This tubing is good for 10,000 pounds per square inch so it must be good enough for a muzzleloader." What they don't realize is that 10,000 psi static pressure is one thing but the pressures guns are subjected to are far from static.

Even the most basic of formulas for calculating tubing strengths and wall thicknesses stresses the need to multiply the expected pressure by 4 if an explosive pressure is being considered.
Said another way, that 10,000 psi (static pressure) tubing becomes 10,000/4 or 2,500 psi tubing if it is being used as a gun barrel.
Most of us on the forum are well aware of the fact that pressures as high as 20,000 psi (and higher) have been observed in a .45 caliber muzzleloader loaded with black powder and shooting a slug.
The more complicated formulas delve deeply into the fluctuations in pressures and the speed of these changes and yes, they too use pressure correction factors of 4 or higher in their calculations.

For these reasons and more I do not recommend using real seamless tubing as a basis for a gun barrel and DOM tubing rates a poor second to real (and very expensive) seamless tubing.

The bottom line in my book is why would someone want to use DOM tubing for a gun barrel? To save money?

That $100 or $200 savings can easily be wiped out in a heartbeat by the $1,000's expense of having ones face reconstructed or being subjected to a life in total darkness because their eyes were blown apart, not to mention arms that don't work or even death.

Trying to save a few bucks on a gun barrel at the risk of these happenings (and worse) is often called, "being penny wise and pound foolish".
 
DOM tubing has a but welded seam even if you can't see it. I would never use it for a gun barrel not even black powder. A friend of mine who is gone now had a blunderbus barrel made from tubing and it blew up with the first normal charge. He never made another. He made threee before that tested OK. NOT ME. Buy a piece of 1137 or 12L14 from a barrel maker.
 
In the 18th and 19th century gun barrels were made by taking a long ribbon of wrought iron and folding it lengthwise around a mandrel. The two long sides were butted together and then hammer welded along the length of the barrel, a little at a time, until a long tube with a seam along its entire length was formed. The inside was reamed and rifled... or not... , the outside filed into octagon or round.

I have a gun from before 1825 which has a barrel made in this way. The seam is visible, if you know what to look for. The gun has given good, safe service for almost 175 years and is still going strong.

These DOM barrels start with a long ribbon of steel which is bent into a tube along its length, the long edges are butt welded along the seam by a process called ERW, electrical resistance welding. They are then drawn over a mandrel to finished size and so are called DOM, drawn over mandrel.

The two processes seem very similar, to me. Can someone explain why the barrels made today are less strong and safe than those made 150-250 years ago? Surely with modern manufacturing methods the seam can be more uniformly and reliably welded. Surely we understand more about metals today than then.

What am I missing? Should I sell my gun?

Spence
 
Somebody needs to take one out & start pouring black powder & balls in & try to blow it up. Has anybody heard of one blowng up? The welded barrels of a few hundred years ago were probably no better or stronger than this stuff. For that matter how much better is 1018 than the soft iron barrel steel of those days?

There's some other problems with it as far as I'm concerned. 1018 or 1025 is miserable steel to work with & get a good internal finish. Some time back I rifled a DOM barrel for a guy. At some point I got into the weld & had a chip come out of this seam turning the thing into junk.

If safety is truly the concern then some attention should be given to the inferior breeching & metal work that goes on. Guns walk thru the shop door day after day that I wouldn't crawl in behind. Poor fitting threads, breechplugs that don't bottom out, breechplugs that are butchered by an intersecting drum, overly deep dovetails, ect. I seen a patent breech one time where they drilled the bore diameter down to the nipple depth. This ment that at the back of the barrel where the breech shouldered against the barrel there was a piece of steel tubing in the neighborhood of .070 thick holding the breech on. That's a bit more than a piece of thinwall electrical tubing.

From what I see the barrel steel is the least of our worries.
 
I'm sure dead soft iron is totally unsuitable for use as a gun barrel too. ;)
 
Gun barrels of yesterday did blow up, for no apparent reason.( Damascus barrels )
Back then law suits were unheard of, so companies and gun makers continued on as best they could.
Today we have better communications, and pass on problems we hear of in the gun industry.( Savage inlines)
Getz, Green Mountain, Douglas are all well known barrel makers, I'm sure they had problems, BUT they remedied them and moved on.
Today we have some of the best materials available to us, to make our pieces, whatever they may be.
However everybody is trying to make, and save a buck, hence some of will try and substitute a product to come out on top. ( been there ).
Are you ready to try a gun barrel from India, China,Pakistan, I'm sure somebody can get them here a lot cheaper than a "Getz Barrel ", would you try it............NOT ME SUCKER!
Think about what you are gambling with!
Old Ford and his opinions!
 
Because steels are alloys of metals, they also handle tensile strength differently from iron. Iron, which was usually pretty soft back in the day when your gun was made, "stretches" better, and easier when put to high stress( pressure) for a brief period of time. Steel, being harder, does very little "Stretching" in the same situation. It either holds, or doesn't.

Its not as simple as just measuring pressures in a barrel. You have to consider the metallurgy of the barrel to determine how it will handle particular stresses.

I am also not a metallurgist. I long ago decided to stay away from DOM barrels. Old, Iron barrels need to be carefully inspected using a bore light, both inside and out, before they are continued to be fired. And, as you have done, use a little compassion when you load anything that OLD. No magnum loads, Please!
 
Just for the record. Gun barrels of the colonial period were wrapped around a mandrel but were not butt welded. They were lap welded. Each side was scarfed and the weld was lapped over. there is a difference. They were on average thicker than the ones we have today also. All of them were proofed.
The English sold inferior barrels to the indians and to Africa as trade guns. If they blew up it didn't matter that much. did anybody here ever see an African trade musket?? Scary stuff.
 
Back
Top