![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. Louis, MO area.
Posts: 1,630
|
![]() Quote:
Thanks so much for your response. I was just wondering if your barrel was plugged in the same manner as Stewart's and mine. And it sounds like it is. I've seen one other variation of plugging the breech using a fairly thick, flat plate with a notch cut in for a rear sight. The plate is just slightly larger diameter than the breech of the barrel. The barrel they cut up in the "Mughal Matchlock" YouTube video had this style. Sorry to hear your recoil lug is missing. But that seems to add proof that the barrel was mounted in a stock at some point. Yes, it's obvious some of these barrels were made without pan covers. With the barrels being made so robust, I've wondered why the pan covers were made of such a thin piece of metal? It seems that most of the barrels you see today have the cover broke off. I'm going to have a new cover made for mine using a bit thicker iron, since mine is already missing. Thanks for the Link with that list of guns. Super interesting!!! Especially the notes of barrel decoration. By the way, the length of my barrel is 55.5". Your barrel, with the silver work should display very well. Rick. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 803
|
![]()
Rick,
I can fit another recoil lug, and will likely stock it up. It will not hurt the barrel at all to do so. I wonder if the museum in the link has any on-line photos, And if they have any of these pieces still, from 1864....Indeed I wonder if the museum still exists! Always something to look up! I suppose the pan cover only need be sturdy enough to divert the match, but they do seem frail. I too would make one a little thicker. On my homemade English matchlock, I added a 'front' to the pan, for extra security. (Read 'back' for an Indian matchlock, as the serpentine works the other way!) Last edited by Pukka Bundook; 16th August 2015 at 05:32 PM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. Louis, MO area.
Posts: 1,630
|
![]()
Hi Richard.
Thanks for the additional photos. I can see your barrel is sealed up similar to mine and Stewart's. If you want, I can take close up photos of my recoil lug for you to use when the time comes. Meantime, here is an original Torador trigger bar and spring assemble, still in working order. ![]() Rick. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: CHRISTCHURCH NEW ZEALAND
Posts: 2,786
|
![]()
I note that Rick and Richard mention a "recoil lug" in relation to Torador barrels.
Can you explain the purpose of this please. In most firearms the recoil is absorbed by the stock, and the shooters shoulder/arm. The barrels of my two matchlocks both have a pin holding the barrel firmly in place which goes thru a lug with a hole in it. Barrel bands as well obviously. Stu |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. Louis, MO area.
Posts: 1,630
|
![]()
Hi Stu.
What we are calling a recoil lug on the bottom of the barrel where the pin goes through simply serves the same purpose as a barrel tang on other guns. The tang being held to the stock with a screw. It's interesting that these Toradors were built without the use of a single screw. Everything held together with bands or pins. Rick. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: CHRISTCHURCH NEW ZEALAND
Posts: 2,786
|
![]()
OK Thanks. For some reason I was visualising a wooden peg of some sort
![]() I guess the term "recoil" confused me. Stu |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 803
|
![]()
My fault Stu,
I have seen these with a fairly large square peg extending down into the stock, obviously helping spread the weight of recoil over a large area. The ones depicted in this thread appear more just to hold the breech -end of the barrel down, like Rick mentions as a tang screw would. Sorry for the confusion! Richard. Last edited by Pukka Bundook; 17th August 2015 at 03:09 AM. Reason: to change tnag to 'tang'. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|