![]() |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Austin, Texas USA
Posts: 257
|
![]()
Looking at the illustration, it seems that wadding must have been used between the powder charge and the ball. Otherwise, the loose powder would have spread along the bottom of the rear chamber when the barrel was lowered to a horizontal position after loading. Such an arrangement would likely have produced less than optimal results.
This comports with the observation of the old charge removed from my torador by its previous owner: Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 803
|
![]()
In a bit of a rush this morn, but a couple of things;
BTW, good photos Rick! For a breech like this to work, where wadding cannot pass through the small (narrow) section of the barrel, the mealed powder would have to fill the breech area more or less full, but not compressed much. Very light compression at most. The other point is that Nitro powder should not be compressed like black powder normally. Many loads for cartridges have the case maybe half full at most. I Do know what you mean though Stu! Nitro on it's own burns like a garden fire. :-) I think the term with Nitro powder is it has to be Contained. As in, a few grains contained in a cartridge case are contained but not compressed, but develop pressure quickly in such a case. Rick, I do not know how difficult it would be for your gunsmith, but how about boring out the chamber area with an end mill cutter, and threading the whole chamber for a screw-in breech? This breech would look like a cartridge case with threads on the outside, making the powder area much smaller than at present. I have read that these Indian matchlock barrels used very heavy charges of powder; Can you figure out How much? Also, I Think, (Think!) that such powder chambers Must have been used with the newer corned powder as well, as I can't imagine India and surrounding areas continuing to use mealed powder into the mid 19th century. If this was the case, then such a breech would not be required, but maybe used because it always had been. When my barrels turn up, I will compare them and see if made same. If my breeches are made the same as this, and are in good condition, I will be tempted to try one of them out with fairly coarse powder, and see what happens. Not from the shoulder though! Richard. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. Louis, MO area.
Posts: 1,629
|
![]() Quote:
Thanks so much for your reply. I ran a wood dowel down the muzzle area till it rest where the ball would seat. Then filled up the breech chamber and narrow area to the front of what would be the breech plug material. Took about 210 grains of FFG. ![]() I understand what your saying about using the whole breech area as a screw-in breech. But the one thing we can't change is the position of the vent hole from the pan to the breach area. It's drilled just in front of (what was) the breech plug, which is normal. But the vent hole travels to the large area of the breech. So I believe we are back to the complete liner again. But we'll se what the gunsmith thinks. Should be interesting. (Actually, he will probably be cussing me LOL ). Here is how I visualize this happening: The current bore size at the muzzle is .59 caliber. From the muzzle end, the bore will have to be drilled out to that size, plus 4-5 calibers to accomodate the liner, all the way through the breech end. This will also eliminate the narrow section. But the liner will have to be made with a tapered, wider outside diameter to accomodate the breech area and meet flush with the existing vent hole location. This might end up with a longer travel area of the vent hole, which would slightly delay ignition. But we can't re-position the vent hole. The new threaded breach plug can be made any size. But we'll see what the gunsmith thinks. Should be interesting. I'll send the barrel to him in the next couple weeks. By the way, the gunsmith who does the liners is different than my regular gunsmith. He is the only guy I know in the USA that can do this. Rick. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. Louis, MO area.
Posts: 1,629
|
![]() Quote:
![]() Rick. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | |
Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: CHRISTCHURCH NEW ZEALAND
Posts: 2,786
|
![]() Quote:
Stu |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 803
|
![]()
Rick,
Just to clarify; When I suggested the breech alteration, I was meaning with the interior bored out so that the original touch-hole could be used, not screwing in a solid piece of metal. Best, Richard. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. Louis, MO area.
Posts: 1,629
|
![]() Quote:
No, I know what you meant. And that may very well be a possibility. It would actually be great if the barrel could just be drilled out and burnished clean, with a new threaded breech plug made. As long as I end up with the same interior bore diameter from muzzle to breech, for ease of loading and cleaning. I'll send the barrel out next weekend when I get home.I'll let you know what the gunsmith and I decide to do. Thanks again for everyone's interest in this Thread. Rick. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 | |
Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. Louis, MO area.
Posts: 1,629
|
![]() Quote:
Well, you're right. The greased patch was probably the most common method of loading, as it still is today. That's how I load my muzzle loaders that use a single round ball. In a rifled barrel it's a must. But with a smooth bore barrel, there is more than one way to load it. Even today, some shooters like to load their smooth bores similar to a shotgun, even though they are using a single round ball. With some guns and load combinations it seems to work just as well. Rick. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|