Post by: huntinguy on June 25, 2011, 03:16:26 PM
I have found a couple interesting things... One, I don't know squat about what I am doing. I have read Recreating The American Longrifle three times now and am more lost than ever.
I have three rifles on hand to use as a guide, One is the CVA Kentucky (the one that had an accident with a teenager... not that I am confessing or anything... and it was many... many... moons past. This is the where the barrel came from) My Renegade and my sons Traditions Hawkins.
I have learned so far that the width of the butt and cheek piece make a difference on the need for cast. I have seen where others have said that also. I learn slow...
The attached is the layout I am looking at, a 13.5 lop and a 4.5 drop. As can be seen the CVA is 3.5 drop and the TC is 2.5. Am I off base with a 4.5 drop?
Where does the arc for the transition for the fore-stock/lock area start the bend to the butt-stock. It looks to me like the trigger or just behind the trigger is the bend point...?
I would like to follow the lines of the LeMann but man... that butt... it has to hurt, I am also enamored with the Southern Mountain rifle. I like the lines of the one ridjrunr posted in reply to one of my questions... but this is going to be a flint... I think...(I have only changed my mind four times to date.) Considering this is going to be a half-stock... I am still waiting for the small Siler to show up, so I can't draw the lock on yet.
Anyone have suggestions?????? Keep in mind this is a practice rifle for the real one later. So.
Post by: pathfinder on June 25, 2011, 09:56:19 PM
Post by: Indiana on June 26, 2011, 03:51:56 AM
Good luck!
Post by: Captchee on June 26, 2011, 10:41:03 AM
Your transitions should start up at the center of the tang screw .
Drop and cast is not an case of ; it is what it is .
These are things that are specific to a given person or a given style of shooting .
Today production manufactures build for an average shooter ..
But by trying to work this out now , you are jumping ahead and thus your becoming confused .
You need to start with understanding the why of things .
Quote
I would like to follow the lines of the LeMann but man... that butt... it has to hurt,That would be true if one were to shoot that style of rifle from high on the shoulder . But when we understand that the rifle was designed to shoot from lower on the shoulder to top of the arm , we then see that it wont hurt . We also then see that the very deep cresant shapes , must be shoot from the arm , not the shoulder
See , once we start to understand the shapes We can even then go to the extreme and understand why the evolution of some of the very deep butt plates on some target rifles
. See by understand that many of these were meant to be shot from under the armpit . IE a laid back , backwards prone position , not off the shoulder .
As such this shooting style effect the drop and the cast . Today people are built differently then they were 150 years ago . We are taller , heavier and in some cases our necks and arms are longer . that’s where the drop comes in .
Let me see if I can explain this to you . When you shoot a rifle that’s been designed to be shot off hand , for a specific person , that rifle , when brought to the shoulder , should yield the persons eye to instantly be inline with the sight . The less movement , the shooter has to do to make that alignment the better ,IE leaning forward or tilting the head to the side . Thus if one has a short neck , their drop will be less then someone with a tall neck . Same holds true for cast in that a person with wide shoulders often needs more cast then a person with narrow shoulders . Now add in a gun designed to be shot from the arm and not the shoulder and you can see that such a gun would need even more cast so as to reduce the shooters need to hunt for the sights .
Next consideration come style of shooting . Is the gun designed to be shot with a forward facing stance like a shot gun or a more side type of stance with the shoulder in the same direction as the target . IE the gun runs more across the chest the away from it .
Once you understand these things you then can decide of you drop and cast .
You also will then be able to look at a given rifle and understand the type of person it was made for and how it was to be shot . As well as why the rifle has the lines it does
Quote
I like the lines of the one ridjrunr posted in reply to one of my questions... but this is going to be a flint... I think...(I have only changed my mind four times to date.)
there is this misconception that all half stocks must be percussion guns . this isnt true .
the Hawken Bros did not invent the half stock rifle . in fact the lines of their guns wasn’t even innovative. Even if we hold the conclusion that they did do something special , they basically only re invented the wheel as the plains type rifles very much resemble the early European half stock sporting rifles .
Here are some other ½ stock rifles for you to look at . As you look at these , try and look past the gun and look at the details of the gun . Notice the differences in the barrels
Some are round , others swamped , others tapered . Notice the differences in the drop . Look at the butt plate designs and see if you can understand how the rifle was ment to be shot .
I am also including a photo of a gun made by Gustuvus Erichson in Texas in or around 1838 .
Notice the gun is a ½ stocked flintlock . It also carries a longer swamped barrel .
Notice the drop of the stock . See that the butt plate isn’t of a design that’s shot off the shoulder ?.
This tells me that the person it was built for most likely had a tall neck and did a lot of off hand shooting .
As such , even for it length , for such a person , the rifle would have been quick in the draw
Gustavus Erichson was a gun maker, gunsmith, and gun dealer in Houston from 1838 until 1872. Two of his sons, Otto and Alexander, continued the business until the 1890s.
An amazing rifle has just been discovered hidden away in the vault at the Sam Houston Memorial Museum in Huntsville, Texas. An original flintlock rifle that appears to have been stocked in Houston as early as 1840 and stamped G. ERICHSON HOUSTON. TEXAS. on the lock and the barrel. Mounted in iron with a pewter nosecap, stocked in walnut. This large rifle measures 61 inches overall and has a 43 5/8", .51 caliber, swamped barrel. The rifle is in fine shape and, at this time, is the only known Texas marked flintlock sporting rifle.
Post by: pathfinder on June 26, 2011, 11:41:00 AM
Post by: huntinguy on June 26, 2011, 01:23:43 PM
Quote from: "Captchee"
. Once you understand the basics and how the placement of each component effects the placement of another , then you can start using the book as a reference
This is definitely an area where I am having trouble… I can kinda see it as far as the main components but it is the transition areas I am having trouble with, the angle of the butt plate, the beginning of the bend to the butt from the barrel…
Quote from: "Captchee"
. Next consideration come style of shooting . Is the gun designed to be shot with a forward facing stance like a shot gun or a more side type of stance with the shoulder in the same direction as the target . IE the gun runs more across the chest the away from it . Once you understand these things you then can decide of you drop and cast .
I understand this mechanically but not quite yet from a build angle. I have been playing with an old CVA stock and that is where I am coming up with these weird numbers… I have been picking a point on a wall and mounting my rifle, then change the drop and do it again. I know that the more drop the more torque in recoil I will feel. This barrel thought shoots round balls with 55gr of FFF very well, so I don’t think it will be much recoil to worry about.
Quote from: "Captchee"
. Some are round , others swamped , others tapered .
I didn’t know that until I saw the pictures ridjrunr posted of his rifle…..
Quote from: "Captchee"
. Notice the differences in the drop . Look at the butt plate designs and see if you can understand how the rifle was meant to be shot .
So the AW Spies rifle looks to be an arm gun. And the Erichson looks to be a shoulder postion. More like what is commonly shot now. The Hummel looks like the deep hook would rest over the collar bone, so more direct facing the target and the Linn looks more like todays shooting style, 45 to the target.. Have I got them close?
Quote from: "pathfinder"
Again, a really fine reply by Charles! Can think of nothing else to add! Everything he said is right on,especially the part about the book being a progression of steps to be taken IN ORDER! One of the wisest things I've heard in a long time. Been building for over 30 years and that statement put's all of the gun building "secrets" into one bucket. :bow
I will post some pictures when the chips start to fall.
Greg.
Post by: Captchee on June 26, 2011, 02:40:30 PM
Quote from: "huntinguy"
Quote from: "Captchee". Once you understand the basics and how the placement of each component effects the placement of another , then you can start using the book as a reference
This is definitely an area where I am having trouble… I can kinda see it as far as the main components but it is the transition areas I am having trouble with, the angle of the butt plate, the beginning of the bend to the butt from the barrel…
again this this all depends on what your building. Thus you have to look at the style of rifle your doing . But generally these things start gradually to drastically from about the tang bolt
Quote from: "huntinguy"
Quote from: "Captchee". Next consideration come style of shooting . Is the gun designed to be shot with a forward facing stance like a shot gun or a more side type of stance with the shoulder in the same direction as the target . IE the gun runs more across the chest the away from it . Once you understand these things you then can decide of you drop and cast .I understand this mechanically but not quite yet from a build angle. I have been playing with an old CVA stock and that is where I am coming up with these weird numbers… I have been picking a point on a wall and mounting my rifle, then change the drop and do it again. I know that the more drop the more torque in recoil I will feel. This barrel thought shoots round balls with 55gr of FFF very well, so I don’t think it will be much recoil to worry about. [/qoute]
forget about the production guns . myself i have no idea who they are correct for . I have never seen one that fit anyone correctly . Be it in drop or pull .
They might if you wanted to mount a scope or were shooting off a bench a lot . But for off hand shooting , they cause you to contort your body like a monkey humping a football . In reality they have more to do IMO with a the idea of shouldering a modern center fire then they do with anything else .
When your setting this up for your new rifle what I find work is to stand relaxed . Shoulder the rifle without moving your head . You want a strait line of sight .
You will not that when you do this with the TC or CVA the barrel will be well below you line of sight . This causes you to have to lean over and bring your eye down .
If the rifle is properly fit , you shouldn’t have to do this very much .
So if you building a gun to be shot from the shoulder IE the top of the Butt plate is just below your collarbone , what you do is measure up from that point of your body , to the corner of your eye . Now subtract the height of your chosen sight .
What this now will give you is the amount of drop to the heal of your rifle .
When it comes to recoil . What I have found is that the more drastic the drop , the more the muzzle will want to rise up ignition . This doesn’t always hold true and is more prevalent with very high loads . Now what you do want to take into account is the grain of the wood . The more the drop . The more you need to be concerned about the grain running through the wrist . Especially if your building something with a very small diameter wristQuote from: "huntinguy"[Quote from: "Captchee". Notice the differences in the drop . Look at the butt plate designs and see if you can understand how the rifle was meant to be shot .
So the AW Spies rifle looks to be an arm gun. And the Erichson looks to be a shoulder postion. More like what is commonly shot now. The Hummel looks like the deep hook would rest over the collar bone, so more direct facing the target and the Linn looks more like todays shooting style, 45 to the target.. Have I got them close?[/qoute]
you would be correct with the AW Spies but you have the other 2 backwards .
think of it this way . you know where you place the butt to your shoulder with a shotgun right ?
Now realise the more the hook , the further off the shoulder the gun needs to be .
in some cases like with the Erichson the gun can set in the same place as a flat buttplate . but as the shape becomes more cupped and narrow , it must be moved further off the shoulderQuote from: "pathfinder"Again, a really fine reply by Charles! Can think of nothing else to add! Everything he said is right on,especially the part about the book being a progression of steps to be taken IN ORDER! One of the wisest things I've heard in a long time. Been building for over 30 years and that statement put's all of the gun building "secrets" into one bucket.
Quote
Pathfinder, I am really good at doing things in order… just not the order prescribed… I guess I need to calm down and take it slow.
yes . you need to start with the basics and go slow . everything . i mean everything has a relationship to something else . these guns dont look the way they do just because someone thinks they look cool . the look the way they do base on a need
spend as much time drawing your rifle out as you will building it. don’t start cutting tell your happy . in the end you will be happy you did . its a whole lot easier to use an eraser on a sheet of paper then it is to find out that your lines or parts placement is all wrong in the wood . Over time as you gain experience , much of this becomes second nature . Its still always has to be lined out but it will come quickly .
Many years ago when I first started building , I would cut out my drawing on a piece of plywood . That way I could actually shoulder the profile and check the fit and make minor adjustments
trust me with this . the slower you go , the more control you take of your tendance to want to rush , the better your end product will be . If you cant do that now , then 1/2 way through , your going to want to just get it done so that you can go out and shoot .
resist that want with every fiber of your being . the day will come when your done and you job will be much better for it
Post by: Captchee on June 27, 2011, 10:13:48 AM
this rifle was made by John Blanck. . while it originaly shot a belted ball . no real reason that it you couldnt use a regular barrel though
(http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y242/captchee/documentation/JohnBlancklondonbeltedball.jpg)
(http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y242/captchee/documentation/380375_detail7_max.jpg)
(http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y242/captchee/documentation/380375_detail5_max.jpg)
(http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y242/captchee/documentation/380375_detail3_max.jpg)
(http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y242/captchee/documentation/380375_detail6_max.jpg)
Post by: FlintSteel on July 01, 2011, 08:34:29 PM
Quote from: "Captchee"
How about this 1/2 stock now this is really going to set you back . but if your confused about what you want , IE flint or cap , why not do this
I'm confused Cap. Never saw a "Flintcaplock" before, or even heard of one for that matter. How does it work? Either or both? Kinda like wearing a belt with suspenders?
Post by: Captchee on July 02, 2011, 09:19:41 AM
Quote from: "FlintSteel"
Quote from: "Captchee"How about this 1/2 stock now this is really going to set you back . but if your confused about what you want , IE flint or cap , why not do this
I'm confused Cap. Never saw a "Flintcaplock" before, or even heard of one for that matter. How does it work? Either or both? Kinda like wearing a belt with suspenders?
well i dont know for sure but , YA eather or both is what it looks like to me
Post by: huntinguy on July 03, 2011, 12:31:08 PM
The lock was waiting at the door when we returned home. I do see what you mean by the parts will define the way things go together... WOW, That small Siler sure redesigned the how things will flow into the wrist..... and how the trigger and such will set in... I didn't realize it would make that much difference.
That last rifle Cap posted the picture of... it would take a stouter man that I to shoot that... Seems like you have your choice, a flash hole jet in front of you face or a cap lock jet coming around the hammer.... I will give it that it is an interesting work of art.
Still waiting for my taps.... darn....
Post by: huntinguy on July 21, 2011, 04:30:03 AM
I have squared (squared to the side facing the camera) and leveled the area that the plane is setting on. Do I need to square and level the top of the butt stock area for any reason. The wood seems to have a twist in it and it would cause a problem. Or can I just put a line, square to the area I have planed, where the butt plate will go?
Post by: Captchee on July 21, 2011, 09:27:25 AM
Quote
Do I need to square and level the top of the butt stock area for any reason. The wood seems to have a twist in it and it would cause a problem. Or can I just put a line, square to the area I have planed, where the butt plate will go?
you mean the comb area ?
you can if you like . what you need is a good centerline to your plank . everything builds from there .
so if you dont plane the comb , be sure to check your buttplate alignment so that its true for no cast or off sent for cast .
it should be noted that there are times when buttstock needs alittle twist as well .
do you have one of the building books ? if not , i would recommend getting one .
they will save you alot of Time money in the long run
Post by: Captchee on July 21, 2011, 09:34:40 AM
Quote
That last rifle Cap posted the picture of... it would take a stouter man that I to shoot that... Seems like you have your choice, a flash hole jet in front of you face or a cap lock jet coming around the hammer....
actually i cant see where either would happen . if you look closely , you will see that the pan is angled forward . as such the jet from the flashole would go forwards . looks to be about 100-maybe 112 deg or so away from the shooters face . .
simply about the same as one would do if venting a percussion drum .
Post by: huntinguy on July 22, 2011, 03:34:16 AM
Quote from: "Captchee"
you mean the comb area ?
you can if you like . what you need is a good centerline to your plank . everything builds from there .
so if you dont plane the comb , be sure to check your buttplate alignment so that its true for no cast or off sent for cast .
it should be noted that there are times when buttstock needs alittle twist as well do you have one of the building books ? if not , i would recommend getting one .
they will save you alot of Time money in the long run
I am Using Recreating the American Longrifle.
It says the top flat and lock side need to be square before starting. I think it is to make sure the lock and barrel are square for fit. I just didn't know if that thought needed to extend to the comb area (too little sleep and too much going on at home... couldn't think of the right name).
It seemed to me if I put lines from my two good surfaces onto the other surfaces it would be sufficient. We do that at work. I just wanted to check with those who know. Don't want to walk myself into a corner.
I just don't know how much of my machinist thinking transfers to gun building. I am used to working with datums and projections... metal is my thing... not so much wood.
Post by: Captchee on July 22, 2011, 10:35:01 AM
Quote
I just don't know how much of my machinist thinking transfers to gun building. I am used to working with datums and projections... metal is my thing... not so much wood.
well most all of it . just look at the wood as a soft metal . Use the knowledge you have and how its applied so as to make the parts you do .
The only real difference is that your going to have to learn to trust your eye to tell your hands what to do . You can use all your other tools to check your work/ tolerances . Just like if you were turning a part . You are now the mill or lathe
as to the last part . that’s not uncommon . allot of folks are better at their bright work or better at the wood work .. very few , to include myself ,are good at both aspects
IMO good choice in books . Shumways writings are what I learned on many years ago .
It also is better to read all of the book before you start . That way you understand how and why shummay is doing what he is .
If you don’t and try to do things a chapter at a time , your never going to understand why he has done a given thing because it relates to something a few chap peters away .
don’t get me wrong here , you still have to follow the order of build . But it helps a lot to understand the WHY of that order before you start .
Where the book does fall short is that it doesn’t provide a lot of photos .
While it can leave a first time person with questions . IMO this is good because it makes you think . You have to take your time and work through the lack of understanding .
Thus down the road you will have the mind set to figure out how something’s were done . Basically its training you to be self reliant and how to analyze the situation . This is one of the biggest things , if I look back , that shumways book taught me .
I can tell its working on you to because your asking why Does this need to be done ? .
soon you will be able to backwards plan and answer that question . to the point when you see a photo of a gun you will be able to it as small projects . realizing just how each project relates to eachother and the order in which they were done .
Today people want photos to show them why . Thus when asked why something needs to be done , they say ; ahhh because .
See they don’t know . They just followed what someone else did .
They look at a photo of a finished work and wonder . But few have the natural ability to figure it out .
Case in point . The LaPage im working on had an adjustable rear sight . All its working are hidden under the standing breech . I found no photos showing these workings .
But after many long hours of setting there starring at the photos , it finally dawned on me . My mind finally clicked and I realized just how overly simple it was . Along with that came the process needed to complete the working adjustable sight .
Im 99% sure if someday I do run across a photo of an original , im going to be dead on in my assessment.
IMO being able to do that is one of the things shummway was trying to teach from the very start . It maynot have been intentional . But it happened never the less
Right now your probably looking at a drawing of your finished shock on the side of your plank and wondering ;Why do I need to plane this top squire when im just going to remove it ?
Well because what you did was that you didn’t cut your plank ¼ to ½ over size of your drawing . If you had , you wouldn’t be cutting off what you squared up . The process of squaring brings the top of the comb down to very close to the final finished top edge of the comb .
See shumway doesn’t cover drawing out the stock on paper . He is drawing the stock out on the wood . Thus that big plank he starting with is all trued up so he can do his reference lines . Thus he has enough wood to allow for drop , cast and such .
But if you have you stock outline already drawn onto the plank . Then your ahead of what he is doing at this step .
So you should have a stock blank cut to approx ¼ larger then what your finished project should be . Then that is all squared up so as to start placing your reference lines.
Does that make since or am I confusing you ?
your squaring things up is to ensure that you start with parallel surfaces. Just like when you put a part in your mill.
this helps you draw your center line is drawn . From that line all your measurements are taken and drawn at 90 deg . It also ensures that when you clamp the stock so as to drill a hole , your doing so with a true base .
Its also going to help you with your depth measurement for the barrel inlet .
When it comes to the comb area , having the top edge square and the sides parallel, allows you to take proper measurements for the butt plate placement as well as the cheek piece placement. It also ensures that if the stock has any twist , cant or offset , its there because the builder put it there . It gives you a proper base for all your measurements, just like it does on the forestock .
If you don’t do this then your going to have to remember to compensate .
The other thing I would remind you is to not forget about your files and rasps .
Use these tools to bring things down . Then use your plane to do the finish truing
My copy of shumways work may be different then yours . But on page 32 or close to it ,is a picture of the beginning steps your going through .
Myself I start with the stock looking like #2. I then square the sides and the barrel area and the top and bottom edge ..
I then draw my centerline all the way around the stock . I then draw in my cast line ..
I then come off that center line 90 deg and mark the placment of each side of the barrel ,my lock mortices , entry thimble , nose of the comb , begining of the cheek plate .............
Keep in mind all this is being done to provide references . The stock should at this point still be way to thick in all its demission’s . the only part that’s going to not change , or change very little , is along the barrel . This area will then only be changed as you do the final shaping .
Again all this work shumway is showing is all setup for the next steps in the actual inletting and layout of the parts . Once you get a few stocks under your belt , your going to be able to do a lot of this by eye . Thus you will need less references to go by .
but tell then its best you use as many refrances as you can .
So here is my advise to you . If you think you can remember to compensate in your layout for the commb being out of square on the top edge . Then go for it . Carry your lines across just as your thinking . Just make sure that you sides are parallel to start and that the plank is way wider then what you need .
Always remember that just like with your mill work . What you want is fully hidden inside that plank of wood . Its up to you to remove all the surrounding material leaving only the item left .
the important part is to follow the order of build so as to ensure that each part relates properly to the next part . IE the barrel placement dictates the lock placement by its breech location . Which in turn dictates the side plate and trigger placement and final position of the lock panels . Triggers dictate the butt plate and trigger guard ………..
its like a tree growing from a seed . It all starts off with that seed and no mater how big the tree grows or how many branches it makes , it all starts and relates to its base .
Right now your base for all the above is the placement of your references. The base of those references is in truing your plank .
i also want to say this . Im not very good a writing . The longer my posts get , the more they wonder . As such im going to send you a PM with my #
If I have confused you or your still unsure , then step back and give me a call .
I can line you out real quick over the phone . No issue
Post by: huntinguy on July 24, 2011, 03:44:11 AM
Quote
"the important part is to follow the order of build so as to ensure that each part relates properly to the next part . IE the barrel placement dictates the lock placement by its breech location . Which in turn dictates the side plate and trigger placement and final position of the lock panels . Triggers dictate the butt plate and trigger guard ………..
its like a tree growing from a seed . It all starts off with that seed and no mater how big the tree grows or how many branches it makes , it all starts and relates to its base ."
This light dawned on me today as I was working on the barrel.
I started to see why the barrel has to be set first, Then the lock becomes dependent on the barrel and then the trigger... etc. I was, am, not really, the light is starting to come, on why the butt plate goes where it does.
Quote
"What you want is fully hidden inside that plank of wood . Its up to you to remove all the surrounding material leaving only the item left.[/quote][/quote]
I am used to working off casting and machine planes. The big difference is that at work they are numbers in space and I can see them in my mind, here... they are more of a feeling in wood... much different. I do understand the square and perpendicular thing. That is why today I marked the forearm as master, so I wouldn't' forget the butt area is warped and twisted.
my stock is still full blank size, I have not started cutting it down yet. I do, did, have a reason for that. 1, I am not sure of my wood working skills and this way I can start carving the barrel Chanel high and get the feel of it before I get too far into the wood. 2, there was another person building their rifle and missed on the barrel channel. The suggestion was to re-cut deeper if possible... I just wanted to save that life vest for myself.
I redrew my lines on the top of the blank last night and saw that the wood is warped and twisted. IF I try to square as Shumway suggests I will take my blank too small. However, knowing I want about .250 of cast, I redrew with my barrel center line, with the barrel channel portion of the stock, and set that line to the top end of the comb and that in turn set my cast almost exactly where I want it to be. In other words the wood is warped about .250 so it all works out for me even to the .375 for the cheek piece. (in short there is a .250 variation between the center line as it is between the blank ends and where the barrel channel line, following the forearm section of the barrel meets the front of the comb.)
I really started this project thinking this was all a series of components assembled together, I have now discovered this is one component built upon another.
Considering I wanted to make as much of this rifle as I could... I now realize this is going to take a very long, long time.
Quote
Today people want photos to show them why . Thus when asked why something needs to be done , they say ; ahhh because .
See they don’t know . They just followed what someone else did .
Never was me, I need to understand what the reasons are, the mechanics, the history of a situation.
This is really beginning to become fun :bl th up
Post by: huntinguy on August 04, 2011, 12:11:33 AM
First item of business was to bottom grind the tap so I could get flush to the bottom of the breach. This was my solution. It gave a nice hollow grind to the bottom of the tap.
[attachment=1:owan8k8w][/attachment]tap.jpg[/attachment:owan8k8w]
There is a tutorial on this site that made installing a breech plug look soo easy…. Professionals at work do that…. This is going to take me some time.
This is the reason all of this started. Some years back… someone :oops: )
Post by: huntinguy on August 04, 2011, 12:25:31 PM
In the book the American Longrifle, George says the flash hole is supposed to be off the breech plug by half the hole diameter or half the flash hole liner. He also states that the back of the lock fence should be even with the back of the barrel.
So, on my lock the back fence to center of pan is 3/8 inch. My breech plug is close to 5/8 long. I don't see how I can get his numbers.
My breech plug is 9/16 18 and the barrel is 45 cal. Can I get away with counter boring my breech plug and putting my flash hole liner through the barrel and the breech plug into the counter bore... Or am I asking for trouble?
I found this image on another forum. [attachment=0:2k6qv5cu][/attachment]breech plug.jpg[/attachment:2k6qv5cu]
It is kinda what I am talking about but I would drill for the liner into the counter bored area. How deep can I go with the counter bore before I get into trouble. I think I would have to go in about 3/8 deep (I figured about the same diameter.)
Post by: Captchee on August 04, 2011, 12:50:51 PM
fit your flashhole then set the lock to it .
as to counterboring or doing a patent breech . yes you can do that . BUT the channel needs to be smaller then the plug your showing. which looks nice but i wouldnt trust a plug made of brass or bronze .
now it could be a alloy and that would be fine . but it doesnt apear to be .
but anyway . ya you could counter bore the center so as to provied a 1/4 inch hole .
but your incresing the chances that fouling will rear its head and creat an issue down the road
Post by: huntinguy on August 11, 2011, 02:39:34 PM
Stock work starts next...
Post by: Captchee on August 12, 2011, 11:02:53 AM
But don’t forget that you also still have to draw file the barrel . Which will bering the flats down to match the tang .
Your plug face to the inside barrel shoulder looks good by the way
Post by: huntinguy on August 12, 2011, 03:31:51 PM
These are the things I found out doing this.
I started trimming the breach plug using a 10 inch smooth cut mill file. I found that was too hard to control as far a keeping things flat goes, and it removes material TOO fast.
I then switched to a Swiss pattern file. This was too flexible and started to crown the plug. I did find I had more control over the amount of material coming off though.
I then switched to a 6 inch double cut pillar file. That might have worked but being double cut... one mistake and... darn... another trip around.
I then switched to 220 grit wet/dry sand paper placed flat on a mirror (I used cutting oil on the paper for lubrication). This worked pretty well. But, still, it is amazing how little material needs to come off to fit a breech plug.
I finally settled with 400 grit wet/dry using the mirror method. I have to admit, this worked the best for me and for those who are not file savvy I would recommend this method.
Being as how I had used up one full thread of the breech plug I decided to go for fit only. Once I got the fit the way I wanted it, I used the lathe to re-bore and face the barrel to get the proper clocking.
I believe I have somewhere over 30 hours in just fitting the plug... At this rate I may have this rifle done and ready for my great-great-grandchildren.
Capachee, said to go slow... I just didn't realize how slow slow was.
Post by: huntinguy on November 14, 2011, 04:25:13 PM
So, I have the barrel almost inlet... well I have about .06 in depth to go. I keep using lipstick (gals at walmart are starting to look at me funny....) to mark the stock high points... HOW the double rammrods am I supposed to keep the octagonal angles correct??? I have been using a 1/4 chisels to work the high spots but I think I am loosing the angles. I lipstick up the barrel, put it in the stock, slide it back and forth, give it a light clamp and tap, then remove it... and now NO lipstick marks?????? :Doh!
Please, some advise or gin
(BTW, I don't have a clue what gin is... so joking on that one. )
Post by: Captchee on November 14, 2011, 08:33:32 PM
Then when you remover the transferred color just remove enough to remove the color . What your after when the barrel is fully inlet it will have full color everywhere . But if you remove to much wood , then you end up chasing yourself. Because the area around the area you just removed , is now to low .
Strait barrels are a lot easier to inlet because you can use the breech end as a scraper . But you have to go slow and make sure the barrel doesn’t turn as you scrape back and forth
Post by: huntinguy on November 15, 2011, 02:49:22 AM
I was thinking about using the barrel like that but was worried it wouldn't work. I will give it a try next week when I get another chance to work on it.
Post by: Kermit on November 26, 2011, 08:01:24 PM