black powder barrel

tahoe2 · November 10, 2011, 11:41 PM

I have a Hawken percussion rifle in .50 cal and my buddy has an inline also in .50 cal, and I was just curious as to why the barrels are so thick? Aren't the pressures of modern smokeless powders much higher than black powder, so why can't black powder barrels be made thinner? Thanks in advance to all those that respond. In all fairness I'm new to BP!

Ideal Tool · November 11, 2011, 12:10 AM

Could be to prevent "Davy Crocketing" them..He once told someone that he had loaded a ball so tight..he had to hammer it all the way down..when fired..why, that barrel just turned itself inside out!..rifling was now on the outside..(and I bet you thought fluted barrels were something new!)
Seriously, it is probably from tradition..the Hawkin rifles were made stout to survive a fall from horseback & brls. were thick walled to withstand 100gr. or more charges.

Jim Watson · November 11, 2011, 12:17 AM

Tradition and appearance now.
But in the day, barrels were hand forged out of pretty low grade iron.
Old horseshoe nails were well thought of, the clop, clop, clop was supposed to have "condensed" the metal.
Low strength called for high thickness.

Even then it was not absolutely necessary, look at a musket, rifle musket, or fowling piece.

Had I lived back then, I would have had a nice 7 lb fowling piece. I can't see well enough without glasses to benefit from a 12 lb rifle.

briandg · November 11, 2011, 02:24 AM

barrels back then were low grade steel. Very, very weak. Every time someone tried making thin steel barrels, well, eventually a flaw would cause the things to blow out. If you have a good enough weak spot in a barrel, let the thing pit and rust, and there's only maybe .25 inches of metal, it will blow out at black powder pressures.

consider a couple things. with a percussion rifle, all that pressure is held in by only a layer of foil. with a flint lock, you actually have an open hole into the barrel, and no seal at all. this should tell you that the pressures are really pretty modest.

When you look at some of the guns made today, will see that barrels today have less than half of the steel used in BP days, and they even taper.

Dixie gun works had a gimmick. they would drill a flash hole in a barrel, screw plugs into each end after packing it with powder, and set the thing off with cannon fuse.

Golly, that barrel never blew up.

BP barrels were overbuilt in the old days because steel was horrible. Overbuilding saved lives. We did not change the process as the materials improved.

that simple.

arcticap · November 11, 2011, 04:00 AM

The thick barrels also allow for both the reboring and refreshing of the rifling after it became worn out and/or the bore pitted.
The barrel could then be made into a larger caliber.
I don't know if doing that was intended, however that was what could have resulted.

Hawg · November 11, 2011, 01:33 PM

People back then were of smaller stature, heavy barrels helped dampen recoil. Barrel strength was not an issue. Look at the barrels on fowlers and rifle muskets.

Rifleman1776 · November 11, 2011, 01:38 PM

I don't know about the recoil dampening bit. But, otherwise, a lot of good replies. In essence, it was over engineering. But, don't think rifle builders were not wise back then. A heavy barrel, just as today, dampens the harmonics that destroy accuracy. Lighter barrels are found on many longrifles. Often those had 'swamped' barrels that dampened harmonics for accuracy. The lighter weight and graceful lines were not unnoticed either.

HisSoldier · November 11, 2011, 06:04 PM

A friend of mine who has made a number of BP rifles and muskets told me that he read or heard that one test of a BP rifle produced pressures in the range of 6000 lb square inch, which if true means they could be drastically thinner.

I measured my KelTec at that place near the muzzle where it's necked down for lock function and it's .015" thick there.

Also, I've wondered at the wall thickness of some of the 1840 period muskets, maybe .100" to .125", looked real thin with that big bore. Sure enough it's the squeaking wheel that gets the grease, and the barrels that blow up that determine how thick rifle barrels are going to be, plus common consumer expectations. Since we all know of the multiple rifles picked up on battlefields during the civil war with loads on top of many loads I bet that may be why. I'd rather my grenades look like grenades rather than looking like rifles, someone might make a mistake!

g.willikers · November 12, 2011, 09:23 AM

Mr. Watson,
According to the last couple of American history books that I've read, you would have been in good company with the fowling piece.
Apparently, there were lots more of them than rifles in the hands of the early Americans, farmers, pioneers and explorers.
The shotgun has been touted by some as the gun that really won the west.

November 10, 2011, 11:41 PM	#1
tahoe2 Senior Member Join Date: August 13, 2011 Location: Seattle area Posts: 661	black powder barrel I have a Hawken percussion rifle in .50 cal and my buddy has an inline also in .50 cal, and I was just curious as to why the barrels are so thick? Aren't the pressures of modern smokeless powders much higher than black powder, so why can't black powder barrels be made thinner? Thanks in advance to all those that respond. In all fairness I'm new to BP!

November 11, 2011, 06:04 PM	#8
HisSoldier Senior Member Join Date: August 9, 2007 Location: Oregoncoast Posts: 1,793	A friend of mine who has made a number of BP rifles and muskets told me that he read or heard that one test of a BP rifle produced pressures in the range of 6000 lb square inch, which if true means they could be drastically thinner. I measured my KelTec at that place near the muzzle where it's necked down for lock function and it's .015" thick there. Also, I've wondered at the wall thickness of some of the 1840 period muskets, maybe .100" to .125", looked real thin with that big bore. Sure enough it's the squeaking wheel that gets the grease, and the barrels that blow up that determine how thick rifle barrels are going to be, plus common consumer expectations. Since we all know of the multiple rifles picked up on battlefields during the civil war with loads on top of many loads I bet that may be why. I'd rather my grenades look like grenades rather than looking like rifles, someone might make a mistake! __________________ CNC produced 416 stainless triggers to replace the plastic triggers on Colt Mustangs, Mustang Plus II's, MK IV Government .380's and Sig P238's and P938's. Plus Colt Mustang hardened 416 guide rods, and Llama .32 and .380 recoil spring buttons, checkered nicely and blued.

November 12, 2011, 09:23 AM	#9
g.willikers Senior Member Join Date: September 28, 2008 Posts: 10,442	Mr. Watson, According to the last couple of American history books that I've read, you would have been in good company with the fowling piece. Apparently, there were lots more of them than rifles in the hands of the early Americans, farmers, pioneers and explorers. The shotgun has been touted by some as the gun that really won the west. __________________ Walt Kelly, alias Pogo, sez: “Don't take life so serious, son, it ain't nohow permanent.”

November 11, 2011, 12:10 AM	#2
Ideal Tool Junior member Join Date: October 6, 2010 Location: Michigan Posts: 1,080	Could be to prevent "Davy Crocketing" them..He once told someone that he had loaded a ball so tight..he had to hammer it all the way down..when fired..why, that barrel just turned itself inside out!..rifling was now on the outside..(and I bet you thought fluted barrels were something new!) Seriously, it is probably from tradition..the Hawkin rifles were made stout to survive a fall from horseback & brls. were thick walled to withstand 100gr. or more charges.

November 11, 2011, 12:17 AM	#3
Jim Watson Senior Member Join Date: October 25, 2001 Location: Alabama Posts: 18,579	Tradition and appearance now. But in the day, barrels were hand forged out of pretty low grade iron. Old horseshoe nails were well thought of, the clop, clop, clop was supposed to have "condensed" the metal. Low strength called for high thickness. Even then it was not absolutely necessary, look at a musket, rifle musket, or fowling piece. Had I lived back then, I would have had a nice 7 lb fowling piece. I can't see well enough without glasses to benefit from a 12 lb rifle.

November 11, 2011, 02:24 AM	#4
briandg Senior Member Join Date: May 4, 2010 Posts: 5,468	barrels back then were low grade steel. Very, very weak. Every time someone tried making thin steel barrels, well, eventually a flaw would cause the things to blow out. If you have a good enough weak spot in a barrel, let the thing pit and rust, and there's only maybe .25 inches of metal, it will blow out at black powder pressures. consider a couple things. with a percussion rifle, all that pressure is held in by only a layer of foil. with a flint lock, you actually have an open hole into the barrel, and no seal at all. this should tell you that the pressures are really pretty modest. When you look at some of the guns made today, will see that barrels today have less than half of the steel used in BP days, and they even taper. Dixie gun works had a gimmick. they would drill a flash hole in a barrel, screw plugs into each end after packing it with powder, and set the thing off with cannon fuse. Golly, that barrel never blew up. BP barrels were overbuilt in the old days because steel was horrible. Overbuilding saved lives. We did not change the process as the materials improved. that simple.

November 11, 2011, 04:00 AM	#5
arcticap Senior Member Join Date: March 15, 2005 Location: Central Connecticut Posts: 3,166	The thick barrels also allow for both the reboring and refreshing of the rifling after it became worn out and/or the bore pitted. The barrel could then be made into a larger caliber. I don't know if doing that was intended, however that was what could have resulted.

November 11, 2011, 01:33 PM	#6
Hawg Senior Member Join Date: September 8, 2007 Location: Mississippi Posts: 16,194	People back then were of smaller stature, heavy barrels helped dampen recoil. Barrel strength was not an issue. Look at the barrels on fowlers and rifle muskets.

November 11, 2011, 01:38 PM	#7
Rifleman1776 Senior Member Join Date: April 25, 2010 Location: Arkansas Posts: 3,309	I don't know about the recoil dampening bit. But, otherwise, a lot of good replies. In essence, it was over engineering. But, don't think rifle builders were not wise back then. A heavy barrel, just as today, dampens the harmonics that destroy accuracy. Lighter barrels are found on many longrifles. Often those had 'swamped' barrels that dampened harmonics for accuracy. The lighter weight and graceful lines were not unnoticed either.