Torador Barrel Investigation - Part II

rickystl · 18th October 2015, 06:21 PM

Now the breech end.........

rickystl · 18th October 2015, 06:22 PM

Last ones.............

kahnjar1 · 18th October 2015, 06:54 PM

Hi Rick,
Well I have to admit I am surprised! The thing which interests me is that if the patched?? lead ball when loaded has to be forced past a swamped area of the barrel, what happens when it reaches the more "open" part? I would have thought that the ball would then not be a snug fit anymore, and pressure would be lost past the ball at the time of ignition of the powder.
Also when fired the pressure inside the barrel would be markedly increased on the way out, again when the ball reaches the swamped area, which I would have thought would have increased the chance of the barrel bursting at that point.
Swamped barrels would be safe if lead shot was used rather than a solid ball.

I do not for one moment doubt your findings, but it goes against the safe laws of ballistics as I know them.

I also need to comment on the barrel itself. You would be correct in thinking the barrel was forge welded round a mandrel. That is how the beautiful pattern you have there is created. This method was also used in England and European countries, and we know there are some really exquisite barrels which have come from there.
Regards Stu

rickystl · 18th October 2015, 07:41 PM

Hi Stu.
It's very unusual to say the least. There is a short 1-1 1/2" narrow section (smaller than the bore diameter) between where the ball sits in the barrel, and the loose powder in the breech. And the ball not sitting on top of the powder would seem to reduce velocity. And, could even be considered a bore obstruction!

But they seemed to believe this design, along with the long barrels, was more accurate. Which, of course, defies what you and I understand of black powder ballistics.
I think the best explanation for this bore design was posted by Forum member Richard in Part-I of my original Thread. The ancient "meal" powder versus the later "corn" powder. Apparently the old meal powder would not reliably ignite if compressed. If this is true, than that would explain the loose (non-compressed) powder in the large chamber funneling through a narrower chamber to help increase pressure/velocity to the ball make more sense.
Of course, I would not shoot the gun with this bore configuration. Especially with today's black powder, which is more powerful than even the 1880's powder. Which also means, that this barrel will require a new steel liner if I intend to shoot it.

Rick.

kahnjar1 · 19th October 2015, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickystl

Hi Stu.
It's very unusual to say the least. There is a short 1-1 1/2" narrow section (smaller than the bore diameter) between where the ball sits in the barrel, and the loose powder in the breech. And the ball not sitting on top of the powder would seem to reduce velocity. And, could even be considered a bore obstruction!

But they seemed to believe this design, along with the long barrels, was more accurate. Which, of course, defies what you and I understand of black powder ballistics.
I think the best explanation for this bore design was posted by Forum member Richard in Part-I of my original Thread. The ancient "meal" powder versus the later "corn" powder. Apparently the old meal powder would not reliably ignite if compressed. If this is true, than that would explain the loose (non-compressed) powder in the large chamber funneling through a narrower chamber to help increase pressure/velocity to the ball make more sense.
Of course, I would not shoot the gun with this bore configuration. Especially with today's black powder, which is more powerful than even the 1880's powder. Which also means, that this barrel will require a new steel liner if I intend to shoot it.

Rick.

Hi Rick, I see Berkley has provided a very clear illustration of what you have described. Thanks Berkley for clarifying that.
Your comment about long barrels is a slightly different subject. The reason that (most) black powder guns have long barrels is due to the way black powder reacts when ignited. On ignition black powder gradually builds up pressure as it pushes the ball down the barrel. This does not happen with nitro powder which instantly creates the pressure upon ignition.
The other difference is that NITRO powder requires to be COMPRESSED if it is to explode. If not compressed it will only flare up. You can try this for yourself but DO NOT do it inside...... and DO NOT try to ignite black powder in this way!!

Berkley · 19th October 2015, 08:27 PM

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:

I dug out some very dry bits of paper that was serving as an over shot wad. Then I dug out a bunch of corroded shot. It was so corroded that it was just a mass of granular white gunk but could be recognized as having been lead shot at one time a long time ago. Following the corroded shot, there was more dry crumbled paper and then I dug out the original powder charge.

Pukka Bundook · 23rd October 2015, 03:50 PM

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.

rickystl · 24th October 2015, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Berkley

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:

Berkley: Thanks for the Link to your Torador - that was still loaded !!!! Very nice gun, especially the western style trigger. Very unusual. I think these barrels were loaded with bare ball (no patch UNDER the ball). Then a tight wadding on TOP of the ball to keep it from rolling down the barrel while the gun was in transit. They seemed to believe that the loose powder would build up most of it's pressure in the chamber, then forced through the narrow section. Rather than building pressure while traveling down the barrel. It's certainly a curious theory for black powder ballistics.

Rick.

rickystl · 24th October 2015, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kahnjar1

Hi Rick, I see Berkley has provided a very clear illustration of what you have described. Thanks Berkley for clarifying that.
Your comment about long barrels is a slightly different subject. The reason that (most) black powder guns have long barrels is due to the way black powder reacts when ignited. On ignition black powder gradually builds up pressure as it pushes the ball down the barrel. This does not happen with nitro powder which instantly creates the pressure upon ignition.
The other difference is that NITRO powder requires to be COMPRESSED if it is to explode. If not compressed it will only flare up. You can try this for yourself but DO NOT do it inside...... and DO NOT try to ignite black powder in this way!!

Hi Stu.
Well, of course you are correct. The longer barrels gave more time for the powder to burn and build up velocity. Also, the longer barrels often offered a better sight plain.
But this 55.5" barrel is so long, I would probably have to put a dab of white paint on the brass front bead sight just to see it - with my old eyes. LOL!!

Rick.

18th October 2015, 06:21 PM	#1
rickystl Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: St. Louis, MO area. Posts: 1,630	Now the breech end......... Attached Images

18th October 2015, 06:22 PM	#2
rickystl Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: St. Louis, MO area. Posts: 1,630	Last ones............. Attached Images

18th October 2015, 06:54 PM	#3
kahnjar1 Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: CHRISTCHURCH NEW ZEALAND Posts: 2,786	Hi Rick, Well I have to admit I am surprised! The thing which interests me is that if the patched?? lead ball when loaded has to be forced past a swamped area of the barrel, what happens when it reaches the more "open" part? I would have thought that the ball would then not be a snug fit anymore, and pressure would be lost past the ball at the time of ignition of the powder. Also when fired the pressure inside the barrel would be markedly increased on the way out, again when the ball reaches the swamped area, which I would have thought would have increased the chance of the barrel bursting at that point. Swamped barrels would be safe if lead shot was used rather than a solid ball. I do not for one moment doubt your findings, but it goes against the safe laws of ballistics as I know them. I also need to comment on the barrel itself. You would be correct in thinking the barrel was forge welded round a mandrel. That is how the beautiful pattern you have there is created. This method was also used in England and European countries, and we know there are some really exquisite barrels which have come from there. Regards Stu

18th October 2015, 07:41 PM	#4
rickystl Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: St. Louis, MO area. Posts: 1,630	Hi Stu. It's very unusual to say the least. There is a short 1-1 1/2" narrow section (smaller than the bore diameter) between where the ball sits in the barrel, and the loose powder in the breech. And the ball not sitting on top of the powder would seem to reduce velocity. And, could even be considered a bore obstruction! But they seemed to believe this design, along with the long barrels, was more accurate. Which, of course, defies what you and I understand of black powder ballistics. I think the best explanation for this bore design was posted by Forum member Richard in Part-I of my original Thread. The ancient "meal" powder versus the later "corn" powder. Apparently the old meal powder would not reliably ignite if compressed. If this is true, than that would explain the loose (non-compressed) powder in the large chamber funneling through a narrower chamber to help increase pressure/velocity to the ball make more sense. Of course, I would not shoot the gun with this bore configuration. Especially with today's black powder, which is more powerful than even the 1880's powder. Which also means, that this barrel will require a new steel liner if I intend to shoot it. Rick.

23rd October 2015, 03:50 PM	#7
Pukka Bundook 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.