HuntingNet.com Forums - View Single Post - Early Renegade barrels...........
View Single Post
Old 03-06-2007 | 08:00 PM
  #14  
SHills
Fork Horn
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
From: Rochester, NY
Default RE: Early Renegade barrels...........

To all,
Some of you saw my post about the used custom kit rifle I purchased w/the Douglas barrel. I did some research and called the factory. I tried to find out the years they made BP barrels. I spoke w/an older employee and he gave me some rough dates of 1962-1987. On the bottom of my barrel it is stampedclearly, GR Douglas 50 cal. No twist is indicated but he did say it was a slow twist.My rifle has a Longs lock of Denver and I have zero info on this one other than it is mid to early 80's @ the youngest. I remembered an interview I read that Wakeman did w/Doc White. The article is pretty clear but open to interpertation when in reference to sabot loads. Here is the article!

http://www.chuckhawks.com/doc_white4.htm
"DOC: One of the big problems in the muzzleloading industry is the lack of standardization that exists in the modern gun industry. That standardization is the lone factor that has made modern guns so predictable and trustworthy. We have been downright spoiled by that fact. It has also worked to the benefit of the manufacturers, because the customer knows that he can trust the products of even obscure makers, whch makes for easy sales.
Standardization in muzzleloading would have a similar effect, but it would present some problems to certain manufacturers. They would have to step up to the quality control home plate, but I think they would hit a homer if they did. The current situation is chaotic and confused, to say the least, somewhat akin to the teen years of human life; maturity approaches but at a distance. Thus the panic and distress, and thus the hate mail rather than a measured, responsible approach.
The question of extruded steel barrels is another matter. Douglas used extruded steel for their round ball barrels for years, extruding just the blanks then drilling, reaming and rifling as usual.
The steel was quite brittle; screwing in a breechplug would sometimes crack the barrel. They finally desisted after several lawsuits. Yes, their barrels were accurate and enjoyed a great reputation. Those that have survived for years are probably going to survive for centuries. Still, unless the technology of extrusion and annealing has changed, and as far as I know it has not, the question will eventually be answered in the same fashion (in the courts), since average pressures using modern sabots, rather than round balls, have about doubled.
RW: On the subject of barrels, I was surprised when a major muzzleloading manufacturer related their allowable rifling depth tolerances to me: it is .0035" to .006". I was further taken aback to learn that these "tolerances" are not just from barrel to barrel, but they are allowable tolerances in the very SAME barrel! Doc, you has mentioned in one of our conversations that realm of windage, not quite coincidentally, is the range that saboted projectiles can seal. Muzzleloading bullet specialists have additionally verified this. It seems that, for lack of a better term, many muzzleloading companies can "get away" with this type of slop as sabots have a bit of memory, and tolerate the rough ride though a barrel like this. Yet, pure lead conicals do not have this ability. It seems that White rifles' barrel tolerances, and their proficiency at throwing conicals into the same hole where other manufacturers' rifles fail, is far more than just rate of twist, GBQ steel, and barrel rigidity-but is contingent on your rifling tolerances as well. Is this the case?"

What is your opinion on the article?
Thanks, SHills
SHills is offline  
Reply