New barrel construction question

[Cannonsight]

I'm looking at an original 1863 Springfield that has been rebarreled. I noticed that the barrel is constructed differently than an original, having a separate breech section like a modern replica rather than a one-piece barrel with a forge-welded bolster. Is this common practice among builders of replacement barrels? My second question is this; I've read that modern replica muskets have misfiring issues due to the differences in breech/bolster construction. Is this an issue with this type replacement barrel? I might add that this is set up for skirmishing with glass bedding, and tall front sight.

[Maillemaker]

I would bet yes. You would probably be hard pressed to find anyone who can forge weld a bolster onto a barrel blank. It is far easier to be able to make barrels independent of the breech. And casting the breech.

[Curt]

Hallo!

Yes, many replacement barrels used cast breech sections with a sleeve that slipped into the barrel. When disguised the jo9int was typically invisible to the eye.

The mis-fire problem with repro muskets is "complicated." Part of it is structural in bow the Italians "simplified" the flash channel so as to make 90 degree drilling runs. Part of it is the reenactor use of 'N-SSA" competition stryle cones (nipples) with small vents which do not work as well with blank charge pressures and foul readily. And part is a coking issues when reenactors are lax with cone and bolster cleaning and coke builds up and constricts the flash channel.

Also some older Italian repro's still floating around sometimes do not have removable breech plugs.

Curt

[Cannonsight]

Thanks for the info. I acquired the rifle musket yesterday and curiosity got the best of me. I pulled the barrel and was pleased to find the Whitaker logo on the bottom side. It is also marked ".577" so I'm thinking minies from my .575 mold will be just the ticket