Loyalist Arms Lorenz rifled version?

[Steve Weems]

While web surfing came across Loyalist Arms selling a rifled version of their 1854 Lorenz. They credit a Dykes Reber of the Muzzleloader Shop in
N. Little Rock , Arkansas with making ther rifled barrel --apparently thru relining. Has this ever been submitted for NSSA approval? Like many I am
doubtful of the quality of the Indian made repro's.

[John Holland]

Steve,

The arm in question has never been submitted to the Small Arms Committee for either an Individual, or a Production Approval. Nor have we ever even seen a sample of one. If someone owns one and would like to bring it into Small arms during our regular business hours at the Nationals we would be more than happy to examine it. If it would be submitted for approval at that time we would like to see all documentation on the barrel, such as who actually lined it, including their paperwork showing liability, what liner was used, and the process used to line the barrel. A barrel being approved would also have to be presented in an unbreeched condition for inspection purposes.

At this point you are probably thinking this is a bit tedious, but it is what we are required to do.

Like you, we are very skeptical of the barrels coming out of India.

Sincerely,
John Holland
Chairman, Small Arms Committee

[Edwin Flint, 8427]

Like you, we are very skeptical of the barrels coming out of India.

Correctly So!

I have seen pictures of a Loyalist Arms Brown Bess that ruptured. The actual guns I have seen did not look or feel solid (safe). Unless they have changed, These are imported unvented. In short, for show, not firing.

[Southron Sr.]

Most of the repro arms from India use barrels that are made from "seamless steel tubing" and that always makes me nervous-

Those repro guns from India are much better used as "wall hangers."

I like my barrels made out of good old 4140, Thank You!

[Steve Weems]

I am currently having my Muster 1854 relined to .54 so that is where I voted my money--that being said I was once told by one of our well known reliners that the
the reline tube takes the effect of the powder explosion. If the imported Lorenz 1854's have a quality reline put in place it seems to me that the safety factor
should be acceptable.
The last several years I have worked in gunsmithing on comtemporary firearms and have seen a number of destroyed or severely damaged guns and in
every case so far it was the fault of the shooter. I have also heard of the blown Indian made firearms and assume it was the metal fault but cannot but
help wondering if it was not a case of a shooter not having the ball properly seated or useing smokeless powder or doing something else to create and
unsafe event.

[RangerFrog]

Steve, there is one factor different between the front stuffers and modern rifles... the breech plug vs bolt, etc. A liner will still have a breech plug at the rear which will need to maintain its integrity when ignition occurs. :shock: Just a thought, but an important one, IMHO! :roll:

Froggie

[Steve Weems]

The only dog I have in this hunt is the satisfaction of my curiosity--so I spoke with Mr Reber this afternoon and he indicated the following:
1. The relines are acquired from a barrel maker and are made of 4140 steel--apparently they are .54 slug gun liners( something I know nothing about).
2. the breech plugs are the ones coming with the original firearm.
3. rifling is square cut and twists at 1 turn in 38--supposed to be for a 425 gr minie backed by 60gr of powder.
4. I found Mr. Reber very understanding of the paramount inportance of safety in the NSSA inspection process.
5. He mentioned that two or three persons buying these had mentioned possibility of shooting them in the NSSA--from Mr. Hollands comment
above it is obvious that as of today they have not submitted them for inspection.
6. I do not know one way or the other what Mr. Rebers interest would be in having his rifles inspected.
7. Some of his customers are buying them as combination reinacting and hunting rifles.

I found my conversation with him very pleasant and now my curiosity is satisfied. Might be fun to go by his place if I ever pass
thru Little Rock during business hours. A picture of my Muster 1854 that I hope to have shooting in the coming months is attached.

[R. McAuley 3014V]

3. rifling is square cut and twists at 1 turn in 38--supposed to be for a 425 gr minie backed by 60gr of powder.


That's an awful fast twist for such a light ball. You building a carbine? Just that I was under the impression that the Muster 1854 rifle-musket had a 1:62* twist, not 1:37 like the carbine a tige?

*C.M. Wilcox (1859) Rifles and Rifle Practice, p182

[Steve Weems]

Mr. McAuley--The original 1854 Muster in the picture is being relined by one of the NSSA approved barrel makers with a rate of twist appropriate for that rifle. The discussion
was about the relining of Loyalist Arms Lorenz reproductions that come as smoothbores . I guess I confused things by posting a picture of my original.

[threepdr]

I have seen pictures of a Loyalist Arms Brown Bess that ruptured. The actual guns I have seen did not look or feel solid (safe). Unless they have changed, These are imported unvented. In short, for show, not firing.

I've seen the lab report on the Indian made 3rd model bess whose barrel blew. The lab conclusion was that it had an obstructed barrel. Hardness tests showed that the metal used had a tensil strengh of about 85,000 psi, "typical for material strengths used in muzzle loading weapons."

I've been involved in Civil War and 18th Century living history for almost 40 years. There are a great many of these indian muskets being used in Rev War and War of 1812 events. Many of the owners also use them for live fire. Besides the Indian musket, I know of two Pedersoli Brown Besses that have ruptured. No one seems to be alarmed by those for some reason.

By the way, my understanding is that they are left unvented so they will NOT meet the classification as a "firearm." That greatly simplifies the export/import requirements in India, Great Britain and Canada.

I don't own one, but I may need a First Model Bess in the future and I'll buy the Middlesex Indian made version when I do so.

[John Holland]

Here's another thought on the un-vented imports: they aren't proofed. Who has the liability for the un-vented Indian reproductions once they are vented?

Europe has a long standing proof house system and the Italian reproductions are proofed. The manufacturers hold the liability for them, as long as the arm hasn't been modified.

As for bursting a barrel, you could probably cause anything to fail if you put your mind to it, or if you made a serious mistake. The desired properties for a barrel is to have it swell, or bulge, before it suffers a catastrophic failure. I saw the pictures of the recent Indian import that failed. To me it appeared as if the metal in the barrel sheared in jagged sections rather than expanding before it burst. In the past 50 years I have seen numerous antique muzzle loading barrels that have burst, or split. They all showed evidence of expanding before they failed. Very different from the pictures of the Indian musket.

Just my personal thoughts and observations, not from the Small Arms Committee!

JDH

[threepdr]

John you are right.

The Indian bess swell at the constriction first, then split back to the breech.

[Southron Sr.]

Dear John:

You have to take Italian "Proof Marks" with a big "Grain of Salt." As it was explained to me when I was in Brescia, Italy by the owner of a company that manufactures replica arms for sale in the U.S.: "They use a VERY WEAK powder at the Proof House."
This is further confirmed by the fact that I am familiar with several instances where Italian made barrels or percussion revolver cylinders failed that were loaded with proper loads of only black powder.

Sincerely Yours,
Southron

[John Holland]

As always, Southron, I appreciate you sharing your extensive background of experiences with the Italian manufacturers with us. Even though their "proof system" may be a bit lacking from the standards of yore, they hold the liability for their products nontheless.

Even though the good ol' USA doesn't have a proof house system, the American manufacturers are still liable for their products in a court of law. I seem to remember Douglas having made some very fine muzzle loading barrels at one time.....

See you in Winchester?

John