To use, reline, or replace?

[John Westenberger]

Howdy skirmishers,

I've been going back and forth. This past national I picked up a Trenton contract in as-found condition. Someone had clearly not shot it since they were a valid military arm. It is well used, and I suppose was sold as surplus and used as a hunting rifle for decades. Once we oiled everything up, ran some steel wool to knock all the crust out of it , it revealed a nice bore, not pristine, but nice. The rifling is crisp down the full length. After replacing a chipped tumbler, and fighting a stuck nipple, the musket is once again, fully functional.

A month or so ago, I had it out to my local range, and shot a few dozen rounds using loads I use for my Zouave. At nationals, the team guessed the bore was a little big just from feeling it with patches and a cleaning jag. But I wanted to check for lock functionality, so I soldiered on. My .579 rounds wouldn't even all hit a standard 50 yard musket target at 50 yards! The bullet would drop all the way to the bottom freely without the rammer. Far undersized...

At a M.A. shoot last weekend, I threw up a sighter target and gave it another go. I tried my moose molds .582 wadcutter unsized through it. No dice.

When we tried a set of pin gauges through it, it sat right around .585. This is extremely large, and precludes the use of pretty much anything but an old style minie. By the time I buy a mold, a sizer, and test and tune, I could pay for a Hoyt reline. Or bite the bullet and pay whitacre's going rate for a 3 band barrel, his '42 smoothie barrel drives tacks for me. Bobby Hoyt's shop is only a few hours from me, and I've seen his work. It's very nice. And I experience Whitacre's work every time I pull my smoothie out, it's equally nice. I suppose what I'm asking is this:

Being rarer than your average '61 springfield, I'm not sure if I want to mess with an original barrel, even if it makes it functional again. I'm also not sure if I can realistically get the original one shooting, and if I do, it'll be with a heavy bullet that will cost me a fortune in lead, and make it far less fun to shoot. Whitacre makes great barrels, but his going rate would just about double what I have in this gun. I won't make it a wall hanger, I want to get it slinging lead again, I'm just not sure how. Any thoughts on my conundrum?

[John Bly]

Buy a new barrel for shooting and keep the old one to put it back original when you are done with it.

[CAGerringer]

Or....you can go to the Bulletman, he advertises in the Skirmish Line. Find out what he makes in .585, buy a few of whatever you're interested in, and see what the original barrel will do. If you can get a grouping at all, you can then try working up a load. If the original won't perform anymore, then you can decide on whether to reline or buy a new barrel.
That's what I'd do.
Respectfully,
Charlie Gerringer
Old Dominion Dragoons

[Joseph Plakis Jr, 00302V]

Buy a barrel from Bob Hoyt. Also next time don't use steel wool to "scrub out a barrel" It is harder than the old barrel you are trying to clean. I use "copper wool" that I get at a food store. It is softer than a civil war musket barrel. Takes longer but it is a lot easier on the old barrel and it doesn't remove metal from your barrel!

Joe Plakis Jr. 00302V
Hampton Legion

[jim14th]

John, I have a .685 Minie if you're interested , could size them down...

No seriously I have a lyman .585213 Mini mold I have used in my Norris Clements and a .575-213 that puts out a .581 ball.
I don't have any made but if you're not in a hurry I could bang some out hopefully this week for you send them out to you

Member Since 1973

[Don Dixon]

When we tried a set of pin gauges through it, it sat right around .585. This is extremely large.

Actually its not that far out from the original standard. The U.S. Army ordnance standard for the Springfield family of .58 caliber rifles and rifle muskets called for a bore diameter of not less than .580 inches and not more than .5825 inches, using a .5785 swaged bullet. Moulds manufactured today are made for the smaller sized bores in reproduction weapons. I would try to get a larger sized or enlarged mould before relining the barrel. Relining will destroy any value it might have to a collector.

Regards,
Don Dixon
2881V

[John Westenberger]

John, I have a .685 Minie if you're interested , could size them down...

No seriously I have a lyman .585213 Mini mold I have used in my Norris Clements and a .575-213 that puts out a .581 ball.
I don't have any made but if you're not in a hurry I could bang some out hopefully this week for you send them out to you

Member Since 1973

I got my hands on an old Rapine old style minie mold that was supposed to drop at .585, but it drops larger. Something like .587 or .588. Before I dumped money into a sizer, I wanted to get some more experienced opinions on this before I started down the rabbit hole.

At this point, I may just give Whitacre a call (or a few, I'm told!) and see what the cost and lead time would be to get a new barrel to use molds and sizers I already own. I love my moose molds wadcutter, and It's a very pleasant shooting round compared to the few times I've tried the heavier styles of minies.

[John Westenberger]

Actually its not that far out from the original standard. The U.S. Army ordnance standard for the Springfield family of .58 caliber rifles and rifle muskets called for a bore diameter of not less than .580 inches and not more than .5825 inches, using a .5785 swaged bullet. Moulds manufactured today are made for the smaller sized bores in reproduction weapons. I would try to get a larger sized or enlarged mould before relining the barrel. Relining will destroy any value it might have to a collector.

Regards,
Don Dixon
2881V

Not far out of original spec, perhaps. For skirmishing use? Very far out of what I would consider a "common" bore diameter.

[gemmer]

If you already have the mould, get a push through die from John at Northeast, for around $50.00.

[Don Dixon]

Not far out of original spec, perhaps. For skirmishing use? Very far out of what I would consider a "common" bore diameter.

One of the objectives of the N-SSA is supposed to be the preservation of original Civil War weapons. Reline a serviceable weapon that meets original service standards so that you can skirmish with it? I go back to my original response.

Regards,
Don Dixon
2881V

[CAGerringer]

John,
It looks like your options have been narrowed down. If the barrel is serviceable, then you don't want to reline it. If you want to skirmish with an original, serviceable barrel, you're going to have to alter that front sight, if you want to be competitive. If you take Mr. Dixon's advise to heart, which I strongly advise, no matter the subject. (That is NOT meant as a joke.) Then you have but one choice left.
That makes John Bly the winner with the original input of "Buy a new barrel for shooting and keep the old one to put it back to original..." Well done, Mr. Bly.
Respectfully,
Charlie Gerringer
Old Dominion Dragoons

[Maillemaker]

I use "copper wool" that I get at a food store. It is softer than a civil war musket barrel. Takes longer but it is a lot easier on the old barrel and it doesn't remove metal from your barrel!

A word of caution: Make sure you are buying real "copper wool". The stuff at my local grocery store was copper plated steel. The Chore Boy brand is 100% copper. You can tell by taking a magnet with you to the store. The magnet will stick to the copper plated stuff.


Steve

[Muley Gil]

Brownells sells bronze wool in different grades of coarseness. Fine is good for light rust without removing bluing. A coarser grade would be appropriate for the bore.

[John Westenberger]

Wow, never thought this was a hot enough topic to make it in the skirmish line, but here we are. I will provide a little update as to what course of action I made before providing a response.

I ended up contacting Dan Whitacre to make a new barrel for me. It is now sitting. glass bedded, in a Dunlap stock in a totally different gun. The Trenton is sitting, complete, in a gun sock leaning on the wall next to my gun safe. I have not pulled the Trenton out more than twice a year for it's regular upkeep, A healthy dose of ballistol! Once in a while, I do a quick internet search for minie moulds, trying to find one suitable to allow this arm to go back into use, but have thus far not had any luck finding much other than an old style minie, dropping at .585 or larger, and weighting at least 500 grains. Great for shooting a few times a year for fun. Not for dumping 40 shots in a row on a Sunday morning! My smoothbore bruises me enough!

For my responses to the article, I will provide a few little bullet point responses, in order of how they appear in the skirmish line.

-Condition, and lack of pictures. The condition is not museum quality, but is not a rusty hunk of junk. It was almost assuredly used post war for many years. There is a little patched pitting on the metal, the wood has shrunk in places from where it hung over a fireplace (Complete with soot to prove it!). The bore is, at best, okay. The rifling is strong, but there is quite a bit of pitting. Enough I was worried it would never group tight enough for my satisfaction (is there such a thing!). Now that I do not need it as a skirmishing arm, perhaps I will revisit the idea of using an old style minie (Heavy, more expensive, and more recoil!) as a plinking round. But then group size is just secondary to fun. As for pictures? Yes. I could have posted them, but nobody asked. Didn't seem important, I thought my description was enough to go on. And a picture of the bore with a bore light can only be so clear.

-Serviceability. While yes, this bore I would describe as "Serviceable" in the broad sense. It is not meeting federal standards, and did not get accepted to federal service (As I later found out from the extremely faint NJ stampings that became visible as I breathed life back into the wood with some linseed oil). The only minie I could find that met the size requirements? Old style mines. As I keep saying. More recoil and more lead. Boo! Hiss! This was part of the reason I pursued a Whitacre barrel, the lack of availability of a lighter, more modern style of minie. The definition of "serviceable" was a sticking point with the sage Don Dixon in the original post. I believe our views aligned, from reading his longer post from last month. But I will talk more on that later.

-Preservation. The mission statement of the N-SSA is not the preservation of arms, but I agree is certainly cultural, and a kind of implied secondary mission. This is a popular topic of conversation around the campfire with my teammates. In short, we agree that the modification of our arms to be more accurate would make the men who used them in combat proud. Using lighter loads, modern bullets, modern sights, etc to achieve the tightest group possible does a service to these men. I believed, and still do, that we shouldn't be modifying the arms without reason, especially if it is a permanent alteration. I did not WANT to line this barrel, but it would never shoot as well in its current state as it could with a liner. This is why I ended up with a Whitacre barrel. Want to take it back to original? Pop the original barrel on. But it will now be as accurate as it would have been in 1863, if not more so because of the precision of Whitacre's machining and the benefit of more modern projectiles. But the cost is what made me balk. Lining to a bore size of .580 to use moulds/sizers I already owned and buying a custom mould and sizer would probably be close to the same cost. A new barrel? 3x the cost of either one, with sights mounted from Whitacre. But now I get the benefit of preserving the gun by not modifying an original arm, or using a heavy and unpleasant to shoot minie. Ended up being worth the cost, as I started 6/7 on the clay board at the last skirmish.

Overall, the new barrel was the way to go. But as a young college student in the thick of his schooling, and now, as a recent graduate on the job hunt, 750$ is a big ask when you factor in all of the costs already associated with our hobby. Especially since I was very new, and did not have family already involved in the shooting sports to rely on for tools and supplies. I suppose this whole ordeal could have been summed up "buy once, cry once". The 750$ sucked, but it is a gun I can shoot until my eyes no longer allow the use of a 3 bander (For which I have now built a 32" colt special from all original parts. This was relined, since the rifling was reamed out of it.). I learned a lot from this, about the ethics of dealing with something that is 160 years old, the availability of moulds (This was the first time I couldn't just call up moose and order what I was told would work), heck, I even learned about bronze wool, a bag of which now lives in my shooting box. Finding my name in the skirmish line was a surprise, and figured I would provide an update, and more details for anyone interested.

[Harry Gaul]

John,

Good choice on a new barrel. As you go to gun shows, keep an eye out for a three bander Numrich barrel. They are out there and very reasonably priced. The bore is on the small size 574, and the breech looks like a 61 with a clean out screw but will fit a 63. The breech is a 63 with a clean out screw. The arrangement is not kosher but legal in the NSSA. "Grandfathered in" is the last story.

Harry in Pa.
forney's
03626v

[John Holland]

Small Arms Clarification:

Today the Numrich M-1863 barrel can only be used on the M-1863 & M-1864 muskets. Their use on a M-1861 musket is not allowed. Many decades ago, there were a number of M-1861 muskets approved with the M-1863 Numrich barrel and M-1863 hammer. Those mixed model muskets are still allowed to be used as long as the owner can produce the original SAC Individual Approval Card. If the SAC Card is lost, then the arm will have to come into compliance with today's standards. Their continued use in the N-SSA is what was "grandfathered-in". And, yes, the Numrich M-1863 barrels were approved with a clean-out screw in the bolster, which is not a point of contention today.

John Holland
Small Arms Committee
Chairman