Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 42

Thread: Gauging Interest in a .58 Cal Gardner Reproduction mold

  1. #11
    bobanderson is offline
    Team:
    1st Michigan Infantry
    Member
    12291
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Howell, MI
    Posts
    661
    Region:
    Northwest Territory - Michigan, Ohio and Indiana
    Quote Originally Posted by Southron Sr. View Post
    So, WHY can't NOE make a Gardner WITH the flange? It isn't that hard
    People "open up" moulds all the time. It should be a simple enough matter to have a machinist (or a hobbyist with a lathe) cut the flange into an unflanged mould.
    Bob Anderson
    Ordnance Sergeant
    Company C, 1st Michigan Volunteer Infantry
    Small Arms Committee

    "I won't be wronged. I won't be insulted. I won't be laid a hand on.
    I don't do these things to other people, and I require the same from them."
    - John Wayne in "The Shootist", 1976

  2. #12
    John Holland is offline Moderator
    Team:
    44th NY Volunteer Infantry
    Member
    00973V
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,594
    Region:
    Northeast- New York
    As Bob says, cutting a flange into the mould is easy with a boring bar, which looks like a Ring of Saturn when the bullet is cast. But, what you have to take into consideration is the finished diameter. If you start with a mould that casts a diameter of 0.575" and then cut a a 0.020" thick flange ring into the mould, once the flange is folded down you will end up with a finished diameter of 0.615". The original Confederate mould had a base diameter below the unformed flange of about 0.535" to accommodate the flanging process that adds about 0.045" to the diameter once the flange is formed down around the cartridge paper. The finished diameter at the base of the bullet is then about 0.577". It is a much more complicated mould to produce than it appears.

  3. #13
    noonanda is offline
    Team:
    12th Regiment US Regular Infantry
    Member
    14002
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    18
    Region:
    Potomac - Virginia, Maryland and Delaware
    Quote Originally Posted by Southron Sr. View Post
    So, WHY can't NOE make a Gardner WITH the flange? It isn't that hard.

    Yup, I would buy a Gardner WITH the flange just to encourage your and NOE's enterprise.

    The Sharps shooters would probably buy a lot of .52 Caliber flanged Gardners as that would alleviate the drudgery of making up combustible cartridges for their Sharps.
    I dont know exactly why, I wish I did.

  4. #14
    gemmer is offline
    Team:
    Visitor (non-N-SSA Member)
    Member
    N/A
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    212
    Region:
    Visitor

    Gardner

    Would a Garner cartridge be N-SSA legal?

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Huntsville
    Posts
    2,765
    Region:
    Deep South - Georgia, Louisiana, Tennessee, Mississippi and Texas
    Would a Garner cartridge be N-SSA legal?
    A period-correct Gardner cartridge would contain paper crimped under the lead flange. Per the current rules:

    g. Cartridges for muzzle loading firearms must be either:

    1. A cardboard or plastic hollow cylinder, sealed on one end,
    • No cartridge shall be employed that allows the ramrod to be pushed through the cylinder.
    • No cartridge may be used that is designed to be set in place on, in, or around the muzzle.


    2. A paper cartridge, of either the Pattern 1855 US cartridge or of the Pattern 1862 US cartridge, properly rolled and tied.

    • Use of nitrated paper or “flash” paper is prohibited.
    • Paper shall NOT be put into the bore of a muzzle loading firearm.


    However, one of the above proposals is to have a mold made that simulates an already-formed Gardner, which would, of course, have no paper under its simulated crimped flange.

    Steve

  6. #16
    Southron Sr. is offline
    Team:
    24th Georgia Volunteer Infantry
    Member
    3002
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Gorgia
    Posts
    1,281
    Region:
    Carolina - North Carolina and South Carolina

    Thoughts....

    To start with, perhaps the BOD should review our rules because:

    1. Paper patched, British made .577 ammunition was considered to be the most ACCURATE of all .577/58 issue ammo (at least so far as Confederate Sharpshooters were concerned)....so, the N-SSA (a target shooting organization) paradoxically bans the use of the most accurate ammunition!

    2. Would someone PLEASE explain to me HOW a .58 caliber Gardner rifle-musket bullet would present a "Cook Off" hazard?

    3. Would not a .52 Caliber Gardner Sharps round be 100% legal under N-SSA rules?

    THANKS!!!!

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Huntsville
    Posts
    2,765
    Region:
    Deep South - Georgia, Louisiana, Tennessee, Mississippi and Texas
    I'm in the middle of casting up 1,000 Pritchett style bullets to make up in authentic, plugged Enfield ammo for a torture test of rapid-fire use. There was an Enfield used in testing in England that was used over a period of years with thousands of rounds put through it without it ever being cleaned. There are no historical records there (or anywhere else, that I have seen) of cookoffs. I'd love to hear some historical accounts of cookoffs; they would be interesting.

    So, I believe the risk of cookoff due to paper-patched bullets such as the Enfield cartridge are negligible. My hope is that my torture test demonstrates this and then perhaps the N-SSA rule can be revisited.

    I don't think a Gardner is any more of a cook-off risk than any paper-patched bullet. Probably less since the only paper left on the bullet is the remnants trapped under the crimp and anything protruding out from under it. All in front of the charge and virtually certain to be expelled with the bullet.

    Paper is not an issue with breech loaders like a Sharps as the nose of the incoming projectile pushes any residue out of the way as it goes in. Usually. I think I have read of a modern skirmisher having a cookoff with a Sharps.

    Steve

  8. #18
    John Holland is offline Moderator
    Team:
    44th NY Volunteer Infantry
    Member
    00973V
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,594
    Region:
    Northeast- New York
    Steve - I am familiar with the British test of the paper patched Pritchett bullet, and how many times and how long a time period it was fired without cleaning. The question that has always bothered me about that statement is the residue buildup in the breech. In my mind there is no way possible they could have done that without ending up with an extensive carbon buildup half way up the barrel. Your thoughts?

    I will briefly address the old topic of using the British Pritchett paper patched bullet. The late "Traditional Match" was the proving ground for traditional type shooting activities. When the match was being carefully designed, the Traditional Match Committee presented the concept of also allowing traditional type ammunition. The committee was instructed by the Board to present a demonstration of the standard U.S. wrapped cartridge at the next August Board meeting. Todd Harrington and I were co-chairman of the committee. At the demonstration Todd did the shooting and I gave the verbal dissertation along with answering the questions of the Board.
    The Board then agreed to allow use of the original type cartridge for the Traditional Match, only. That cartridge worked very well in the Traditional Match. The committee then began experimenting with the British Pritchett round with the intent to present another demonstration to the Board to show the viability of allowing that cartridge, too. The committee's conceptual approach was to "Start Small and Think Big"! The intent of the committee was to have a match that would appeal to those authentic living history groups who looked down on the N-SSA as a "Farby" group who did nothing authentic. In an attempt to encourage that special group of people to join he N-SSA, the rules of the Traditional Match required fully authentic uniforms, ammunition, and the use of muskets that were unmodified in any way, shape, or form, from how they were issued during the American Civil War. The committee had some very good long range plans including the use of additional types of ammunition, and even authentic campsites. Unfortunately after two years of struggling with a lack of participation in the Traditional Match, everything fell apart. Why, because the majority of Units/Teams who promised to support the Traditional Match, very simply, did not do so. Therefore, after much discussion with the National Commander, the Board, and the Program Chairman, who was in full support of the match and its concept, the Traditional Match was removed from the schedule of events, and the Traditional Match Committee was dissolved. Along with the loss of this match was the potential recruitment of Living History enthusiasts, and also the "Golden Opportunity" to prove to everyone that the many types of original Civil War musket cartridges could be used safely.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Huntsville
    Posts
    2,765
    Region:
    Deep South - Georgia, Louisiana, Tennessee, Mississippi and Texas
    Steve - I am familiar with the British test of the paper patched Pritchett bullet, and how many times and how long a time period it was fired without cleaning. The question that has always bothered me about that statement is the residue buildup in the breech. In my mind there is no way possible they could have done that without ending up with an extensive carbon buildup half way up the barrel. Your thoughts?
    That is a good point.

    Just this last weekend I was cleaning my Enfield with Whitacre barrel. Normally when I clean my musket, I remove the barrel so I can stick the breech end in my utility sink as I swab the barrel. But lately I have not done this, going for just an "in the gun" cleaning. Partly because folks said it was detrimental to accuracy to unship the barrel, partly because I was lazy in cleaning.

    Well, this last weekend I was running a pipe cleaner down the flash hole with the nipple out, and it "felt funny". I took a prick and inserted it into the flash hole and it would not go very far into the bolster/barrel. I took my bore scope out and looked down at the breech face and at first I thought perhaps a bullet has been double-loaded and blasted down against the breech face - the breech face looked like a glassy/metallic mass. And the channel from the fire channel was actually coming through this mass (out of the "face" of the breech).

    So, I took the barrel out, and used a breech face scraper with the breech end of the barrel submerged in the sink, and eventually was able to get it all sparkly clean inside. I could then see that on this barrel the fire channel enters the bore almost at the breech face.

    So clearly coking/carbon buildup is an issue. Maybe the British account of "no cleaning" is exaggerated? Maybe they used a breech face scraper but did not clean the bore/rifling? Or maybe the percussion cap continuously blasts the fire channel path though the coke clear so that the musket keeps firing in spite of the coke buildup?

    I was sorry to see the Traditional Match fall by the wayside. I never would have been able to participate with it (I hardly ever go to Nationals - only ever been to 2 of them) but I thought it was a cool idea. I think it was probably a bridge to far to hope to have large participation at the team level. But, I hope that individuals will be able to be as authentic as they would like to be within the rules. I'm going to use my US cartridges in Individuals. For one thing, my P8 likes 60 grains of powder and with the plastic tubes you can barely get the bullet to sit in the mouth with that much powder!

    Steve

  10. #20
    Southron Sr. is offline
    Team:
    24th Georgia Volunteer Infantry
    Member
    3002
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Gorgia
    Posts
    1,281
    Region:
    Carolina - North Carolina and South Carolina
    Everyone needs to "pull the breech plug" on their Skirmish arm every year or so and clean out the "cake" on the face of their breech plug. "Cake" is nothing more than hardened powder fouling and can be responsible for cook offs.

Similar Threads

  1. Looking for interest in mold for Remington .44 mold
    By Maillemaker in forum Wanted/For Sale Items
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-29-2015, 03:39 PM
  2. gardner style .54 cal mold
    By YOU DON'T KNOW ? in forum Wanted/For Sale Items
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-28-2012, 08:02 PM
  3. WTB - .58 Caliber Gardner Mold
    By Scott Kurki, 12475 in forum Wanted/For Sale Items
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-19-2011, 12:18 PM
  4. maybe of interest to our members.
    By matt in forum Civil War Small Arms
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-23-2010, 10:46 AM
  5. FS .576 Gardner Mold $65 includes shipping SPF
    By E. Robertson in forum Wanted/For Sale Items
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-22-2009, 09:43 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •