Different rifling grooves

[rifle]

I rebuilt  an old Belgian Colt 1860 Army type. Did the mydrid of normal stuff like set the barrel back and bottom the arbor and the action tune/time ect;ect;
The rifling in the barrel turned out way too shallow and a wide spot near the muzzle and it just wouldn't shoot.
I had the barrel sleeved with a new rifled liner that was fer a .454 size bullet.
I measured it "after" I got the resleeved barrel back. Gettin old and silly and should have measured the barrel liner "before" sending it off to the machine shop.
Anywhoooo.....I figured I really screwed up since measuring the grooves in "this" liner for a .454 bullet the "grooves "were right at .445 in. and the only .454 in. in the barrel is a thin deeper part of the grooves right along side the rifling lands.
I knew something was up after using a piloted reamer to spiff up the breech of the barrel and looking at the forcing cone the shiny new looked uneven between the lands like a nice scalloped design where the less diameter part in the middle of the grooves dipped down to look like a nice scalloped design one migtht put on a gingerbread type cottage.
I thunked....man that middle to those WIDE grooves (and very narrow lands) being .445 in. is going to be too tight for a .454 bullet and cause leading and pressure spike and all those bad things overly tight bullets cause. Not to mention lose of accuracy.

Anywhoooo.....I got with the seller of the barrelliner and wanted reimbursed the money the liner sleeve cost and....the money spent fer the machine shop to get the liner in the barrel properly. No dice. Pretty much told to go get "you know what" and told to talk to the actuall maker of the sleeves. Some places just don't stand behind what they sell and.......since the liners are hammer forged I was told I must be measuring wrong since hammer forged can't make mistakes. That's a good one.
Well I got with the maker of the barrel sleeves and was told that he sells lots of those liners for .454 bullets with black powder since the design of the rifling in the sleeves is a copy of what was used in the 1873 Colt Army revolver for a good long while right at it's inception.
Man, my slugged lead balls I used to bump up in the bore to measure the thing looked funny to say the least.
Anywhoooo...I figured the barrelhas the weird rifling in the barrel so....may as well try it out with the round balls of pure lead used in the Belgian 1860 Army Colt. I figured the balls would swag into the barrel easy enough being balls and all.(not conical)
Well......wonder of wonders and contrary to everything I've held as gosple about bullets fittin barrels and all.....that Colt Belgian Army shot like a laser beam and never had the barrel get overly fouled and didn't seem to spike the pressures much more since the gun is just fine after a hundred or so balls fired thru it. I use lube pills under the balls in my cap&ballers so the barrels stay pretty foul-less and accurate and the cylinder keeps turning. The sound of the report was not any different than when the balls go into a barrel sealed well with the balls right at or a lil more than the diameter of the grooves in the barrel. Those seem to have a sharper report a little and are more consistant probably from the balls sealing the gases well and  probably from a spike in pressure.
Anywhoooo....anyone know anything about how the rifling was in the original Colt 1873 SAA? I don't know where to go to check on the validity of what the barrel sleeve maker told me about the liner he made is a copy of the old original rifling in the Colt 1873 SAA that used the black powder. He seemed to infer the rifling was the way it is in the liner and the original because of using the blackpowder. I assumed it was something to do with barrels gettin fouled from the powder and the rifling was made to accomodate the fouling.
I can't see the bullets stripping thru that rifling even when really fouled since to look at it it is akin to a six sided sextagonal rifling like the Whitworth rifle had the pentagonal rifling bore the bullets could not strip thru.
Anywhoooo....I'm leaving the weird liner in the barrel of the 1860 Army Belgian made by Centaure because it shoots darned danged well. Didn't try conicals in it though...just balls.
After all the gunsmithin the gun is a real gem now. It had a pretty good finish left on it and was pretty to begin with.....and now has been "Waynerized". That's the nick name fer guns I redo. "Waynerized." ha ha ha ha ha  I did do a real good job with it. The thing with straightening out the barrel slots and the arbor slot for a new made wedge was a stickler. It has that just right now. It can be fired with a thumb pressed in wedge and the wedge stays put. I still tap the wedge very very lightly to seat it since I like to "hear" when all the arbor bottoming and all comes seated right on.The lil hammer sounds higher pitched with the light taps when everything is right against each other so I can "hear the gun seatin in" and tight and ready fer shootin. Can't abid in a loose Colt cap&baller. I'm eccentric like that.
Anyone know about rifling grooves and all in the original Colt 1873 SAA I'd like to hear from you. Anyone have an opinion about how the rifling is in the new liner (if you can imagine it by how I described it) I wouldn't mind hearing what you thunk.

[Blair]

rifle,

Gain twist rifling was standard for Colt cap & ball revolvers. All calibers!
This changed very quickly, shortly after production started with the Colt 1872/3 SAA revolvers to a standard rate of twist to 'about' 1-20 to 1-22 for the 7.5 inch barrel. (Slightly faster for the shorter barrels.)
Bore diameters can vary greatly depending on the caliber the revolver was chambered in.
Hope this helps.

[rifle]

Blair, that does help some.Thanks.
This rifling is different than anything I've seen before. The middle of the grooves,that are really wide, are the smallest diameter in the barrel. The balls would get a good swagging when they hit the breech end of the barrel that's fer sure.
I wonder where to go to research the old SAA's and find out what the rifling was like in the very beginning? Some collector place? Peacemakers Specialist?
I guess I'll leave the liner in the barrel of the Belgian 1860 since it shoots real well. It might be harder on the barrel wedge but I make those on my mill so I can always just make a new one if need be. I use a certain tool steel that in it's form ,as it comes to me, it's hard but not hardened and I leave it in that state so the wedge will get deformed before the barrel does....hopefully.
I'm going to get with the maker of the liner I got offa him and see where he got his info since he makes the durn things.
If the weird rifling in the liner keeps working well (only tested it once with about a hundred balls) I may use it again in barrels I have that need relined to be good again.

[Blair]

rifle,

I have to admit, I really have no idea what you are talking about.
The smallest dia. of the bore (minimum bore dia.) is the top of the lands (not the groves). This should remain the same dia. from breach end to muzzle end.
Progressive Depth rifling is where the depth of the groves (maximum bore dia.) is slightly deeper at the breach end of the barrel than at the muzzle. I know of no revolvers that use Progressive Depth rifling. The barrels are generally too short for this type of rifling to be of any benefit.
However, if your new barrel sleeve shoots well for you... why fret over it?

[rifle]

Blair, the rifling to this sleeve is different and supposedly good fer blackpowder. It's not progressive depth.
It's just ....the grooves are real wide and the lands are real narrow. The grooves are at .445 in. The lands are a little less and engrave the balls well. The grooves aren't curved to match the round of the hole. They are a lil straightened out.
The deep part to the barrel or the wide diameter is on the sides of the grooves next to the lands. Like the lands are actually in the grooves that are between the lesser diameter somewhat flat grooves.
On the balls I bumped up to measure the inside of the barrel.......the wide grooves in the barrel make somewhat flat(from land to land) six sides on the balls with the lands engraved into the balls in  the area between the wide groove flats that is the wide parts of the balls.  Like the lands are in grooves between the less diameter flats that sort of make a six sided bore not unlike the five sided bore the Whitworth rifle from the Civil War snipers used with a five sided bullet.
On the balls I put thru....the lands are engraved in the wide parts on the balls with the wide parts in the balls being between the lesser diameter flats "sort of" grooves. The danged grooves being .445 in. and the lesser diameter in the barrel. Like the grooves are wide and are actually the lands and the lands are in the area between the lesser diameter grooves that are sorta flat making the lands and the area between the wide grooves the wide part in the barrel like the lands and the narrow area on each side of them are actually the grooves and the wide grooves are actually the lands that are like six sides of a six sided bore with lands and deeper on each side of the lands make the grooves.
Draw a six sided rectangle and then draw where the lands actually engrave deeper at the corners that are the widest parts of the rectangle.
That would be what the balls look like after I force them thru the bore. Six sides with the lands engraved into them at the corners between the flat-ish sides.
The only draw back is the fact the balls are tight and probably raise pressures and probably put more force to the back of the wedge. That might mean replacing the wedges more than usual even with making the wedge from tool steel. I left the tool steel as it comes to me and didn't harden it since I don't want it too much harder than the barrel.
Gotta admit I never saw anything like this and.....it seems really accurate and seems to keep fouling of blackpowder to a minimum in the barrel. I would have to shoot the gun without the lube pills I use to keep the barrel fouling to a minimum. You know to test whether or not the bore of this sleeve is meant to keep fouling to a minimum. I've actually probably seen this before lookin in barrels of guns at gun shows. It looks a good bit different somehow then looking thru a bore with some normal rifling.

[Blair]

rifle,

If I understand correctly, the type of rifling you have is preferred for cast lead bullets.
The grove width may often be wider than the land width. The leading edge of the groove may also be slightly deeper than the trailing edge. Both of these concepts help keep the lead projectile from jumping or shearing out of the groove.
A tight fitting projectile (maximum grove depth) is recommended.
This type of land and grove rifling also allows the rate of twist to be faster than was tipical in black powder cartridge guns.
I hope this helps,
  Blair

[pony express]

I think I understand what the rifling looks like from your description, but I have no idea if it really is like the origionals. My only contribution here is to remember that you aren't really shooting .454 bullets through that barrell. They may have been .454 before you loaded them, but AFTER loading, they are only as big as the chamber diameter(I think normally .450) I remember reading years ago about reaming the chambers to match the groove diameter of the barrell on C&B revolvers, was supposed to be a big improvement in accuracy. Seems like you got the same result by reducing the barrell diameter instead.

[Fox Creek Kid]

It's sometimes referred to as "skinny" rifling by collectors. Dave Lanara sells repro SAA rifled barrels like this:

http://davelanara.homestead.com/services.html


Original 1st gen. SAA barrels in .45 Colt were 0.450" GROOVE diameter.

[rifle]

Howdy Hombres,
Thanks fer the heads up.
The groove diameter of the originals being .450 seems more logical to me than the .445 in my barrel sleeve.
I have to  note that the balls I actually shoot are .464 in. and the chambers been reamed to .454 in. when the first barrel was on the gun(before the re-sleeve).
I use balls since it's cap&ball and don't thunk I'd want to use actual conical bullets in a barrel that is .009 in smaller than the bullets.That's got to be too tight fer conicals.
When I talked to the sleeve maker and mentioned I shot balls he said,"no,no shoot conicals in that barrel it's for black powder".
Personally I'd say a barrel sleeve like the one I have would be much better for balls since once a ball swagged into the barrel it would be the right size fer it but.....not be long and have too much bearing surface to lead up the barrel.
Anywhooooo.....thanks fer the heads up.
If the balls going thru that barrel seem to much fer the gun and wear/wreck the wedge too soon from the balls being tight and having to swag so much to get in I'll get another sleeve the right size. If it's not too hard on the gun I'll leave the sleeve in and just keep using balls since the gun is pretty danged accurate and seems to shed fouling from the barrel.

[pony express]

Maybe you could find a cylinder that hasn't been reamed out, if the cylinder is only .450, then you'r ball will only be '05 oversize, instead of .09. But with soft lead bullets, and the very short bearing surface on a round ball, it's probably not going to raise the pressure too much.

[rifle]

Poney Express,
That's an idea and I thunk I actually thunked it myself but fergitted it. 
The way gases act at the muzzle and the fact there are the thin areas next to the sides of the lands where the diameter dips to .454  I'd be afraid the gas blowing out the .454 areas with the ball sized by a .450 chamber to .450 would disrupt things sorta likea bad crown.
Of course......the fact the lesser diameter ball would lower pressure is a good thing to thunk on. It's not so much the pressure as the mechanical pounding of the oversized .454 ball hitting the breech of the barrel with more force. If the wedge holds up(made of tool steel) I guess shooting balls .009 in. more than the predominating diameter in the barrel wouldbe alright. Time will tell.The balls at .454 don't seem to be a real problem right now after a hundred and some balls fired. I'll refrain from shooting conicals though. I was going to try the Lee .456 conicals. They would stay put in the chambers....maybe.
I'd hate to have to pay another bunch of money to sleeve the barrel again. I like the method he (gunsmith with a lathe)uses to do it though. Maybe I should break down and have some piloted drills and reamers made and doit myself except fer the turning of the sleeve to diameter. That takes a lathe and a live center and I can't figger how to do it on my milling machine.
As it is the gun shoots great and seems pretty danged consistant about it. Maybe the flubbub weird sleeve is....a good thing?
I haven't been able to get backwith the sleeve maker to qyestion him about the design of it. he did say.....he sells a real lot of them fer...BLACK POWDER. The gun is a nice Belgian 1960 Centennial Trade Mark 1860 Army. I fitted it better and tuned it and all that with a good trigger and timing and all that. Bottomed the arbor and set the barrel back to set the gap and rehardened the hammer with a new cam and adjusted the springs to be the right temper with the mainspring a lil stiff since it's a percussion with the blow-back thru the cones and all. I did fergit to make it a "dry-fire safe" action but I will get to that soon and......niter blue the backstrap and cylinder and....rust blue the barrel. Can't niter blue a sleeved barrel. I have to ,yet, mill a piece of brass to insert a taller front sight too.
I have several,maybe four, Belgians I tuned and all so they shoot real well. One other I had a sleeve installed but it was the 44/77 Sharps sleeve since it is the same as the original barrels in the Belgians. I usually leave them shooting a lil high fer some reason. Maybe to leave the front sights the same as they come on the guns. Other guns I make them POA/POI.