Hypotetical(sp) question...

Imagine, you have a single shot action, like the ruger #1, but, instead of beeing a single shot, it would have to barrels attached, and two triggers. A wider action, with two barrels if you will.

Now, since both barrels are independent, they will shoot, or should atleast, the same amount of distance at the target, as the distance between the bores of each barrel. Just like a ordinary rifle. Correct?

What happens, when soldering, or welding them together? Do they shoot all over the place? If so, why?

Is there somekind of warping of the barrels? Trying to "rip" eachother free?

quote:

Originally posted by Nortman:
Hypotetical(sp) question...

Imagine, you have a single shot action, like the ruger #1, but, instead of beeing a single shot, it would have to barrels attached, and two triggers. A wider action, with two barrels if you will.

Now, since both barrels are independent, they will shoot, or should atleast, the same amount of distance at the target, as the distance between the bores of each barrel. Just like a ordinary rifle.

................NO!!!If the barrels were left free standing , not connected, the rifle would still shoot ALL OVER THE PLACE, as you put it!

quote:

What happens, when soldering, or welding them together? Do they shoot all over the place? If so, why?

Is there somekind of warping of the barrels? Trying to "rip" eachother free?

The same rules apply to a two barreld Ruger No1 as they do to any double rifle! The rifle would not regulate together till the barrels were physicly attached together, and wedged to shoot to a common POA! The barrels must converge before they will shoot together! The amount decided by trial and error!

Your questions are perfectly understandable, and I'll explain in more detail later! I just took some medicine, and need to go to bed now, so I'll pick this up in the morning.

quote:

Originally posted by Nortman:
it would have to barrels attached, and two triggers. A wider action, with two barrels if you will.

What about 2 scopes? one for each of the rifles you are welding together.

Mac: thats what I dont understand. A single action/barrel would shoot straigth.. just like #1, they dont shoot all over the place.

Here you have two barrels, free standing, attached to the same reciver. But there would be a small "wall" of steel between them, so the one would not affect the other.

So if there where 1 1/2 inch between them at the muzzle, one would azume(sp) that there would be the same spread of 1 1/2 inch at the target as well?

IF, one would aim at the target between the two barrels? Like if there was a scope attached between the barrls.. just to simplify(sp) things.

Please correct me if Im wrong.

Okay, you're wrong. It won't work and the reason is really basic. Two barrels, same action, same stock. The barrels of double rifles do NOT recoil through the same arc, and the rifle is in recoil during the time that the bullet is traversing the bore. In other words, the right barrel won't be in the same spot when the bullet exits the bore as the left will be when it's fired. Perfectly parallel bores would make it impossible for the individual barrel groups to print together. The barrels must converge in the horizontal plane, and usually diverge slightly in the verticle plane. How much? Shoot, heat solder and move wedge; shoot, heat solder and move wedge; shoot.......... ...and no two otherwise identical pairs of barrels behave in exactly the same way. That's what "regulation" is, and no, there isn't a way around it.
------------------------------------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."

quote:

Originally posted by Nortman:
Mac: thats what I dont understand. A single action/barrel would shoot straigth.. just like #1, they dont shoot all over the place.

Here you have two barrels, free standing, attached to the same reciver. But there would be a small "wall" of steel between them, so the one would not affect the other.

So if there where 1 1/2 inch between them at the muzzle, one would azume(sp) that there would be the same spread of 1 1/2 inch at the target as well?

IF, one would aim at the target between the two barrels? Like if there was a scope attached between the barrls.. just to simplify(sp) things.

Please correct me if Im wrong.

As 400 Nitro Express says, "YOU ARE WRONG", and "NO There is no way around it"!

Nortman, assuming you could make both barrels identical, and alligned exactly the same, side be side, which is imposible, they would still not shoot to exactly the same place with only the distance between the bores on the target at any range!

What you fail to take into consideration is, some geometry, and physics of each barrel's position on the action, being on opposite sides of the vertical CL (centerline) of the rifle, between the barrels, and with both barrels being above, the horrizonal CL of the rifle, and a little thing called BARREL TIME

Barrel time is the time the bullet is in the barrel before it exits the muzzle. The reason this is important is the barrel starts it's recoil arch the nano-second the primer egnights the powder charge, and the position the muzzle is when the bullet exits the muzzle determines where the bullet hits the target. Even in a single barrel with the barrel in line with the center of the rifle, the elevation, on the target is still effected by the recoil arch, and must be compinsated for by sight adjustment!

NOW! you take two barrels on the same action and stock, one on each side of the vertical CL of the rifle, and both above the horrizonal CL of the rifle! When the right barrel is fired it recoils up, and to the right, and when the left barrel is fired it recoils up and to the left of the vertical CL of the rifle. This means if the barrels are not converging, the right barrel will shoot high, and wide to the right, and opposite for the left barrel. NOW! To regulate the two barrles to shoot thier two individule groups into a composite group on the target, the barrels must converge, and the amount will never be the same for any two rifles, eventhough they weigh the same, and are chambered for excatly the same cartridge/load!

If you take a double rifle and place the barrel set in a vise with the sights alligned on the POA at the target, then take two empty cases without primers one in each barrel, and look through the primer holes you will see that the right barrel points to a place on the target that is low, and on the LEFT of the POA on the target, and the left barrel will be pointing at a spot that is low and RIGHT of POA on the target. As the rifle is fired the right barrel will rise up, and to the right, and the left barrel will rise up and to the to the left. When the barrels are converged properly, both barrels will hit the target in a composite group of both barrels.

If you think barrel time doesn't exist, in relation to the bullet printing on the target at a given distance, the take your Ruger No1 zero it to hit exactly on target at 100 yds. Then take that rifle place it in a padded vise, with the scope's crosshairs on the center of the target, then do the empty case, with no primer thing and look through the bore of the rifle, and you will see the barrel will be pointed at a different place on the target, but that barrel will be pointing right on target under recoil of the rifle being fired!

If the regulation was as easy as you would like to make it, everybody would be makeing double rifles, because they could be made by machines, instead of very skilled craftsmen. All makers of fine double rifle ustilize modern technology, like lazers, and CNC machineing, but these things only cut the cost, and time taken by the hog work, which can be done by a plumber. The fitting, and regulation still must be done by hand, and I would doubt there are more than 100 people in the USA who can build a double rifle worth owning, and that statement includes most well known gun makers and custom rifle makers in this country!

400, and Mac: Thanks for the walkthrough

Im not trying to argue, just trying to understand.

Now yesterday I stumbeld across a two or three year old thread about barreltime while searching for something else..

From what I understand now, is that each load, bullet and powder has its own "frequency" if you will. F.ex 500 grain bullet at 2150fps using 90grains of powder, will pull the barrel to XY degrees of point of aim. Right?

If so, one should be able to calculate how much each load would push a rifle up and to the side?

With such a action I described, one could mount the left barrel in such a manner that its pointing X degrees down and right. The same would be done with the right barrel. I dont know if this is called off-axis?

Anyway, I have not seen a double rifle, this is just speculation, but I would guess that during regulation, the barrels are bent down and inwards to compensate for barrel time. Correct?

Nortman:

Yes, you're describing how it's always been done. The barrel maker must set the tubes up with something reasonably close to the proper convergence when the barrels are joined. One barrel maker I talked to said roughly .003" for each inch of barrel length for a large bore. The regulator can only move them so much, as the soft solder joint at the muzzles can only hold so much adjustment. However, as stated in my previous post, no two barrel sets behave the same with the same load. That's where trial and error comes in.
-----------------------------------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."

Allright.. and the only way to try it, is to shoot it yourself? There can´t be a mechanical rest?

Correct. The rifle must be rested in a manner that permits it to duplicate the recoil arcs that it will have in the field. A mechanical rest, or the type of bench rest commonly used with other rifles, won't permit this. Regulation is usually done with a standing rest.

The bottom line is that the short-cuts in regulating available today due to "modern" technology are the same ones that have been in use since Victorian times.
------------------------------------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."

I can see this.. especially if they are using factory ammo.. and in large calibers this would be extreamly expensive.


But, using a falling block action, one could use high pressure loads. Say, a double rifle in 7STW. Just load a 175 grain bullet to 3000fps, then regulate the barrels.

Who wants one of those?

quote:

Originally posted by Nortman:
400, and Mac: Thanks for the walkthrough

Im not trying to argue, just trying to understand.

Nortman, nobody is thinking you are trying to argue. The questions you are asking are not unusual at all! You would be surprised to find the number of well known, long time custom gun makers who do not understand double rifles! The conceptions you display, are quite common. The only dumb question is the one you don't ask, if you don't know the answer!

quote:

With such a action I described, one could mount the left barrel in such a manner that its pointing X degrees down and right. The same would be done with the right barrel. I dont know if this is called off-axis?

What you just described above is what is called regulation. The left barrel pointing down, and to the right, is the result of the regulation process. The only thing most seem to not understand the convergance, cannot be predicted, and must be doen with trial, and error.
One thing that causes some of the confusion in the unschooled is the missuse of the word "REGULATE". Many use the word to discribe the working up of a load to match the regulation. This is incorrect! REGULATION is a physical process, of properly joining the barrels together to shoot to a common composite group with both barrels. This is built into the rifle by the maker, and is done with a load of known pressures, and velocity. The working up a load for a double rifle you have bought, is a very different thing, and requires some experience, and must be done with extreme care! This process should ba called FINDING a LOAD that will shoot to the regulation of the rifle, and not REGULATION!

By the way the double barreled rifle, useing a modified, and doubled, Ruger No1 action, if done properly, would make a very strong double rifle, that would handle just about any cartridge that would fit into the action. However, I doubt the traditionalist would buy them, if they were only double barreled No1s, still lever operated, instead of break open doubles. SOOOOOoooooooooo, what I'm saying is, all your ideas are not smoke, just show a misunderstanding of the double rifle in general!

Here is what Hagn did.. not exactly ugly!!

https://forums.accuratereloading.com/eve/forums/a/tp.../956103053#956103053

The HAGN shown is a beauty.

I bet though if built in an ellie caliber, say 450 3 1/4 or larger, it's reload is slower than the TOP LEVER BREAK OPEN Double Rifle.

I actually think in any caliber that the T/L B/O D/R would be reloadable faster than the BOTTOM LEVER Falling Block or Break Open DR.

quote:

Now, since both barrels are independent, they will shoot, or should atleast, the same amount of distance at the target, as the distance between the bores of each barrel. Just like a ordinary rifle. Correct?

NOT correct! No two barrels, even successive ones off the same machinery, will ever shoot the same whether they are soldered together or not! Recoil alone, not to mention barrel harmonics, assure this will never happen. If the bores are perfectly parallel, recoil will make the left barrel shoot to the left of the center of the barrel mass, and the right one shoot to the right of that plane. Therefore, the axis of the bores have to converge. This is speaking of the horizontal plane.

In addition, one barrel is bound to shoot to a spot higher or lower than the other one even if the axis of each of the two bores is perfectly aligned with one another in the vertical plane, due to barrel vibration if for no other reason.

Unfortunately no matter what scheme you dream up, or what breeching system one uses, regulation by trial and error cannot be avoided! Even if the bores are aligned with laser equipment.

quote:

Originally posted by bwanajcj:

quote:

Originally posted by Nortman:
it would have to barrels attached, and two triggers. A wider action, with two barrels if you will.

What about 2 scopes? one for each of the rifles you are welding together.

Now, THAT will work! As will a separate set of iron sights on each barrel, adjusted for that barrel. The Pedersoli Kodiak ML rifles use a similar scheme, with two rear sights which can be zeroed independenty for each barrel. But such things are unattractive and cumbersome to use, and if you have to switch sights before shooting the second barrel, it kinda defeats the purpose of having two shots immediately available......

Why not just enlarge that .600 NE revolver that I read about in a German magazine. Add a buttstock and lengthen the barrel and we would have a 6 shot .600 NE. A rapid second shot could be provided my making it double action.

quote:

A rapid second shot could be provided

Hi Dan,

From what I saw of the video of the shooting of a 600 NE Pistol that second shot is delayed at least a little while the shooter walks back the twenty feet behind him to pick-up the pistol and the remainder of his hand....

This could also be done.. I have seen pictures of some old rifles made up like this. But not in heavier calibers.

How would accuracy be when the bullet has to "jump" into the barrel?

It would look out of place in afrika, but think about it.. a six shot 470NE, or as you said 600 NE. With the right design, one could probably be seen with it hunting as well.. Could also be a top break for a more "classy" look like these guns: http://www.uberti.com/firearms/TopBreak.tpl

Always like the looks of those..

Yet one more grand complication to add to the excellent describtion of regulation Mac already provided is that the right barrel is regulated to be fired first in a top shelf double. That is, the right should shoot to the sights when both barrels are cold, and the left should when it is cold at the right is hot, subtly altering it's convergence and harmonics.

That's why you can get different groups firing a left-right vs a right-left, and obviously is incredibly time consuming/labor and $$$ intensive. I don't know if anyone still does this today, or if it's worth the trouble, but some did in the past and is certainly understandable considering the perfectionist nature of some folks .

Bob