I have just got my british double back from my very good reputated and experianced gunsmith. Anyway, one thing that has been done is a re-regulating of the barrel set. The barrel ends(front) have got an irregular coned inner end so the "hole" is not in the middle anymore..(please excuse my english but I simply cant fint the word of the machining of the barrel ends ;-) ) He explained that it was his way to find the final precision between the barrels after the regulating by heating and adjusting the barrels. Is this a current and common methode?

Martin

Martin:
Could you possibly mean "crowned muzzle" or the "crown"?

Dutch


Damn the man who talks shoot but won't wager a nickle on his gun or ability.

It is my guess that Martin does indeed mean the lack of concentric crowning of the muzzle ends. If they shoot well be happy Martin.

quote:

Originally posted by Martin:
I The barrel ends(front) have got an irregular coned inner end so the "hole" is not in the middle anymore

He explained that it was his way to find the final precision between the barrels after the regulating by heating and adjusting the barrels. Is this a current and common methode?

Martin

What I get from martin's description of the problem is. The barrels have been machined on only one side of the muzzle, to get the barrels to come closer together to increase convergance, leaving the bore off center in the muzzle end of the barrel. If that is, in fact, the case someone needs to take that smith's machines away from him, because in all my years I've never seen a double rifle regulated that way!

Maybe I'm missunderstanding what he is describing, I certainly hope so!

Again, sorry for my poor explaination. Now you have placed the word "crown" that I missed yesterday. Thanks!
The thing is that the barrels has been rebored from 303 British to 9,3x74R because of rust and wear. I have used the rifle intensively for years in the original caliber but the individual accuracy of each barrel has gradually failed and finnaly it was not acceptable. However, the barrels are regulated between themselves but the crowning is not made in the middle of the bores.

Martin

Martin,

Please photograph the muzzles from right in front of them,

looking straight back to the breach end and post said pic.

We all are curious as to what you are actually describing!

It is hard to see in the picture but I hope it helps you to understand. Normally you finish the muzzle inner side crowning with a lathe(single barrel rifle), or use a ball end(or cooned) milling tool to make the shape, but in this case the muzzle crowning is not centered to each barrel and is irregulary done with a rotating file or something likely.

Points of view?

Martin

To me, it looks like a crown job performed by a drunk blind man suffering from Parkinson's disease.

And there sure isn't much room there to clean it up.

i couldn't find the picture.

but to me it sounds like this repudated gunsmith did a little hillbilly engineering.

it has long been known that removing metal from one side of a muzzle will cause the bullet to move in that direction when exiting the barrel.

maybe the smith doesn't know how to properly regulate a double but if he got it shooting well .... good for him.

maybe martin can post some targets he shot with it ?

I've known some "gunsmiths" who used to "regulate" double rifles by filing inside the muzzles. The funny thing is that I've even seen it work ?!? It sure is simpler/cheaper than the in/out moving of the the wedge. Need I say that I'm not an admirer of such token of craftmanship...

quote:

Originally posted by Andre Mertens:
I've known some "gunsmiths" who used to "regulate" double rifles by filing inside the muzzles. The funny thing is that I've even seen it work ?!? It sure is simpler/cheaper than the in/out moving of the the wedge. Need I say that I'm not an admirer of such token of craftmanship...

Andre, If the wedge is not moved the regulation will not change, PERIOD! The fileing of the inside the muzzles does nothing except leave the barrel egg shaped on the muzzle end, with the bore off center of the muzzle. Some plumbers, that call themselves gunsmiths, do this to make room for a thinner wedge without haveing to be unsoldered to a long way up the barrels. Anyone who attempts to re-regulate a double rifle in this manner shouldn't be let out of the insane asylum.

The rifle being cussed,and discussed, here was rebored from 303 Britt to 9.3X74R, and what should have been done is the barrels should have been seperated a re-turned to a smaller diameter, if they needed to be closer together that their dia would allow, rather than butchering the muzzles, the way it was done! The only other way this can be done is to file a small flat on the inside of each barrel about a 1/4 " wide, and 3" back under the ribs, so a thinner wedge can be used. Once the regulation is completed, the exposed end of the wedge can be thinned, so the barrels appear to be still round, with the bore centered in the muzzles! In any event the rib, and front sight ramp will have to be re-fitted!

A real double rifle smith, will re-regulate a double and you will not see anything off center, and shade tree machanic may get the same results on the target, but it will be by MAKE DO workmanship, IMO!

One thing I am not quite clear on here. If the object is solely to get the barrels to shoot together, and IF they do so reliably, what is the major concern over how that was accomplished?

Now, if the purchaser paid to have the barrels separated, re-bored, re-fitted together re-soldered, and re-regulated by cut & try re-soldering, as per the traditional method, I can certainly see where HE might be upset by any other approach being applied. But, if he simply asked that they be redone in the least expensive possible manner to atttain both barrels shooting to the same point of impact with the new chambering, then I am not certain why he or anyone else would be unhappy, so long as that end is accomplished without comprimising the safe operation or life of the firearm.

I know in other fields of riflery, there are many ways to "skin the accuracy cat", depending primarily on how much money the pruchaser wishes to spend. Is that verboten with doubles?


(I know the method used in this instance might not be the one I or any other specific person might chose, but does that by itself make it necessarily inherently evil and wrong?)

quote:

Originally posted by Alberta Canuck:
One thing I am not quite clear on here. If the object is solely to get the barrels to shoot together, and IF they do so reliably, what is the major concern over how that was accomplished?

Now, if the purchaser paid to have the barrels separated, re-bored, re-fitted together re-soldered, and re-regulated by cut & try re-soldering, as per the traditional method, I can certainly see where HE might be upset by any other approach being applied. But, if he simply asked that they be redone in the least expensive possible manner to atttain both barrels shooting to the same point of impact with the new chambering, then I am not certain why he or anyone else would be unhappy, so long as that end is acomplished without comprimising the safe operation or life of the firearm.

I know in other fields of riflery, there are many ways to "skin the accuracy cat", depending primarily on how much money the pruchaser wishes to spend. Is that verboten with doubles?

AL-Canuck, if that level of expertese suits you then it matters not to me! It certainly isn't acceptable to me! There is simply a right, and wrong way of doing things, and when the way a double rifle is finished dirrectly effects the value of the rifle, the wrong way devalues the rifle!

You could most likely weld the barrels together, with an arch welder, in a couple places, and not bother to card the barrels down, and leave the bore off center with the taper of the barrels and get them to regulate, but I doubt anyone I know would buy such a doggy looking rifle! I guess it all depends on what is acceptable to the individual, but it seems it isn't acceptable to the owner of this rifle, nor would it be with me, no matter how well it shoots!

Gemtlemen, to avoid further missunderstanding and as I mensioned earlier in this topic, the rifle has been traditionally "cut and try re-soldering" re-regulated and there is no problem regarding space to place the barrels closer or so, it is only the final precision that is made with an irregular crowning of each barrel. It is this and only this with the crowning my question is all about. I have ordered a re-bore and a traditional re-regulation and so is done.

Martin

That method would not be acceptable in any reputable shop that I'm aware of.
--------------------------------------------------
"Serious rifles have two barrels, everything else just burns gunpowder."

Mac -

Please understand I was not recommending that approach. It would not be acceptable to me today either, but that is because in my current life & circumstances, I see my rifles as more than just tools to shoot to provide needed food or protection.

At the same time, it is a method worth knowing about. Having lived through some times and in some countries where one could not have everything exactly as he wished, I never feel really good about roundly condeming anything which actually can be made to work to achieve a specific, needed, result. Who knows when someday I may not have the choices I have now?

Seems to me I have read in some of the old African hunter's tomes about very similar "shade-tree" make-shift solutions to problems in the bush, which saved their bacon either literally or at least so far as the financial aspects of their hunt(s).

So long as that was understood in advance as the way a thing might be done, the goal was achieved, and it worked such that the owner was satisfied, I see no evil in that.