First post,a bit involved Q

[Racing]

Hi guys!
I´m Jesper and got directed for this place via 1858.com. I live in Sweden.

I´m currently into a bit of a project where i intend to see what´s to be had out of an old french made Chassepot needle fire rifle.

I´m by no means a newcomer to doing my own work and do so for others on occasion too,while hobby basis only.

Anyways.
As much as the Chassepot is claimed to be an "eleven millimeter" rifle it is in reality a 45 caliber one. The rifle in case i´ve slugged to a 460 even. (Just with a regular roundball)

What we´re dealt here is what could be abbreviated as a 45-90 cartridge,which can in practice be pushed up as well as down. In short a half potent round all said and done.

Now. The rifle in case only part i´m going to keep is the barrel and the breech really. I see no reason to hog into an old Chasse stock and what not,so i´ve bought a GRS stock that´s fully adjustable all over the map and will bed and stud and so forth as needed.

Barrel is approx 750mm long,so we´re in essence talking a rather piece of kit here.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152703856329807400_resized.jpg

I´ll throw every trick in the book at the thing,but as is i´m currently into the fudder for it. Regular variations of the 45-70 bullet in its own rights,but what i have in mind-as a direct Q,is what´s there to be had for medium distances?

Thinking GOOD boat tail designs.

Ammo,if we´re to call it that,is made up from a plastic tube a´la a jumbo straw approx. To hold the primer i turn small "anvils" out of POM that are glued in place into said tube.
The original design,which i guess many of you are aware,is a bore riding design of 385 grains but TBH i have a bit of a hard time taking the use of such a design to heart.

Basic idea here is to see what´s there to be had from this rather precise 150yr old barrel (gun was made in 1868).
Ie; medium and long range shooting is on the agenda.

[rancher1913]

first thing to learn is the search box in the upper right hand corner, under your log in area. type in "chassepot" and it will at least 10 threads about that gun and there is even a thread on homemade ammo for it. welcome to the forum and have fun learning.

[Lead pot]

I just watched a video on reloading the Chassepot https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xi47hIRi3b0 interesting. But for medium distance (300-600 yards??) I would question the .460" 360 gr BT bullet being use full for mid range. It would almost be a round ball and it would loose elevation right quickly.
But interesting project your doing.........Kurt

[Racing]

Thx.
Been lurking for quite a while before that first post,and have read what´s there to read on the Chassepot. Trust me.
Very rarely though (never?) there´s been stuff posted as far as trying to "reach out" beyond 4oo to 5ooyards. Hence my questioning.

Most seem to fire these things at 100 meters and done deal which leads to that there´s very very little to be read on the subject. Have for instance the piece written by US ordonance from back in the day when using Martini-Henrys and what not up to 3000yards,which to an extent hands an idea i guess but that´s about it however.

However it does amount to a minimum as far as what could/can be had today.

Thanx Kurt.
Yeah. They´re a tad different as far as how you fill ´em up. The stock slug for them is a bore riding design alright and does indeed weigh a mere (for a 45) 385 grains. Looks of it,which in essence tells very little i guess,is rather mundane?
Accurate molds makes one for the stocker,but like you i sincerly doubt that would be the end of all ills. Understandable from a historical POW but that´s about it.

FWIW the barrel is a 1:22 twist proposition. Here on CB i dug up an old boat tail design that i´ve given thought to cutting out of aluminium a good while back, buuuut... BC seems a tad low.? Now from memory,but designed by a former member that´s passed,sry to say,if memory serves me.

IOW it comes down to 45 slugs in general to me,which i hope spreads the offerings a bit. The bore riding design? Yeah well,you tell me.
I´m no matter very comfortable with a minor jump-per normal.

As this is a blank piece of paper i´m even open to sabot suggestions.

[Racing]

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152705512229525100_resized.jpg

There ya go.
A drawing of the original paper cartridge which hands a decent idea of OEM bullet looks too.

[Lead pot]

Jesper looking at that drawing that bullet was designed for multiple shots fired with a fouled barrel. Not much bearing surface on the bullet shank and the bullet really gets swaged down entering into the bore so this might add more to the shank. It would be interesting to have some of the original projectiles to see how they shot.
Your 1/22 ROT barrel will shoot the lighter bullets just fine. Post some results when you get it going...........Kurt

[beltfed]

Rather interesting.
I wonder about fixing the primer to the end of the plastic tube. Is
this rigid enough that will hold the primer to be hit by the needle firing pin.
It is noted that the Dryse "needle gun" had the primer on the base of the bullet,
and a LONG needle firing pin protruded thru the powder charge to hit the primer
beltfed/arnie

[Randy Bohannon]

Couldn't help but to notice, mine is a Hamer as well, built in Michigan in 1992

[Lead pot]

I had a Ibanez acoustic guitar I never learned how to play. My fingers are like clubs on that narrow neck that would just give me buzzes :)

[Ballistics in Scotland]

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152705512229525100_resized.jpg

There ya go.
A drawing of the original paper cartridge which hands a decent idea of OEM bullet looks too.

That drawing is interesting, for it says that the obturator is of leather treated with suet. It might work as well (which is to say, not very well) as the rubber obturator which was used in the Chassepot's military days. But it is the first I have heard of it. Dry leather would have the same property as cork wads, of compressing without widening out. But thoroughly impregnated leather, becoming incompressible, would widen. No doubt there are now high-temperature greases which would do it better than suet.

There is no substitute for some of the other threads on this topic, notably http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?286848-Mle-1866-Chassepot-Cartridge-Construction-DIY-Insanity! Some exceedingly fine minds have worked on making the Chassepot perform really well, and as in 1870, show that exceedingly fine minds can't completely succeed in this. Nobody ever achieved this in smallarms without a sealing cartridge case, although the principle works well in heavy artillery. The Chassepot had its limits. But as Dr. Johnson said, if a man teach his cat to play the fiddle, the wonder is not that it is done badly, but that it is done at all.

These pictures come from Captain HM Hosier's book, together with his assessment of the Chassepot which I have copied into the above thread. I think the front of the bullet was probably supported and aligned by the throat, against which the cartridge, not being completely rigid, could be forced with a consistent pressure.

221076

221077

The conversion proposed here isn't very different from what France did, converting their Chassepots into the 1874 Gras. One problem is providing an extractor, and another is what to do about that large, wide empty space behind the Chassepot cartridge. The barrel shape doesn't look suitable for setting back very far. It might be that the larger .544in. head of the 11x 59 Gras brass case permitted this, or perhaps they soldered a sleeve into the rear of the barrel.

It is worth searching www.naturabuy.com for Chassepot and 1874 Gras parts. Even if you don't buy any, it may show you how the conversion was done.

[Racing]

Hm.
Now please don´t get this wrong but..we mainly buy our Chassepot rifles on Naturabuy up here most of us.

Main difference in barrel for the Gras is the cutout for the extractor alright. That´s about it though.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/204/152738570919234200_resized.jpg

There´s a bunch of lads around these pts that load their Chasses up like this with great success. Yet a few has reverted to shrink sleeve.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152668255808526700_resized.jpg

What i´m currently into is fabbing a sorts of primer holder,for lack of better description,but the issue is as noted in that other thread. Chamber evacuation.
Chamber evacuation is based on wake area theory though,not some magic p1/p2 relationship between adjacent areas that are interconnected. Ie;it comes down to how that sub pressure is used to advantage.
What we´re currently debating is using shrink sleeve around a turned to size piece of aluminium,thinking this "first" heating will stiffen the construction per se. Shrink sleeve indeed comes in a variety of qualitys,hardness and thickness why we expect to spend quite some time evaluating this. What´s more we need to figure out a solution for evacuating that primer holder.. Reasoning as such that if we make it split down the middle it´ll grab the cap like a "jaw" as the needle strikes while it´ll fold as the gasses of the cartridge starts to expand and thus be able to evacuate-bring the rest of the remnants with it. At least,that´s the theory as of current.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152650345686035600_resized.jpg

Needles are in reality real simple,and cheap,to produce. We use standard small Linde TIG electrodes of 1.6mm diameter. Just cut to length with a dremel tool (cutting with any sorts of shear will shatter the rod) and then weld a "blob" to the end of it with a MIG welder. After that it´s a simple matter of turning said blob to 3mm diameter on the bench grinder.
As the electrodes are tungsten/wolfram they take to the heat generated with a laugh just about,they´re hard as you won´t believe and they sharpen needle sharp with ease.
What´s more..they´re pennies at your local weld house. No need for "special" anything actually. These electrodes are readily available all across the globe.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152658264714510000_resized.jpg

What i´m working on ATM though is a piston solution instead of the obturator. As you pick the breech/receiver and barrel apart and get up close and dirty with it the use of a rubber obturator is a genius move really as it brings the need for accuracy as far as machining to an absolute minimum. Valuable when you aim to turn rifles out by the million.

Well,i´m not why i´ve opted to use a stainless steel piston and most likely (haven´t arrived on that yet) teflon seals (either two or three of them).
To make that work i have to ream the sealing cylinder to size which in reality works out to my advantage as that also brings that i can cut the piston in case to the clearance i see fit.

[Racing]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHkSbRDv_xo

Oh! ´N for SnG here´s me and that Korean made Hamer in action :hijack:
Enjoy. :grin:

Uhu. I build tube amplifiers for a living.

[Bigslug]

Jesper,

You've no doubt seen my "DIY Insanity" thread on making ammo for these things. I've got to admit I'm a little awestruck by the direction you're taking.

Boat tails are probably not the direction to go. You're not going to turn a .45 propelled by black powder into a .300 Weatherby Magnum no matter how you try. Stability and predictability of trajectory coupled with the ability to adjust for it is going to be the key. It's worth remembering that the Chassepot WAS the long distance thrower during it's brief day in the sun.

Fit of the bullet to the rifle is going to be the No.1 important thing, and a nose that helps to mechanically center the drive bands in the forcing cone will probably trump everything else when it comes to accuracy. I think careful measurements of a chamber casting followed by a request to Accurate Molds for that nose with a lube grooved shank would be the avenue to follow. Possibly multiple, tapered driving bands?

It's also worth considering that the Chassepot's sights are obviously for officer-directed mass volley fire - for individual precision, they lack any kind of windage adjustment. You might want to research the various WWI and WWII offset sniper rifle mounts, as well as the offset mounting system for the Davidson scopes sometimes seen on Confederate Whitworths. That basic method for achieving sufficient elevation could be improved upon. You could, for instance, attach a Unertl or Malcolm-style external adjustment scope to some form of side mount.

[Racing]

Useful info,no doubt.

Nah. Blackpowder will,like it or not,set the limits here. Well aware of that but then again as we´ve measured muzzle speed it will be borderline for making use of a boat tail.? (Well aware that bullet weight will affect this)

Many seem to swear by the LEE 459-500 and that might very well be why we´re going to try that too. Mold is cheap enough at least.
Completely agree on the bullet fit matter. This particular rifle i´ve slugged to a true 460,and in doing so you can really "feel" that it´s more loose by the chamber then the muzzle. From another point of view,number of drivebands of course becomes imperative as well.

Yes. I´ve read that post of yours more than once. Ie;seing the goal here any info available could be of use.

Uhu. I wouldn´t call this a long range attemp just yet... but...the goal for starters is at least medium range. Ie; 3oo-6oo meters. Where that´ll end up is anybodys guess at the moment,but as i write above i´m going to toss every trick in the book at this piece.
Hence the reason for the GRS stock. No matter if blackpowder or smokeless a free floating barrel for instance at least leaves us with a piece that we can trim to need.

Sights. Mind over matter,they don´t mind and we don´t matter...:lol:
Being in my 50´s my eyes sure ain´t what they used to be so that some sort of optics will be used is clear. Sry to say though the optics TO use doesn´t cater to sidemounts by any measure,and i´m really sorry for that as i would sure love to have kept the bolt intact.
It is a no-can-do however why i´ve thus far just made a new handle.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152727040202256500_resized.jpg

No. Design isn´t done yet. Going to turn a sorts of "collar" where it meets up with the bolt,for looks reasons,and in turn shorten the actual knob a few mills still.

No matter. This take on the matter leaves me with much greater leeway as far as optics and for starters i´m going in shallow. Ie; a used cheap piece,albeit not current chinese crop.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152703860956561200_resized.jpg

A 6-25/40 by Tasco. Don´t want to spend top dollar until i at least get a reasonable grouping on paper. If i do i plan to replace that with one of the newer digital offerings.

Further plans,from a tech POW,is to cut a fresh hammer for this thing out of either 7075T651 or Alumec (titanium approx).
Reason is that the Chassepot´s shutter time sure is on the slow end why any and all help could be put to good use i bet.
Ditto for replacing the trigger with a Timney unit. Of course we could have cut/made one ourselves,but to what good really seing what a used Timney setup runs.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152710571468461800_resized.jpg

This is for a Mauser though why we´ll need to trim to fit. Basic operating principle however is the same between the two

[Racing]

221102

An attempt to see if these attachments come out right...

[Racing]

221103

221104

221105

Seems to take three at a time at least? Anyways. These are original Chassepot drawings. Post them attached to this server as i guess someone down the line might make use of them.?

[Racing]

221106

221107

221108

221109

221110

[Racing]

221111

221112

221113

This one´s a little interesting as it hands us the dimensions of the various "rooms" of the barrel. Mind you that measurments given are anything but exact really. Question i´ve got is if this is intentional.?

221114

[Racing]

221115

221116

221117

221118

221119

[Racing]

221120

221121

221122

[Racing]

221123

221124

221125

221126

That much for a few of the original drawings for the gun. Figuring as such that it might come in handy for someone one of these days.

[Bigslug]

Neat! Given your new Soviet PU 91/30 style bolt handle, adding the optics should get easier. Do you plan to eliminate the rear sight entirely, or use it as a hardpoint?

If you find a suitable replacement for the striker spring that speeds up the lock time or increases the force of the hit, please make it known. You can scratch 1911 recoil spring off your list - O.D. is too large.

[Bigslug]

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152705512229525100_resized.jpg

OK. . .a little more outside the box thought on bullet/cartridge redesign here:

We've been using Hodgdon's Triple 7 black powder substitute in my Dad's Chassepot simply because it's less of a PITA to deal with in California, but it does have the advantage of being 15% more energetic than black for an equivalent volume. You could take advantage of that reduction of charge to play a little bit with the bullet shape. Since the original paper patch is not strictly a necessity, adding a tapered section to the front of the driving band of that exactly fits the taper of the chamber might work wonders for alignment in the bore. The extra space you gain with Triple Seven could then be dedicated to a second driving band with a large lube groove. The existing driving band could then be shortened slightly to account for some of this.

The main goal here would be a solid, consistent interference fit that takes your cartridge tube out of the equation for bore alignment - at least as much as possible.

[Lead pot]

Jesper I don't think a BT projectile will be of any benefit using a lead bullet with black powder.
Over the years I worked with making lead rebated boat tail, cup bases shallow and deep as well as rebated BT hollow point lead bullets. The hard part using these type of projectiles with lead is protecting the base, keeping it from getting deformed when the black powder starts pushing down the bore.
In the end of several years or changing the designs of the base, protecting the base from damage, the effort just didn't justify the results using or making the BT that is shot mostly in the subsonic velocity ranges.....Kurt

221129221130

[Racing]

Well.
One thing at a time then. Direct replacement hammer spring for a Chassepot,here in Sweden resides Lesjöfors. World reknown for making springs in any imagineable form and size.. Swedish SIS 2090 spring steel was once the norm of the world and to us it still is.

http://www.lesjoforsab.com/

What you need is pressure spring 6015. Write them and ask where you can pick it up. It is a direct fit.

[Racing]

As for the stock sights.
Seing that the bolt handle will build it´s 10mm diameter as a minimum this will most likely bring optics stands that are of taller option.
Thus,i might as well reinstall the iron sights and make use of the 100m ones at least. Front and rear sight are both soldered in place. Rear sight with regular solder and front sight is silver soldered in.

I hear you on the consistent cartridge alignment. Truth be told i´ve played around a little more..

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152745840556004200_resized.jpg

First up i took to turning this piece to verify the sealing chamber diameter. Issue here is,per noted previously,that it isn´t conform as we´d expect today.
Measures to approx 18,6mm (won´t go any closer then that). Benefit is that it leaves us leeway to set a "new" diameter of the sealing chamber for THIS particular gun to 19mm flat.
Benefit.... as 19mm or 3/4" is a very common diameter for such seals. In turn by being in control of said chamber diameter it also hands me the opportunity to be in real anal control of piston diameter (as noted earlier,the idea in THIS case is to replace the stock obturator with a piston setup)

That said i proceeded with the actual powder chamber and as it turns out this dials in at...

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152745840826087900_resized.jpg

...a trued and checked 14,55mm.
This leaves us with a question, and that is why the deliberate difference in chamber diameter vs cartridge diameter? As Bigslug states above it is very likely that the actual precision part,as a firing rifle,has been handled by a boolit that enters the rifling to part. Ie; a bore riding one.
As presented then... the reason for the difference in chamber vs cartridge diameter might be to make sure that the actual cartridge (the paper,silk and what not) turns into parts and remnants small enough to be swept out with ease as the bullet evacuates the bore.

Now.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152746017211240200_resized.jpg

Several users around here have made castings of that part of the barrel to get a clean idea of what´s going on. What we can take to the bank here,aside from the actual measurments,is the rather long ramped parts between the spaces set within.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152745841586042100_resized.jpg

...and here in turn we see a similar relationship,just sans the ramped parts. This was just me playing around with making a plug that´ll fit into the barrel as a whole AFTER checking the exact numbers for the chambers at hand.

Speaking of which. I´d be lying if i state that these chambers are circular or cylindrical in any manner, and as i´ve noted before that is what´s part of what´s genius with the Chassepot as it brings machining time down on the barrels in a rather severe manner. The rubber obturator ensures a gas seal no matter.
To US on the other hand this presents an issue as I try and modify this into...shall we call it more of a "match" setup.?
In short these chambers will need to become more uniform but what´s of ABSOLUTE essence here is the measured powder chamber diameter.

Why?
Well. If i´m right in my assumptions,that the reason for the 1,15mm difference in diameter between the powder chamber bore and the actual cartridge is that they wanted to be certain that the remnants of said cartridge is shredded and evacuates,then we can ignore this "need" as we´ve got different materials to play around with 2018 then they did back in 1866.
Enter,for instance,shrink sleeve.

Now. Please take to heart that a cartridge based on shrink sleeve,it becomes an imperative part of how "stiff" said cartridge will be...how we stuff it.
But.
If we select shrink sleeve of appropriate diameter it is reasonable that we don´t HAVE to obide to the 13,4mm stock dimensions anymore as a piece of shrink sleeve will most likely evacuate the barrel even at 14,5mm original outer diameter. Also be adviced that shrink sleeve comes in a plethora of qualitys.

So? What gives? Well. I´ll be visiting my supplier tomorrow and hope to bring a few different quality shrink sleeves with me. Idea here is to check their material thickness and compensate for that to get a true 14,45-14,50 true outer diameter. In turn it also leaves me with the option of trying to figure a cap holder of some sorts out AND..in turn it might even let us assemble the cartridges from the wrong end,rendering that we can use the shrink sleeve to keep the bullet in place (although i doubt it)

Interesting take to say the least....
Hm.


Well.
That aside then.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152745603628908300_resized.jpg

Say wut? What the...

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152745603173845400_resized.jpg

Have bridgeport. Will travel :lol:
Nah. There´s an idea behind the madness. As much as i doubt that we´ll make THAT good of a use of a muzzle brake i on the other hand see more use of different weights at the muzzle end of the barrel.
As all riflemen know the free length of the barrel and vibrations from setting the powder charge off...induces finite movement of the barrel and to be able to with at least a bit of reason alter that by various weights..yeah well.

Yeah. That. And the mere fact that we can. :lol:

[Racing]

Jesper I don't think a BT projectile will be of any benefit using a lead bullet with black powder.
Over the years I worked with making lead rebated boat tail, cup bases shallow and deep as well as rebated BT hollow point lead bullets. The hard part using these type of projectiles with lead is protecting the base, keeping it from getting deformed when the black powder starts pushing down the bore.
In the end of several years or changing the designs of the base, protecting the base from damage, the effort just didn't justify the results using or making the BT that is shot mostly in the subsonic velocity ranges.....Kurt

221129221130

Kurt.
I hear you. So bottom line is that it´s hard to keep the boolit form conform under pressure when working with pure lead? In essence...
Hm. No matter felt wads or whatever?

If you read what´s been arrived on today only it DOES present a different ballgame as we in reality most likely will get away with a fatter cartridge.
In the case of MY rifle in turn i´ll get away with a taller cartridge too. How? Well,as "chambre" in reality won´t be needed for a piston sealed gun them approx 10mm of the bolt can be omitted.

In other words,as a whole,we´re at the very least looking at a larger cartridge (read-more inner space) by the mere successful use of shrink sleeve (which remains to be proven. There´s those using shrink sleeve around here but then of lesser diameter).
This would fit ALL Chassepot if you ain´t hellbent on firing the original cartridge for whatever historical reasons.
For MY piston sealed rifle to come in turn,it actually means a crapload of more space. In fact most likely more space then i´ll ever need as far as POWDER..why it also presents a poss to use said space for wads or whatever along those lines really.

The stock cartridge is specified for 88,5 grains of blackpowder. Seing the now available space i bet we´re into the 100+grains with EASE,and that arises questions as will the barrel take it...and do we IRL see any use for it.
The approx 800mm long barrel..yeah well. That´s beyond my knowledge as of right now at least.
Increased amount of blackpowder,or as stated T7 in other cases,should suffice for sending a pill downrange appreciable faster can the barrel handle the heat.

Hm.

[yulzari]

That is some careful work going into your take on the Chassepot. My understanding of the expulsion is that the gauze is to keep the bag (less the base which has been blow back off the bag) together as one piece to be dragged out by the bullet to which it is attached and not to shred in the gun. It then falls away as the paper patch blows free of the bullet. Yes the chamber and throat are military and not match specifications to allow for both fouling in a battlefield environment and easy (cheap) machining. The quality of machining varies greatly depending on the makers.

[Bigslug]

Thanks for the link to the spring supplier Jesper! Got an email off to them this morning.

I just took a look at the print for the Accurate Molds Chassepot bullet copy - the 46-365C. This slug has a base diameter of .460" and a diameter of .453 where the nose taper runs into. Given the thicknesses of paper we're using for those "Pope Hat" patches, what goes into the bore could easily be bulked up to well in excess of that.

Clearly, a study is needed as to what the BORE actually wants, regardless of what is going on back at the chamber. My instinct for a custom diameter lube groove bullet with an interference alignment nose feels even stronger, but a more conventional paper-patching such as on Martinis, Sharps, etc... might have a place here.

I really like the idea of shrink tubing. Is your plan for the cartridge to be a straight cylinder? Can the material be used for otherwise? If one were sufficiently clever, an aligning bullet nose coupled with an aligning cartridge base could work wonders for centering, though that may only be a realistic outlook with modern, rigid brass.

[Racing]

@Yulsari

I´ve figured as much,seing how many places the Chassepot was manufactured. Or..remodeled even.

This "hotrod" of mine is basically about pushing the limits of the envelope per se. To try and wring out what´s there to be had.

We DO own stockers too though..

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/204/152702135954804700_resized.jpg

For instance this claimed "marine" model. Basically just your standard Chassepot with a bit of paint.. Nice rifle though and as you can see although busted the stock sling is still there.
Plan to repair that btw.. :coffeecom

[Racing]

Thanks for the link to the spring supplier Jesper! Got an email off to them this morning.

I just took a look at the print for the Accurate Molds Chassepot bullet copy - the 46-365C. This slug has a base diameter of .460" and a diameter of .453 where the nose taper runs into. Given the thicknesses of paper we're using for those "Pope Hat" patches, what goes into the bore could easily be bulked up to well in excess of that.

Clearly, a study is needed as to what the BORE actually wants, regardless of what is going on back at the chamber. My instinct for a custom diameter lube groove bullet with an interference alignment nose feels even stronger, but a more conventional paper-patching such as on Martinis, Sharps, etc... might have a place here.

I really like the idea of shrink tubing. Is your plan for the cartridge to be a straight cylinder? Can the material be used for otherwise? If one were sufficiently clever, an aligning bullet nose coupled with an aligning cartridge base could work wonders for centering, though that may only be a realistic outlook with modern, rigid brass.

Well. If you think about it for a sec,it does carry a bit of merit. Disposable is the name of the game here and the advent of products like shrink sleeve indeed CAN make life a tad simpler.
I´ve picked a few variants up today...we´ll take it from there.

The one with the greatest promise (i guess?) is the one that shrinks to a third of its original diameter.

Sure. Of course you can turn a master plug out of aluminium that for instance is a full 14,5mm outer (the finished sleeve that is) and shrinks enough to grab the bullet up front in turn. Can´t really foresee any kind of issue doing that?
Imperative part here will of course be the plug in itself.

Have spent quite a few hrs reading up on 45 cal bullets here on CB and...i´d say lots have been gained on a personal level. Thank god for forums like this.

But yeah. As long as the finished cartridge possess rigidity enough there´s no real limit to using said cartridge to reference on its "mouth",per normal brass standards.
As far as i´m concerned the main variable here is the blackpowder residue but as with any other blackpowder as long as grease is included of ample amounts that should keep the residue pliable at least,thus becoming way less of an issue.

Therein also lies my main thought as far as a larger cartridge. Ie;we get to stuff whatever we need in there and STILL have room for whatever reasonable amount of blackpowder we´re set for.

However.
The assumptions made by me as far as reason for the difference in diameter of the chamber and the cartridge,i´d really like those within the loop here to voice up. Mainly as i want that thesis challenged.
I for one at least have a hard time seing any other reasonable explanation,cause that there IS such an explanation is dead clear. This difference is NOT a result of hip-hap.
The Chassepot is a WAY to thought trough gun for that.

Point here,as far as bullet choice,though is that from what i´ve understood reading up most bore riding designs seems to be a fail when we´re trying to stretch the distance to the target.?
All said and done it seems that it boils down to a few conventional designs all said and done,and the advent of cartridge reference in the case of the Chassepot opens up a whole new ballgame from what i can see.?

Yet another question mark is how much V muzzle will jump with a given,stout,amount of blackpowder for the OEM bullet.? With its 385 grains it´s a good 100 grains less than most other 45cal designs. Not only of the era but on a whole.

So?
I agree with you. To the point where we´d do best in regarding this as a blank piece of paper more or less. Seing that the chamber for instance is a full millimeter+ fatter then the OEM cartridge tells the story.
Fooling around with the original cartridge per specification in its own right but..of course what i´m hoping for here is that by the use of modern materials..there´s more to be had.
But this will also entail the trial of different bullets for the Chassepot. A few of the boys over here have ordered Accurate molds take on the stocker and we´ll see where all that ends up.
No point in reinventing the wheel and as one of those boys is a rather known retailer of BP gun parts and acc i´ll ask him for a bag or so i guess.
Me in turn..might be that i´m better of ordering molds for the "other" end of it.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152754375373730700_resized.jpg

The muzzle brake. Right....coming along at least.

[Racing]

FWIW.
Next couple of days i´ll be into checking how such a shrink sleeve cartridge will look. Ie; as far as the increased powder volume for a stocker as well as THIS particular rifle (which will most likely be able to use a longer cartridge as well).

Main point of interest here really isn´t the amount of powder per se but the ROOM that becomes effect of using the chamber with modern day n era materials.
Ie;what we can use said space for,and hopefully to our advantage.

I´ll be back with a specified report asap,incl pics.

[Bigslug]

I wouldn't call bore-riders a "fail" per se, but they can be a maddening item, as they require the fit of the nose section to be bang-on, which requires the alloy to be bang on, etc... It's style that I've learned to either avoid, or carefully compare blueprints of to chamber slugs from individual rifles before I'd consider a generic, off the shelf mold. Not that they can't do great things, but more can go wrong than right.

The OEM Chassepot slug wouldn't really be a bore-rider. For that, you need a long nose with parallel sides. I tend to think that the Chassepot's "funnel" chamber would not let you start such a thing close enough to the lands for it to help.

I went back and checked the data from when Dad was gifted (cursed?) his Chassepot and we got a bore of .435-437" and a groove of .459". Nothing mysterious there. Customizing whatever you decide is the optimum nose taper to the front drive band location is probably where the magic will happen - seating depth to be determined of course by shank length and powder volume.

A further thought. You might want to experiment with a somehow-centered smaller diameter wad between your front powder wad and your bullet base. I'm thinking of this as a shrink-tube replacement for the string that tied the bullet to the original powder bag, to somehow "lock" the case to various masses that are, for sure, going out the muzzle. The tube would hopefully shrink into the gap formed by that wad, locking things in place. Just spitballing there - I'm not terribly familiar with the shrink-tube media.

You're right that the shrink tube will give you more room. That might in itself be problematic - bullet diameter dictated by bore vs. powder bag diameter dictated by chamber. :veryconfuHrrrrrmmmmmm. . .

[Racing]

Uhu.
Indeed. A blank piece of paper. I´m still trying to figure out the various reasons for the way the chamber looks like it does.

Maybe especially so the ramps in themselves. If those rather generous ramp areas was to secure the insertion of a paper cartridge with an absolute minimum chance of damaging it?

I mean,no matter the round has had to register one way or another and the stock Chassepot bullet is rather...charcteristic isn´t it?

Looking at the original drawing of the chamber there´s quite a few changes of dimension in there. Ergo one side of it the stocker and how it registers and so on,this particular rifle though is another matter and reamers are cheap after all...
But as always,before changing ANYTHING understand what´s behind the decision that WAS made at one time. Seing that shrink sleeve is on the agenda however that brings that differences in diameter can,and should i guess,be catered for.

But as you say,no matter the cartridge solution really the imperative part here is the boolit all said and done. Like yours my barrel here comes out to about the same dimensions so..
I still wonder if there´s any real point in pursuing the original bullet design as long range performance and accuracy is what i´m after here.?
We KNOW that there´s several solutions to the 45 caliber "issue" per such..and to NOT reinvent the wheel i´m thinking that maybe it´s a good idea to start out with KNOWN good performers for long range work and instead invest the time and work in the cartridge itself.?

To me knowledge very little is written/known on the original bullet as far as long range accuracy? Please correct me if i´m wrong.
So in essence i guess what i´m saying is that this is turning into the age old story of the hen and the egg to parts...

Many shoot their Chassepot rifles with "other" 45 cal boolits as is,and they can´t very well all be wrong. In that case i´d wager we´d read about that by now.

Using shrink sleeve for this application i also feel is the correct route to endeavor. Mainly as shrink sleeve can be "fireformed" (with a heatgun) around basically any shape and form we wish (within reason of course).
That´d bring that we could even get away with chamber evacuation if we play this right. Or,more to the point,those over here using smaller diameter shrink sleeve already are.
Recall that some has taken the route of jumbo approx 1/2" outer diameter straws and others the shrink sleeve setup,but then to about the same outer diameter.
But if nothing else it proves that shrink sleeve indeed DOES work. Question mark would be to what limits and borders and seing how many different shrink sleeve types and materials there are...with glue even.. Well..

I believe the word we´re looking for is mind boggling and as it is we´ll most likely benefit from cutting the problem into smaller pieces.

[Racing]

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152755592722742300_resized.jpg

Shrink sleeve cartridges for the Chassepot.
Courtesy Fredrik Olsson.

[Bigslug]

Uhu.
To me knowledge very little is written/known on the original bullet as far as long range accuracy? Please correct me if i´m wrong.


Check post #107 on page 6 of the DIY Insanity thread, where B.I.S. cites some period material, and my comments to same on post #123. Been busy over there the last few days.

I don't know that the blame lies with the BULLET necessarily, as it does with the variability inherent in the original cartridge making process. There's A LOT of human element in there. Maybe back in 1868, Lucy twisted tube ends clockwise, and Belle wrapped bullet patches counter-clockwise, and ammo made during the one shift per week when they worked together consistently shot 2-MOA. . .but only if it was Marguerite tying them together.

The way to eliminate the wrapping and patching as a variable while still using that bullet would be to put a lube sandwich of card wad, lube disc, card wadand onionskin disc behind the bullet to keep the cards from sticking to it. Buffalo Arms has the lube ribbon extruder to do just that.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

The tungsten electrode needles sound good, perhaps better than is needed. I always thought that if the steels such as 154CM developed to resist high-temperature erosion and embrittlement in jet engine turbine blades, are available in wire form, they could be useful for the Chassepot and for needle guns in which the needle penetrates the powder charge.

The variation in diameter of the place where the obturator makes its seal is interesting, and surely very harmful to accuracy with one-size-fits-all issue cartridges. It may, although I have nothing but imagination to back it up, have been a military or post-military armourer's solution to pitting in that area, which would be even worse. Why should that area suffer more damage than the bore? We have seen pictures of badly deteriorated rubber obturators, and who knows what they exuded? The originals were plain natural rubber, but if vulcanised rubber was used, the combustion products would probably be sulphurous too. I once overheated some sulphur while using it to make chamber casts, and it ignited with a small blue flame. No big deal I thought, for the flame showed no inclination to be large. But it rusted anything of steel which was near enough for the gases to condense upon.

The Gras conversion was in many respects a good one, which was occasionally converted and so far as I know found safe for the 8mm. Lebel cartridge. It could be replicated, but the majority of Chassepot users today probably don't want to modify any part of a valuable antique rifle. But if you are willing and able to do some lathework, I would have thought the obvious solution was to make a true centrefire bolt head, leaving everything original in safe storage, and some short brass sealing cups, rather like the Germans used in First World War medium artillery. I think that for this sort of pressure, you could probably manage with a tubing extension of some kind of existing cartridge head. The Chassepot case isn't, and was never intended to be, the combustible one it is sometimes said to be. But with a sealing case-head it could be, made with nitrated paper and stuffed just tightly enough to position the bullet against the beginning of the lands.

The right length of cup should seal the gas and yet be more easily extracted than a complete case. That could be important, as the Chassepot doesn't have primary extraction, which it never needed in the days when it didn't extract anything.


221296

That leaves the problem of finding room for the extractor. But I think it could be done with a reduced version of the turnbolt Mannlicher extractor, or even a pair of them. Or a semicircular lip on the new bolt head, like a shellholder, into which the rim must be dropped. It would be a nuisance, but should permit effective use of the rifle.

W Milton Farrow, author of "How I Became a Crack Shot", toured Europe and thought the Gras rifle had rifling too deep for the sort of accuracy his modestly entitled book suggests, with the bullet coming out almost square. I doubt if even purpose-built Gras cartridge rifles had a different bore from the Chassepot. There isn't much that can be done about this, but among the little that can, I think it is important that the shape of the bullet conforms closely to the beginning of the rifling. Even a bullet that touches it, but has a smaller base unsupported by a brass neck, may tip slightly before it engraves.

I agree there is very little advantage to a boat-tailed bullet in terms of drag, with the Chassepot. But it reminds me of the original cartridge for the Swiss 1889 Schmidt-Rubin. This had pretty much the same bore dimensions as all the later 7.5mm. Swiss rifles, and very nearly the same case, but the chamber had a much wider neck and throat. It is usually described as having a heel bullet, but the step down in bullet diameter is nowhere near the thickness of the case neck, and the bullet is paper-patched.

It seems likely that the bullet was originally of full diameter all the way to the rear, intended to experience a large reduction in the throat before entering the rifling. The question has to be, why abandon that? I think the "heel" was so that the possibly irregular "finning" at the rear of the bullet would be at a point in its side, not at the rear. Wads or wax "cookies" in any conventional material wouldn't prevent this. What I contemplated, but haven't so far tried in my 1889s, was a disc cut from 8mm. aluminium rod, so that that if anything would experience the finning, but being so disinclined to solder (e.g. when you want to solder aluminium) is discarded with the patch on leaving the muzzle.

[Racing]

To me over here there´s a limiting factor in this.

The Chassepot is exempt from the permit law as it uses a "non gastight cartridge". That there´s cartridge conversion marketed by the French i hope all are aware.?

That brings that i HAVE to play around within the realms of the original cartridge,or i´ll be breaking the law.

[Racing]

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152762167646444600_resized.jpg

Just about forgot. The muzzle brake is about done and in place. The idea here isn´t the brake in itself but the CAPACITY of added weight to the muzzle.
As the barrel will be installed free floating into the stock i plan to toss every trick there is after the gun hardpart wise to get where i want...

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152762167857294300_resized.jpg

Timney trigger showed up as well. Timneys "featherweight" one with added safety lever. Going to take a more in depth look at what´s needed to adapt it,but from the looks of it i´ll get away with just cutting an ever so slight amount of the underside of the receiver away and then bolt the thing firmly to that.

This will however also entail moving the barrel and receiver assy rearward a bit in the GRS stock. No biggie,but it needs to be done.

Off to pick some sample shrink sleeve up boys....be back tonight with an update on that.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

To me over here there´s a limiting factor in this.

The Chassepot is exempt from the permit law as it uses a "non gastight cartridge". That there´s cartridge conversion marketed by the French i hope all is aware.?

That brings that i HAVE to play around within the realms of the original cartridge,or i´ll be breaking the law.

Sounds all right, if your system is different from ours. We have a long list of obsolete (but often extremely useful) cartridges for which firearms made up to 1939 should be considered antiques, free from all controls, as long as they are owned as a "curiosity or ornament". I've negotiated a few cartridges onto it myself. The snag is that using them, or possessing ammunition, requires that they be entered on your licence. But it is hard to find a good reason to refuse you, when you have the gun anyway.

Components for reloading are mostly also uncontrolled, legislators and criminals alike having heard very little about them. A primed case would certainly be uncontrolled, let along the rear end of one, which you carry around and load separately from the little nitrated bag. Still, our law relies much more on precedent in trials than most of the continental ones - i.e. judges telling the prosecution to go away and not be so silly. I'm pretty sure somebody suffered a lot of inconvenience and worry to get that one.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Check post #107 on page 6 of the DIY Insanity thread

I always did think you put that title too strongly. I would call it no more than eccentricity.

[yulzari]

Bearing mind that the Chassepot is a weapons system, so each part of the cartridge/bolt/chamber/bullet is designed in relation to the whole, a bore riding bullet makes sense to the original concept and purpose as it lets the fore part ride on fouling and only had to engage the rifling with the rear portion. Not that it means it is the most accurate choice, but that it was a right answer to the question of a military rifle at the time.

As you are looking to maximise the non rigid case Chassepot concept two things come to mind to me FWIW (very little).

One is that your modern needle probably can cope with a Dreyse style primer at the bullet base, passing through the black powder charge. This reduces the importance of case rigidity.

Another is to wonder if one could take another approach and experiment with a caseless charge of coarse grained black powder bound by thin (4% in alcohol?) shellac or a collodion with the primer set into the rigid case and the bullet glued onto the end in some (denser shellac?) manner. Not a round that would be robust enough for military service but one that would be fit under match care standards. The key here is taking advantage of the Chassepot needing neither an obturating case nor extraction. Of course one would need to consider if the residual shellac or collodion would flash the ignition too fast through the charge and cause a dangerous initial spike of pressure. Here I go well beyond my competence.

BTW where did you get your Chassepot parts drawings?

John

[Racing]

Right guys.
It just might be...that we´ve unveiled something here.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152771713870403900_resized.jpg

So what i did was turn a "master" on the lathe right. Subtracting the thickness of the material from the overall diameter of the master. Using the stock bottleneck...just disregarding the twin angles and making that into one angle over those 3mm in the stock drawing where it goes from 14,5mm downwards. Shutter angle all in all 22deg.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152771714366969300_resized.jpg

Master out of 7075T651 aluminium,meaning it´ll stand for a while no worries.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152771713694142500_resized.jpg

Sprayed it with regular WD-40 before heating/fireforming the shell with a regular heatgun....


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQXlnK9NCGA&feature=youtu.be

..n here ya go lads.

The mere fact that we now have a cartridge that registers on the bottleneck brings a few very usable features. First up we can set bullet depth to basically where ever we want it to be. We can toss n turn as far as bullet type until the cows come home.
That brings that need be we can design for bullet jump and/or interference fit with any 45 cal bullet that´ll fit the bill.

Now. Please keep in mind that when filling that shrink sleeve with powder,grease cookie and whatever..it´ll only get more tough.
In turn the close proximity to the chamber wall will increase toughness even more as it´ll make it even harder for the cartridge to fold in any way possible.
In essence?
From the looks of it it sure looks like we have a winner. This was the second type shrink sleeve i tried,and as the *** i am i of course forgot to write the numbers/manufacturer for it down..no fret tho..info is just at the work table of mine at the shop.

IF i got it right this particular shrink sleeve works on a 3:1 bias. Ie;it´ll turn three times as small vs its original diameter. IOW approx shy of 5mm worth.
That´s kind of academic though as the REAL question is if it´ll shrink FAST enough. Only one way to find out i guess...

[Bigslug]

I always did think you put that title too strongly. I would call it no more than eccentricity.

I think Jesper here may have dethroned me. This may very well be the highest example of the Jurassic Park Foreboding - "Just because you CAN doesn't mean you SHOULD" - that I've ever seen. But dang if this isn't turning into an interesting show! ROCK ON SIR! ROCK ON! :awesome:

Yeah. I think he's on to something with shrink tube matched to what is essentially a chamber casting - at least as far as accuracy goes. How it does for expulsion? Let's solve one problem at a time.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Or just because you possibly can't, doesn't mean you shouldn't.

There used to be a vogue for wrapping grooved and lubed bullets in Teflon plumber's tape (PTFE in the UK), and shrinking it with gentle heat. It was banned for some classic target-shooting in the UK, and there is nothing like a ban for convincing people that something must be good. I probably know its origin, for in Clyde Williamson's extremely good "The Winchester Lever Legacy" he illustrates his own patent application.

Some years back therefore, I searched eBay for Teflon tubing, and bought some, which was much thicker than the filmy plumber's tape. Unfortunately I found that it was too uneven in thickness to position a bullet precisely enough on the bore axis. I will find something else to do with it, one of these days. Of course current production or other brands might be better, and not all heat-shrink tubing is Teflon, although that is surely the strongest.

I'm intrigue by the process, although I have some doubt whether it would be consistent enough for rifle use. Mounting the former on an electric screwdriver, to produce even heating on all sides, might help. It would surely be usable for someone with a problem feeding an 8ga or 4ga shotgun.

[Racing]

@Bigslug.
Thx!

You guys are already aware,but the possibility of registering the cartridge on its bottleneck for a Chassepot cartridge does hand us a crapload of leeway. Really.
Granted that it will become a matter of shrink sleeve consistency,and the only way to pursue that for a fact is to check loads and loads of it i guess.
To the point where it´ll become part of the loading process to check goods thickness for every time you pick it up?

I doubt a few hundreds (millimeters) will make for any appreciable difference in performance, while tenths will. Or? Point here is the actual angle between the two diameters that i aim to register these bullets/cartridges on.
That brings that main chamber fit will have to be rather tightly controlled,just as with a regular brass cartridge. OTOH,within reason,as long as that bottleneck is of uniform angle and measurment..i dunno. To me at least it stands with that fact.

But this bring a whole array of other question marks that needs to be made into exclamation points. Not least the fact of how to handle the added room a cartridge like this will hand us.
Filler of some sorts,sure..
Would it be an added benefit with shrink sleeve that holds glue (thinking bullet here)?

What i have in mind ATM though is something completely else and that is to turn a sorts of holder for the primer where we´ll be able to turn the cap "the right way around",and do this using blackpowder primers. Ie;sans built in anvils.
Ie;musket,revolver..whatever,but a cap designed for cap n ball use.

This will present several issues that needs to be handled,none the least how to make such a holder fold,or whatever,to be able to evacuate as the shot´s been fired.
Current thinking is a straight forwards plastic such where i glue a very small piece of brass tubing within the cap,yes..cumbersome for each cap,to work as an anvil.
Said holder will almost be sawed through,leaving like a mill at the utmost bottom of it. Insert cap and superglue in place...
Small piece of tubing will come to an absolute halt at the bottom of the crevis/hole drilled for the cap,and thus work as an anvil.
As the holder is sawed through from the cap end it´ll "fold" as a pair of scissors, sort of, and in essence just grab the cap even harder as the firing pin hits it.
As the powder ignites however this´ll excert pressure the opposite way,and the holder will fold in two,being sawn down the middle as it is.

This whole process,have looked into it,sounds way more cumbersome and explicit than it is,one of the design goals here being simplicity.
Only part of it that´s not is really the use of a piece of tubing within the primer.

I even bet such a holder could be cast at very low cost if i just built the tool for it. Even know a couple of guys that works at such a plant...and with the tool in hand these guys don´t really care if we ask for 50 or 50 000...

Then again..i guess we could still revert to the original manner,just modernize it a bit by omitting the "cup" for it aso and just add a rubber disc at the absolute bottom of the cartridge to act as a "broom".

Point being that i´m unsure if the stakes are worth it (time) to look into such a holder in greater detail. Turning a few on the lathe of mine is sure doable (prototype work IOW) but the question is if there´s a point to it really..

[Racing]

Or just because you possibly can't, doesn't mean you shouldn't.

There used to be a vogue for wrapping grooved and lubed bullets in Teflon plumber's tape (PTFE in the UK), and shrinking it with gentle heat. It was banned for some classic target-shooting in the UK, and there is nothing like a ban for convincing people that something must be good. I probably know its origin, for in Clyde Williamson's extremely good "The Winchester Lever Legacy" he illustrates his own patent application.

Some years back therefore, I searched eBay for Teflon tubing, and bought some, which was much thicker than the filmy plumber's tape. Unfortunately I found that it was too uneven in thickness to position a bullet precisely enough on the bore axis. I will find something else to do with it, one of these days. Of course current production or other brands might be better, and not all heat-shrink tubing is Teflon, although that is surely the strongest.

I'm intrigue by the process, although I have some doubt whether it would be consistent enough for rifle use. Mounting the former on an electric screwdriver, to produce even heating on all sides, might help. It would surely be usable for someone with a problem feeding an 8ga or 4ga shotgun.

This comes down very much to original diameter of the shrink sleeve used. Hence why i opted to use a sleeve that would just baaaaaarely slide onto the master piece.
That brings that as i apply heat the actual shrinking of the 14,5mm part of it very very limited. What it DOES do is harden the plastic though.
In essence selecting the closest diameter we can just brings....consistency.

[Racing]

Sounds all right, if your system is different from ours. We have a long list of obsolete (but often extremely useful) cartridges for which firearms made up to 1939 should be considered antiques, free from all controls, as long as they are owned as a "curiosity or ornament". I've negotiated a few cartridges onto it myself. The snag is that using them, or possessing ammunition, requires that they be entered on your licence. But it is hard to find a good reason to refuse you, when you have the gun anyway.

Components for reloading are mostly also uncontrolled, legislators and criminals alike having heard very little about them. A primed case would certainly be uncontrolled, let along the rear end of one, which you carry around and load separately from the little nitrated bag. Still, our law relies much more on precedent in trials than most of the continental ones - i.e. judges telling the prosecution to go away and not be so silly. I'm pretty sure somebody suffered a lot of inconvenience and worry to get that one.

To us the law states any gun made before 1890 that´s not intended for use with a sealing cartridge is exempt. That ALSO brings firing the pieces and all that goes with it.
Thus powder,primers and what not for these guns are exempt as well.

We,as a group,are trying to get that last "not intended for use with a sealing cartridge" struck out of the text. TBH it´s kind of moot isn´t it?
Guns made up until 1890 are mainly all blackpowder why one can certainly question that part of the sentence. What difference does it make if said blackpowder is fired from a cartridge like the shrink sleeve one in the works here or an old paper/brass 12ga one?
Really.
Just BS law mumbo jumbo if you ask me,but the law is the law and law abiding citizens we are...

[Racing]

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152779078342798300_resized.jpg

Indeed. A bouquet of shrink sleeve. What´s there to add?

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152779077302341900_resized.jpg

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152779077610349600_resized.jpg

Hm. Of course i bought the wrong,ultra high,rings. Point being that i needed to fab risers to make the rail clear why..if of course need ultra LOW rings.
That be ****ed tho...we´re getting there boys...

[Racing]

The tungsten electrode needles sound good, perhaps better than is needed. I always thought that if the steels such as 154CM developed to resist high-temperature erosion and embrittlement in jet engine turbine blades, are available in wire form, they could be useful for the Chassepot and for needle guns in which the needle penetrates the powder charge.

The variation in diameter of the place where the obturator makes its seal is interesting, and surely very harmful to accuracy with one-size-fits-all issue cartridges. It may, although I have nothing but imagination to back it up, have been a military or post-military armourer's solution to pitting in that area, which would be even worse. Why should that area suffer more damage than the bore? We have seen pictures of badly deteriorated rubber obturators, and who knows what they exuded? The originals were plain natural rubber, but if vulcanised rubber was used, the combustion products would probably be sulphurous too. I once overheated some sulphur while using it to make chamber casts, and it ignited with a small blue flame. No big deal I thought, for the flame showed no inclination to be large. But it rusted anything of steel which was near enough for the gases to condense upon.

The Gras conversion was in many respects a good one, which was occasionally converted and so far as I know found safe for the 8mm. Lebel cartridge. It could be replicated, but the majority of Chassepot users today probably don't want to modify any part of a valuable antique rifle. But if you are willing and able to do some lathework, I would have thought the obvious solution was to make a true centrefire bolt head, leaving everything original in safe storage, and some short brass sealing cups, rather like the Germans used in First World War medium artillery. I think that for this sort of pressure, you could probably manage with a tubing extension of some kind of existing cartridge head. The Chassepot case isn't, and was never intended to be, the combustible one it is sometimes said to be. But with a sealing case-head it could be, made with nitrated paper and stuffed just tightly enough to position the bullet against the beginning of the lands.

The right length of cup should seal the gas and yet be more easily extracted than a complete case. That could be important, as the Chassepot doesn't have primary extraction, which it never needed in the days when it didn't extract anything.


221296

That leaves the problem of finding room for the extractor. But I think it could be done with a reduced version of the turnbolt Mannlicher extractor, or even a pair of them. Or a semicircular lip on the new bolt head, like a shellholder, into which the rim must be dropped. It would be a nuisance, but should permit effective use of the rifle.

W Milton Farrow, author of "How I Became a Crack Shot", toured Europe and thought the Gras rifle had rifling too deep for the sort of accuracy his modestly entitled book suggests, with the bullet coming out almost square. I doubt if even purpose-built Gras cartridge rifles had a different bore from the Chassepot. There isn't much that can be done about this, but among the little that can, I think it is important that the shape of the bullet conforms closely to the beginning of the rifling. Even a bullet that touches it, but has a smaller base unsupported by a brass neck, may tip slightly before it engraves.

I agree there is very little advantage to a boat-tailed bullet in terms of drag, with the Chassepot. But it reminds me of the original cartridge for the Swiss 1889 Schmidt-Rubin. This had pretty much the same bore dimensions as all the later 7.5mm. Swiss rifles, and very nearly the same case, but the chamber had a much wider neck and throat. It is usually described as having a heel bullet, but the step down in bullet diameter is nowhere near the thickness of the case neck, and the bullet is paper-patched.

It seems likely that the bullet was originally of full diameter all the way to the rear, intended to experience a large reduction in the throat before entering the rifling. The question has to be, why abandon that? I think the "heel" was so that the possibly irregular "finning" at the rear of the bullet would be at a point in its side, not at the rear. Wads or wax "cookies" in any conventional material wouldn't prevent this. What I contemplated, but haven't so far tried in my 1889s, was a disc cut from 8mm. aluminium rod, so that that if anything would experience the finning, but being so disinclined to solder (e.g. when you want to solder aluminium) is discarded with the patch on leaving the muzzle.

That brings up another question,which is specific to me. How much will the chamber take of a Chassepot rifle? From the looks of it at the moment i´ll most likely end up with a chamber that´ll take way inxs of 100 grains of powder,with ease. Wouldn´t be surprised (going to check) if that chamber of mine will take around the 140 mark or so.
Know all to well that many BP arms of the time were stuffed into the 800s with no ills (like the Remington RB) but where will the use of let´s say 120grains T7 take me long term?
Does ANYONE know?

[Ballistics in Scotland]

I don't think a large black powder charge will impose any risk. The Gras (i.e. virtually the same action) was sometimes converted for the 8mm. Lebel. Anyway, the usual experience with black powder above a certain charge limit is that the increase has almost no effect on velocity. It just enables you to achieve the velocity with a heavier bullet. I read this as meaning that the peak pressure is little higher.

What it will do, besides the cost of the stuff, is increase the fouling, and the resulting loss of accuracy if you fire many shots without cleaning. The Chassepot, with its fast twist and deep rifling, is more susceptible to this than most black powder rifles. The spinning bullet experiences the lands like straight ridges, but the non-spinning gases experience them like corrugations.

On a similar note, we hear of the Prussian needle-gun giving extreme problems with heavy fouling. The Chassepot required clearing out of cartridge case debris after a smaller number of shots, but the soldier could that without the water a Prussian would probably require.

[Racing]

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152788469262551300_resized.jpg

Lots got done today. Timney setup is up and running. Not really an especially hard job just cumbersome so in hindsight this i should have done on a bridgport.
Difference in trigger tho is downright laughable.

In turn,the optics. That there with the bolt handle where it´s at certainly sets the limits,but..yeah well...
Ment that i modified the install of the bolt handle beyond what i had in mind but hey..whatever works right.

In turn i turned some more cartridges out of shrink. Amongst those ones out of clear plastics and...i guess it has a place. But TBH...regular black sleeve works just as well as far as i´m concerned.

Now to drill and ream that cone out of the barrel between the sealing cmpt and the chamber..and in turn turning a plug,that also gets reamed to size,to become an elongation of the chamber with an approx 20mm.
One of the things i´ve got in mind here with that piston setup is to minimize "leakage area". Ie;i want a piston that comes up close to the "new" chamber end.
How to get away with it?
Added grease for the cartridges...

[Racing]

Guys.
I wanna ask,seing that there "new" cartridge (in short one that fits the chamber diameter) does anyone of you have an idea for a primer holder?

[Bigslug]

You could probably stack card wad to an appropriate thickness so that you can install a musket cap facing the "proper" direction. I would be inclined to recess the cap a bit to prevent an out-of-battery ignition while closing the bolt (which may be why they flipped the cap in the first place).

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Possibly, but I think the main reason is that the partial rigidity of the well-stuffed case is enough for the firing-pin to impact sufficiently on the priming composition without moving it forward instead... well, usually... but not enough for the firing-pin to indent metal as well.

[Bigslug]

Jesper,

More brain-waves here. . .

Would it be possible to chop the "neck" off your shrink-tube forming mandrel right at the shoulder, then mill a cavity down the center of it at .45???" diameter? That cavity would serve as a holding fixture for a lubed bullet as you heat-shrink the tubing around bullet and mandrel together. You could then insert shims into the base of that cavity to control seating depth. You might need some kind of elaborate alignment fixture extending forward to grip and align the nose of the bullet, but this, coupled with a purpose-cut bullet mold, could go a long way toward getting the bullet straight into the lands. I don't think this concept is "fully baked" in my mind yet, as I see a need to create extra neck for wad spacers and lube cookies. Maybe a two stage operation - assuming this stuff can be heated and shrunk more than once?

Still more brain-wave:

This would create the somewhat weird situation of filling the cartridge from front to back, with the primer assembly being glued in last. The result of this is that the primer assembly wouldn't necessarily need to be flush with the back of the case, but rather be recessed slightly. This would form a "cup" out of the back of the cartridge. A properly designed bolt head could socket into that cup, further assisting with cartridge/bullet alignment.

Even MORE brain-waving:

Assuming that the shrink-tube shell with primer assembly doesn't travel down the bore, the socket/cup fit described above could be exploited by designing the bolt head with "grippy bits" (coned with sharp grooves maybe?) that grab the shrink tube cup tightly enough that it can effectively act as an extractor.

[Racing]

All good,viable ideas in my book.

Yes. A sorts of "bullet centering device" could easily be implemented into the master. No worries what so ever.

On shrink sleeve. The material is referenced for how well it conducts and what not but to OUR purpose the material parts of the specs would be material thickness IN HEATED FORM and shrink bias.
Most shrink sleeve is either 2:1 or 3:1. This means that as long as the shrink sleeve hasn´t for instance shrunk three times its starting diameter you can heat it a zillion times,and it´ll still shrink as long as there´s mechanical possibility for it to do so.

Compare for instance Fredrik´s pic on the opposing page here. You get a solid idea of how that stuff grips the bullet. In summary this stuff hands us a crapload of leeway no doubt. Almost to the point where anything goes,as long as we haven´t "bottomed" the material out.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152755592722742300_resized.jpg

Primer cup/holder then. We´ve debated this quite a bit.
From what i´ve understood the blackpowder caps lack an anvil per what regular caps use. Iow the primer nipple is what forms a blackpowder caps anvil. Sudden stop if you wish.
This brings that if we´re to run a stand alone setup here some sort of anvil has to be provided OR a different (read-smokeless) primer like a 209 shotgun one be used.
The latter MIGHT present an issue to us over here and we´ve debated that too..going to make a couple of calls come tomorrow,but for now it´s presented as being under permit as well. There´s plenty of us that´s got permits for varying guns (which in such a scenario is all it takes) but that would be wandering off the main design criteria to us.
Permit exempt.

The Chasse being a sort of caseless ammo proposition it of course in the case of the Chasse comes down to chamber evacuation. It is said,and believed,that this "sweeping" of the chamber is due to the stock rubber disc at the utmost rear of the stock cartridge in conjunction with the gauze used as sort of a fishing net.
Be that as it may or not the evacuation of the chamber is based on a couple of facts of physics being at hand,why those laws at work sure as hell can be used to our advantage in this case too.

What we need to adress is some sort of primer holder,and this primer/primer holder setup needs to fit a few design criteria. First up the leftovers need to be of size small enough to pass through the barrel.
Second up we will most likely benefit from adhering to the stock "sweeper" idea. That NOT said what that sweeper should be made out OF.
In essence these are old guns and we as enthusiast want to shoot them on the one hand and we want to be kind to them on the other.
Steel is the name of the game here why in reality an array worth of materials can be used. Down to soft metals like brass and aluminium.
I bet full soft aluminium would work well even,without marring or in any other manner damage the barrel and its rifling. More so than bronze or copper even.
But.
The main player here i´d say is plastic. Really. Plastic can these days be had in just about any imagineable manner thought of. What´s more i bet that IF we arrive on a solution that holds water long term the making of a tool to have such "holders" cast or extruded or whatever it takes..sure is viable too.
The advent of a CAD file would in turn make it real simple to spread across the globe with ease.

IMO there´s two takes on this really. Or..three if you regard the making of cartridges a little indelicate.

First up is naturally the stock cartridge. Then one that´s been debated to death just about by now. We´ve all seen the official blueprints for it and i for one can certainly understand those that purse that route. The historical correct route.
With it though comes the ability of the 1860s. Or the limits of it more to the point.

Second up is a thought through modern take on the matter,which to large extent is what we discuss in this thread. The one does NOT rule the other out though,which i at least find imperative to take to heart. Evolution is always a good thing.

Third up...is all the fails. Where people set cartridges off of..dubious performance and safety. This group however is STILL interesting to look into as ideas for No2 can be picked up..

So.
As a sort of reply to your idea of a "bullet holder" Bigslug,yes. It could even be handled as such that you crimp a thinner piece of shrink sleeve onto the base/lower skirt of the bullet and let that tube extend let´s say 10mm (just shy of an inch) lower than the bullet to be filled with grease cookies or whatever you find plausible.

..and to an extent therein lies the side benefit of using shrink sleeve. One thing certainly does not rule another out. Which leaves that the only real culprit left to be settled on is...

What primer and primer holder. Do we even NEED to turn the **** primer around really? Fredrik solves the entire matter by glueing musket caps to a 10mm rubber disc that he in turn glues into his shrink sleeve cartridges. As he fills the cartridge up with BP that musket stays put as the needle comes protruding anyways,and what´s more the use of the rubber disc in turn minimizes the expansion of blackpowder residue into the action of the rifle.

I´ll draw a fast sketch of what i´ve got in mind for my own "balls to the wall" rifle up there. It kind of comes down to the same reasoning as Fredriks,just reusable and serviceable.
Remember,i´m going to replace the stock obturator setup with a stainless piston setup instead. Need to hone that sealing cmpt cylindrical you won´t believe though...to reamers it is.

Anyways.
That said,time for pics of parts of the Chassepot i presume most have NOT looked into-why they might be of interest. As noted above i plan to have a hammer made out of Alumec,and see that show has been launched..

...and this weeks correct lotto numbers are...:lol:

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152795783884816700_resized.jpg

...the hammer. We´ve been onto that with the need of a rather specific hammer spring. Well,much of that comes down to the dimensions of that center spindle axle of the hammer right.
Notice that this axle sports first up a rim and in turn a small peg at its one end. The rim is what centers it into the hammer chamber cutout and the small peg fixes it at that bottom.
In short a rather nifty manner in which to guarantee an absolute centered pin,and thus firing needle + holder et al.

However. Also notice the part that is the sear.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152795784257930700_resized.jpg

The sear and the small guide are what´s out of hardened steel. Rest of it is just plain mild steel and done deal.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152795785111385000_resized.jpg

...´n here that sear cylinder (that´s kind of..weird isn´t it? :lol:) is out of the hammer housing too. Please be adviced that the cylinder per se is 11,00mm at its root and widens to almost a full 11,10mm at the top. In other words a sort of wedge,which indeed is felt as you drift the pieces apart.
Doing so sans an acetylen/oxygen torch tho..fugedaboutit. 150 yrs of blackpowder crud makes heat an absolute MUST taking these piece apart.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152795785517381200_resized.jpg

Here in turn even the guide has been removed,rendering the only two parts left in there is the roller wheel and its axle out rear-which we won´t bother with.

So. Upcoming is a lighter hammer to speed up shutter time. All good i guess,and this out of Alumec. A space age material if there ever was one,prompted by ASEA of Uddeholm back in the day.
Think of it as real expensive aluminium of sorts you´ve never encountered OR more correctly as a contender to titanium grade 6.
Anodized Alumec normally comes out at HRC approx 65-66.
In other words a material if you sharpen it that can be used as cutters for tools even need be.

The spindle axle though. A steel piece of axle like that can of course always be mimicked leaving us with an axle of better material but less diameter...leaving the door wide open to a MUCH greater selection of springs to be used. Worth it?

Well. I guess that will be part two of this multistage rocket all said and done. The stock hammer housing though weighs its fair share,let that be known.
However.
Having fooled around with a few Chassespot by now let it ALSO be known that it is VERY common for hammers to bind. In one or several places.
This can easily be felt by cocking the hammer and then releasing it slowly under thumb pressure. That movement should in reality be butter sweet..which it often isn´t.
In such a case scenario,find out why and remedy.

Primer holder.
Hm. Fellow local board member Jonas is going to pursue using plastic "beads". You now,out of acrylic that some put together necklaces out of for kids et al. He might be on to something there,calculating that the primer will rupture the bead and thus make the primer reach the main charge no matter...

[Racing]

Ontopic of evacuating the chamber and shrink sleeve in turn.

Knowing a thing or two when it comes to close quarter combustion that part with the shrink sleeve is basically a matter of one thing and one thing ONLY as being able to evacuate the chamber after firing.
Time.
As is we see inxs of 2000degC in the flamefront as an educated guess and that sure is heat enough and energy enough to make said shrink sleeve become REAL small in diameter in a hurry.
Only question is,is it fast enough seing the diameter we´ve got at hand NOW. Fredrik reports that his cartridges work real well...and no argument there but then again his isn´t 14,5mm diameter either.
So.
That´s the reservation i´ve got on the matter.

In turn. If we arrive on a primer holder of weight ample enough it should be the rule of physics act as a broom no doubt,and thereby assist the other parts in evacuating the chamber.

[Bigslug]

Primer holder.
Hm. Fellow local board member Jonas is going to pursue using plastic "beads". You now,out of acrylic that some put together necklaces out of for kids et al. He might be on to something there,calculating that the primer will rupture the bead and thus make the primer reach the main charge no matter...

Seems like it would be a simple matter to obtain/construct some sort of nipple/anvil that could be inserted into a percussion cap, which would then be held in place by a simple sheet of paper or foil glued in place on the inside of the cartridge/primer assembly. I'm envisioning a small aluminum tube, if such a thing exists. Once it's got a charge of compressed black in front of it, it would go nowhere. I figure your striker head would need to be somewhat smaller than the diameter of the cap, giving a really hard, indenting bash on the middle 2/3rds or so, forcing contact with whatever you've installed.

Another option would be to fill the cap with some kind of "crunchy stuff" - if flammable, so much the better. . . just so long as it isn't bore-eroding.

[indian joe]

Useful info,no doubt.

Nah. Blackpowder will,like it or not,set the limits here. Well aware of that but then again as we´ve measured muzzle speed it will be borderline for making use of a boat tail.? (Well aware that bullet weight will affect this)

Many seem to swear by the LEE 459-500 and that might very well be why we´re going to try that too. Mold is cheap enough at least.
Completely agree on the bullet fit matter. This particular rifle i´ve slugged to a true 460,and in doing so you can really "feel" that it´s more loose by the chamber then the muzzle. From another point of view,number of drivebands of course becomes imperative as well.

Yes. I´ve read that post of yours more than once. Ie;seing the goal here any info available could be of use.

Uhu. I wouldn´t call this a long range attemp just yet... but...the goal for starters is at least medium range. Ie; 3oo-6oo meters. Where that´ll end up is anybodys guess at the moment,but as i write above i´m going to toss every trick in the book at this piece.
Hence the reason for the GRS stock. No matter if blackpowder or smokeless a free floating barrel for instance at least leaves us with a piece that we can trim to need.

Sights. Mind over matter,they don´t mind and we don´t matter...:lol:
Being in my 50´s my eyes sure ain´t what they used to be so that some sort of optics will be used is clear. Sry to say though the optics TO use doesn´t cater to sidemounts by any measure,and i´m really sorry for that as i would sure love to have kept the bolt intact.
It is a no-can-do however why i´ve thus far just made a new handle.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152727040202256500_resized.jpg

No. Design isn´t done yet. Going to turn a sorts of "collar" where it meets up with the bolt,for looks reasons,and in turn shorten the actual knob a few mills still.

No matter. This take on the matter leaves me with much greater leeway as far as optics and for starters i´m going in shallow. Ie; a used cheap piece,albeit not current chinese crop.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152703860956561200_resized.jpg

A 6-25/40 by Tasco. Don´t want to spend top dollar until i at least get a reasonable grouping on paper. If i do i plan to replace that with one of the newer digital offerings.

Further plans,from a tech POW,is to cut a fresh hammer for this thing out of either 7075T651 or Alumec (titanium approx).
Reason is that the Chassepot´s shutter time sure is on the slow end why any and all help could be put to good use i bet.
Ditto for replacing the trigger with a Timney unit. Of course we could have cut/made one ourselves,but to what good really seing what a used Timney setup runs.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152710571468461800_resized.jpg

This is for a Mauser though why we´ll need to trim to fit. Basic operating principle however is the same between the two

You mentioned the LEE 500 above - some of the long range boys here called questions on that one for stability - since I liked the boolit I have been attempting to prove them wrong on it - not able to do that so far - in calm conditions I can get it to shoot but any amount of wind (doesnt take much) and that big pointy boolit goes haywire - seems like for me it gets out to about 400 ok but by 500 its all kaput - a few days back I tried a modification to it by turning a small flat on the front end that seemed to work - just a flat .215 across instead of the pointy nose - something to try if you get that far with this chasse project.

[Racing]

Seems like it would be a simple matter to obtain/construct some sort of nipple/anvil that could be inserted into a percussion cap, which would then be held in place by a simple sheet of paper or foil glued in place on the inside of the cartridge/primer assembly. I'm envisioning a small aluminum tube, if such a thing exists. Once it's got a charge of compressed black in front of it, it would go nowhere. I figure your striker head would need to be somewhat smaller than the diameter of the cap, giving a really hard, indenting bash on the middle 2/3rds or so, forcing contact with whatever you've installed.

Another option would be to fill the cap with some kind of "crunchy stuff" - if flammable, so much the better. . . just so long as it isn't bore-eroding.

Right. Just off the phone with a local vendor and it seems all version of 6 and 9mm blanks are exempt. Net idea though in such a case would be the 9mm version as that is centerfire by design.
Only drawback,seing what we´re talking,would be economics as they´re certainly more expensive then regular blackpowder primers but then again...using BP for propellant is cheap enough anyways so.
Thinking as such...you win some you lose some.

Ordered a couple of boxes,they come 50 a box,and will design around that. Dimensions of said cartridge is on the correct side of 11mm so..we should be good to go.
Even for the better there´s versions that hold minor amounts of smokeless,me thinking as such that smokeless present will minimize fouling.

[Racing]

You mentioned the LEE 500 above - some of the long range boys here called questions on that one for stability - since I liked the boolit I have been attempting to prove them wrong on it - not able to do that so far - in calm conditions I can get it to shoot but any amount of wind (doesnt take much) and that big pointy boolit goes haywire - seems like for me it gets out to about 400 ok but by 500 its all kaput - a few days back I tried a modification to it by turning a small flat on the front end that seemed to work - just a flat .215 across instead of the pointy nose - something to try if you get that far with this chasse project.

Yup.
Read about that,thx for going the extra mile! Sort of a situation to us over here are lead times involved with the more...obscure molds.
LEE for instance is normally to be had over the counter while the more exotic RCBS,Saeco,Lyman aso are not.

A lathe i´ve certainly got,a Lyman melting pot as well (cast craploads for my revolvers) so...nothing´s stopping me from going out on a limb as far as trying various mods to a casting mold.

Speaking which,and about as off topic as it gets,i really enjoy shooting my 44 cal revolvers too and that there with using shrink sleeve might just be an idea to implement there as well.
OTOH..paper cartridges works that much smoother with the revolvers.

As we´re gun buffs and i happen to own the occasional odd ball oldie...

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/190/151656088643467200_resized.jpg

A real scarse Freeman 44 Army. Yes,i use it. :-D

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/199/152241799246940900_resized.jpg?width=1280&height=720

Guess i don´t have to explain that one... LOL

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/192/151803542557784100_resized.jpg

´N here an 1858 born in nov of 1864 that i overhauled/restoed and use as one of my main guns for CAS.

Guess a few pics of goodies always makes for a better day...

[indian joe]

Yup.
Read about that,thx for going the extra mile! Sort of a situation to us over here are lead times involved with the more...obscure molds.
LEE for instance is normally to be had over the counter while the more exotic RCBS,Saeco,Lyman aso are not.

A lathe i´ve certainly got,a Lyman melting pot as well (cast craploads for my revolvers) so...nothing´s stopping me from going out on a limb as far as trying various mods to a casting mold.

Speaking which,and about as off topic as it gets,i really enjoy shooting my 44 cal revolvers too and that there with using shrink sleeve might just be an idea to implement there as well.
OTOH..paper cartridges works that much smoother with the revolvers.

As we´re gun buffs and i happen to own the occasional odd ball oldie...

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/190/151656088643467200_resized.jpg

A real scarse Freeman 44 Army. Yes,i use it. :-D

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/199/152241799246940900_resized.jpg?width=1280&height=720

Guess i don´t have to explain that one... LOL

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/192/151803542557784100_resized.jpg

´N here an 1858 born in nov of 1864 that i overhauled/restoed and use as one of my main guns for CAS.

Guess a few pics of goodies always makes for a better day...

1864 - you kidding! it looks like a new one ! pleased to see you use it - collector guns that dont get shot seem such a waste to me - that remmie is alive - stashed away in a collection its just a pretty piece of dead metal. I just have bread and butter stuff . I like workin on em though, its fun to bring a tired one back to life or hit center with one that somebody thinks is shot out !

[Chill Wills]

???? 1864 really? With S&W DA grips fitted to it? Typo maybe?
You restored it to this current condition - Please tell is more, fill in the details. This is a story that needs to be told.

[Racing]

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/192/151521008533502700_resized.jpg

Sure. Looked like this when i bought it. Ugliest sights in history,but i reasoned as such that such a gun most likely had a barrel and cylinder looked after. Indeed.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/192/151733775806564500_resized.jpg

Getting rid of that fugly front sight i thought they had turned that diameter difference down,no such luck. But i cut a fresh barrel end (looks only) and went at it. Ditto for the dovetail at the rear.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/192/151759752299214400_resized.jpg

Blending the new barrel end in...and handing the piece a new crown while at it.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/192/151768396428304100_resized.jpg

Much of making the outers of it come full circle,seing how involved the design is after all,was a matter of..by hand. Finer and finer grit emory backed by a regular file.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/192/151768397812302100_resized.jpg

Stocks indeed are off of a Smith model 29 that i´ve had laying around for 30yrs or so. Reasoned as such that..why the hell not. TBH it makes for a profound difference in how you handle the gun.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/192/151777982639610000_resized.jpg

Then..bath time. Old fashioned style. Ie;nitrates only,which brings that gorgeous blue,at approx 360degC.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/192/151777983466682900_resized.jpg

Here fresh outta the bath. This is where polishing with 0000 steel wool and oil pays off and the rest...is history as they say. Use the gun vividly.
Serial tells it saw light in november of 1864 i believe.
Pulled a couple of stunts on it to secure that NOONE ever will be able to pass it off as an untouched original. Actually own half a crapload of Remmy 58´s..

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/193/152286911466378900_resized.jpg

For instance. Bought this "deactivated" 1858 in Britain a while back. Completely ruined in essence,drilled right through the frame and barrel,cut with a die grinder into the barrel aso aso aso.
Well. I got it cheap,being an original,with a serial of 58 xxx...and see i had something completely different in mind.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/193/152316471792045800_resized.jpg

Reshaped the grip of it into a birdshead one..

[Racing]

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/193/152398988983699300_resized.jpg.

...and made a 3,5" barreled snubbie out of it. Cool little piece that actually shoots very very well. Tight as a...just purrs as you spin that cylinder.
T7 and a diet of 200-240 grainers make for a nice,compact little gun. A large cal and large frame piece of kit..
Stocks of it are a little neat. Fellow countryman to me has a past as a diver. That there is "black oak". Ie;oak that´s been under water for a long time...as in a LONG time.
It´s salvaged oak from one of our regal ships that the russians sank in the baltic sea back in 1723... ;-)
How´s that for a story.. LOL

That said.
Back to Chassepot cartridges and bullets friends!!

[Racing]

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152814510253593800_resized.jpg

That over and done with,this is a pic of the full length cartridge as it´ll present itself in MY gun. Ie;it´s all in all 18mm longer than the stocker (just a tad under 3/4").
It does make room beyond what even i thought. I filled the thing up,leaving ample room for a boolit and i came to a halt at 140 grains worth.

Now. That leads me to believe that a fullsize (as in 14,5mm outer) shrink sleeve cartridge for the stock thing..that´s an easy 100-110 grains at least,which leaves room enough for the stock 90 grains at will AND a hefty sized grease cookie or whatever along those lines.

In other words these are ballpark figures and hands us an idea what to expect.

[Racing]

Ok guys.
So for the time being i picked up a LEE 459-405HB and cast me a couple of hundred boolits.

From the looks of it this has turned out as thought. Need to adjust the mix used in the pot though as for some reason i get quite a few wrinkles. Antimon i guess.

Anyways.
What i´m playing around with at the moment is the use of either RWS shotgun primers (nope,no 209´s) or 9mm blank cartridges by Walther.

What i´m having doubts about is if the NC 9mm blanks will evacuate the chamber and barrel seing the size of them. The regular shotgun primers though,no doubt what so ever.

The NC 9mm blanks though,as far as i´m concerned,might very well be the ticket that aside as they do contain a very limited (approx 5 grains) amount of smokeless.
Idea there,i guess evident enough,is that the very minor amount of smokeless will make the main blackpowder charge burn way cleaner.
Yay or nay...you guys tell me.

[Racing]

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152925622343309000_resized.jpg

Alright. So this is what i´ve been up to. Them there are the two primers i´ve noodled around with. First up a RWS one for shotgun shells and in turn a 9mm rimmed cartridge for blank firing revolvers.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152925622854968100_resized.jpg

Both of them sport an anvil within,which is the main trick here as far as i´m concerned. The 9mm blank in turn also sports a few grains of smokeless,which i hope will add to the gun burning way cleaner than on BP only.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152925624113446900_resized.jpg

Over all cartridge length here is approx 90mm. Ie;cartridge in case is intended for my "hotrod",but in essence the same thinking applies for cartridges for a stocker.
I´ve up until now been of the absolute opinion that some sort of primer holder is of need,not so anymore. What i´ve basically done is superglue a sorts of "lid" to the main cartridge body and in turn just poked a hole for the primer in it.

My main concern here being the integrity of the cap holder part. Any and all flex is bad news and might very well render a no go.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152925624331588900_resized.jpg

This previously led me to the conclusion that some sort of holder is/was needed. As it turns out though the main body of the cartridge is plenty strong,meaning that it all comes down to that "lid" being stiff enough to handle the poke of the firing needle.
That,of course,also means that the bigger the primer diameter the less the flex, naturally.

Seing the mimic design vs a regular brass cartridge,just out of shrink sleeve,i´m happy to report that it seems like the main body withstands the movement imposed by a firing needle with ease.
..and see that 9mm blank is of dimensions where it´ll clear the rifling no worries.

So.

In the next couple of days i´ll try and make a few for the stocker of mine SANS powder. Ie;i WANT it to be as "lose" as it can be cause if the gun fires the primer no matter i´d say we´re home free.

In essence?
Well,this made the whole thing come together as simple as can be in my book.

[Racing]

Alright...

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152986925788898500_resized.jpg

I insisted on using 9mm blanks as primers. Thinking that...how hard can it be. Well,i was wrong. To a degree...

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152986926330421100_resized.jpg

The topic of how much this stuff will diminish...this is a 4:1 sleeve. Fast? Hm. Fast enough? Well,future will tell.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152986926057304500_resized.jpg

By now i´ve had a few Chassepot in the door. It is very common for the hammers of them to bind or rub,and this HAS to be attended to. So did this one..
In doing so,getting the hammer to run like butter i still had "no-fires" you won´t believe,and it was to the point of me running around like a one legged chicken.
So. To steam that hammer up a tad i opted to turn a shim on the lathe. 7mm inner diameter 10mm outer and a height of 7mm. Made for a rather profound difference in "hammer smack".

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152986926118792300_resized.jpg

Still though. Nothing but dents,and that was about it.

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152986927036664300_resized.jpg

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152986926807129700_resized.jpg

This to show the impact/dents on the primers of these blanks. At this point i knew i was close....

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152986927678409700_resized.jpg

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152986927428174200_resized.jpg

http://iloapp.elegic.com/data/_gallery/public/203/152986927245319800_resized.jpg

Huh. A small step for man,a giant leap for mankind. It wasn´t until i turned a fixture out of aluminium i got this thing to work,but the REAL difference here IS that this works!
Ie;lesson learned is that by forming cartridges out of shrink sleeve that registers on its shoulder...we can get ignition and as we DO get ignition this opens the door wide open as far as how and where we set a given bullet of CHOICE.

Now.
I opted to for instance glue two pieces of shrink sleeve together as a "bottom" for the cartridge in which i installed the blank. Nope..dents and no-fire.
Ergo.
What i guess is needed here is that we smack our heads together and start brainstorming for a combustible sort of "primer" holder.?
What i have in mind to try out for size is the same solution used for the Dreyse. Ie,a roll out of paper.
Question is if that might work?

[Bigslug]

Your ignition will almost certainly improve once you get the case packed tight with powder. Judging from your pushed out primers, it's obvious that the stern of your cartridge is flexing forward under impact. No different than firing a metallic cartridge in a chamber with excessive headspace.

Even odds if the 9mm blanks will do anything to clean up your burn. I'm somewhat concerned that they may rapidly increase the burn to a detonation, so you should DEFINITELY fire the first one with a string from behind a wall (No doubt the shotgun primer would do, as that's common enough on the inline muzzle loaders). At best, you might get the bulk of the burn going on farther down the barrel. . .maybe. . .keeping the chamber cleaner.:confused:

[Racing]

Yeah.
There´s like a ton of hurdles to handle getting this right before the bottom line. No argument what so ever.

As for the primer/kicker,well there´s only one way to find out. One benefit of using a 9mm blank is the added structural integrity it brings to the rear of the cartridge.

Yep,all to aware of the come loose primer. ATM though that´s besides the point as the prime objective here was to see if that cartridge out of shrink sleeve will be rigid enough to back and support the blank cartridge enough for it to go off,and it indeed is.

We all "know" that BP needs to be compressed,to a minor or larger degree,and as such if there´s room to spare it needs to be adressed with some sort of filler. All good i guess.

But what about some sort of wad? Commonly used,but not so in reality with the Chasspot? Why is that? It would improve gas seal,it would make recoil more doable to handle and what not...

I´m currently looking for a postell Lyman mold. Have found one in 457,and seing how my one rifle at least slug 460.. Would i be more content with a 459 one?
Well,that´s what i need you guys to tell me really. Be aware that in such a case scenario i WILL fit some sort of wad in there too.

[Bigslug]

NOE has Postell molds in .461": http://noebulletmolds.com/NV/index.php?cPath=42_143&osCsid=vjne2pf0tm0ib2f0aaa4d1mjb5

[9.3X62AL]

FWIW.......this is a FASCINATING thread to follow. I don't have a Chassepot, but I do have an appreciation for the adaptive skill on display throughout this project.

I played around with a SAECO 45 caliber 405 grain semi-spitzer (#021, IIRC) while I had a Ruger #1 in 45/70. I ran those to 1300 FPS most of the time, and they ranged better than the usual run of 400 grain-class 45 caliber bullets of this weight. There was a 20" dinger plate at 600 yards that I could keep ringing in calm conditions, which were not frequent in its location (Inyokern, CA/USA). It did not get squirrelly in the wind, just the usual drift values with the right-to-left tendencies of that wind-swept snake ranch. I also tried the bullets at higher velocities, and in a 7-1/4# rifle that got old in a hurry. At 1300 FPS (black-powder velocities), the bullet was tractable in recoil, even in that light single-shot.

[Bigslug]

FWIW.......this is a FASCINATING thread to follow. I don't have a Chassepot, but I do have an appreciation for the adaptive skill on display throughout this project.

BELIEVE ME AL. . .Chassepottery is like any good train wreck: healthier to view from outside than from within.:veryconfu

I had a summer where I went through a fascination with the atlatl - mankind's first mechanical "arm extension" used to increase the throwing force behind a spear. If it was all you knew, and you started on one when you were three, I expect you could become ****ed effective with one. In our ACTUAL reality however, two cousins and I spent 45 minutes taking turns with it on a mammoth-sized mulch pile trying to get a dart within a yard of our mark. At the end of it, my dry-humored, aeronautical engineer cousin paused and said:

"Well, this has been fun. Let's go inside and invent the bow."

Savor your drawn brass casings guys. . .SAVOR THEM!!! :wink:

[9.3X62AL]

Savor your drawn brass casings guys. . .SAVOR THEM!!! :wink:

Oh, that I surely do, Erik. I never messed with an atlatl much, but I did some stunt work at age 12-13 with a home-made sling--that David vs. Goliath bit of kit from the Old Testament. I managed to avoid whacking myself in the head with the assembly while gaining skill and accuracy with the arrangement. 4-5 of us took this practice up, and once you became reasonably skillful with the sling its impact was no freakin' joke. The Romans used the sling to good effect from time to time, usually volley-launching dozens to hundreds at a time. The missiles used could be rocks gathered in the field, or iron or lead balls the size of a soldier's palm. Some of these missiles were cast with the impression "AD INFERNOS" or "AD STYXOS" ("Go to H--l") on their circumference. (The Gallic Wars, Julius Caesar.

I did steer this text back on to casting......

[Racing]

I guess the easy way here would be to copy the basic shape of the 460 WM and form them to Chassepot dimensions.
Turn them yourself,make carbide tools for it.

Just sans the "bottom end" of said cartridge. Fact is,for our Swedish purposes as far as legislation,you´d get away with just drilling out the primer pocket and install the primer in such a manner that the cartridge in case wouldn´t be gas tight. Ie;keep the extractor rim and what not...

That´d combat the ill of the original setup i guess and hand us a platform where the bullet would end up in exactly the same place every time.

Then again,where´s the fun in that?



Ontopic though. I´ve conducted yet a few tests and the mere truth is that the shrink sleeve cartridges work. That simple. Time to bring some of the black gold,grease,a wad and a bullet to it i guess.

Speaking of which,what effect is there to be expected from the use of a let´s say 10mm (approx 1/2") wad from a recoil point of view-if any seing the load levels we´re at.

[Bigslug]

The British used wadding of various flavors in the Snider and Martini cartridges - both to serve as a gas check, and to reduce volume for lighter carbine loads. The British Muzzleloaders You Tube channel goes into this at some length.

[Racing]

Uhu.
So did the Westley Richards Monkey tail,and i'm in the market for one right now.
Mainly to be able to go back to back with the Chassepots i've got.
Thinking this will make for an intersting comparsion.

[bigted]

So maybe my tablet ... but i got no pictures on page 4 if thete are any.

[Racing]

Nope.
Sry to say the idiots that keeps my pic server decided to go "new and improved",and in doing so changed every URL there was.

[Racing]

Trying to upload pics here,to no avail though?

No matter. Pic server of mine is still down,but have taken plenty of them to share as soon as the server is up and running again.

Showtime..and in short?
Small step for man,giant leap for mankind.

Them shrinksleeve cartridges just simply works,and they work very very well. All those who shoot Chassepot are familiar with "clicks". In this case no such thing.

Proof of concept? No doubt. Flaws? Yes. One,and we´ll get to that.

Cartridge has been fireformed over a mandrel i turned on the lathe,as been noted earlier. Major difference there is that this cartridge registers on the bottle neck of the cartridge,not the bullet.
So.
A 459/405 Lee HB bullet. As cast. 93 grains of Wasag 3F and then..the kicker held by the 9mm blank rimmed round i use as a primer.

Per advice i strapped the in this case completely stock Chassepot to a pair of old wheels and hooked a piece of string to the trigger..boom.



To be able to check into any stress or cracks i opted to dismantle the barrel from the receiver and in doing so... I´ve done that before,with my modified rifle,and let me tell you... This is no walk in the park.
Barrel threads on the "wrong" way and if not previously serviced is on there you won´t believe. Heating the receiver cherry red is what it takes AND an approx 1 meter long lever on the wrench.
Bolting the thing back together again though is easy as pie,just add some copper grease to the threads and go at it.
Anyways.
This to be able to check the material involved way better then if the barrel n receiver would have been in one piece.

I´ve previously cut into the receiver and barrel both on my modified rifle and thus know that the gun is certainly made out of steel. There´s no questions there,and as such the dimensions involved are overkill-to say the least.

I´ve fired 22 rounds out of it today,and they have ALL gone "boom" on first attempt. This,to me,proves that the filled cartridge,that registers on the bottleneck,is ample stiff enough to make sure the rear of the cartridge does NOT flex,and thus the blank cartridge/primer does its job. Every time.

Culprit though is the stock "umbrella",which by any means is needed,and all 22 rounds have gone off in such a manner that the primer pocket of the blank has been completely blown out and the remains of the cartridge has been pressed onto the umbrella. In short,each round ment bringing the Leatherman out to pry the remains off of the umbrella.
Ergo,i need to go back to the drawing board to figure out some other means of primer,and as of right now shotgun primers comes to mind.

That said.
Apart from the primer/blank residing ON the umbrella the rest of what was loaded up evacuated just fine. Nothing remained in the barrel,not for any of the 22 shots fired.
Soot,as we´re accustomed to,was down and i presume this from a few facts....

First up the shrink sleeve cartridge most likely smears to the chamber walls upon firing. About making THAT part of the cartridge "gas tight".
Second up the "kicker" few grains of smokeless within the blank that acts as a primer most likely helps in that dept too.

In short this trial has been a massive success. Proof of concept has certainly been achieved and seing that..i just need to figure that part out with the primer setup.

Happy as pie in short boys.....and more to come [smilie=2:

[Racing]

225152

225153

225154

225155

225156

Seems making the files way smaller might work?

[Racing]

Right.
A follow up.
As i wrote there was rather little soot residue. All i did at the range was pump a few shots of Ballistol down the barrel to neutralize the acids.
Here at home in turn,tonight,i brought the brushes and what not out.

Into the shower with the barrel,out with a regular nylon brush for a 12ga and regular dishwasher fluid. Took a mere few strokes,rinse with running water.
Clean.
Pushed a few wipes through it that had been merely "wetted" with Balli and that was it.

In other words my first observations was right and to the point. Less soot then usual,and i presume this is due to the smokeless kicker of the blank cartridge/primer.

Guys.
That said,what could we use as a "bottom" for this cartridge that will hold say a 6mm/0,25" shotgun primer steady enough and that will desintegrate and evacuate on boom?
Some sort of cardboard?

[Racing]

Alright.
So pushing forward.

First up a few pics of how to MAKE these **** things! :coffeecom

225249

So. This is the mandrel i´ve turned out of aluminium. Cut to length in as much that it´s shorter than needed,and this of course for a reason.
In turn it´s got a mark at 40mm which lends me that all i do is set it in the vice at that mark,and thus..get 40mm between the "bottom" of the cartridge and the bottleneck,on which it registers.
At this point i spray the mandrel down with a couple of shots of 5-56/WD-40 or similar to ease getting the finished cartridge shell off of there.

225250

As you can see the shrink sleeve is somewhat longer than the mandrel. I´ve made sure the top of the mandrel is flat and in turn make sure the base of the bullets are too.

225251

Uhu. Just pan lube these LEE 459/405´s and drop them onto the mandrel and center them. Then out the heatgun comes..

225252

As i want the thing uniform and in turn inline i heat the bottom of the shell up first and work around the cartridge as i go. In this manner the shell conforms to the mandrel and bullet both.
Adjustments are very easy to make as long as the shrink sleeve is a tad more than luke warm...to hot even.

225253

Now,it might be just me being anal but all said and done i also secure the bullet to the shrink sleeve with a couple of drops of superglue.

This done i set it aside,today i´ve made 50 of them,and let them cool where after i clean them out with a regular gun brush on the zink to get rid of any form of grease which can contaminate the powder.
That done,just leave them to dry.

225254

Right. So i had issues with the primer/blank cartridge setup. Cheap is imperative and simple is imperative. It dawned on me..why not wood? So that there is a piece/disc of pine. Regular dirt cheap broom handle that i´ve turned to size and in turned drilled a hole into to fit the new primer setup.
Seing how well the blank cartridge addition of absolute minor amounts of smokeless went...i´m going to add a few grains to the mix manually this time out.
The primer is a RWS for shotgun shells and is small enough to evacuate the chamber and barrel,and i expect the pine disc to evaporate to kingdom come..

Beauty of using wood as sorts of an "anvil",for lack of better description,is that it is very easy to work with. Ie;need be the wooden disc can be turned to whatever is needed for whatever choice of primer one arrives on really.

Well.
We´ve had a hell of a summer here,to the point where we´ve been prohibited to shoot like we´re used to but in the last couple of days we´ve had at least decent amounts of rain.
Thus the ban will be lifted come this weekend for the range where i´m a member so...

Only one way to find out right? :grin:

[Racing]

240310

Got me yet another Chassepot. Half decent condition so..leave as is.
For those of you that just want to make real simple cartridges that goes bang with anything at least reminding of accuracy...

240311

Regular jumbo sized straws,as i´ve touched on before. These made with a primer setup sort of a´la the stock thing. Ie;a musket cap glued to a piece of paper installed "inside out" into the rear of the cartridge.
Bullets in this case is AM´s Chassepot ones.

For those having issues making even these go boom...there´s a solution for you too.

240312

Entire primer setup replaced with a 9mm rimmed blank revolver cartridge. A sorts of "sabot" keeping the thing in place while filling the cartridge up,kept in place with regular superglue.

Both kinds work and work very well. These ARE cartridges that will go boom every time you pull the trigger.

On that note. Always make sure your hammer is free to move as needed. When you pull the trigger on an empty chamber the sound to listen for is a "metallic" dead stop.
If not,remedy..as the needle needs all the acceleration and power we can hand it.

[Racing]

Hm.
Alright. So the rifle is as up and running as they come. No doubt.
Having tossed a few trix n ends at it even the trigger came out ok. Fair even.
Since i had them "jumbo straw" cartridges ready i´ve basically been at idle as far as the rifle due to..rain rain rain rain..
Today though,during the afternoon,we all of a sudden had a window so i was off for the range in a hurry.

240646

Wine n water.. Ok. First up,i´ve replaced the hammer spring in this rifle with a fresh one that´s an ever so slight bit hotrodded. It sports 1,4mm wire in contrast to the original springs 1,25mm.
The stocker measured 3kg at 45mm length and the new spring 4,5kg at 45mm..just that free length for the new spring is 4mm shorter and when you compensate for that the difference gets even bigger.. Spring is an absolute drop in.
Just install the thing and go.
Me i turn i turned a sleeve that is 10mm long,10mm outer dia and 7mm inner. So..first the threaded nut,then the sleeve..to be followed by the spring.
The new spring of course makes the hammer ever so slightly harder to work but..it does so in a way more linear and smooth fashion so..it kind of comes out to approx the same thing.
But...
The new spring,coupled with a fresh 73mm needle,makes this thing go boom every time. No hesitation or the likes so ever.. Difference in hammer speed you can even SEE.
In short,seeing that a spring like this is like 4$ just replace and be done with it,you´ll never look back.

Now.
That much for the positive side of things. What´s not is..accuracy. Or more to the point the lack of it.
Excuse my choice of words here but it IS in my opinion called for cause..piss poor is what comes to mind.

This is after all a rifle that holds all of the right attributes. 1:22 rifling twist,a groove depth that´s ample and so on and so on..
Accuracy wise though it´s a **** joke. This with stock,or Accurate mold at least,bullets. I´ve shot the thing previously with other 45 cal bullets too,with the same net result.

So. What gives? Well. Only thing that comes to mind is that as a paper cartridge rifle from the onset we need to get that thing to register one way or another and the ONLY manner i can think of is via the use of a bore rider. Just..not bore rider per what most think of i guess.
Just a bullet that comes to rest on the rifling,that sports a rear driveband that´ll fill out the grooves. You know what i´m getting at here.

240649

This particular rifle,as most Chassepots,prints a tad high. Not only that but a bit to the left too. Approx 25cm (10") high and maybe just short of 10cm to the left.
So. Kentucky windage,but that aside as i held the same sight picture i should at least have seen something of a group.

Cartridge in case..jumbo straw,90 grains of 3F,Accurate molds Chassepot bullet and a COAL of 76mm. Ignition via a regular RWS musket cap. No mumbo jumbo filling the cap or whatever. No need with a well functioning needle setup.
But.
That´s the print that cartridge and load hands me at 100 meters and..it´s a friggin joke.

Next cartridge up was the same deal really just with 75grains of 3F and a 9mm PAK blank as primer.

240650

..which ended up in that. Pathetic.

Now.
This had me thinking. So what i did was cast me a small batch of the old 457/500 Govn bullet. The old true n tried.
Then i had them hit the lathe and cut the body down to 11,05mm until the first band/GG.

240651

An issue here is the Chassepot "forcing cone". It tapers from 12mm down to them 11 REAL slow. Slippery slope..hello!
Well.
This rendered that them cartridges there didn´t protrude as i thought they would and COAL was now all in at 78mm. Then,seeing the vastly longer and heavier bullet,it holds 80 grains of 3F and done deal. Still with the RWS musket caps for ignition.
I had planned to try these out today last thing but..the needle bent as i fired them PAK cartridges and when i tried to straighten the needle it of course broke.
No biggie,but..no more shooting for today.

That got me thinking though why as i got back to the shop i took yet a handful of them 500 grainers (that btw weigh 475 cut back to the first band)and..turned them back even further.
Still the 11,05mm diameter but out of the 4 bands i cut back two of them. Yeah well...doing so i all of a sudden had myself a 90grain 3F cartridge again and now with a COAL of 85mm. I set that to 84 to hand me a tad of leeway.

The small yellow rings on there are out of rather soft plastic and are on there to center the thing in the chamber. Ie;it registers on the bullet resting on the rifling up front now and that small plastic ring out rear.

For those of you that don´t shoot a Chasse..**** these things soot! Why that is,no idea..but they do. What many in my opinion fail is to use enough grease to keep the fouling soft enough to keep shooting.
Another thing that dawned on me today. Just going to add grease,loads of it,at the "umbrella" instead of trying to cramp it into/onto the cartridge.
That the bullet might need a bit of grease,sure. A BIT. But..the main reason here is for it to react with the blackpowder and i guess that adding it at the umbrella will make this happen way better than trying to make the cartridge hold it,no matter which cartridge really.

Anyways.
I´ll get back to you with fresh results as soon as i hit the range again. This much tho..let the Accurate mold Chasse bullet be the one to use with the original paper cartridges,for historical reasons if nothing else.
For plinking ...see above.
..and for more serious use in turn,yet to see..

[Racing]

240919

For the Chassepot world to know then. That there is 4 fired. Three of them into one ragged hole,at 100 meters. Flyer is on me,not the gun.
Yep.
The solution is a bore rider.
Period.

As much as it turns out that the Chasse is capable of very good accuracy,Sir Joseph Whitworth was on the money,now will follow loads of work trying to figure this out.
Clear is that the stock forcing cone is an issue as it keeps us from introducing a bore rider apart from becoming extreme.
If it isn´t the bullet it´s the "casing" that´ll bottom out somewhere along those insanely long 8mm worth of forcing cone. No doubt.
In short..the forcing cone should really take on another form,but as that really isn´t an option to most..extreme looking cartridges,and bullets for that matter,it is.

We just scored an original old Thomas Turner mold for his 451 volunteer rifle and as i checked the boolits dropped from that one they´re 32mm OAL vs the 457/500 used 30,6mm.

So i guess that is a first to check from an empiric point of view.

I´ll be back on the subject,rest assured. But for now suffice it to say that for those of you wanting to transform your Chassepot from a scattergun to the marksman accuracy inherent...bore rider..

Cartridge in case.
COAL 80mm
Bullet,turned down to 11,05mm 457/500 govern. Two of the 4 bands removed. Casing glued to just a tad over 1st band
90 grains of Wasag 3F
RWS musket cap.

To keep the gun clean like every second shot fired i just...

240920

..fabbed that in a hurry from en el-cheapo store. In this manner keeping the actual chamber clean is simple. Thus the cartridges used today were all 80mm COAL and that worked with ease.

[Racing]

241603

Day came to dismantle the entire gun. For several reasons,but mainly to freshen various surfaces up. For you Chassepot boys out there,please notice that the barrel is threaded "the wrong way". This will make it bolt tighter and tighter the more you shoot it as the rifling runs left too.

241604

As i had the barrel off i came to take a few pics. This much is for sure,the original drawing with set dimensions of the stock chamber is off.

241606

As you can see there is a ledge in there. In rather poor shape at that but no matter as the rifle shoots a million bux with these "new" bore riders.
That said i believe we need to investigate this a little closer. I had issues with soot..and due that i took to polishing them surfaces off with 240 grit and oil on my lathe.
To be honest though i suspect even better results using finer grade emery so i´m going to hit it once more,with 800 grit this time out and until happy.

241607

Yep. The actual rifle got its fair share too. Please have in mind that this is my "mule". Used to evaluate how to push the envelope of these rifles.
Attention to detail. Idea here is to establish what can be expected from a Chassepot that´s handed what it craves to perform like WE want it to and..i´d say we´ve come a fair way now.

241608

Granted,this time at a mere 50 meters (had another rifle along..don´t ask..) but suffice it to say that that there is three bullets into one hole.
Handed them a few stickers,walked back up to the firing line and let yet another two rip. Same hole.

Jumbo straws. Indeed. Bore rider design bullets,to the letter,of 475 grains as it turns out. 80grains of Wasag 3F (true black). I literally smear the bullets and front edge of the cartridge before chambering.
That said i get to fire like three rounds before i need to wipe. I HAVE to to be able to chamber the next round.
If this is due soot from the straws (yes,they burn-like hell. Have checked) or merely the blackpowder,no idea.
One added fact though is that polishing of the chamber certainly helped in that dept. It became way easier to get the residue out of there and thus chamber a fresh one.
Buuut..even if i get to polish the chamber with 800 grit and oil..there´ll still be the actual issue of residue. I feel i need to adress that before calling this done.

Performance wise though i,obviously,have no regrets what so ever.

[Racing]

241651

Btw. This is the last take on them bore riders. One drive band cut off at each end,rendering for way more area for the straw to adhere to while still being enough to protrude effectively into the bore the other end of the boolit.

241652

This in turn the cartridge.

Edit; hope for better luck with the pics...

[Bigslug]

No joy on the attachments to post #90.

You have indeed been busy!

Filth, it would seem, is simply inherent to these rifles. While it may have something to do with the empty space behind the cartridge providing a "condensation chamber" of sorts, I think it is just simply that on a typical black powder muzzle loader we can't see the crud building up. The flintlock and percussion cap boys all had vent and nipple picks, and the rifle-musket era had "cleaning cartridges" with zinc washers at the base of the bullet to fire periodically and remove the worst of the gak.

To paraphrase Captain Jack Sparrow "You've got to get yourself a Gras, mate!" :mrgreen:

[yulzari]

Yes a Gras would solve all your problems.

[Racing]

No joy on the attachments to post #90.

You have indeed been busy!

Filth, it would seem, is simply inherent to these rifles. While it may have something to do with the empty space behind the cartridge providing a "condensation chamber" of sorts, I think it is just simply that on a typical black powder muzzle loader we can't see the crud building up. The flintlock and percussion cap boys all had vent and nipple picks, and the rifle-musket era had "cleaning cartridges" with zinc washers at the base of the bullet to fire periodically and remove the worst of the gak.

To paraphrase Captain Jack Sparrow "You've got to get yourself a Gras, mate!" :mrgreen:

Uhu.
Still though,they strike me as developing a downright apetite for hardened soot,to the point of silly. Worse than other 45 cal BP rifles i´ve got,and i of course wonder why.?

It´s to the point where i´ve smeared grease even on the "umbrella" but..case to case scenario that grease comes out about unharmed still stuck to the umbrella as i open the bolt again. Sometimes..
Other times..it seems to react with the burn,and indeed the issue is way less all of a sudden. Btw. Yes. I get the rust red color indicating a good burn on the umbrella.

Overly smearing of the bullet though and foremost part of the cartridge per se seems to help a bit. I at that point DO get the fabled star pattern at the muzzle,but.. Chamber still fouls like crazy,and not only that but some of it turns hard as coal as stated. Like there´s such a storm going on in there that some of the blackpowder simply won´t get to reach the grease,if you know what i mean.

I´ve got a cartridge modified Monkey tail too for instance and there i wipe the bore as accuracy goes out the window. Never had an issue chambering an actual cartridge though. Yes,of course obturation et al yadda yadda..but still. Got a stock Whitworth too and that thing will keep running as long as you just keep track of the grease...albeit like with the MT accuracy will go sour after a number of shots. Sans,it´s two shots maximum and then wipe.

It´s not so much the soot in itself as that i can´t get it to behave as is "should" in as much that with enough grease added it should turn more into "goo" than hardened soot,for the next cartridge in line to just shove out of way like a shovel.
As noted,and by design,this issue proves itself mainly at that forcing cone,which of course is where next cartridge up eventually bottoms out seeing the inherent design of the chamber.

I´m not even close to convinced that the problem would alleviate itself as one would modify the chamber/FC. In other words i doubt this being an issue as far as the FC in itself but more so an issue that i can´t,from what it seems,get the BP to react with enough of the grease to keep the fouling soft.
WHY that is,i have no idea as of current. A friggin thunderstorm in there?
You guys tell me...

Could it be as simple as that i need to try e different grease compound?

[Bigslug]

SPG seems to be the universally recommended black powder lube. Certainly worth investigating - if indeed in my lazy failure to review you haven't been using it all along.

I find what you're doing to be fascinating, so don't misinterpret the following as an attempt to be discouraging:

The combination of the drawn brass case and smokeless powder was a leap forward that cannot be overstated. It essentially handed Star Trek warp drive and interstellar navigation technology to Christopher Columbus. Naturally, all of the Ferdinand Magellans that followed discarded their canvas sails and lodestone compasses in favor of the new tech and never looked back.

The brass case "meteor that wiped out the dinosaurs" hit in the early 1860's. The Dreyse was the last generation of T-Rex to live to adulthood. The Chassepot was its unfortunate child that hatched out of the egg in 1866 while the dust from the impact was blocking out the sun and the long, fatal winter was setting in. As such, the Chassepot's childhood was short, confused, and unpleasant - worthy of being highlighted in a heart-rending UNICEF advertisement.

My point being, it's a system that went extinct for very good reasons. Working WITHIN that system attempting to find the Nirvana of caseless black powder functionality is going to highlight those reasons. Just remember that in testing various filament materials, Thomas Edison found A LOT of ways NOT to make a light bulb. You may be at this a while. :drinks:

[Racing]

No.
No i have not. SPG,dunno if we can even get that over here in Viking land.? Sure worth checking out though but suffice it to say that the Chassepot as stated above just doesn´t seem to react as other BP rifles i´ve fooled around with as far as this.

That advent of soot to that degree is for instance often a result of to low a chamber pressure. Well,the Chassepot isn´t an overly heavy rifle but nor would it be fair to dub it lightweight.
Please keep in mind that the bore riders of mine weigh in at 475 grains,to be compared to the approx 380 grains stocker. Spite that ,recoil doesn´t feel excessive in any manner...and this with 80 or 90 grains charge no matter.

Of course the 90 grainer packs a little more oumph but nothing that is a deal breaker of any kind. In short,with a 475 grain slug and 90 grains of 3F you could fire that thing all day and live to tell about it. At least if you´ve been around rifles for a while.
That said i´m absolutely positive that we experience SOME leakage no matter what. As you state the Chassepot system is by no means perfect and there´s reaction time to that rubber obturating and so on.
On the other hand the chamber turn-S sealed off enough for the bullet to be able to create a backdraft as it leaves the muzzle so..

FWIW i had the barrel off the receiver again. This to hit the chamber a second time as i felt the job could be done better. 150yrs is 150yrs after all and steel is steel all said and done.
So a good old fashioned polish of the chamber sure won´t hurt. Where i just shade tree did it last time out with 240 n oil i this time opted to again start out at 240 grit and advance to 400 and from there to 800...where i let be.
What´s more this time out i moved the mandrel around,shod with emery,in such a manner i could actually feel the rifling start as that lathe turned. Something i did not the last time out and thus i believe i´ve come to clean the forcing cone out way better this time out.

Indeed as i hit the barrel lighted at both ends the chamber now looks better than decent even,and i´m absolutely positive this will help as far as keeping soot klinging to the walls of the chamber,and then the forcing cone especially.

Do i somehow believe it´ll alleviate the issue? Not by a long shot. Just saying that a good old fashioned polish of the chamber of a Chassepot might very well be a good thing and it sure won´t hurt.

As for Yulzaris comment above one of my fellow members of the club i belong to bought a Chasse of me a while back. He came by the shop today with one of them H&C "brass" kits. One of them that contains brass shells that do NOT obturate(brass is very thick,follows the outline of the chamber but is cylindrical within) and uses a replacement part for the umbrella n obturator that acts as a cartridge "holder"/ejector.
Funny bit of kit,have to say, and as much as i can understand the rifle owners move here..it simply ain´t for me. I´ll stick to the original concept for now thank you very much.
Very very interesting to see how them french boys had advanced the issue at hand though.

Nah. On a general whole i´m REAL pleased seeing that it seems we´ve at least cracked the ever eluding problem of accuracy for the Chassepot,and that kit today FWIW..guess what... LOL. Yep. Bore rider bullets...

However.
As Whelen once stated,the only interesting guns are precise guns. As the idea of shooting is to actually hit what you are aiming at.
That said i´m very humble as far as the task of developing loads as well as bullet designs that´ll work to its best with these rifles has just begun. At the same time i have no issues what so ever thinking outside the box,evidently,why i mean it to the letter that i´m open to suggestions here.

Thus. I keep the two apart. Accuracy is one thing and that "dirt" problem is another. Accuracy ...we´ve at least opened the door ever so slightly,which feels REAL good,but the dirt issue...well it in my opinion kind of clouds it all a bit as it keeps us from repeated fire in a more...to be expected kind of manner from an after all military issue rifle. Its age be ****ed.

It stands to reason that soot and dirt was as present back in the day as it is to us now and it also stands to reason that back in the day,when this rifle was GI,there´s no way in hell they´d accept being able to pull a few mere shots before cleaning the thing out.
In fact,one of the main benefits of the Dreyse as well as the Chassepot was that rate of fire climbed immensly vs the muzzle loader of the day and seeing that..it kind of becomes moot that they had to back down on rate of fire just to be able to chamber a fresh round. Most these days,at least up until now,have therefore taken to the range with two different length cartridges. Normally 73mm and 70mm.
Ok,but seeing that it is not likely this was the norm cause for a soldier to keep the two apart in the heat of battle? Not friggin likely is it?
In short?
I´m missing something here. It´s that simple and i´ve kind of stonewalled to a degree. Best idea i can come up with at the moment at least is grease compound because SOMETHING odd is going on in there under load/pressure.

As for soot and residue due to lack of chamber pressure. Hm.. In such a case scenario at the MOST for the brief nano seconds it takes for the rubber to expand,and due that pressure to rise. Any other take on it..not so much in my book.
What´s more,peak pressure should be right up there as far as i´m concerned,at least sooner or later. Otherwise the **** thing wouldn´t be of much good in the first place right. That said,has anyone dwelled on the optimum rubber grommet diameter? Me i just use regular grommets used to protect wiring when pushing it through a hole. Turn these to dia and shape on the lathe. Note though that i install these to an aluminium spacer that fits the actual umbrella,and the rubber inner dia in turn fits that spacer. Idea here is to have a "dead stop" for the umbrella and thus the compression of the rubber. Have fired hundreds of rounds with this setup by now and i´m still on my first obturator. Yes,it expands enough - and then some.

I´ve been debating this cartridge thing with myself a bit.
For a while there i used shrink sleeve ,and it does certainly work,and what i´m thinking of is capacity. Cartridges made out of straw,when using a modded 500 grainer,comes to a halt at approx 80 grains of 3F and at that with NO room for "accoutrements" what so ever. Ie;grease cookie,wad or whatever.
So as i see it it to a degree is... ****ed if you do,****ed if you don´t. We NEED the full charge to make the bullet as well as rifle behave and deliver. On the other hand setting this up the manner i do brings that stuff that we most likely could make good use of..no room.
So a cartridge "2.0" with a main body of them major 14,5mm wouldn´t exactly hurt to try at least.

I tried using approx 25mm worth (1") of straw attached to the bullet and formed a shrink sleeve hull around a matrix with a regular heat gun as per previously. From the outside..sure.
Inside? Pointless. Point being that the thickness of the shrink is such that the inner diameter of the major hull is so small (approx 13.5mm) that the outer diameter of the straw,that it meets up with,comes in so tight that stuffing powder in there..well,just fugedaboutit.

On one of our local forums we´ve even toyed around with the idea of having plastic shells made professionally. That DOES present other angles too to handle though.
One of being that such a shell would get support from the chamber wall and thus won´t collapse in the same manner as the straw setup or original paper cartridge and due that most likely won´t get expelled,why we to a degree are back to square one really.

One of the benefits to the straw idea is that the straw does evacuate. Using straw cartridges from that aspect works as does the stock paper ones. When you open the bolt up after firing...empty. Just inser fresh cartridge.

Ditto for modifying the chamber. Or more to the point the forcing cone. I´m 100% with you on the take that the Chassepot was "the first modern rifle" and the mere proposition/idea that they got it all right n correct from the onset..wet dream. So of course there´s going to be drawbacks to the design. Of course there is.
..which is kind of the fun too on the other hand right? Trying to "outsmart" the flipsides of the original design without actually touching the hardparts. Getting the rifle to work,as intended. No matter 150yrs to late or not.

After all the bottom line here is to try and arrive on a cartridge concept that can be used in ANY Chassepot,put together by all..and that on the cheap.
Straws..superglue..yeah. Having to turn bullets on a lathe..not so much. Why at least i see a mold in the future to cater to that.

Modifying the chamber,same deal. That´d be stepping out of bounds as far as design criteria for what we´re trying to do here. That said though,cutting back the forcing cone,or more to the point opening it up every so slightly,would allow for a deeper set bullet which would render a longer cartridge which would hand us the room we might very well need. Not for powder but for cookies,wads or whatever. As is,if accuracy is the name of the game here,we´ve got no such luxurys at all.



All that rambling done then.
Modest recoil with even 90 grains and a 475 grain bullet.? Overly much soot and residue present. That kind of points to that we lack chamber pressure doesn´t it?
If so,apart from just trying to stuff even MORE powder in there,how could we get to handle that? Is it the umbrella and rubber disc who´s reaction time is simply to slow? Could it be worthwhile fabbing that umbrella out of lightweight material? Just for trials,to see if that renders any difference in behavior.? Aluminium will NOT stand up to BP over the long run,but who cares for just trying that idea out for 20 shots or whatever.

I guess i could try replacing the current Swiss and Wasag with some Triple 7 just for trials too? That stuff certainly burns different.
Could the answer be a duplex load?
Not to increase oumph but to make the BP burn more complete? In such a case scenario an ever so slight amount of smokeless. The rifle will take it,remember that i´ve already tried the rifle with 9mm blank PAK cartridges for primers and the rifle just laughs at that stunt. Rugged enough no doubt.
5 grains of smokeless in there? Well,i don´t know... Where i´m at though i´m basically open to suggestions.

If we could muster some manner of soot control and keep the accuracy we just figured out,well that´d be eating the cake and keep it too...

But hey. That´s just me! :killingpc

What i´m saying guys is that..if you have a lightbulb coming on here..spill it. Please.

[Bigslug]

No lightbulb, but perhaps a realistic goal.

Some research into how many rounds you typically could go with an American Civil War period caplock rifle-musket before the thing up and quit would make for a worthy comparison. My take has been that yeah, the rifle musket is slower to load a single round; yeah you have to stand up to load it unless you've had a lot of practice; BUT THE **** THING WORKS and the functional rate of fire in the field might well be higher.

Obturator material as well as diameter are are factors to consider. I played with silicone sheeting which is pretty soft. Worked great with a clean gun but started to compress and bulge on loading as the gun fouled and began to shear off bits of itself against the receiver.

[Racing]

Came to read up on Larry Gibsons fantastic post on the old 45-70 trapdoor. His work on duplex loads...well..bees knees it might very well be in our case.

Going to look further into the idea of a duplex load. That and different grease compound.

[yulzari]

Whilst there is no doubt that the drawn brass case is the ideal, and still the norm today, the Chassepot was far superior to the Dreyse and kept in French service until the Lebel. Albeit as a second line rifle. For the French Navy the Gras was not enough of a step forward for them and they waited until they got a Gras with a magazine with the Kropatschek which then became the smokeless 2 piece stock Lebel.

My point is that, with well made to specification cartridges, the Chassepot performed well for it's day. Possibly one of the leading military rifles of it's day. With the pace of change in those times that day was short but it worked well. However, none of that applies to your 21st century non Chassepot cartridge of course. A better Chassepot is called a Gras for which cases are easily available. Improved paper case cartridges were offered and trialled post war but the army went for the drawn brass Gras.

The Chassepot continued in production for three more years after the war and remained the standard French Marine rifle until the Kropatschek M1878 yet still remained on issue until the 1890s. Still with the same paper cartridge. My old Chassepot was a professionally sporterised Chasse version and the seller told me that his grandfather was still buying commercial Chassepot paper cartridges for it in the 1930s for use on deer and wild boar and gun shops then sold obturators and needles.

[Racing]

Thx Yulzari,and to part my point.

There´s GOT to be something i/we are missing here. Fouling must have been just as much an issue 1870 as today and obviously the French had figured a way out around that.

One major issue here,to me,is that i can´t really get the grease to interact with the BP burn. Why that is is the question of the day. I will of course dwell on this to try n figure that out and i hope others will chime in as well as they get to try this type of cartridge out.

On another note the Chassepot was known to shoot far,just not very accurate. Well,it seems we´ve figured accurate out. Putting such a cartridge together from paper back in the day would,as far as i can see it,make it real flimsy. Net result of that reasoning is that the forcing cone was arrived on by thought,for whatever reason.
As we´ve been over,it´s not real likely that they got it all right the first time out and the difference vs today is that we´ve got 150yrs of experience on the matter to draw from.
Big difference in my book.

The development of a "21st century era" cartridge for the Chassepot i hope many can benefit from. Even the die hard collectors that just want to be able to shoot their rifle in a non complex way. Plinking away if you wish.
Ie;the one does not detract from the other and the collectors of the world can STILL fire stock made cartridges all they want,which to an extent is the beauty of this. A modern day equivalent that anyone can put together in a jiffy really.

The main design goal though has been to develop an acccurate load,and i guess we to an extent have. Of course this can be improved upon,which i certainly hope,as we push forward.

[Racing]

241999

As stated. Not "like new" but very well way better than average. Which i guess can be concluded by how it shoots too.

[Racing]

Currently negotiating for yet a Chassepot...
Why if and when this thread will be built upon,to solve the soot issue.

[yulzari]

252427
There was more than one way to obturate a Chassepot. See (German) http://dingler.culture.hu-berlin.de/article/pj184/ar184013

[Racing]

Thx Yulzari.
You´re an absolute prince.

254830

Yeah well guys,i got kind of lucky and then again not. That Chassepot i bought was one of the very few manufactured by Potts&Hunt in London alright,just..it ain´t numbers correct by any margin.
Rifle is in very good shape. No complaints what so ever really. What doesn´t match is the actual bolt which is from a Mutzig produced gun,imperial produced such.
Pity,and the mere idea of trying to dig up an original,for the rifle,bolt...2720 is claimed to have been produced. So..fugedabout it.
In other words this comes down to enjoying a Chassepot in rather nice condition and end of story.

254831

Indeed. Them Chassepot are marked as follows..

254832

What makes this particular rifle stand out is that someone´s been at it before me. Our laws makes for that guns produced before 1890 are permit exempt IF they don´t use a gas tight cartridge,which of course can be debated ´til hell freezes over. Point is though that THIS particular gun sports a chamber insert,one that´s been crimped in place,which makes the rifle use 45-90 brass.
TBH it carries logic seeing what the original Chassepot cartridge was. Ie; a 45-90,just out of paper.
That being said i am thus giving thought to removing that insert and fab one according to the original design. Or,actually..making two of them as the one doesn´t detract from the other.
Then just make them "floating".

254833

As you guys are aware i´m a shooter first and historian second. Or put another way,what drives me is the performance possibilitys of these guns.
Handing a 150+yr old rifle a fresh muzzle crown is therefore a given. Time takes its toll,that simple.
Careful attention to detail does it..

254834

Rather nice nick,as stated. Within the rifling looks about new. It has also come to my attention that there WERE Chassepot made different. Such with slower rate twist amongst other differences/features. I had no idea,but CERTAINLY good to know. This is one of the musketoons though,as they were referenced,why it is the regular 1:22 twist.
Speaking of which that 1:22 figure is second hand info...i need to get around to checking it myself. Seeing the performance of these rifles when handed the fudder they crave though i don´t expect any revelations doing so.

254835

In contrast to some i ALWAYS unbolt the barrel and receiver (or tail plug) as i trust my life in them threads and seeing is believing. Who ever installed that chamber insert though bolted the thing back together "dry" why it was pure HELL getting the two apart. MASSIVE doses of heat was needed..
Indeed a smaller part of the threads had seized,which cleaned up perfectly fine on the lathe so no harm no foul.
Had me a bit sweaty there for a moment though,have to admit.

254836

So. I´ve come to adress the tech aspect of this. Closing up clearances for the bolt lug and what not.

As i´ve touched upon before my main aim this time out is to figure out why these rifles soot to the extent they do,or more to the point why i couldn´t get the grease added to react with the burn.
Which of course leads up to that i HAVE to turn myself an insert a´la original specs. Not that it´ll ever make the rifle a numbers correct "stocker" ever again,but it sure won´t hurt any and all value of it either.

Still got a number of complete rounds laying around one of the gun cabinets here since last time out and i´ll have a sit and try to figure them out.
Dunno if i mentioned that last time out,but we also figured out that when using jumbo straws as "cartridge" the wings of a regular musket cap can be pried ever so slightly apart to make the cap come to a stop as you install it to the cartridge. Then just superglue in place..
Point being that this brings that the cartridge does NOT have to be filled to the brim and then some anymore to deliver resistence enough for the cartridge to go boom. Thus,you can run this way,with an otherwise completely stock Chassepot,and drop whatever you see fit or need for into the cartridge.
Like grease cookies,wads or whatever.

This time out also going to try a few different boolit types. Got a smaller boat load of 45 molds on the shelf...by any means,but truth be told you can never have to many.
One i´m going to try and have delivered in the "new" LEE 459/500R. The Postell look-alike. Kind of curious as far as that...

Then. Need to come to some sort of conclusion as far as boolit. My homebrew 459/500 RN that i´ve used,a´la the government,works very well but..
Shooting at extended ranges around here isn´t as commonplace as i could hope for,and i need to figure out what happens at medium distances at first (up to 600 meters) and beyond that as we go i guess. Range where i´m a vivid member bottoms out at 300 meters.
Far enough to hand an idea,but not conclusive by any measure. Got a 600 meter range up the road though..for starters. Furter than that,i need to travel northbound.

Well well. Future will tell. First up though is a thorough go through as far as the rifle itself...and am a good bit underways.

[Racing]

Oh yeah.
I´ve got more than one bolt to use. So what i´m pondering ATM is to have a stock chamber insert with a stock bolt. Obturating rubber disc n all..
Then the cartridge insert with a stainless steel piston up front instead of the stock "umbrella" setup where i´ll be able to set headspace and what not.
Both inserts floating as mentioned. Floating in as much that they can be removed at will,but it might none the less be an idea to glue them in place at least. Loctites cylindrical will handle that..and approx 200degC will kill the glue at any given time you want to replace the one insert with the other.
Simple enough.

[Racing]

Thread revival if ever but as i saw that new thread i thought i´d update a tad.

We´ve pushed forward. First up there´s of course the "sleeper" Chasse in the works, which is just getting more F´d up by the day, but secondly so a fresh take on the by now known "straw cartridges".

We came to figure accuracy out but what we never came to solve was soot. For original rifles that is. Grease is indeed needed and it seemed it didn´t matter how we applied the stuff, with the exception of making it part of the cartridge - which we really couldn´t for powder capacities sake.
Well.

271096

What i did was cut a fresh "umbrella" and cut back on the obturator. What that did was add massive amounts of length to the thing rendering that we now basically had a cartridge shy of a 45-120 to play with. Mind you, NOT to add powder. What it did lend us though was great leeway in as far as wads, cards and what have you not.

As we pushed on we dropped the entire "45 shell" idea for used range scrap in the form of 308Win brass. Turned a small piece of stainless to fit the bolt and then a Hornady shell holder cut to fit on the lathe.

271097

Yeah, not exactly earth moving but.. you get the picture.

271098

Indeed. Pouring 90-100 grains of black down there.. ample room to spare.

271099

What originally started out as a dual faced project, accuracy and in turn keeping the gun permit exempt to us, came to this. We now had a non gastight cartridge (approx goes together like Lego) that saw reference at both ends. In short we now, for the first time, could play around with various loads as well as 45 cal bullet types and in turn amounts of grease, wad thickness and finally COAL to hearts desire.
Indeed it worked.. basically as planned.

271100

271101

Yes. Cutting down regular 308 range scrap works perfectly well. The "culot" left is like 10mm long total. We´ve tried 15mm too with no ills.
The actual seat, for lack of better words, for the jumbo sized straw used we turn to 11,40mm diameter and as the brass part of the cartridge doesn´t expand per se these pieces are in essence reusable indefinitely.

Cartridges turn out sturdy enough that you could magazine convert one of these.. Ie; no more being delicate around them per before.

In short? This just plain works and all it takes is a homebrew (or local machine shop) piece to replace the umbrella and a seal/obturator cut back to 10mm thickness. Then.. shorten the needle as u see fit to just reach out of the shell holder and whack the primer. Simple.
Indeed we use 1.6mm TIG electrodes instead of the OEM steel version. Cheap n effective wile it lasts for friggin ever.

Why? Well. These are not only plinking loads, works great as such though, but very very effective cartridges for the Chassepot that when played around with hands payback as far as accuracy capacity as well as repeatability. Imperative part here is that first powder.. then an over powder card followed by a semi liberal dab of grease. After that me personally i use a 1/8" greased wad and in turn any of the 45 cal reputable bullets turned down to 11,00mm flat for approx 65% of their length to become true bore riders.
The making of these cartridges is very swift, very simple and basically just sans goo and what not. They just come together..
Sure.
You have to deprime and reprime and all of that. Then again, tell what cartridge doesn´t? However. The second main advantage here is the one of being able to fire at will for extended sessions. The use of grease in direct contact with the powder seems to be what the Dr ordered.

That said..i STILL bring a dedicated brush with me to the range.. :lol:

The no holds one then?
Well.
I threw the entire book at it. :lol:

271102

...which is just for starters...

[Bent Ramrod]

Racing,

That’s a very clever adaptation! The use of a shell holder to hold a brass obturator is really out-of-the-box thinking!

Thanks for posting your procedures. I don’t have a Chassepot, but the ideas are very interesting.

[Racing]

Time has sure passed, and the project has anything but come to a standstill.

Owning several paper cartridge guns i came to conclude that even though the Chassepot is CRYING for help in the forcing cone dept the truth - to me - is that most of them can make good use of bore-riders.

282971

Said and done we sat down with Solidworks and let it rip. Very loosely based on the fabled Postell we drew in all three versions.
One for a rifle i compete with, a French made take on the 451 rifles of the day - a Felix Escoffier, muzzle loader.

Then for the Westley Richards Monkey tail (bore-rider) and finally for the Chassepot (again a bore-rider.

282972

Nevermind that wrinkles et al, "cold cast" in a hurry just to get an idea if we were on par, and indeed we are.

282973

Uhu. So all in all 4 drivebands. Next up, trials.

[Racing]

Oh!
´N for viewing pleasure [smilie=w:

282974

A rather rare cavalry Chassepot. A tad shorter and most of its furniture out of brass. In a downright WONDERFUL condition seeing its age.

282975

282976

282977

282978

282979

282980

[Racing]

283650

Alright. Bottom line, the riddle of how to make a Chassepot into an accurate rifle is cracked. Wide open even i´d say.

The bore-riders do what´s expected and thus the saga has come to a halt. The jumbo straws makes making cartridges a breeze. I cut them 62mm long, and this can no doubt be improved upon. The ones i made the other night was just fast n dirty.

The bullet fits the straws press fit. Thus adding grease to the grooves is as safe as it comes.
Then upside down and powder is poured in. In this case 75 grains worth. Need be it can of course be T7 too, no worries.

The musket cap then. A pair of pliers and i pry the wings apart ever so slightly. So the wings make the cap come to a dead halt as they come to rest on the end of the tube/straw.
Then a tad of powder into the cap, and the whole thing is sealed off with a small piece of paper and school glue.
Yes. It´s THAT simple.

Upon chambering be certain the cartridge comes to a dead stop within the chamber by pushing it to seat with your pinky.

Close the action and shoot. Seeing the cap comes to a dead stop on the tube it is no longer of importance with COAL really, as long as the needle is long enough to reach the cap the gun will go boom.

Now. Due the bore riders the guesswork of how the bullet would otherwise enter the barrel is gone, and accuracy climbs in a manner it isn´t even funny.
I cast these 1:30, just to be safe, and no matter.. the thing hits what you aim at. Period.

True though that i still haven´t solved the issue of soot, which that gun does - A LOT!. Thus i swipe the bore (read - mainly chamber) clean every 3 - 4 shots.
We´ll get there too tho...rest assured.

For now however, enjoy real sweet inherent accuracy with these guns :mrgreen: