Proof Testing a .54 TC barrel

[LAGS]

A while back I bought a used .54 TC barrel that had a good bore at a very reasonable price.
The seller stated that it was drilled for a scope mount.
When I got the barrel , it had 5 holes drilled in the top of the barrel.
Some had stripped threads and others were infilled with solder.
Not being the best quality of workmanship , I do not really Trust this barrel.
So , I built a small jig so I can Proof Test the barrel before I decide to use it or sell it to someone else.
Can someone give me a little guidance on what loads I should try for Proof testing.
Some people tell me that just double your powder load.
Others say , double the projectels.
I decided to build the cradle in case the barrel Fails and becomes a pipe bomb.
I wouldn't want to destroy a good stock or lock if the barrel recoils too much or Fails.
I have it set up so I can pull the trigger with a Very Long String just for safety.

[mooman76]

Double max would do it for me. First I would try to put inserts in the wholes. I don't think solder would do much. Retap the holes and put in new inserts.

[LAGS]

I already retapped the holes and filed the screws off flush with the top of the barrel.
The barrel measures out .950 right now.
I will check and see that the dimensions remain the same after proofing.
Especially in the area where the holes were drilled.
When you say Double Max Load ?
Are you talking about Double the powder only.
Or put in a double Projectal also on top of the double powder load?

[RU shooter]

These numbers soya still ring a bell on what I’ve read about proof houses ,The brits did I believe 250 percent powder and double ball for proofing . In Italy it’s only 150 percent and double ball . For me I’d do a double load and double weight . Take some measurements before and after

[LAGS]

Thank you for the info.
Per this , I think I will try loading 240 gr of 2f topped with Two .535 lead balls with thin patches.
That should give me double the 120 gr powder load.
I think I will start off with the full Proof load first.
This is going to be such a heavy load that I might only get one shot out of the barrel cradle I built.
I better get a few more sandbags to weight this contraption down.
And to provide another level of safety in case the barrel does fail.

[indian joe]

Thank you for the info.
Per this , I think I will try loading 240 gr of 2f topped with Two .535 lead balls with thin patches.
That should give me double the 120 gr powder load.
I think I will start off with the full Proof load first.
This is going to be such a heavy load that I might only get one shot out of the barrel cradle I built.
I better get a few more sandbags to weight this contraption down.
And to provide another level of safety in case the barrel does fail.

you guys will think I am mad but I would feel much safer firing that barrel (after a thorough inspection of course) with a normal load before than after it survived the double charge "proof" test .

[CastingFool]

I remember reading an article in Guns & Ammo many years ago where the writer was wondering how much powder it would take to blow up a BP barrel. In his progression, he started with light loads and progressively went to heavier loads, with single balls, then double. Nothing seemed to phase the barrel. He miked along the barrel, trying to detect any bulging. IIRC, he had the barrel filled with powder about half its length, without any problems. He was finally able to split the barrel by shooting two balls, 1st one on top of the powder, the 2nd one, some distance apart. Basically, he created a barrel obstruction. He concluded the article by saying something like it was impossible to split the barrel if loaded correctly. the amount of powder was irrelevant, as black powder only burns at one speed, and the barrel could only burn so much powder, before the excess was pushed out the barrel. I surely wish I could remember the writer's name and the date of the article. BTW, all this time he was firing the barrel from a cradle he made up.

[725]

You could always send it to Bob Hoyt and have an insert (reline) installed. Go from .54 to. 50 or even .45. Less drama and added strength.

[LAGS]

Thanks guys.
I think you made a good point to start off with a lighter load.
I had considered having Hoyt do something with this barrel.
But the bore is fairly good.
And the main concern is the poorly drilled holes that someone did to mount some kind of scope base.
The holes were drilled deeper than I would normally do .
And the tapping was very poorly done in 6/32 thread and it did not look like they used a bottom tap since the threads were only near the surface.
I get very leary of Bubba's work and what made him sell the barrel.
And with the holes in the barrel filled , it detracts from anyone else wanting to buy the barrel.
So why dump a lot of money into the bore that probably will shoot good as is.
But I to have always heard that you can never Overload a BP rifle because a lot of unburned powder will just blow out the end of the barrel when fired.
But the tests you mentioned were probably with a barrel in good condition , not possibly weakened by a bunch of extra holes drilled in the sight area on the barrel.

[brewer12345]

Are you sure you want to do this? Sometimes it is better to just write something off rather than fool with it. You are talking about intentionally creating what could turn out to be a pipe bomb.

[LAGS]

If the barrel test fires well without any damage.
I have a scope mount that can be redrilled to match the existing screw holes in the barrel.
My friends seeing me Proof test the barrel and mounting a scope mount on the barrel properly , they would want to buy it .
As far as the chance of creating a pipe bomb out of this barrel are slim.
And a lot of safety measures will be in place like sandbags and a Very Long String to trip the sear.
My other option is to lop off the barrel ahead of the old screw holes and use the front half of the barrel for a pistol barrel.
The rear section can be made into a very short pistol also.

[indian joe]

I remember reading an article in Guns & Ammo many years ago where the writer was wondering how much powder it would take to blow up a BP barrel. In his progression, he started with light loads and progressively went to heavier loads, with single balls, then double. Nothing seemed to phase the barrel. He miked along the barrel, trying to detect any bulging. IIRC, he had the barrel filled with powder about half its length, without any problems. He was finally able to split the barrel by shooting two balls, 1st one on top of the powder, the 2nd one, some distance apart. Basically, he created a barrel obstruction. He concluded the article by saying something like it was impossible to split the barrel if loaded correctly. the amount of powder was irrelevant, as black powder only burns at one speed, and the barrel could only burn so much powder, before the excess was pushed out the barrel. I surely wish I could remember the writer's name and the date of the article. BTW, all this time he was firing the barrel from a cradle he made up.

that might have been Sam Fadala I think
the theory about doesnt matter how much powder might hold up (might !!!!) where there is only a single projectile -
I blew the nipple (and shredded where it was welded in) on a post hole gun, with a half charge of coarse blasting powder - being stingy - the big gun takes an expensive charge to fill - powder chamber is 1" diameter and near 12 inches long so I half filled it, tamped damp dirt down the rest of the barrel till it was full, then drove that gun into a roadway - took me a good 15 minutes with a 12 pound hammer (yeah a couple of breaks to get wind back) the gun went in about a quarter inch each hit - 2 feet down - lit the feuse - stand back this is gonna be fun - instead of the usual boom and the heavy gun looping up 40 feet in the air - there was a vicious loud crack like a high power rifle shot - gun never moved - little bit of smoke curling up in the air - I walked across and about halfway there - a clang on the tin roof of the shed - tinkle tinkle plop and the blown nipple landed on the ground near my feet - that thing had been airborne for at least 20 seconds (more likely longer) - it went vertical and landed about twenty yards from the remains of the gun - had some shards of metal about three inches oa where it tore the fabric of the steel it was welded into. People tell me blackpowder cant generate more than 40,000psi I just shake me head,

[Sasquatch-1]

Check out this video by Iraq Veteran 8888.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=en384qVqrug

He is using CVA rifles and his ultimate goal is blowing one up using smokeless powder. He works his way up with black powder and does some wild do-do. It is actually amazing to see how much abuse these rifles will take. Although his final load of 80 grns. of Titegroup is a very good warning of not to use smokeless powder.

[RU shooter]

I’ve always felt it was harder to damage a BP barrel because except for a bore obstruction a lot of pressure gets vented and bled off out of the flash hole or percussion vent rather than all of it being contained by the steel

[scattershot]

If you use a double ball load, make sure and double check that the second ball is seated firmly on the first. As someone pointed out above, the second ball becomes a bore obstruction if not seated properly.

[indian joe]

I’ve always felt it was harder to damage a BP barrel because except for a bore obstruction a lot of pressure gets vented and bled off out of the flash hole or percussion vent rather than all of it being contained by the steel

yeah correct but .........................................nuthin is impossible to the willing student.
The post hole gun I blew did surprise me a lot - long time ago and I dont have a picture -
a later experiment we were doing an ag blasting course - the instructor used our farm for demo day - had been talking about post guns and stuff - anyway I made a gun with a short chamber with the idea we could use it in hard ground to blow a kind of underground chamber to place the fertiliser mix in later - it worked great made a nice little cavern about football size down nearly two feet with a one inch hole leading to the surface - was a brilliant demo on the value of a placed charge. Anyway one of the boys had brought out a can of old smokeless pistol powder - lets try that - we test burnt a bit of it and looked like it was ok - put about 100grains of it in the little post gun drove it down 18 inches or so out in the yard by the workshop - was a bit of a pop when it went off gun never moved out of the hole we walked away dissappointed came back a couple hours later to investigate - the end of that gun was shredded - absolutely - split into four and peeled back like bent over rivets - it took us an hour and pouring a heap of water down to get the thing out. Lots of power but too quick - it didnt do anything useful.

[LAGS]

You have made a good point about the nipple area being a weak point in the rifle.
But too.
That should be part of the proof test.
From the video posted,
It confirms that BP will not blow up a barrel without other major factors like space between Projectal if you double ball your load.

[LAGS]

Proof testing is complete on this barrel.
I took it out and started with a regular load of 80 gr of 2f with a single .535 patched ball.
Then I tried the same load with double lead balls.
I then started increasing the loads.
I worked up to 220 gr of 2f with double patched balls.
The barrel shows no damage or bulging.
One thing you have to watch out doing Double Ball loads.
When you try to ram the second ball down the barrel , it seals so we'll going down that the ball is compressing the air behind it and will push the ball partly back up the barrel.
Make sure that Both balls are fully seated against each other and the powder.
The first ball doesn't tend to back out because of compressing the air , because the air can escape out the nipple or flash hole.
But the second ball is compressing air sealed between both sets of balls and patches.

[megasupermagnum]

Sounds great. I'm a supporter of proof loads myself. If a barrel can't handle a couple double loads, you never wanted to shoot it to begin with. The thought that you caused damage is nonsense, or Europe would have given up proof testing centuries ago.

[LAGS]

I really see no point in Proof Testing most barrels unless you suspect some kind of issue like I had with extra holes drilled by someone with little experience..
But the Italian proof load of 150 % of a Max load, does seem reasonable for a barrel with no questionable defects.
Mainly because from what I saw today, anything higher is mostly just blowing out the end of the barrel.
But if there is a possible or suspected defect , then I would opt for the British Proof of twice the max load including the Projectal.
But I would be all for Proof Testing any Imported Barrel from an unknown manufacture , and Imported as a Non Firing Gun.

[LAGS]

One thing I would recommend if you want to Proof Test your barrel.
Do Not proof test it while mounted in the stock.
The double load will crack the stock.
I made a cradle out of 1x4 pine and poplar I had laying around.
The firing mechanism was made from a hammer off an old lock.
The set up I built to fire the hammer worked good , but just needs a little heavier main spring.

[Sasquatch-1]

If you ever have to do this again you may want to consider model rocket igniters as a firing source. No lock needed.

[LAGS]

It is funny you mentioned the model rocket igniters.
Back when I made some barrels for muzzleloaders back when I was very young.
I test fired them using rocket igniters.
But that was when I was a kid , and making barrels out of steel pipe I found.
I also used firecracker fuses to test the barrels.
I got that idea from an old western movie I saw , and the blacksmith used them to proof test pistol barrels he was forging.
The barrels back then were strapped across an old car tire to anchor them down.
The steps we have taken in our lives.
But I have a higher skill set now , and a little more knowledge.
But going Back to Basics could be a good starting point for many.