New SAMCC barrel

[Cannoneer]

That's pretty much what the directions recommend. I didn't use blown air to dry, and I used denatured alcohol to degrease, but other than that I did basically the same thing you did. After my experience with this cold blue I went back to Birchwood Casey's Super Blue. The truth is that I don't think there's any cold blue on the market that even comes close to a proper hot blue job, but at least the Super Blue covers well with an almost black finish (although not very durable).

[grymster]

Man you guys got it bad!!

I did a do over today!!!



Now this is a lot better!!!

Did you drill all the way through and use a single pin for the spokes you added?

[Soot]

The truth is that I don't think there's any cold blue on the market that even comes close to a proper hot blue job

I agree.

[Double D]

Did you drill all the way through and use a single pin for the spokes you added?

Yes I drilled my first hole through and pressed the cross bar in.  Then I drilled the second through hole.  I used welding rod that was .120 diameter.  The through holes I started with a center drill and drilled though with a #31 drill which I believe .116 diameter without looking it up.

I have used a lot of oxpho-blu.  For me the trick is 0000 Cabinet makers steel--it's degreased.  Or degrease 0000 with acetone.  Degrease the metal to be blue also with acetone.  Alcohol when it evaporates leaves a residue.  Warm the the metal so its hot to touch,  Letting is sit in the hot sun works good,  Apply several coats.

Those Colorado guyd do not make cannons, they make works of art like Michalangelo or Da Vinci...they don't count.

[pyro13]

Not to get off topic, but looking at the carriage plans for the SAMCC raises a question for me. The cheeks are in two pieces and bolted together. Why is this done? I am in the process of putting together my first naval carriage  to use for the postal shoot, and was going to use 1 piece of oak for this but now I am holding off. I did get the book on building naval cannons suggested in the stickies. I assumed for large scale this was due to the size needed, but it looks like it applies to small scale as well. Advice from the experts greatly appreciated.

[Double D]

There is no reason to to make two piece cheeks.  I did because I was using 5/8 white oak and I figured oak that thin would warp and split, so, I made them in two pieces to make them stiffer and less likely.  One piece thicker might work.

The drawings are guideline not gospel...if you get out a ruler and ask to see my carriage, I will run and hide.


We do have some experts here, but I ain't one...those folks cringe when I say us use MIF for tolerances---MIF, make it fit!

[GGaskill]

I don't cringe at MIF, but you can't put MIF as a dimension on a drawing.  Well, you could, I suppose, but then why draw the feature if it is optional.   

[dan610324]

the reason for the 2 pcs in the book is just because it should be a perfect scaled copy of the original

mif is a new tolerance grade for me   
but it sure is a good one

if you check this 3 drawings you can see that the naval carriages was made both with and without the split
both straight and zigzag was used

[Zulu]

All carriages are subject to the whims of the carriage maker.  Yow want an end product that is funtional and very closely resembles the the drawing you are using.  All carriage makers throughout history put their own personel touches on their work.
Zulu

[Max Caliber]

The main reason that wooden cheeks were made in two or more pieces was the size wood available to work with. It would take a lot very large trees to supply one piece cheeks for the larger carriages.

[pyro13]

Thanks for the quick replies and the clarification. Great the everyone is willing to share their experience with a newbie. I hope to finish my first cannon up this weekend -- been traveling for work the last three weeks so that really put a crimp in my plans. That is the 30 cal Coehorn from Brooks. I will be starting on the naval carriage which is for the Brooks 50 cal Parrott. I really wanted to go with a field carriage, but a man's got to know his limitations, and my woodworking skills are not up to making quality cannon wheels. Maybe later, and I can put the 50 cal Napoleon on it!

[Double D]

Well I got the capsquare die roughed out today and made some prototype capsquares.



I am using 5/8 x .060 strip for capsquares.



Here what the die looks like inside with the side off.  I need to mill the top down a bit.

Here's how it works.  



Drop the strip in flat,  put  the top on, put it in the vice and squeeze.




I made the body long on purpose.  This allows longer arms on the capsquare for different types of carriages-cut to fit.

[Double D]

I had an email comment on the capsquare die and how robust it is.  Southpaw and I did test it in a 25 ton press and it didn't break.  That's as robust as I need.

[Double D]

Well I cut, drilled and finish bent the cap squares today.  I need to bend the ends up a bit more.



The gun is completed.  I am going to take it out and fire a few test rounds and make sure every thing is set up and fit right.  Then I will trim every thing up, sand it and paint.

[seacoastartillery]

     It's looking really nice, Double D.  Why do the capsquare ends need to come up a bit more?  What color will you paint it, black, red, green or yellow?  For a first time naval carriage build, would you suggest a Four-Truck or a Marsilly type?

We predict a great looking gun after painting and mounting is complete,

Tracy and Mike

[Double D]

    It's looking really nice, Double D.  Why do the capsquare ends need to come up a bit more?  

Good point. HMS Victory's 32 PDR's were hook and staple attached and flat.  This is a fantasy attachment, I fantasized the ends needed bent up like the M-1841.

What color will you paint it, black, red, green or yellow?

Yellow uchre

For a first time naval carriage build, would you suggest a Four-Truck or a Marsilly type?

Depends on the gun you are building.  But the 4 truck most likely, it's the more traditional naval gun style. With Damion Siekonic's great book "Building 18th Century Naval Artillery" makes building  one of these carriages a snap!  

The Marsilly style was a kind of a late heavy gun carriage, I believe late 1850's and I believe French design.  It wouldn't be quite fit right on a  British style late 18th century early 19th century naval gun.

The SAMCC gun was built like a garrison gun, with metal wheels and no recoil restraint.  The gun in firing was like a missile, flying off the shooting platform.  I change to wooden naval carriage and breech rope to restrain the gun.  

We predict a great looking gun after painting and mounting is complete,

The best is yet to come!

 

[NORMSUTTON]

Double
OUT STANDING

NORM

[MikeR C]

Looks good, I'm a big fan of jig-bent capsquares

As opposed to bending the ends up you might consider soldering/welding a short piece of round stock across the ends like thus:



keep up the build log,
MikeR C

[Double D]

I considered welding something, but my capsquare stock is only .060". 

I'll figure something out.

[Double D]

Smoke and fire-1st shot!!!




click on picture

[GGaskill]

WHAT?? No breeching rope? 

Wouldn't have helped here.

[little seacoast]

Why wouldn't it?

[seacoastartillery]

     It wouldn't because the recoil on almost all miniatures is far more violent than recoil on the full size gun.  Full size guns do not recoil to a "Tight Breeching" with every shot; in most cases they do this only if double-shotted, or fired for maximum range with the heaviest powder charge used for that purpose or due to unusual sea conditions.  Normally the sea-service guns recoil 4 or 5 feet to a horizontal, but not tight breeching.  You can see that DD's gun recoiled viciously, just as do ours, two to five times the normal full size recoil, roll back.

     Breeching on his gun would probably keep it on the ship's deck, but the muzzle may still touch the deck during roll back or fly-back!  The maker does not have to make any errors to have his gun exhibit this phenomenon.  Perfectly scaled guns, shot and powder charges reliably exhibit this behavior.  It doesn't make any sense, but it's true, nevertheless.

Mike and Tracy

[Double D]

Watch the video again.  If the platform was about a foot longer the cannon would have stayed up right. It was almost stopped when the rear wheels dropped of the back.

I will build a platform and use a breech rope for this gun for future shooting.

[GGaskill]

Why wouldn't it?

Because in that case, the piece was a mortar and they don't have breeching rope.

[Double D]

This is what George is referring to!!

Click on picture

[GGaskill]

Maybe you need to elevate the rear of the bed so it has to recoil uphill.

[Double D]

Maybe you need to elevate the rear of the bed so it has to recoil uphill.

Maybe a longer shooting platform, George.

Did some finish work tonight.  Trimmed the various  bolts to finish length.  Started sanding. I hate sanding. 

I also looked at all the square nuts.  14 of them altogether. They don't look right.   

I chucked a piece of threaded rod in the three jaw, slipped a washer over the rod and tighten a nut up to the washer.  Then I put two more washer on the thread rood and turn the corners round.



After I got the corners round, I shortened the threaded rod so a nut would only just go on the end  I then took a file and beveled the top.



I think I can find one more finish thing to do before I have to go back to sanding, did I tell you how much I hate sanding.

[dan610324]

DD , you havent told us yet how much you like the sanding 

[Terry C.]

That's a beauty DD, sorry I slept through much of the build.

Your die for the capsquares operates much like the one I built. Yours is actually superior, but mine had to be adjustable (no two sets have been the same) so some concessions had to be made.