New to forum. Please help identify.

[nicksw81]

Hello all I just picked up my first cannon from a friend and would like to know a little more about it, if possible.  I don't know the lingo but total length 22 inches bore depth 17 inches bore width 1.69 (golf ball i think) width 3.5 inches, and trunnions are 1.5 inches. cannon carriage and 10 lbs goex cannon grade $400 no tools.  I am going to weld a lifter spring to a washer to bolt to a dowel for a worm.  Will be using paint rollers for mops and 1.5 inch walnut head on dowel for ram. i will also eventually want to build a nice carriage to match.  So if you guys would be so kind i would love to know how i should describe my tiny cannon.   Thanks Nick

[KABAR2]

First welcome to the Forum!
Your cannon looks like it is based on cannon made in the 1830's to 50's with 10 pounds of powder you did well as to price....
Well I think I can tell you what it is not.... it was not made by Southbend or Lapan foundries, it is not a Hern Iron Works / Dixie gunworks tube..... I don't recognize it as to who made it, it may be a turned steel barrel rather than a casting, if it is a casting does it have a steel liner?
 

[nicksw81]

It is turned steel without a liner and there are no marks anywhere.  I know it isn't old but when i am talking to people i want to be able to say  This is my ?? scale model repo of a ?? type cannon from approx ?? date. Any help is appreciated.

[RocklockI]

That is what is refered to as a 'Naval Cannon' by the Cannon Mania site . I used to look at them and they looked good to me .
 
I just hit my favorites and they seem to be out of bussines ,....with many complains listed .
 
Gary

[flagman1776]

My research led me back to an extensive list of complaints against the business practices of CM...   CM did not make the barrels in house & I believe the cannon was produced by a vendor.   If it's a good barrel, and it appears to be, then you are golden.   Nice find. 

[Double D]

Cannon-mania change there name and moved to  Georgia.  Cannoner, found them again...John do you recall their new name?

[Rayfan87]

Flash 60 llc. Same scam, new name.

[intoodeep]

nicksw81,

 RocklockI is correct. Your cannon was sold thru Cannon-Mania I remember considering one at one time. I was never able to find out who actually made them. It looks like you did well with your purchase.

 Not to change the subject but, since CM was brought up. I saw the owner on Auction Kings last week with a Winchester 10ga.

[nicksw81]

What scale would this be considered like 1/4 scale 24lb naval cannon or something like that?  I am appreciative of any and all in I have and will receive.

[Zulu]

It seems to me like a fantasy barrel that is reminiscent of some naval type gun.
Zulu

[intoodeep]

I think they just called it a Golf Ball Naval Cannon. It kinda has a style of it's own. I would think it was considered a 1/3 scale.

[GGaskill]

The repro 24 pounders that were/are on the Constitution kinda look like that, although they look much more like this:



A full size one is 10 feet long so that one would be between 1/5 scale and 1/6 scale.  If golf ball bore, it is overbored for scale.

[Cannoneer]

Hello nicksw81,

I agree with the opinions of Zulu and intoodeep; I don't think that your gun was actually modeled after an existing historic cannon, but rather it was meant by the maker to represent a general form of naval gun from the muzzleloading era.

[Mike H.]

Is there a reduced powder chamber?  If the dimensions of 1.69" bore and 3.5" OD are correct, I hope it has a reduced chamber.  If not, it strikes me as a little "thin".

[flagman1776]

delete

[Mike H.]

If the whole barrel is turned steel, is it not considered as if it is a "liner"?

Not sure.  As I see people turning tubes from basic 1018, seems like the trend is at or very near to the 3X rule.

[KABAR2]

There should be more than enough steel there and at 70,000 psi more than enough to handle normal loads....
.
Take a look at this thread on distructive testing:
http://www.gboreloaded.com/forums/index.php/topic,182123.0.html

[GGaskill]

As long as you stick to golf balls and don't get carried away with the powder, you should be OK.  Should you move up to Fox balls, you will have to be even more conservative with the powder.

[Mike H.]

There should be more than enough steel there and at 70,000 psi more than enough to handle normal loads....
.
Take a look at this thread on distructive testing:
http://www.gboreloaded.com/forums/index.php/topic,182123.0.html

Very interesting thread.  Which then leads me to the question, why do I see so much talk of strict adhearance to the 3X rule even with modern steel tubes?

[GGaskill]

Speaking only for myself, since I have no control over the details of someone else's build or future use, I think it prudent to recommend this standard when someone asks.  If they have the engineering experience and machining skills to do their own engineering analysis, they are welcome to build to their own standard.  But I will not do engineering for them for free (besides, I am a computer programmer and an engineering dropout.)

[Double D]

Very interesting thread.  Which then leads me to the question, why do I see so much talk of strict adhearance to the 3X rule even with modern steel tubes?

There is no reason whats so ever to stick to the standards, as long as you have the skills and knowledge do otherwise.

But why not build to the standard, what really is to be gained by not building to the standard?

Think of the future.  We like to say here don't build for how you will shoot the gun, but how the next guy will shoot the gun.

I got slapped in the face with reality this year with the death of my wife.  Totally unexpected, no warning, a total shock.  If I had been the one to go instead of her what would have happened to the cannons I have.  Who would get them and how will they shoot them? I wouldn't have been around to guide them.

I know my cannons are over built.  I have a clear conscious, and am not worried about any cannon I ever built  failing because of ignoring safety guidelines.  Or worse yet someone saying my cannon failed because it wasn't built to standards and suing my family for it.. 



 

[Mike H.]

There is no reason whats so ever to stick to the standards, as long as you have the skills and knowledge do otherwise.

But why not build to the standard, what really is to be gained by not building to the standard?

Think of the future.  We like to say here don't build for how you will shoot the gun, but how the next guy will shoot the gun.

I got slapped in the face with reality this year with the death of my wife.  Totally unexpected, no warning, a total shock.  If I had been the one to go instead of her what would have happened to the cannons I have.  Who would get them and how will they shoot them? I wouldn't have been around to guide them.

I know my cannons are over built.  I have a clear conscious, and am not worried about any cannon I ever built  failing because of ignoring safety guidelines.  Or worse yet someone saying my cannon failed because it wasn't built to standards and suing my family for it..

DD, I agree with you.  I was not questioning why have the 3X rule.  I had questioned in reply #13 and #15 the wall thickness, in this case about 54% of bore.  My response that you quoted above was in response to the ones I got to my #13 and #15, questioning why deviate from from the 3X.

I wholeheartedly agree with overbuilding.  I overdesign things professionally, and I overbuild my home projects.  I even recite the 3X rule in my eBay listings for small mortars to educate people (which probably ticks the folks off on there that don't build to it).  I have no issue with it.

[jamesbeat]

That's precisely what worries me about using tubing and welds to make barrels.
Sure, you might know to inspect the piece regularly for signs of corrosion, but will the next guy?