Author Topic: Can Anyone Identify This Cannon? (Read 1715 times)

Mule Brain · « **on:** August 12, 2005, 06:34:33 PM »

First post folks! Trying to determine the origin of this cannon?

[/img][/url]

This cannon is very well made, and has a one inch bore!

Thanks

GGaskill · « **Reply #1 on:** August 12, 2005, 09:40:57 PM »

Can you make another post listing all the markings?

Mule Brain · « **Reply #2 on:** August 13, 2005, 01:25:58 AM »

The thing is, that all the markings are very clear in the pics. That is all of them.

mule

Cat Whisperer · « **Reply #3 on:** August 13, 2005, 05:07:40 AM »

Looks like one I'd like to make!

Don't know anything about the cannon, but welcome to the board!

I assume a Google search didn't turn up anything.

GGaskill · « **Reply #4 on:** August 13, 2005, 06:53:20 AM »

Sorry, must be old age, but I cannot determine the first line of the breech markings. The rest of it appears to say "Fg BLACK POWDER ONLY NO WAD NO BALL". The muzzle markings imply it was made by Wilton Ordnance in 1955 and they made at least 20 guns. Since that is so far back, the maker is probably long gone and never had an internet presence. You will probably get the best results by backtracking the ownership history of the gun.

It appears to be cast iron without a steel liner. From the irregular quality of the marking, it appears that hand stamps were used, implying that Wilton Ordnance was a small time operation.

Firing it today would be frowned upon without a thorough bore inspection and use of relatively light loads.

irishman · « **Reply #5 on:** August 13, 2005, 07:17:04 AM »

I like the looks of that barrel! If more history is found, I would like to make that out of brass. What is the max dia at the breech and the min od at the muzzle end?

Michael

jeeper1 · « **Reply #6 on:** August 13, 2005, 07:20:41 AM »

It looks like it says.

50 grs max
F. blackpowder
only
no wad no ball

Third_Rail · « **Reply #7 on:** August 13, 2005, 07:21:59 AM »

1985. :grin:

50 grain max is the first line.

Terry C. · « **Reply #8 on:** August 13, 2005, 07:30:42 AM »

It appears that the first line says: ...50 gr. MAX.

Sounds like a tiny amount for such a big bore.

I don't think the barrel is lined, looks more like splotches and runs in the paint on the muzzle.

Ex 49'er · « **Reply #9 on:** August 13, 2005, 08:32:58 AM »

It kinda looks like there is a small step or shoulder just on the inside of the muzzle. Might just be the angle or the lighting, though.

jeeper1 · « **Reply #10 on:** August 13, 2005, 01:21:33 PM »

Could be either a step or a chamfer.

GGaskill · « **Reply #11 on:** August 13, 2005, 07:27:08 PM »

"It appears that the first line says: ...50 gr. MAX.

Sounds like a tiny amount for such a big bore. "

Probably a liability induced charge weight, but maybe also a concession to cast iron construction. I wouldn't think 50 grains would give a satisfying boom as a blank load.

jeeper1 · « **Reply #12 on:** August 13, 2005, 09:35:31 PM »

Quote

I wouldn't think 50 grains would give a satisfying boom as a blank load.

Especially since you aren't supposed to used even a wad to help contain the powder and make it louder.

Mule Brain · « **Reply #13 on:** August 14, 2005, 01:29:14 AM »

I would like to add, that the barrel weighs around 33lbs, and is machine turned. I do not beleive this is cast iron. I would assume whoever made it did not want any liability issues. I think 50 grains is a joke, for a barrel of this size

What is the best way to test this barrel? The barrel is 2" at muzzle, and over three inches at the breech.

jeeper1 · « **Reply #14 on:** August 14, 2005, 08:02:08 AM »

How are the trunions fastened to the barrel?

GGaskill · « **Reply #15 on:** August 14, 2005, 12:26:40 PM »

I don't want to start a bad blood argument over whether this is cast iron or machined steel since I am unable to examine the tube in question in person, but http://www.lassengunsmithing.com/images/DSC00103.JPG" target="_blank">here is a large (2560x1920) picture of a similar size, similar style barrel which I machined from steel bar stock and the surface is completely different from that in the pictures already posted. A lower resolution image of the same original is shown below.

http://68.190.219.22:443/images/dsc00103-30.jpg">

Powder keg · « **Reply #16 on:** August 14, 2005, 04:11:52 PM »

Very nice job on the cascadable! Did you use a form tool? Or was that freehand?

GGaskill · « **Reply #17 on:** August 14, 2005, 04:17:13 PM »

It was the step and file method, but the steps were real small (like .005") so the filing didn't have to remove much material or alter the shape much.

All of the big curves on http://www.lassengunsmithing.com/images/DSC00104.JPG" target="_blank">this barrel, http://www.lassengunsmithing.com/images/DSC00101.JPG" target="_blank">(2), http://www.lassengunsmithing.com/images/DSC00102.JPG" target="_blank">(3) and http://www.lassengunsmithing.com/images/DSC00103.JPG" target="_blank">(4) were done that way. Very tedious work but the curves come out looking really nice.

http://68.190.219.22:443/images/dsc00104-30.jpg">

Mule Brain · « **Reply #18 on:** August 14, 2005, 04:17:19 PM »

I will find out more about my barrel very soon. I should be able to talk to the previous owner this week. I do know for a fact that my barrel is turned steel.

Mule

Cat Whisperer · « **Reply #19 on:** August 14, 2005, 05:00:57 PM »

If you can find the # of the steel. CRS could be several types, as 1018 or 1020 or several others. Then it could be 4140 , not likely , but it would be great if it were.

kappullen · « **Reply #20 on:** August 15, 2005, 02:56:33 AM »

Mule,

Take a cold chisel and cut a little chip somewhere that doesn't show.
If you get a clean curly chip, it's steel.
If you get a crumbly one. it's cast iron.

It is definitely a quality tube.
It doesn't look like it was cast from old door knockers, and pipe fittings.

I wouldn't have an issue with proofing it and firing it.

Cannon were CAST for hundreds of years and used by relatively unskilled soldiers on the battlefield without steel tubes glued or cast in.

This may start a hot discussion but that's ok.

George,

Your barrel is looking really beautiful.
Wonderful job.

Kap

Kap

Mule Brain · « **Reply #21 on:** August 15, 2005, 03:35:53 AM »

Thanks for all the replys folks! I did some more digging, and did find that the trunnions are tacked in place, and their is either a test area, or and area where something is trying to be hidden? See pics!

Mule[/img]

kappullen · « **Reply #22 on:** August 15, 2005, 07:37:19 AM »

mule,
If that's all that's holding those trunions on, better set her by the fireplace.
Kap

GGaskill · « **Reply #23 on:** August 15, 2005, 07:57:35 AM »

Maybe that's why the 50 GR MAX, NO WAD, NO BALL markings.

Mule Brain · « **Reply #24 on:** August 15, 2005, 08:05:10 AM »

I do know the trunnions are recessed into the barrel, the tacks could be an added measure of safety. Like I said, I will know more later this week.

Mule

You guys beatin up my poor little cannon

jeeper1 · « **Reply #25 on:** August 15, 2005, 04:34:51 PM »

I was in a gun shop today and they had a cannon about the size of yours. This place is known for their high prices and their asking price for that cannon proves it. They wanted $2800 for it.

GGaskill · « **Reply #26 on:** August 15, 2005, 09:13:19 PM »

Having machined a cannon of similar size with the trunnions still to go, let alone the carriage, I would have to say that $2800 is not an unreasonable price based on the number of hours of skilled labor that go into the project. I once calculated that to not be subsidizing the customer with my labor, I would have to charge about $2500 for a half size bronze mountain howitzer BARREL alone. And less than 10% of that is for the bronze. And that really is allowing for labor OR profit, not both.

kappullen · « **Reply #27 on:** August 16, 2005, 02:50:57 PM »

You're welcome GGaskel.
She is a pretty job.

Sorry if I insulted you somewhere along the line.

One thing I do is leave a lug on the ball to centerdrill into.

When I'm done, I just saw and grind it off.
That way I don't have to weld it to fill it up the center hole.

Someone was talking about steady rests somewhere but I can't find it right now.

When machining a barrel I leave a lug to run the steady on.

Here's the three pounder on the lathe. This 42" barrel was drilled in a 54" lathe.

Someone here said you need a lathe twice the length of the tube.

I use steam oil for lubrication on the steadies. Jane has some of that.
She's a setam engine girl too.

Another way to do it is make a cat head.

This Dalghren Howitzer allows the head to slip right on but a two piese job would be required for another type of gun. The head is relieved to bear on four spots and slotted to clear the the site.

Here is an over sized steady built of burned out plate for cannon barrels.

The top ia machined off flat to avoid fitting that hinge pin.
There is a bolt holding the top on front and back.

Really big machines are built this way. On a 36" lathe you need a crane to open the steady.

The photo is funky but all I could find without rescanning the picture.

That is a woodruff gun in the lathe.

kap

GGaskill · « **Reply #28 on:** August 16, 2005, 03:37:07 PM »

"Sorry if I insulted you somewhere along the line. "

Don't know what you are referring to, Kap; in any event, I do not feel insulted. (-:

Cat Whisperer · « **Reply #29 on:** August 16, 2005, 04:08:43 PM »

kap -

Thanks for the pix!

I'd not seen the 'cathead' but it makes perfect sense.

I'm in the planning/scrounging for materials to build a steady rest on my 13x38 lathes. Since I've got pleanty of bearings I may just build it with bearings rather than brass sliders. The rest I have will go up to about 3 or 4 inches and I'm interested in doing 6-7-8 inch work.