Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Need infor about this pistol

Discussion in 'Blackpowder' started by zimmerstutzen, Apr 14, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. zimmerstutzen

    zimmerstutzen Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2009
    Messages:
    1,065
    Location:
    banks of the Susquehanna
    50 caliber, 1 in ATF, a drum and nipple hangs down under the barrel and a plunger moves backward against the nipple when the trigger is pulled. The plunger is cocked by pushing the knob forward. Trigger pull is about 2 lbs.
    There are no marks whatever on it. No dovetails for sights, but the top flat is grooved for a scope or red dot.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    The seller said it was made by Fulton Arms in Fulton, Michigan, but I can't find any information about any such maker.
     
  2. BCRider

    BCRider Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2008
    Messages:
    7,705
    Location:
    Pacific North"Wet" Coast of Canada
    I can't help you on the history of your gun. But I gotta say that it's about as simple a design as anything I could ever dream up.

    Seriously, it has the look of a very low production cottage industry specialty target shooting gun. That's not to say it's crude. THe craftsmanship is evident in the details. Just that it's a very simple design that suggests a sole craftsman making a few for himself and to sell.
     
  3. 72coupe

    72coupe Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2008
    Messages:
    912
    Location:
    Iowa Park, Texas
    Nice looking gun. How does it shoot?
     
  4. kwhi43@kc.rr.com

    kwhi43@kc.rr.com Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2008
    Messages:
    2,153
    They have "Red Dot" pistol matches at Friendship, but I don't think anybody
    would use a 50 caliber. Probably it is for a scope, or red dot for hunting.
     
  5. J-Bar

    J-Bar Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2010
    Messages:
    2,407
    Location:
    Springfield, MO
    Curious about that short a barrel versus powder charge...

    What would you experts estimate would be the maximum powder charge that such a short barrel could burn completely?
     
  6. arcticap

    arcticap Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2005
    Messages:
    6,185
    Location:
    Central Connecticut
  7. arcticap

    arcticap Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2005
    Messages:
    6,185
    Location:
    Central Connecticut
    Here's an unproven formula

    The following formula was posted by the Muzzle Loading Forum member named paulvallandigham.
    I don't know if this formula was ever found to be accurate.
    When I performed the calculations based on an ~11 inch barrel, the answer is 24.83 grains of powder.

     
    Last edited: Apr 16, 2012
  8. Skinny 1950

    Skinny 1950 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2010
    Messages:
    532
    Location:
    Vancouver B.C. Canada
    It looks like a very rare gun.. possibly a one off project. I would doubt that the brass plate that contains the blast from the cap is original to the piece. The dovetail front barrel mount and rear nipple drum screw are a good idea because you would need to clear the passage to the breach often.
     
  9. Ryden

    Ryden Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Messages:
    153
    Location:
    Sweden
    That's an interesting formula Articap
    It tells me I can increase my musket charge by 130 gr before I start wasting powder.

    Do you have coefficients for other types of bullets as well?
     
  10. J-Bar

    J-Bar Member

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2010
    Messages:
    2,407
    Location:
    Springfield, MO
    Thanks, Articap, and thanks to Mr. Vallandigham, for sure.

    24.83 grains, eh, ...now I gotta look for a way to measure blackpowder in hundredths of a grain!!
     
  11. zimmerstutzen

    zimmerstutzen Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2009
    Messages:
    1,065
    Location:
    banks of the Susquehanna
    I believe in that formula (The Davenport formula) as a way to estimate a place to start testing loads, but it has some limitations, It doesn't take into account, powder variations, projectile weights, and a few other things. It definititely skews off the mark for very large bore guns and very small bore guns. For the average gun between 40 and 50 caliber, it works pretty close to a good target load.
     
  12. whosyrdaddy

    whosyrdaddy Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    Messages:
    332
    The problem with theoretical formulas is that they don't always bear out in real life. According to this formula a .54 cal barrel 12" long should see little velocity increase with a charge greater than 32 grains.

    The following info came from a table in the T/C Arms manual for the Scout Pistol and Carbine found on their website. This clearly indicates that charges over 32 grains continues to yield significant increases in velocity up to and including the max recommended load of more than three times the theoretical number.

     
  13. hang fire

    hang fire Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2012
    Messages:
    1,089
    Its the little brother to this rifle.

    [​IMG]
     
  14. junkman_01

    junkman_01 member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2009
    Messages:
    1,728
    Location:
    Florida
    I don't think I would be wanting to lay my cheek directly on the chamber area of the barrel to shoot the thing! After the first shot it will be hot.
     
  15. barstoolguru

    barstoolguru Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2011
    Messages:
    129
    Location:
    under a rock in area 51
    looks like a modern black powder that uses nipple caps
     
  16. junkman_01

    junkman_01 member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2009
    Messages:
    1,728
    Location:
    Florida
    There's no foolin' you! Duh!
     
  17. zimmerstutzen

    zimmerstutzen Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2009
    Messages:
    1,065
    Location:
    banks of the Susquehanna
    Whosyrdaddy: TC's figures for the Scout are the most optimistic ballistics figures I have ever seen. Some of their figures beat full length rifles. And swince they don't give figures for lower charges, we'll never know how it bears out.

    And as said before, it isn't that more powder doesn't increase velocity. It is velocity per grain of powder. (if I screwed with a Toyota Prius and put nitro methane in it < I;ll bet I could reduce gas mileage.) The formula is not about the ridiculous efforts to achieve smokeless velocity with black powder. It is to calculate something close to a target loads for most guns.

    It has nothing to do with hot loads for hunting etc,

    Don't try to make it into something it is not. The Scout has a different ignition system as well, more akin to an underhammer with the fire from the nipple going directly into the powder unlike the convoluted twists and turns of the TC hawkens breech plug.

    Why not point out something more similar to most pistols, like the figures given for the TC Patriot pistol. Oh that's right, it bears out the formula! Max load of 35 grains. Most efficient load as determined by ft/sec per grain of powder, 20 grains.
     
  18. frontiergander

    frontiergander Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2008
    Messages:
    798
    Just to add the big daddy to Zimmers pistol,

    Heres my .50 Bullpup
    [​IMG]
     
  19. BCRider

    BCRider Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2008
    Messages:
    7,705
    Location:
    Pacific North"Wet" Coast of Canada
    Hang fire and frontiergander.... so these would be tactical percusion muzzle loaders then.... :D The only thing they don't have is the tacticool black paint and a set of quad rails around the forend.... :D

    So come on you two. Let's have the info on who makes 'em and the other particulars. And how they shoulder and what it's like to shoot them.

    Then I need one of you to send me their rifle so I can use it at the next Mountain Man Monthly at my club. The looks on the faces when something like THESE come out would be priceless.... :D
     
  20. zimmerstutzen

    zimmerstutzen Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2009
    Messages:
    1,065
    Location:
    banks of the Susquehanna
    Prairie River Arms, Ltd was incorporated in Princeton Ill. in 1996 and filed dissolution in May 2006. However, the name Prairie River Arms is still an active name owned by L.W. Schneider, Ltd, a firm that makes modern rifle parts.
    It is likely that the guns were made between 1996 and 2006. Maybe a prototype or two before that.

    I vaguely recall seeing pictures of these bizarre rifles in a Gun Digest, or muzzleloader yearbook of some kind.

    All that being said, I remember years back at Tidewater Muzzleloaders in Davidsonville, MD, Ron Griffie and Pat Miller and some of the others would design some truly strange buck rodgers looking muzzle loaders. I have a rifle made in Philadelphia PA in the 1860's that has a similar striker that is hit by a box lock hammer which pushes the striker rod forward into the nipple which is located under the hollow barrel shell and is attached to a short 28 caliber barrel insert. There was a picture years ago of an underhammer using a bar striker which moved perpendicular to the barrel going up ward through the pistol grip of the gun. The knob to cock it was pulled downward from the bottom.
     
  21. arcticap

    arcticap Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2005
    Messages:
    6,185
    Location:
    Central Connecticut
    Last edited: Apr 16, 2012
  22. whosyrdaddy

    whosyrdaddy Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2006
    Messages:
    332
    Mr. Zimmerstutzen:

    I’m not sure that I understand your position here. Are you asserting that there may be an actual decrease in velocity between the indicated load of 32 grains and where T/C’s figures begin at 60 grains?

    I must be missing something here as I have checked and rechecked Paul’s quoted statement, and I can’t find a single mention of velocity per grain, efficiency, or target vs. hunting loads, or even smokeless Toyotas. What I did find, however, is the claim that:

    “It only means that relative to the weight of the round ball, the amount of powder that can be burned inside that length of barrel is the figure indicated by the formula. Everything else is burning in front of the muzzle and adding little to the velocity of the ball.”

    Now, I am fairly confident that a successful attorney like Paul has the ability to adequately convey his actual thoughts and beliefs through simple words, so I will take them at face value and have made a good faith offer of proof to the contrary.

    That is a very interesting point.
    Could you please elaborate further by giving us a quantified example of the effects of these different types of #11 percussion cap ignition systems, including the effects on the pressure curve and burn rate in relation to any changes in the propagation of the flame front caused by the relationship between the location, configuration, and dimensions of the flash channel(s) and it's/their position relative to the axis of the bore and or reduced chamber, anti chamber, or combination thereof as well as it's/their size, configuration, and position relative to the powder column itself?

    I wont hold my breath.

    My choice of examples was based solely on the immediate availability of data for the .54 caliber as used in Paul’s example.

    But if it makes you feel better, we can go with your example of the Patriot which, according to Paul, should see little velocity increase with any more than 17 grains of powder. However, that incorrigible velocity continues to increase as much as 26% despite this fact.

    http://www.tcarms.com/assets/manuals/noncurrent/Patriot_Supplement.pdf

    For Use With .45 Caliber Patriot
    .440" Diameter Pure Lead Round Ball
    Patches Lubricated with Bore Butter
    #11 Percussion Cap
    .45 Caliber Patriot
    Black Powder &
    Round Ball Loads
    .440" Diameter
    Lead Ball
    Weight (Grains)
    Black Powder
    Charge (Grains)
    Muzzle Velocity
    (Feet Per Second)
    127 Grain
    Lead Ball
    20 grs. FFG 853 F.P.S.
    25 grs. FFG 908 F.P.S.
    30 grs. FFG 963 F.P.S.
    35 grs. FFG 1071 F.P.S.

    Now I know how you feel about those shady characters over at T/C and how they must be trying to pull one over on us, so here is some independent data from Sam Fadala as published HERE on page 251 of the Gun Digest Loading Manual. It shows a velocity increase of nearly 40% from 20 to 35 grains. Describing such an increase as “little” seems less than credible, and most certainly debunks the idea that all but the theoretical 17 grains must have burned outside of the barrel.

    fadala scout.png

    Fadala, Sam. "Load Data." The Gun Digest Loading Manual. Krause Publications Craft, 2003. 251. Google Books. Web. 17 Apr. 2012.




    So thank you Mr. Zimmerstutzen for supplying us with yet another example to contradict this pervasive myth, and in future responses please remember that arrogance and ignorance make poor bedfellows.
     
  23. zimmerstutzen

    zimmerstutzen Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2009
    Messages:
    1,065
    Location:
    banks of the Susquehanna
    I said compare the velocity per grain of powder. (which you refused to do for some reason) Using Mr. Fadals's figures, the jump from 20 grains to 30 grains should have resulted in a velocity of 1279 ft per sec,(1.5 x 853) the jump to 35 grains should result in a velocity of 1492,75 ft per sec. (1.75 x 853)

    How is it that the velocity doesn't keep gaining at the same rate per grain of powder as when 20 grains are fired? Hmmm.

    it is painfully clear that the increase in powder does NOT lead to a proportionate increase in velocity.

    If computed according to velocity per grain of powder (as I suggested)

    20 grains yields 853 or (853 divided by 20) = 42.65 FT/SEC per grain of powder
    30 grains yields 963 or (963 divided by 30) = 32.1 ft/sec per grain of powder
    35 grains yields 1071 or (1071 divided by 35) = 30.6 ft/sec per grain of powder

    what possible explanation is there for the apparent lack of oomph in the increased loads? As Paul indicated a portion of the powder is still burning after the ball exits the muzzle. ie wasted.

    hmmm. seems the best yield of oomph per grain is right about the load calculated with the formula. So it seems Mr. Fadala's figures very much support my interpretation of the formula.

    Paul never said velocity doesn't increase. you are merely parsing hairs over the amount of the increase. Either way, the increase of velocity is significantly less than proportional to the increase in powder. The increase of 75% more powder leads to only a 25.5% higher velocity. That is a very poor exchange. (NOT 40% as you mistakenly indicated. A 40% increase would be 853 x 1.4 = 1194 ft /sec Since YOUR 40% is technically only mathematically a 25.5% you may want to rethink your position. 853 x 1.255 = 1070.515ft /sec)

    Now if you still think you are correct, please explain the calculation of percentages.

    Thank you for the opportunity to once again point out the fallacy of your position.
     
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2012
  24. Jaymo

    Jaymo Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    3,530
    Zimmer, I'm confused. What does 1 in ATF mean?
    Never mind. 1 inch across the flats. I get it, now.

    That is about the coolest pistol I've seen.
     
  25. zimmerstutzen

    zimmerstutzen Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2009
    Messages:
    1,065
    Location:
    banks of the Susquehanna
    yep, not to be confused with the ATF used by slug gun shooters as bullet lube.

    I have been collecting weird and unusual muzzle loader pistols. I'll post some pictures in a week or two in new thread.

    I have a Yazel that looks like a dead ringer for a toz olympic free pistol.

    I have been watching for a harmonica pistol. Might have to make one.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page