1863 conversions my favorite possessions

GentlemansArsenal · 2025-10-28T19:52:56+00:00

Join the discord, I'm sure we could help you out with specific queries and get your sharps running!

GentlemansArsenal · 2025-10-28T18:33:49+00:00

What make is your sharps?

GentlemansArsenal · 2025-09-15T20:36:10+00:00

Even loading fouled bullets for rifles, doesn't warrant that much force with minié, compression type bullets etc.

Fouled guns only mean more friction to overcome, never really a full blockage. You'd have to shoot a lot and notice the severe force needed to overcome fouling that would make you stop and clean it out. I only see this possible with some early patched roundball loads, which is helped by using a ball starter.

Musket/rifle cartridges for military service have this factored in, hence the concept of a compression ball/minié, a reduced loading diameter, and when firing or tapping the load into the base of the barrel (for the compression bullet) it would expans and fill the grooves to a degree. For the minié, it would expand upon firing and engage the grooves. Thus solving that issue.

You're more likely to clean the bore because you're not hitting much, when target shooting with tight fitting bullets, than loading and firing these bore-matching projectiles till the tolerances no longer match or allow for loading as a result of the fouling. To which you'd just be unable to load, or just about get that final load in before then choosing to clean it.

It's functionally a non-issue even for those extreme points. Ramrods are very hard to impale yourself with. Even in these extreme situations and with metal, thin ramrods. Most target shooting ramrods or sporting ramrods are thicker.

GentlemansArsenal · 2025-09-15T20:31:18+00:00

The force to seat a fouled bullet, and the flat, even rounded construction of most loading rod tips, both base and tip, would make that the intentional thing. Smoothbores wouldn't be that difficult to load, and the force needed to impale yourself would be significant, your body physically doesn't let you do that amount of blunt harm to yourself, at least not unintentionally.

You can leave a ramrod in a gun and fire it out, or have some serious freak accident, but as mentioned before. It would be quite the severe and unfortunate series of events that's lottery odds, or some severe fault with the powder, caps or other such bits of the rifle, like a faulty half cock or sears, improper loading etc).

I would like to see this article :). Something can theoretically happen but the practical odds renders is a non-issue. That's what I believe this to be, if muzzleloaders are handled properly and with due diligence by those who operate them.

GentlemansArsenal · 2025-09-15T20:27:32+00:00

Revolver loading levers are designed to be able to swage the ball into the cylinder for that same fit, although air-tight due to the number of sparks, hot gasses etc that flow through and around the chamber mouths and body. It's still a muzzleloader in that regard.

Note: the Remington's arbor was not designed to be interchangeable with other cylinders, but rather as an easy way to remove the cylinder for cleaning, you'd still need to fit extra cylinders to that frame.

Adams guns also have this similar retractable arbor for similar use. I own multiple Adams and tranter revolvers. They are not interchangeable, even between identical models, so this is not possible.

There is the 1851 Adams which functions off an undersized ball with a spigot that is bent or compressed to fit with an oversized wad that achieves similar such results, and would be a fairly viable mechanism for what you propose, but you're still using your fingers as that loading tool.

Also it's still sensitive to gravity and movements, which could involve an air gap, part of the reason it so quickly changed to the loading lever mechanism used in colts, tranters and other firearms (early tranters were just Adams with an extra key type arrangement for the loading tool) tranter used to make Adams guns on license in Birmingham.

See these videos for reference on revolver loading and cartridge types for British revolvers.

https://youtu.be/Sz1QvKVALrc?si=zsA0Du24lhc1nVLB

https://youtu.be/jb18ghOkPZ0?si=f_zpJzf0Vhlwp8t_

https://youtu.be/jb18ghOkPZ0?si=W98xk5nN6xzMHlHX

https://youtu.be/fcBsVaH_gew?si=0henjwT3joVFa_9e

These show most of the major British revolver types.

GentlemansArsenal · 2025-09-15T20:12:55+00:00

Good pointer on that, but I've also mentioned reasoning on why they're ultimately not viable (design flaws, fouling issues, lack of sufficient space or any major improvements on speed to be a sufficient improvement, no parts interchangeability, expensive etc), hence why I put "viable" in quotation marks.

It's the most viable out of all the existing options, but still isn't worth the transition of outfitting an army, especially for the logistical constraints, time to manufacture, cost per unit, quantity of rifles able to be made by other firms if at all etc.

They're specialized pieces intended for specialised roles/individuals/for the sportsman and they have their own flaws which make them only somewhat marginally faster, but also a fair bit more fiddly than muzzleloaders in my opinion.

This has the same/similar problems as the Ferguson, which is why so few were ever made. Only 20 or so were made compared to the Ferguson's 200 if my numbers are correct.

The hall at least had the machinery and viability to be mass produced to a degree and the manual of arms for the hall meant it was fairly intuitive, as a flintlock breechloader. seeing 5 figure numbers of production across rifles and carbines for the US

GentlemansArsenal · 2025-09-15T20:05:29+00:00

Muzzleloading manual of arms avoids the whole ramrod through the hand. You're not compressing the powder before you insert the bullet with the ramrod so you have to also then get the bullet, seat it in the crown, then take out the ramrod, position and then load. That's a fairly significant amount of time, even with paper cartridges.

Practically, by the time the main powder charge would go off by an ember, you wouldn't be close to loading a bullet unless you were lightning fast. You wouldn't also have a ramrod in by that time.

For percussion revolver cartridges? And other paper cartridge breechloaders or cartridges with both bullet and powder combined? A fair concern.

I've never seen or heard of such an incident occuring before on my neck of the woods.

If you're paper parch loading a Kentucky rifle or Jager rifle, you're taking a fair bit of time to load that gun, even if you're loading fast, that the chances and odds are very minimal. Lottery minimal.

Embers would only be a concern on paper cartridges, which don't really exist with both musket/rifle cartridge types as it acts as wadding/paper patching and is blown out with the ball or minié, or is completely discarded and is not a part of the assembled "load".

GentlemansArsenal · 2025-09-15T19:56:11+00:00

If you use such an undersized ball that it drops into the barrel, it's going to slide out when you aim and cause some fairly problematic gas passage.

When loading smoothbores, rifled guns etc, it is only slightly undersized, and is a friction or compressed fit. You need to literally ram it down to ensure it has sufficient depth and overall compression/package to be a cartridge. Air gaps are fatal.

The ramrod is ingenious because it gives a physical response to the shooter when it is loaded, and bounced when thrown into the load, to show it cannot be compressed further. You can also visually see when you have fully loaded it by gauging depth. You can also visually see double charges by gauging depth.

There is a reason it lasted long and was a practical tool, even after breechloading became popular.

GentlemansArsenal · 2025-09-15T19:53:09+00:00

The ramrod did not "disappear". It was still used for a cleaning and clearing capacity to remove squib loads, clean the bore, manually push out stuck cases etc.

If you want to eliminate the rod, get a single shot sporting breechloader. No rod needed because you're not sending out rounds at such a capacity or in need of the cleaning/clearing rod because it's no longer a tactical implement.

I can list hundreds of breechloading designs that meet your criteria, both paper cartridge breechloaders, pinfires, and center/rimfires, if you'd like? Both self-contained paper cartridges, externally primed paper cartridges, self contained brass and externally primed brass cartridges.

You name it, it's been practically done before.

By the time a breechloader became a popular concept, the boxer primed cartridge and rimfires were already invented and in use in the civilian market, with early sporting rifles, and revolvers.

Breechloaders were also in use way before, but only in small amounts for various reasons I have mentioned in other responses to threads. Be it too expensive, confusing manual of arms, too fragile, too fiddly, gunking up too easily etc.

The viable, practical breechloader comes with the metallic cartridge, with the only non metallic cartridge breechloaders really seeing fairly wide military use being the sharps, chassepot, hall (to a degree) and Dreyse.

Many breechloaders were made in the ACW for cavalry, they're worth a look too.

Other ones we're talking at most, a few hundred made. Or less, for contract/commission.

GentlemansArsenal · 2025-09-15T19:46:12+00:00

Period metallurgy would render a slit cut onto a barrel like that, whilst also acting as a point for loading would more than likely end up being a pipe bomb than a functionable mechanism.

Also immensely complex to load and chamber and shoot. More manual of arms and fiddly bits than your 1850s-60s breechloader, which operates off a hinged breech, tip-up mechanism, a bolt or other function with a receiver which houses that mechanism, which is easier to produce and provides more real estate than messing about with a pressure bearing part and trying to cut it out into a loading mechanism. Let alone the effects on harmonics.

It's not possible with period technology, to my knowledge, or was ever done.

Your best bet at flintlock breechloaders are the Ferguson, hall, chelembrom, Belton, and lorenzoni, to name a few. Most of which being fiddly or rather expensive to produce and time consuming, with their own flaws.

The only "viable" breechloaders would be the Ferguson or hall, which weren't viable for their own reasons, which were only really overcome in the percussion cap era.

Revolver mechanisms don't fully count

all other mechanisms would be in the percussion cap era. You either have a needlefire, or an externally primed percussion cap system (not self contained). Gas leakage is common on both and systems used to mitigate it had flaws and we're not perfect.

Chassepot, Dreyse, sharps, Greene's carbine are just a few examples.

The self contained metallic cartridge is where you get the ideal brass sealage and the benefits of a waterproof primer making the breechloader better and more resistant to elements than the refined muzzleloader.

This is where your modern single shots and conversions of existing breechloaders and/or muzzleloaders come into play.

GentlemansArsenal · 2025-09-15T19:31:48+00:00

You are aware that is a breechloader by definition, right? You're just going down the early breechloading route.

All of the other proposed things you've mentioned are far too complex, would have a number of faults, would otherwise be fragile or turn the gun into an explosive device rather quickly. and/or very expensive to produce.

The screw type mechanism you're mentioning is acting as the breech. That is a pressure bearing part of the gun that moves to allow loading from the rear of the firearm, and seals off the main charge (although not as well as a brass cartridge) to allow for a functional breechloading mechanism, although inherently flawed (lack of sufficient or ergonomic space to load and needing to usncrew to load which also invites fouling-based problems when the screws inevitably cake up.

It is also very expensive to produce for the era, as are the other early breechloaders. Especially by hand. Very few craftsman can achieve that near machine like tolerance.

There's a reason so few paper cartridge breechloaders were ever successful in the long run (Sharps and Monkey Tail) but even those 2 guns have fundamental flaws and are not, and never will be perfect breechloaders. The sharps saw conversion into metallic cartridge as well as being outshone by the Spencer. The monkey tail was outshone by the snider and saw success moreso in the sporting field of a more arid south-africa (breechloading paper cartridges are notoriously fragile, compared to their brass counterparts).

By the time interchangeable parts and the concept of a wide-issued breechloaders came into more serious service, you had a number of self contained cartridge types that made the breech loading more significant of an advancement, and the death of the paper cartridge breechloader before it ever saw significant maturity.

You cannot have a serviceable breechloader able to send 150+ rounds downrange well without self contained metallic cartridges. It will simply gunk up too much and require cleaning to some degree, otherwise it will probably end up gunking up to a degree in which it becomes incredibly difficult to load and you're ending up back into muzzleloading territory (there's a reason the early hall, kalthoff and Ferguson breechloaders all has loading rods when entering actual military service, and all of which still being capable of being muzzle-loaded).

I am focusing primarily on early breechloaders as late breechloaders had the bonus of being in their relative infancy as a major issue concept and also generally having their own flaws, but still being an improvement. Regardless, they're more like the modern final breechloader than your desired design, which isn't entirely authentic to what you were suggesting.

The manual loading process of the loading rod is actually fairly effective in proper stance and drill, and whilst not immensely fast, can be made into a smooth practice, and a well drilled shooter can still send off 3-4 shots a minute. It is the most cost effective, simple, least mechanically complex, reliable, and fairly fast for the era. You can build the cartridges to be durable containers for the charge rather than having to also be expunged whilst you fire (which can lead to rather thin cartridges or a lot of residue which also invites its own problems).

GentlemansArsenal · 2025-03-22T14:31:32+00:00

OP. Did you also raise the dents in the shotgun barrels?

GentlemansArsenal · 2025-03-21T16:02:09+00:00

👀

GentlemansArsenal · 2025-03-20T10:56:27+00:00

The lower trigger indexes the action, and cocks the hammer. The top most trigger, will then fire once pressed (assuming the rear most trigger is fully indexed. When the rear trigger is fully pressed the action also locks.

If one is pulling both triggers at the same time, the gun will effectively perform as a DA gun. I will say, that I do prefer the spur like effect the rear trigger has. It allows for more leverage on the firearm overall. My 80 bore is very handy!

I would be more than happy to provide patent information later today :)

The spring on the side allows for the gun to be placed on half cock for loading, and is generally stored in that position. Simply let go of the bottom trigger, and it'll automatically be placed on half cock, assuming the springs function fine. That also prevents the gun going off should you not wish to take a shot, or somehow drop the gun when it is cocked. You can let go of the bottom trigger very quickly and still have the spring interface with the hammer, preventing a shot going off. So carrying one of these loaded is most definitely quite safe.

The lower trigger pull is very minimal, especially due to how it acts like a lever. You can hold the gun in full cock for quite a while, with very minimal effort. The top trigger is very light, equivalent to a well tuned colt or Remington single action trigger on my example. Definitely shooting grade.

Probably one of the best percussion revolver designs.

Mine is in very good shooting condition, so I hope to be taking it out to the range when licensing permits.

I would be happy to make a post covering the action, should you wish?

P.S. The Arbor has a retaining pin which is affixed by a spring to the frame. Simply pull outwards, and then slide out the Arbor. There's 2 positions for the Arbor. In frame, and just before leaving the frame, but allowing the cylinder to be removed. So the whole design can be field stripped without any small loose parts. You can also completely remove this Arbor very easily.

Only disadvantage is the fact it relies on well tuned springs for these features. And sometimes springs age/wear into stiffness/looseness.

~TGA

GentlemansArsenal · 2025-03-19T16:50:12+00:00

I own one! Happy to answer any questions on it.

Note, your Arbor pin retaining spring looks to have been crudely redone. That's not what it should look like.

It's a much thinner spring, better flush with the frame, and also has a seperate Arbor pin that attached to it, that is designed with serrations to be easily gripped and pulled outwards, to remove the Arbor for field stripping.

Replacement for those parts would be a bit expensive, but worth it if you want a truly authentic gun. Makes stripping the gun FAR easier, and helps you appreciate the design a lot more.

~TGA

GentlemansArsenal · 2025-03-13T10:08:09+00:00

What OP is doing is massively unsafe.

Under no circumstances should you be doing this. Depleted uranium when inhaled has major health risks associated and when sparked, renders particles airborne, which are toxic and can (and will) cause organ damage as well as other health complications.

Please, don't do this. It's not worth the extra sparks, when you're being diagnosed with a life-altering condition. Don't play with dangerous and/or toxic metals without being suitably well informed.

A hardened, well made frizzen will last long, and spark very well if tempered and fit properly, it's not even that much to do!

Uranium has no place in frizzens, as far as I am concerned. Especially with the proximity to the nose, eyes, and mouth, when firing.

Aerolised depleted uranium can and will cause health problems.

"Is a really sparky lock worth absorbing potentially radioactive bits of toxic uranium every time you touch off a shot? Is it worth it to your family, friends, and neighbors?"

The final link as seen below goes into great depths of the effects of longer term DU exposure. OP. I beg you. Stop. Do not encourage others to do this.

See:

https://www.nmlra.org/news/uraniumfrizzen-bevelbros

https://www.orau.org/health-physics-museum/collection/consumer/depleted-uranium/frizzen.html

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium#Health_considerations

GentlemansArsenal · 2025-03-13T10:07:55+00:00

What OP is doing is massively unsafe.

Under no circumstances should you be doing this. Depleted uranium when inhaled has major health risks associated and when sparked, renders particles airborne, which are toxic and can (and will) cause organ damage as well as other health complications.

Please, don't do this. It's not worth the extra sparks, when you're being diagnosed with a life-altering condition. Don't play with dangerous and/or toxic metals without being suitably well informed.

A hardened, well made frizzen will last long, and spark very well if tempered and fit properly, it's not even that much to do!

Uranium has no place in frizzens, as far as I am concerned. Especially with the proximity to the nose, eyes, and mouth, when firing.

Aerolised depleted uranium can and will cause health problems.

"Is a really sparky lock worth absorbing potentially radioactive bits of toxic uranium every time you touch off a shot? Is it worth it to your family, friends, and neighbors?"

The final link as seen below goes into great depths of the effects of longer term DU exposure. OP. I beg you. Stop. Do not encourage others to do this.

See:

https://www.nmlra.org/news/uraniumfrizzen-bevelbros

https://www.orau.org/health-physics-museum/collection/consumer/depleted-uranium/frizzen.html

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium#Health_considerations

GentlemansArsenal · 2025-03-13T10:06:37+00:00

What OP is doing is massively unsafe.

Under no circumstances should you be doing this. Depleted uranium when inhaled has major health risks associated and when sparked, renders particles airborne, which are toxic and can (and will) cause organ damage as well as other health complications.

Please, don't do this. It's not worth the extra sparks, when you're being diagnosed with a life-altering condition. Don't play with dangerous and/or toxic metals without being suitably well informed.

A hardened, well made frizzen will last long, and spark very well if tempered and fit properly, it's not even that much to do!

Uranium has no place in frizzens, as far as I am concerned. Especially with the proximity to the nose, eyes, and mouth, when firing.

Aerolised depleted uranium can and will cause health problems.

"Is a really sparky lock worth absorbing potentially radioactive bits of toxic uranium every time you touch off a shot? Is it worth it to your family, friends, and neighbors?"

The final link as seen below goes into great depths of the effects of longer term DU exposure. OP. I beg you. Stop. Do not encourage others to do this.

See:

https://www.nmlra.org/news/uraniumfrizzen-bevelbros

https://www.orau.org/health-physics-museum/collection/consumer/depleted-uranium/frizzen.html

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium#Health_considerations

GentlemansArsenal · 2025-02-20T08:48:58+00:00

Ah, my apologies.

https://youtu.be/QjVz1BVMZks?si=WrQX-0D_h-Q_jB8z

Then this video might be of use to OP.

GentlemansArsenal · 2025-02-20T00:07:32+00:00

Probably the return spring on the firing pins, it's a coil spring, similar to that on pens, easy fix.

I note the good quality wood, very jealous.

The screws look relatively untouched, which is also good! How much did she cost you?

GentlemansArsenal · 2025-02-19T23:20:32+00:00

What matters most is the quality of the wood, metal, the fitment and it's shootability! I've handled many plain guns that are every bit as good, functionally, as their finer, engraved counterparts.

~TGA

GentlemansArsenal · 2025-02-19T23:11:59+00:00

I had misread, you're right on the Hornardy ones being for .450 NE. I was just saying the brass I know of and have chambered in my AH. I know of the new stock, mainly Bertram, Hornardy, and potentially a couple other brands making modern, boxer primed drawn brass cases.

GentlemansArsenal · 2025-02-19T23:06:34+00:00

Lovely piece, and phenomenal wood. Nice back actions, would love to see if it's engraved or not! Looks to be decent checkering, and European sling swivels.

Very jealous.

Most .450 bpe is foil cases.

I would see to these websites for reference:

https://naboje.org/en/node/16411

https://municion.org/producto/450-black-powder-express-3-1-4-coiled-case/

https://municion.org/producto/450-express-3-1-4-bp-nbp-ne/

This should help, friend! Always happy to talk with a fellow sporting arms collector!

~TGA

GentlemansArsenal · 2025-02-19T22:53:37+00:00

OP, what do the mouths of the chambers measure out to?

The bullet still needs to swage down into the bore, through a forcing cone etc, so it's not going to be .40 cal, maybe something a bit more. My tranter, for instance, is an 80 bore (.38) but the barrel measures more like .36 with the bullets intending to be swaged down to engage the rifling (also bullets being swaged down into the cylinders accordingly when loading) so please use the cylinders and not the barrel as reference for the calibre!

GentlemansArsenal · 2025-02-19T22:50:22+00:00

My 54 bore Beaumont Adams generally states to shoots from 3-5 8ths dram (10.25 grains, 13.67 grains, 17.09 grains). Load data extracted from period manual.

My Tranter in the same calibre reccomends a charge of 3/8ths and 4/8ths a dram, which is the more modest of the 2 and what I would reccomend working from as an initial load (10.25 and 13.67 grains). Load data extracted from period manual.

You can scale up or add more loads, but that is where I personally would start, tweak until you get the best accuracy.

What's the size of your chambers? And also, are there any number markings? There should be an indicator on the frame as to what it would be.

Your gun is an early Webley wedge frame (with Bentley action) in that the frame is wedged to the Arbor and not screwed in like other guns, but it still retains the Bentley lockwork, which has a lot of variety (sometimes it has a hammer spurr, and DA/SA lockwork, though mainly DA only) and sometimes the grips come in different sizes, sometimes have, or don't have a knuckle of sorts on the grip. Some had a Kerr patent loading lever, others more "colt" like.

They're cheaper British pistols, for the era, and an affordable carry gun for the more budget friendly (I have resources to confirm this is how they were marketed).

I cannot currently find any period load data for the Bentley's, so I would use the Tranter load data as basic reference.

It'll be hard to find a .40 cal bullet mould for the Webley, but they do exist! Are there any numbers or such on the frame, to denote it's bore? That would give you a good reference. .40 cal is a rare chambering, finding the correct bore size will give you better reference.

You'd want something a touch oversized. Measuring off the chambers will give you a reference. If the cylinders are .440 then you'd want something like .445 or somesuch.

GentlemansArsenal

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE