Was there ever a rifle smaller than .32 caliber?

Ok, time for newb question.
I have this ~100 year old rifle given to me by my grandfather. Took to a small shop who sent it out to a gunsmith they work with and he clean it up and test fired it so I know its safe and won't blow up on me.
So I put my micrometer in he bore and measured around .32" so I started ordering supplies. But it seems that .32 caliber tools are too large?
I can take a cleaning brush and screw on the end of a .22 cleaning rod and it will go all the way in an out properly. Am I just running into an issue that because everyone is running repo .45,.50 and .54 calibers all the ramrods and tools are made too big? Or is there some even more obscure smaller than .32 caliber that I have.

Yes they made guns with bores of smaller than .32" but you measured the bore at .32".

A 100 year old muzzleloader is not old, in fact that would be an anomaly so could be anything.

Did you measure the offening "tools" that wouldn't fit? That is where I would start.

What "tools" did you order?

Another option is to ask the 'smith that gave it the once over and shot it what components he used to shoot it and what tools he used to clean it. You paid the guy, it's the least he should do.

Let us know more.

Enjoy, J.D.

What did the gunsmith use??? I would get back with him. He should have verified what caliber the gun was shooting. did you pay this guy?

This thread needs a photo. :hmm: Not so much for figuring out what you need, just to see your rifle!! :grin: :v

Yes, there were some .30 cal & .25 cal rifles made, possibly other diameters less than .32 cal.

I have a 28 cal muzzle loader built around 1860.

Answer is: Yes.
There have been smaller calibers. I know there were .22 cal muzzle loaders. They were (often) used indoors in bars and pubs for entertainment in Europe. They were often referred to as 'parlor' (or 'parlour') guns. Naturally, they used a very tiny charge. And, I believe the ball was loaded bare. There may have been .17 cal. parlor rifles but I don't know for sure.

In the Ned Roberts Book "The Muzzleloading Caplock Rifle" ( or something like that) he mentions that rifles were often sold with options for different length and caliber barrels. He mentioned .30,.28,.25 and even .22. This was the later period of caplocks, mid to late 1800s.

Ok, so I suppose its possible i have a .30 caliber. I am able to push the .32 caliber cleaning brush in easily (it screws onto a cleaning .22 rod).

I just didn't want to call up the gun store with a "what caliber is my gun" question

Eugene Nine said:

I just didn't want to call up the gun store with a "what caliber is my gun" question

Click to expand...

When is comes to safety there is no stupid questions. There are, however, sometimes stupid answers.

Call them up and get the information you paid for. Also ask them what kind of "test firing" was done.

A 100 year old muzzleloader may not be as "safe" as you think and you do risk blowing it up. Most heirlooms are better left unfired.

Be careful, J.D.

I mainly wanted to shoot it myself once or twice letting the kids see it before putting it back in the back of the safe to pass down to my grandkids.

I'm thinking it has to be a 32 caliber, the cleaning brush would be too tight if it were smaller.

Someone asked for pictures

Very nice. I would like to see more. Are there any names or other identification marks on it....on or under the barrel?

I'd venture to say if it wasn't built in the 3rd quarter of the 20th century by an early contemporary builder then you have a 150 old rifle there.

I only caution you as many old guns have been wrecked by doing just what you suggest. You have to ask yourself if it's worth it as it would be a shame.

If you decide to shoot it then a No. 1 buck with a thick patch seated firmly over a light powder charge of fffg would be recommended.

Enjoy, J.D.

It was made by Great Western Gun Works, Pittsburgh PA. From what I can find on the internet the company was open from 1866 to after 1900, for example http://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=14162.0

So the gunsmith was supposed to have shot it already so he must have thought not too bad.
When you say load if with buck, I'm assuming similar to a modern shot gun. I'm assuming a small bag of the shot put in place of the ball. Seems that would be safer that me potentially loading a too large of ball.
Could it even be shot 'blank'? I grew up in WV and the Mountaineer used to shoot into the air at football games before guns became evil.

You have a piece of history there my friend and if that is the original finish it is spectacular....though don't be suprised if it has had some work as that bluing on the barrel is nice.

Where are you located? Maybe somebody here can hook you up with a hands on expert opinion.

No. 1 Buck is .30" diameter ball. If you are going to fire it and only a couple times you can cut open a No. 1 Buck shot shell and use the balls. If you don't have one, singles can often be gotten from friends or at gun shows....sometimes a friendly gun shop owner.

Load one ball in a patch and seat it firmly on your powder. If the gunsmith told you it is good...and you trust him...then 20-25 grains of 3F black powder is a safe load.

Do not fire blank loads...you will probably get some discenting opinions here....but blanks are not safe in these old guns...period!!! Too many have had catastrophic failures.

Again, you have a real gem there. Enjoy, J.D.

Its not the original finish, They refinished it. It was pretty rough when my grandfather gave it to me years ago.
I can do woodworking do I could have finished the stock and could have re-blued the barrel and such but I still would not have known if it was safe to shoot.
I have a 20 gauge, but I some #4, 8, and whatever size is in target load, I could run and see if i can find some 1 for it.
I assume by going undersized to .30 then less pressure so less chance to blow up. The box of balls i got at Cabela's lists as .31.

.31" balls are the usual load for a .32" caliber gun. If you want to go that route, you can buy a box of those. Someone here may even be gracious enough to send you a few, as often happens here. I would, but don't have any.

The .30" would require a thicker patch and the .31" a thinner patch. The patch is what gives you the gas seal. You want a tight combination, but not so much that you have to hammer it in the bore. If your not familiar it's nice to have somebody go over it with you first hand.

Thanks again for posting your pictures. Enjoy, J.D.

Eugene Nine said:

Ok, time for newb question.
I have this ~100 year old rifle given to me by my grandfather. Took to a small shop who sent it out to a gunsmith they work with and he clean it up and test fired it so I know its safe and won't blow up on me.
So I put my micrometer in he bore and measured around .32" so I started ordering supplies. But it seems that .32 caliber tools are too large?
I can take a cleaning brush and screw on the end of a .22 cleaning rod and it will go all the way in an out properly. Am I just running into an issue that because everyone is running repo .45,.50 and .54 calibers all the ramrods and tools are made too big? Or is there some even more obscure smaller than .32 caliber that I have.

Click to expand...

There was no standard caliber. Is it 32 in the grooves? If so it could be a 28-30 caliber. Also original rifles were sometime "freed" at the muzzle for perhaps as much as 1/4" or more and may be a 30 would show as a 32 right at the muzzle.
They were also often choked and were often tighter
4-6" down from the muzzle than at the breech or muzzle. But the differences in diameter are slight.
Dan

I think you had best have a talk with the gunsmith and find out what he shot in it. Too much guessing going on here. Oh, and don't shoot it until you have the proper equipment to clean it once done shooting.

Thats what I'm wondering, would make sense too as the rod goes in a few inches then stops. So I wonder if it is a .30 that gets larger at the end.