The India-made Untouchables

[Alden]

I just read somewhere about the 3rd VA banning India-made guns from CW reenacting. I expect this will become a trend. And a couple of people will drop out of "the hobby" as a result. So be it.

I am not a fan of India-made guns -- they are, IMO, a grade lower than their European imports and probably most custom-made guns. We are all responsible for everyone's safety on the field, or must be made so.

That said, I do think they (India-made) have a place and challenge, complement, the market with options.

I recently bought one of those early 18th C. .69 "Cookson" New England doglock fowlers with a 51" barrel I'd eyed for years. Needed an hour's work outta the box to get the lock to work at all and then ultimately the overall action that performs very well indeed now despite the frizzen screw still being bent just a tad. Sure, it's a little crude, ugly wood filler making up for imperfect carpentry for example, in some respects but it's OK for what it is and the price... luckily they don't charge by the pound. My call. But is it truly safe within reasonable limits?

Now, I need a volunteer to proof it for me please!

 

[Col. Batguano]

I guess I'd research the company that sold it to find out more about their barrels they're using, and do your own measurements to determine thickness and plug length. That's safer than the old "hold my beer and watch this" test.

 

[greggholmes]

I heard something to the effect, I may be wrong so don't quote me. the business partner of the vice-president of that group is a gun maker and doesn't like competition.

 

[zimmerstutzen]

I have two india made pistols. Barrel wall thickness seems hefty enough and are heavier than some of the Belgian and Spanish imports Dixie once sold. The underside of the barrels are marked with name and city of maker and date made. I have seen some shockingly thin barrels on older Spanish guns, Belgian Guns and a Chinese muzzle loader.

I think it depends more on the manufacturer and the pride taken in the product. At least two of the makers from Udapour advertise that their firearms are tested in accordance with The India Firearms Office regulations.

I have purchased some locks from M.Sikligar in Udapour. No flintlocks, but the percussion and matchlock, locks Quality was much better than some Spanish and Belgian locks I have seen

 

[KingofDerby]

Most doing 18C stuff here in the UK use India made. Pedersolis are considered to be Ferraris!

All MLs have to be Proofed before they can be put on the licence. And Birmingham Proof House is where that happens.

So I'm confident that the guns on the field are safe.

Of course, the users are a different matter! But the group I mostly do events with is pretty good with safety.

 

[pargent]

:thumbsup: Well down here (Aus) they are only imported by a couple of one man shows mainly to sell in their own circles ,they are dead set wankers to try to deal with .no idea of the lineage of types of muskets and not willing to sell parts for remodelling ,or any back up at all . (and dearer then a good second hand pedersoli)

 

[Toomuch51]

I just read somewhere about the 3rd VA banning India-made guns from CW reenacting. I expect this will become a trend. And a couple of people will drop out of "the hobby" as a result. So be it.

I am not a fan of India-made guns -- they are, IMO, a grade lower than their European imports and probably most custom-made guns. We are all responsible for everyone's safety on the field, or must be made so.

That said, I do think they (India-made) have a place and challenge, complement, the market with options.

I recently bought one of those early 18th C. .69 "Cookson" New England doglock fowlers with a 51" barrel I'd eyed for years. Needed an hour's work outta the box to get the lock to work at all and then ultimately the overall action that performs very well indeed now despite the frizzen screw still being bent just a tad. Sure, it's a little crude, ugly wood filler making up for imperfect carpentry for example, in some respects but it's OK for what it is and the price... luckily they don't charge by the pound. My call. But is it truly safe within reasonable limits?

Now, I need a volunteer to proof it for me please!

Notict to check out: http://3rdregimentanv.com/unsafe firearms.html

Toomuch
............
Shoot Flint

 

[Loyalist Dave]

From the website [emphasis added]:

This is just three examples of muskets that have burst. There are others. We do not know all the circumstances surrounding these burst barrels. But regardless of the circumstances, it is clear that these examples did not stand up to the use reenactors can give them and present an unacceptable safety risk. I have not seen or heard of a burst barrel like these on an Italian or Japanese made musket.

Now I will come clean and admit to owning an Indian made musket myself in the past.... So I have first-hand experience with these muskets, this is not just hearsay.

Here are the problems with Mr. Steve Blanchard's article.

First he sites three events with Indian made muskets, but one of those three, the burst flintlock musket, was burst due to operator error. I am VERY familiar with the situation, AND with the metalurgy that was done afterward. This was many years ago and the information was and probably still is quite available on the internet... he failed to do research. After thorough investigation follwing this lone event with the flintlock, India made muskets from Loyalist Arms, MVTC, and Discriminating General are still allowed in Colonial Reenactments.

Blancard further writes: "We do not know all the circumstances..." which means, since he did not mention what he DOES KNOW, that he doesn't know if operator error was a factor in the other two. OR, he thinks that an improperly seated ball, will not burst an Italian made barrel. He also claims that Miroku barrels on black powder guns were proofed (this is complete error) This places his conclusion in doubt. He claims there are others... so give as many as you can, the makers, the reason, and the dates please.

Second, his failure to mention the manufacturers of the musket, or the rifled muskets, that he used for examples. I, for one, know that there are several different locations where one can get the parts made which are then assembled into muskets which Mr. Blancard lumps into a single group. They are not all made at the same location, and thus conclusions cannot be made about all of the makers, any more than one can condem all "modern" muzzleloading rifles simply because CVA has had some burst barrels.

Third, he owned one India made musket... he had problems... he doesn't share the maker of that musket... he condems them all due to his lone example. That IS a form of hearsay, and they have had proofed barrels burst in reproduction arms, his lack of ever "hearing" about them simply means he didn't care to do any research.... or maybe his actual objection isn't safety.....

For example, does he mention the fact that the Italian proof house has the lowest presure test of any of the proofing houses in the world for Black Powder, while the Birmingham, England house has one of the highest, and India made barrels regularly pass inspection in Birmingham? Does he say that if a person moved to VA from England with an India made gun that was proofed that it would be allowed? What if I swapped out an unproofed, American made barrel on the India gun, would that be allowed?

His detailed objection is that the rifled muskets that he has seen, look like manure in his opinion. His barrel argument is added to reenforce his appearance argument. (IF his true objection was not to the cosmetics, then the burst barrel agrument would stand alone, with no more need being said, even if the India made guns and rifled muskets were museum quality copies, NO?)
IF you don't like how they look, FINE then say that's your reason. IF you don't like the fact that Company X had a burst barrel, then name the company... telling the truth isn't lible nor defamatory.

LOOK the safest way to conduct a reenactment is to not hold the reenactment. You have no idea if that fellow next to you is properly trained, you just met him, and so what if his uniform looks like he knows what he's doing. (Remember the Frenchman at Gettysburg a few years back was handed a live-loaded Remington 1858 from a "veteran" reenactor, and promptly shot a Confederate in the throat with it?) You have no idea if that proofed, Italian made, rifled-musket, which looks well maintained on the outside, hasn't had a bore so neglected over time that it's unsafe to fire. Ordinance Sergeant Steve Blancard isn't going around to each and every rifled musket at every one of his events and sticking a digital inspection camera down every barrel.


LD

 

[Rickey Brown]

well written well researched and well said

 

[Artificer]

Ordinance Sergeant Steve Blancard

OK, I have just GOT to ask if you made a Freudian Slip or made a couched comment about him making a written decree, rather than passing on good Ordnance Information? :wink:

I don't believe I know Ordnance Sergeant Steve Blancard, so I have no idea of his true technical proficiency. I applaud any Re-enactor NCO or Officer who is concerned about the safety of their membership, though at times, some of them use incorrect information or procedures to inspect or pass judgment on some arms.

David, I very much appreciate you sharing your experience and views on this matter.

Gus

 

[BillinOregon]

Would love to know how many Indian barrels have failed testing at Birmingham. In fact, I'd love to know how many barrels in general have failed the proof tests.

 

[coloradoclyde]

Would love to know how many Indian barrels have failed testing at Birmingham. In fact, I'd love to know how many barrels in general have failed the proof tests.

I would like to know that too bill!

I am also curios if we have “full disclosure” on topics like this when there is promoting and bashing?

 

[zimmerstutzen]

Interesting I'd like to know the failure rate of all muzzle loaders at Birmingham, for all countries of origin, including those from the US

Could be an eye opener

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

Would love to know how many Indian barrels have failed testing at Birmingham. In fact, I'd love to know how many barrels in general have failed the proof tests.

Hard to say, but here is a photo of one. I wish I had saved the location where this turned up, it failed at the Birmingham Proof House:

Easily identifiable as of Indian manufacture by the style of breech plug used.

As said, it would be interesting to know the rate of failure of guns from other countries, including the US. I do suspect that the modern Indian-made "imitation guns" - so called under Indian law - is higher than most modern muzzle loading firearms.

 

[Artificer]

Would love to know how many Indian barrels have failed testing at Birmingham. In fact, I'd love to know how many barrels in general have failed the proof tests.

What I would really like to know is from what Indian Manufacturer/s came the guns that have passed the Birmingham Proof Testing in every or most cases - as brought up by Forum Members from the UK.

Gus

 

[zimmerstutzen]

Re the blown barrel in the photo:

1. Dixie sold breech plugs similar to that years ago.
2. I have never seen a breech in which the barrel is turned significantly narrower right at the end of the breech plug, (And at the touch hole) except in this picture.
3. Why is the touch hole at the 5 o'clock position in regard to the breech plug.
4. Any flint lock pan fitting that barrel contour would have had to have a dogleg in the pan edge just to fit against the barrel. Something I have only seen on pot metal stage guns.
5. I have seen this picture three times now, never does anyone show the type written message on the tag.
6. We are told that it is an Indian Gun, and I can not say otherwise, except that it also looks like one of those Belgian flintlocks that stoeger sold in the 1950's.
7. An indian gun is required to have certain markings on the barrel, including maker, date of manufacture, location etc. WHAT ARE THE MARKINGS?
8. Seriously, how many of us would take a look at that barrel before it was blown and not see major problems.

I have two percussion pistols from India, I stripped them down and measured barrel walls etc. Neither exhibit the red flags that the pictured barrel had before it was blown.

Just playing devils advocate here. At least once a season people put up trail cam pictures allegedly showing a wild cougar here in PA. Some times you can even make out plants that are not indigenous to PA. All we really know is that we are told the barrel is Indian and that the photo was taken at Birmingham. Like the alleged PA cougar pictures, people are ready to believe what they already want to, even if it is not as described. I have also read of a US made flint lock smooth bore that blew up during proofing. Dos that mean all American made guns should be shunned at re-enactments?

 

[zimmerstutzen]

BTW The barrel in the picture isn't even from a percussion musket

a year or to ago, there were pictures of one of those smokeless muzzle loaders blown to bits along with a mangled hand. Without more pictures and documentation it is hard to accept the "birmingham" picture at face value.

 

[zimmerstutzen]

I have not seen or heard of a burst barrel like these on an Italian or Japanese made musket.

As for Japanese, yes there was even a recall and several blew up. Smooth bore three piece barrels. A breech plug, a piece of octagon steel about 8 inches long and then a piece of thin smooth bore barrel threaded into the Octagon piece. There was a noticeable lip in the interior of the bore, where the Octogon and round parts where threaded together.

Two brothers were killed in Montgomery county, PA Nov 1977, when one sold at the store I managed blew up. Unfortuntely for them and fortunately for the chain's liability insurer, the brothers loaded it with smokeless. we got a recall notice from the wholesaler a week later, but the recall letter was dated before the incident.

 

[Billnpatti]

I have never owned an Indian made gun. Years ago, when I was into reenacting, I saw a few Indian made guns at events. If you stand back and squint your eyes just right, they look pretty good. They are good enough for show and parades. But, if you take one in your hands and look at it and operate the lock, you quickly see that it is nothing much more than a stage prop. I think that they are safe enough for reasonable blanks but I have serious doubts about putting a ball in it and expecting to hit anything. Personally, I am not favorably impressed with them based on what I have seen. I won't own one. Some may choose to spend their money on one of them, but I'll spend my money a little more wisely elsewhere. That's just my opinion and welcome to it. :hatsoff:

 

[Rifleman1776]

There was a dealer at the shoot I attended last week with some India made guns. He wouldn't admit they were India stuff but there was no doubt in my mind. I picked up some kind of musket repro, first impression was 'heavier than a truck axle'. :shocked2: And, the touchhole was enormous. Lines an appearance was not bad, even attractive. When I asked the dealer if it was India made he would not answer directly. No matter how I asked the question he slipped and slided every which direction and would not answer. Even when asked directly he would only say they are shipped to him from Canada. Methinks his desire for sales ($$$) was stronger than his sense of truthfullness. I believe lawyers would have a field day with this scenario if someone bought the gun and it blew up. Unfortunately, he is in the process of opening a ml gunshop not far from me and I won't trade with folks I know to be less than truthful. Nor will I refer others to him.