Is this blasphemous?

I want to make a flinter rifle. One that catches my eye is the Harpers Ferry 1803, which is a half stocked walnut in 54 cal.

I usually shoot .50 and wonder how sacrilegious (or even possible) it would be to get a barrel for this made in .50 in stead of .54. This would make it easier and cheaper for me to load. Since I seldom hunt the .50 wouldn't be a big issue ballistically.

I wonder if this is possible, if this is a horrible desecration of history and tradition and would I be tarred and feathered at any rendezvous I attend?

Oldbear63 said:

I want to make a flinter rifle. One that catches my eye is the Harpers Ferry 1803, which is a half stocked walnut in 54 cal.

I usually shoot .50 and wonder how sacrilegious (or even possible) it would be to get a barrel for this made in .50 in stead of .54. This would make it easier and cheaper for me to load. Since I seldom hunt the .50 wouldn't be a big issue ballistically.

I wonder if this is possible, if this is a horrible desecration of history and tradition and would I be tarred and feathered at any rendezvous I attend?

Click to expand...

Do what you want. It’ll be your rifle. If you’re worried about historical accuracy then .54. If not then, whatever caliber takes your fancy.

Oldbear63 said:

I wonder if this is possible, if this is a horrible desecration of history and tradition and would I be tarred and feathered at any rendezvous I attend?

Click to expand...

Make it a fifty, I don't think the calibers were all that standard, because a mold was made for each rifle. I think they were called fifty caliber because they were close to 1/2" diameter. My ancestor passed a rifle down that was actually more like a 53 when measured, but had it's own mold. I remember my grandfather calling it the big 50.

sawyer04 said:

Make it a fifty, I don't think the calibers were all that standard, because a mold was made for each rifle. I think they were called fifty caliber because they were close to 1/2" diameter. My ancestor passed a rifle down that was actually more like a 53 when measured, but had it's own mold. I remember my grandfather calling it the big 50.

Click to expand...

The op is talking about a US martial arm which was standardised at 0.54”

IMO depends on how correct you plan to make the rest of the firearm

The original 1803 Harpers ferry was .54 caliber. The difference between a .50 and a .54 is .04", not a lot. I doubt anyone would notice it unless they were used to the Italian copies that were .58 and it wouldn't weigh a lot more. It would probably affect the resale value though. We could enter into an endless discussion of which is better, .50 or .54 but a whitetail would never know the difference if you decided to hunt. Sort of like sitting in the cabin at the end of a long day in the woods arguing about which is more effective, a .30-30 or a .32 Special.

If you are worried about what others think about the 50, don’t keep your balls in the factory box. 50 and 54 look the same unless seen side by side. Tried putting a 54 in my 50 cal pistol several times

Oldbear63 said:

I want to make a flinter rifle. One that catches my eye is the Harpers Ferry 1803, which is a half stocked walnut in 54 cal.

I usually shoot .50 and wonder how sacrilegious (or even possible) it would be to get a barrel for this made in .50 in stead of .54. This would make it easier and cheaper for me to load. Since I seldom hunt the .50 wouldn't be a big issue ballistically.

I wonder if this is possible, if this is a horrible desecration of history and tradition and would I be tarred and feathered at any rendezvous I attend?

Click to expand...

They're neat guns; I passed up TWO at auction, wish I'd gotten one, I'd have shortened the barrel somewhat, (blasphemy!) because that's what I'd like. Why got to the expense of getting a 50 barrel; what's the big difference? No one at any 'zous would even notice as long as you didn't point it out! Good luck! I love the big patch boxes on 'em, BTW.

I have a couple of 32 bore rifles(.54 cal.) It really wouldn't cost that much to clothe and feed it...much less than trying to make the change to .50 cal and you would be keeping the historicity of the rifle intact.

Anything goes at rondys. Don’t worry. Juried historical re-enactments are another deal. Those are rare and they usually want more bodies and will work with you.

Getting a HF barrel in a custom caliber is going to be costly; much more than you will ever save.

Pete G said:

Getting a HF barrel in a custom caliber is going to be costly; much more than you will ever save.

Click to expand...

That was the answer I was looking for!

Oldbear63 said:

That was the answer I was looking for!

Click to expand...

The barrel for the 1803 (and subsequent editions) has a pretty complex profile. It starts out as an octagon, tapers forward to a wedding ring adornment to transition to round, which tapers to the muzzle. You would have to convince a barrel maker or gunsmith to mill and turn a fifty cal to the 1803 profile, a pretty costly one off.

And that is why I will build a .54 and learn to love it!

You won't regret a .54 caliber; they are a beautiful balance of power, accuracy and economy. I've never heard a bad word from anyone I've met who owned one; I do not, but I have fired a couple and am duly impressed.

It sounds like you have made your decision (go with the 54 and that's what I would do too), but as an alternative to the custom route, you COULD get the 54 and have it sleeved down, That might be too thin of a sleeve though (from a 54 down to a 50). Jerry Hoyt would know if it were feasable.

You could get Colerain to make a special order for a 50 caliber barrel in the 33" 1803 profile. They don't give prices for that barrel on their site.