Cleaning 150/200 years ago

[LaBonte]

Unfortunately this quote includes some errors re: wrought iron

In composition, wrought iron differs from cast iron and steel in two important features, viz.: (1) In having had removed, as an essential of its manufacture, the greater part of the five elements usually contained in iron. In this respect it is near the composition of mild steel. (2) In containing, as a result of the process of manufacture, a quantity of slag (usually called cinder) which surrounds each iron crystal in a thin sheath, and preserves the identity of the crystal as a fiber when a bar of wrought iron is elongated by rolling or hammering. In this respect it differs from steel, which is crystalline and without much slag.
Both iron and steel are crystalline in structure. The silicate slag is/was introduced during the refining process from pig iron to wrought iron - they used sand as a flux. The silicate slag generally shows up as inclusions in the iron and not as a sheath around each iron crystal. But WI also comes in at least three grades and the amount of slag varies considerably. The poorest grade was single wrought used for barrel hoops, wagon wheels, etc. Double wrought for finer products such as fences and bridges, and triple wrought was used for making fine guns parts, knife tangs, and similar items. It was then case hardened for wear resistance


The chief properties of wrought iron are as follows, viz.:

(a) It is very malleable and ductile, and can be readily forged, particularly when heated.
Depends on how readily one means and it must generally be forged at a near white heat. Lower the heat much and it will start to break apart. FWIW - I've been forging WI since the late 1960's and have the same experience as many other long time makers who use WI.

(b) It cannot be cast, as it is fusible only at a very high temperature (about 2800° F.), and merely becomes pasty at the usual furnace temperatures, though because of this quality it is readily united by welding.
Well it can be cast by getting it the proper high heat. Iron ore itself melts at the same temps. Also WI with a fairly high carbon content (see below) will melt at lower temps.

(c) It cannot be hardened, due to lack of carbon.
This is one of the mythconceptions re: WI. Dependent on how well it was manufactured and the number of heats used (the more heats causes the carbon to burn off) and despite what many sites state, WI may contain as much as .60% carbon although generally contains about .02-.03% carbon. Rik Furrer of Door County Forgeworks http://www.doorcountyforgeworks.com/Welcome.html, is one of todays most experienced smiths and an acclaimed expert on period iron and steels and has noted that WI may contain higher carbon and still be WI and not steel, since the differentiation of the two has more to do with the process than carbon content alone. It can also be hardened via case hardening

(d) If pulled apart, the fracture shows a fibrous break.
True one of the best methods when scrounging WI to make sure it is to cut a piece in about half the thickness and bend it to see the structure - if fibrous you've got WI

Wrought iron gets its name from the fact that it may be wrought into various shapes readily under the hammer; also it is called malleable iron in England, because of its great malleability, but it must not be confused with malleable castings, also called malleable cast iron or merely malleable iron in America.
Partly true - the name may also come from the process of working pig iron into WI.
Etymology
The past participle of Middle English werken (“to work”), from Old English wyrcan (past tense worhte, past participle geworht), from Proto-Germanic *wurkijanÄ…, from Proto-Indo-European *werǵ- (“to work”). Cognate with wright (as in wheelwright etc.), Dutch gewrocht, archaic past participle of werken (archaic past tense wrocht, archaic past part. gewrocht), Low German wracht, archaic past participle of warken (archaic past tense wrach, archaic past part. wracht).

While wrought iron and mild steel resemble each other, there are certain distinct advantages of wrought iron which cause it to be retained for some uses. Among its advantages are (1) it welds better than does steel, Generally yes but again only with with the proper high heat. As for the steel some will weld as good as WI when at the proper heat - mistake is most problems with steel are too high a heat and trying to beat it together. When at the right heat whether steel or WI a few taps of the hammer is all that is needed - too much heat/beating breaks the bond. Many modern smiths as well as old time smiths use/used a press rather than a hammer for welding(2) lasts longer when exposed to weather or to water, (3) is better to resist shock and vibration (fatigue), in use, and (4) its fibrous structure arrests fracture, as its breaking is in the nature of a gradual tearing, which often gives warning of a dangerous stress, while steel breaks suddenly. The last three are generally true but again the differences will depend on the type of steel in comparison. As for WI tearing I've seen it burst into bits especially at low temps and not all steel breaks suddenly - it all depends on various factors such as carbon content, manufacturing method, temp, etc.
Among the disadvantages of wrought iron are, (1) its elastic and tensile strength are lower than those of steel, Agan it depends on the type of steel in comparison and the quality of the WI (2) and its production is more costly.True and there is only one modern manufacturer of WI http://www.realwroughtiron.com/ . On the other hand there are sources of various qualities of old salvaged wrought iron such as bridges, wagon wheels, grain storage facilities, etc.

Read more: http://chestofbooks.com/crafts/mec...-Wrought-Iron.html#.VE7RTldZ7ng#ixzz3HOFFUqCk

Period documentation mentions "shot out" barrels not rusted out. Since true wrought iron is somewhat softer the barrels may have truly worn out before rusting out. :hmm

 

[LaBonte]

On their great expedition, Lewis and Clark found it necessary to have some of the rifles "freshened" in the field. I doubt they were shot out based on reading their chronicles, even 10 shots a day by hunters would be less than 5000 rounds over the journey. This raises the possibility that rusting and pitting contributed to the need for freshening the rifling. Every old original black powder rifle I have handled has a pitted bore. That is not "wear".

The late Gary Brumfield of Colonial Williamsburg and I discussed freshening of barrels and cam partly to the conclusion that rather being shot out or rusted out, that the gun began to shoot slick due to a build up of hardened lube and other contaminants from firing and lack of proper cleaning, in part we came to this conclusion based on the tools carried by the L & C Expedition used to freshen barrels that only scraped the grooves and did not increase bore size. In part we also noted the problems that some/many encountered when they tried the Wonder Lube "seasoning" process that often tended to fill up the grooves with the same type hardened "manure" that would cause loss of accuracy over time. Many such "seasoned" rifles were rescued with nothing more than a thorough and deep cleaning down to bare metal which cleaned out the manure in the grooves..
Also while WI is softer than steel it handles high heat better and heat is a major contributor to barrel wear along with the super heated ejecta. In comparison a patched or bare soft lead the harder ball has little effect on wearing out a barrel made of WI or steel. While WI may be softer than steel (although most modern muzzle loading barrels are made of steel-12L14 for example-about as soft as WI. it's also tougher - just try machining it and you'll see what I mean. It dulls tools like lathe cutters and files, both much harder than WI, real fast.
During the buffalo hunter days we also have reference to their guns shooting slick and one of the fixes was urine. The uric acid would have cut through the buildup of "manure" in the grooves bringing the barrel up to par or at least helped.
So maybe freshening a barrel was not always increasing the bore six to cleanup wear or rust/pits, but rather cleaning it back to bare metal or a combination of pits/rust and manure in the grooves.

 

[LaBonte]

Gary also left us with a bunch of info regarding rifles and materials of the past including a treatise on iron and steel on his website Flintriflesmith . com
http://www.flintriflesmith.com/WritingandResearch/WebArticles/ironandsteel.htm

 

[Artificer]

The late Gary Brumfield of Colonial Williamsburg and I discussed freshening of barrels and cam partly to the conclusion that rather being shot out or rusted out, that the gun began to shoot slick due to a build up of hardened lube and other contaminants from firing and lack of proper cleaning, in part we came to this conclusion based on the tools carried by the L & C Expedition used to freshen barrels that only scraped the grooves and did not increase bore size. In part we also noted the problems that some/many encountered when they tried the Wonder Lube "seasoning" process that often tended to fill up the grooves with the same type hardened "manure" that would cause loss of accuracy over time. Many such "seasoned" rifles were rescued with nothing more than a thorough and deep cleaning down to bare metal which cleaned out the manure in the grooves..

Chuck, I really appreciate that info. I have had serious doubts about what the "freshening" process was on that expedition because they would have had to carry A LOT more tools and equipment to truly fresh out the rifle grooves on so many rifles that probably would not have had the grooves cut by the same rifling cutter. However "freshening" to get the built up gunk out of and mostly clean the rifled grooves, rather than cut new grooves, would have been much easier to do and something I could see them doing. :hatsoff:

Gus

 

[Fullstock58]

I don't see them cleaning their rifles every night by the camp fire, unlike us, their rifles needed to be ready to fire at all times.
I bet they cleaned them at the earliest convenience, when they were safe, and if it's a party, I'm sure not everyone cleaned them at the same time. They had many different animal oils to choose from, and I'm sure they all had opinions on which was best. As we all know Blackpowder will cause rust, whether from its burned properties or it's ability to absorb water once burnt. Unlike most, I don't think water was used often to clean, because it takes the gun longer to get into service again. Think about having water in your barrel and trying to get it dry in winter! Yes they could put it next to the fire, but chances are anywhere there's wood, I doubt that it would warm fast, and that means the rifle is out of service. I do believe the just swabbed the barrel with animal fat, whale oil, whatever they felt like works best after shooting. A rifle that was in the process of being cleaned is nothing more then a club, I highly doubt that they liked using clubs too much. Think about if all you had was what you could carry on you, how you would maintain your BP gun, they understood that Mother Nature had what they needed, not some store!

 

[LongrifleDoc]

Great post. Very informative. Thanks for sharing your valuable expertise.

 

[M. De Land]

Poor cleaning and soft metal was probably the reason they were "freshed out" fairly often.
I've never even heard of it being done to modern replicas.
Freshing out is not the same procedure as re-boring and rifling.

 

[robinghewitt]

The Bessemer process pretty much bypassed the wrought phase in the production of steel.

Henry Bessemer got his patent in 1855 for an 1851 inspiration and, as far as I know, we still use his converter today. It is so easy to underestimate our forefathers and usually a mistake. Did you know that for all our cleverness there has been no real breakthrough in physics since the 1930's :thumbsup:

 

[54ball]

Squire,

I think a lot folks assume that 200 years ago mankind was very primitive. If you look at the larger picture of history...The 18th Century is modern times. It's really not that long ago. For instance I could have known someone in my lifetime that knew someone who personally knew Thomas Jefferson. So I am just two personalities removed from the 18th Century and I am in my 40s.

We have reached plateaus in technology. For instance a 1914 army with 1914 equipment trained in modern warfare would be a viable fighting force today in 2014...a tough nut to crack. On the other hand a 1814 army would have little chance today just as they had little chance in 1914.

So the 19th Century was truly amazing like a cherry on top of a dessert.

As far as cleaning guns, they had water, they had oil, they had the mind set to maintain...not much difference in today.

 

[coloradoclyde]

In one of Jas.Townsends latest videos he talks with a blacksmith who says that wrought iron contains some silica that gives it some corrosion resistance. :hmm:

 

[George]

I've never been sure what is meant in this ad, did they mean cleaning them of fouling, or something else?

"The Pennsylvania Gazette
The Pennsylvania Packet
April 15, 1776
... Also WIRES and BRUSHES for firelocks, by the hundred or smaller quantity; muskets and fusees cleaned, stocked and repaired in the best manner;”¦"

Spence

 

[Artificer]

Of course I can only speculate, but it SEEMS like the advertisement is centered on military/militia items in the early part of the AWI. If that is so, then it would seem likely they are trying to drum up business on older Muskets and Fusee's that may have been stored or little used for some time and they are offering to bring them back to "serviceable" military condition for the war. So cleaning may have included bringing the barrels and locks back to "bright" condition as well as other things.

The advertisement reminds me of those by the Geddy's and others in Williamsburg, VA. Now there they actually hired at least one person to clean and repair the "Public Arms" stored at the Powder Magazine over the years and hired more during War Time. With the number of arms and equipment normally stored at Williamsburg during the 18th century, I doubt that one man could really have kept all the arms in tip top condition at all times.
Gus

 

[Artificer]

My speculation on how much they cleaned their rifles and smoothbores is very similar to 54Ball and I would include that how/when it was done would have differed from user to user.

A person who lived in a Town or Village or farm that was not close to the frontier, probably cleaned his firearm after he got home from the day's hunt. He also may have decided when the last shot of the day was fired, he would not reload the gun - so it was easier to clean.

A person who was close to or in hostile country (from both Native Americans and/or other Europeans) would almost certainly have reloaded his rifle just as quickly as he could after shooting it and left it loaded. I agree if there was more than one in their party, that it was smart and more than likely they alternately cleaned their guns so some guns would always be loaded for defensive purposes. But what about a solitary man in hostile territory, even for rather short duration hunts? I think he would have cleaned his barrel in daylight every so often and trusted in his tomahawk and knife in case someone came up on him when loading? He may also have cleaned it at night if he was in a "cold" camp with no fire that would give his position away to hostiles?

What I don't know for certain is how often they felt it necessary to put a "fresh" load in the barrel in hostile country, after having left it loaded for a while? IOW, how long would it take before the natural oils or greases they used in the barrel would contaminate the powder and make it unreliable to fire? Also, I expect they checked the priming powder at least once a day to ensure it had not been contaminated or damp from the morning dew?

I realize I may be inclined to using too much modern military thinking where we at least cleaned "the chunks off" on a daily basis and gave our weapons a serious cleaning at least once a week or more often if needed. However, it has been well documented that Wild Bill Hickock fairly religiously cleaned and reloaded his .36 Navy Colts almost every night and certainly did so before any expectation of use. In hostile territory in the 18th century, I would most likely have cleaned my gun more than some other people.

I personally believe that some of the "freshening" of the barrels, even when done by gunsmiths, was just to clean the hardened gunk out of the rifling that Labonte and Gary Brumfield discussed.

Gus

 

[George]

I have to say I don't think they would have behaved as we imagine we would if projected into their time and place. They hadn't seen all the movies we have. :haha:

I've frequently been surprised and amazed to read that they didn't show a lot of concern about having operational guns always at the ready. I have accounts of their leaving wet guns unattended when they knew hostiles were about, for instance, and comments that most of the guns in a party were not in service. Not all men even carried guns when traveling in hostile country, such as the wilderness Road.

Spence

 

[Ken Cormier]

I clean my guns after every shooting session. Also I know how it feels like to clean a weapon when it feels like a Indain behind every tree. It is nothing like it in the world LOL.

 

[54ball]

I have to say I don't think they would have behaved as we imagine we would if projected into their time and place. They hadn't seen all the movies we have. :haha:

I've frequently been surprised and amazed to read that they didn't show a lot of concern about having operational guns always at the ready. I have accounts of their leaving wet guns unattended when they knew hostiles were about, for instance, and comments that most of the guns in a party were not in service. Not all men even carried guns when traveling in hostile country, such as the wilderness Road.

Spence

I was in emergency services for a number of years. Your statement above makes perfect sense to me. People are people. It's human nature to adjust to stress, simply living gets in the way. Look at a naval vessel, it only goes into "battle stations" when there is a credible threat or a drill even though most of the voyage is in enemy waters. The reason, people can only maintain that level of readiness so long. A ship that remains on Battle Stations for the whole tour, has a crew that's not ready to fight. You can only remain in the "zone" for so long.

A story that sticks with me is an account from Sam Dale's biography.

Dale was born in 1772. I suspect this was around 77 or so. This was southwest Virginia overhtemountain. A young couple had found each other. A young man 17 a young lady 16 years of age. Although there was Indian sign about, it was decided to still have a wedding party. Dale's father was apprehensive about the party as he could read the sign as well as all the other men, so what does he do instead of forting up or preparing for a possible raid? He loads his family, and goes to the party. A celebration such as this was an all to rare and important event, Indians be damned.

A war party hit the wedding sight prior to the quests arrival. The bride was able to escape her captors early. Her 12 year old sister was able to slip into a draw and make her escape as the warriors took her infant sibling from her mother's arms killing the child in an effort to speed their pace. The bride's mother was able to make her escape a few days later.

As the groom and other party guests arrived they found a ghastly scene. Buildings burned, guest tables upturned fine dishes scattered about, this along with the remains of the bride's father and brother. A pursuit was organized and while that was going on the graves of the dead were prepared.

Shortly before nightfall a patrol returned with the bride. She arrived in time to hear the words being spoken over the graves of her loved ones. As the preacher spoke his last words over the graves, without a pause, the young couple joined hands and were married.

Is this a story about complacency or even foolishness in the face of danger. No, in my opinion it's about people trying to hack a life out of the wilderness in the midst of a frontier war and at the same living that life instead of being a prisoner of it.

So as far as keeping guns clean, yeah I'm sure they were clean and dirty at times that varies to the individual. It's no big deal to clean a gun and wipe it out. To say they were at the ready all the time or should be...is just impossible. Life was life and they lived it taking risks even in the face of danger and knowing the consequences yet taking those risks just the same.

If you think it's foolhardy to be in NDN country with a unloaded gun or cleaning a gun, think about tuning your radio while you zip down the interstate at 80 amongst lanes and lanes other equally distracted drivers.

 

[Artificer]

Actually if Indian sign was about, it would have been natural for settlers to gather together to make a better defense than forting up in their separate cabins. Even a small raiding/war party would take out a single family around/in their cabin with comparative ease in many situations, especially if they got the eldest or alpha male first.

I assume the settlers took their firearms with them to the wedding gathering. What I don't understand is why they did not have some men acting as sentries, when Indian sign was recognized. To me, that would have been perfectly normal and natural when Indian Sign was about.

I agree one can not live in the "Red" zone (highest alert stage) for long periods. However, one can live in the Yellow zone for long periods and go much more quickly into the Red Zone when needed.

Further, basic preparations to keep things in good order become habit and don't require one to even stay in the Yellow Zone after a while. It just becomes "the norm" or "natural." The gun almost certainly goes off because the load was not kept in too long and the priming and flint was checked at least once a day. The tomahawk and knife will be in good shape as they are kept sharp while in the lowest levels of alert status/normal life. In hostile country, one learns to sleep with his horn and hunting pouch on his body and rifle by his side or in his lap - though the pan may or would not have been primed while he slept or a feather or thorn put in the vent hole at night. Tomahawk and knife would also be kept on his person, though in sheaths to be sure. This becomes "normal" and "natural" in very little time in hostile country.

So going to the wedding gathering would have made good sense from a defensive point of view, besides the entertainment value. I just don't understand why they seemed to have dropped their guard completely, once they got there, with Indian sign having been recognized.

Gus

 

[tenngun]

All above makes fun reading. :wink: I am put in mind of Joe Meek who was recorded telling a story of his first trip west. Old Timers is getting me and I dont remember who was leading his brigade. It was 1827, I'm thinking it was Sublett. The leader was inspecting rifls and told one man to clean his gun, the man did not. Later on recheck he was told to do it again, and again he dillydallied. On the third recheck the leader asked Meek if he could clean that gun for $2.00, Meek jumped at the chance for better the two days wages. The owner of the dirty gun thought it was funny that the leader would pay such a high price for a clean gun.Then he found out the wages were deducded from his pay.
The moral of this story is at least some knew the value of keeping a gun clean when death was hiding in the trees....and also that some were lazy. Even today people live in houses you could eat off the floor, and some in houses that gives rats nightmares.

 

[hanshi]

Pardon me for an almost but not quite hijack of this thread but this is so odd (to me) that it bears relating. On another forum, which I won't name, an older gent with many years of experience (claimed) and at least with some respect from other MLers, posted more than once that he NEVER, EVER cleaned his MLs. He used black, too.

Now, has anyone ever heard of this being done? Is there any chance this was done way back?

 

[coloradoclyde]

with many years of experience

:rotf:
Statements like that are often quantified”¦..but seldom qualified.
Experience needs to be relevant!