Need help with belgian conversion musket, conversion is buggered up...

[buckandball]

It appears we could be well served with an ordnance forum, since this really doesn't fit into authenticity or defarbing, but simple legitimacy and correction. But that's merely my opinion...

The issue I have at hand...

I just acquired a Millbury contract, A. Waters 1835 Belgian conversion musket. Aside from a chunk of stock missing behind the hammer, overall the musket is in remarkably good shape for what I paid for it. Someone has cleaned it up at some time in its life.

However… the nipple conversion is unlike anything I have ever seen. Instead of the usual neatly built up surface for the nipple's shoulder to seat against, this one looks like it was just drilled out and threaded. I have no idea if this was a necessity of the original conversion being eroded over time, or if an original nipple had to be forcefully removed by someone unskilled at removal, and in the process buggered it all up by drilling it out…??? All a mystery. I make no claims of being an NTSB investigator, but it almost looks like the tell-tale traces of drill chatter scratching down the side of the barrel, notable in one pic.

That being said, the nipple will only thread a few turns and then stops when the shoulder of the nipple hits the barrel.

Anyone out there know anyone who can restore this? I am going to contact Lodgewood, S&S and Whitacer. But other than them, who else out there has any expertise of ability to determine if this is a paperweight or if there is a solution to correct this?

It will be a shame if it is a paperweight since otherwise, it is a perfect piece for the hobby. Just worn enough not to be paranoid if it got a spot of rust. But on otherwise great condition. Of course, a Dunlap stock would be in order so not to further damage the original…

I appreciate any replies specific to the conversion and, if possible, potential correction. Please no conjecture if it is exclusively opinion and not based on historic or technical merits.

Thanks!

[David Fox]

Re: Need help with belgian conversion musket, conversion is buggered up...

Strange. No shoulder built-up for a cone seat. As you infer, not safe for even blanks with this arrangement. During the War and after combat experience, I understand both sides retired these cone-in-barrel conversions ASAP due to the inherent weakness, even when carefully done. I'd contact Whitaker, as you propose, or Robert Hoyt, a source for expert barrel restoration I've used several times in the past. One caveat, and it the conjecture you don't invite: before commissioning an alteration of this piece it might be well to be as sure as ever you could be that this conversion isn't some identifiable Confederate expedient with independent historic and/or monetary value.

[buckandball]

Re: Need help with belgian conversion musket, conversion is buggered up...

David,

You are correct on all counts. Your conjecture is not what I was worried about, and that is a legitimate and useful consideration.

Any idea of Mr. Hoyt has a website or emai? All I can locate is an mailing address. Of course, perish the thought I write someone an actual letter...

Regards

[David Fox]

Re: Need help with belgian conversion musket, conversion is buggered up...

Don't believe Hoyt has a wedsite. I always dealt w/ him by letter or 'phone call. He chooses when he's availabe to answer the telephone...being busy working especially on N-SSA firearms. My pieces (a .69 calibre musketoon, an M.1855 pistol-carbine, and an M.1863 rifle-musket, all with barrel problems and all originals) were addressed with expert, even invisable work in a reasonable time, recognizing there's objective time and there's gunsmith time.

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Need help with belgian conversion musket, conversion is buggered up...

Hallo!

"One caveat, and it the conjecture you don't invite: before commissioning an alteration of this piece it might be well to be as sure as ever you could be that this conversion isn't some identifiable Confederate expedient with independent historic and/or monetary value."

IMHO, no real way to ascertain or prove a CS alteration.

In terms of opinion, the erosion of the threads appear to have some "antiquity" to them, and maybe extant to the alteration work. I would suspect that the the cone is a later replacement, hence the poor fit.
(I have an 1833 dated Pomerory conversion with a loose cone that would not stay snug. While an "old" cone, I suspect it is a later ill-fitting replacement.)

While the degree of the cone seat, "upset," or "bump up" varies on originals, I have never seen one that totally lacked this feature being there in some form- some more and some less than others. It would certainly make one "want" to or wishfully assign, CS hurried expedient work to it. ;)

Again, unless there was provenance to/with the gun, IMHO, "proving" CS association is impossible.

Others' mileage will vary...

Curt

[Minieball577]

Re: Need help with belgian conversion musket, conversion is buggered up...

Daniel Whitacre cane be contacted via http://www.whitacresmachineshop.com/

and Robert Hoyt via phone at 717-642-6696 M-F in the shop.

Both of these guys make excellent products and do restoration work, although Hoyt seems to have the better name recognition. Give them a call for a professional opinion.

[Busterbuttonboy]

Re: Need help with belgian conversion musket, conversion is buggered up...

I too have a cone in barrel conversion. There is no real seat. Just drilled right in. In fact with the cone as tight as it does, there is still a thread or two exposed. I have viewed two others exactly like this. As was mentioned many vary. I have had it looked at by two gunsmiths, they find the thread strength to be strong enough to shoot blanks.
Drew Gruber

[rpierson]

Re: Need help with belgian conversion musket, conversion is buggered up...

A good friend had an 1833 A. Waters conversion that looked exactly the same. The overall condition was about comparable too. Not saying that's the way they should be, just saying that there is at least one more in the world like the one you have.

-Randy Pierson

[buckandball]

Re: Need help with belgian conversion musket, conversion is buggered up...

All, thanks for comments. Randy, that proves rather interesting. It may be a simple reality that this is a result of the original threads just wearing and someone rethreading, and that there never was a built up shoulder that was drilled and tapped. I'll see what additional poking around reveals. However, the nipple gets about a turns and a half into the threads and that's it. So no blanks for this one...

[M.Latham]

Re: Need help with belgian conversion musket, conversion is buggered up...

Hello,

Solution simple.

Make a new nipple slightly larger than the threads currently in place and re-tap the barrel.

Should be easy.

[David Fox]

Re: Need help with belgian conversion musket, conversion is buggered up...

Just wandered again through the weighty tome "Confederate Rifles & Muskets" by Murphy and Madaus. Several "raw" cone-in-barrel conversions of known Confederate origin shown there. Query (and I don't know the answer): any Northern or Northern state equivalents out there?

[ACo.]

Re: Need help with belgian conversion musket, conversion is buggered up...

Excellent, very sharp photographs. Is it just my imagination or does that barrel show file marks around the cone seat? They run from side to side in your picture and the deep pitting marks are surrounded by relatively clean metal - something fishy here. If that is filing that I see (and I suspect that it is) then someone has attempted to "clean up" your barrel to remove deep pitting and removed the seat in the process. Like others, I have seen Belgian conversions like this that did not seem to have the proper seat and every time, with close observation, you could see that they had been ground or filed to remove pitting in an effort to "restore" the gun. Sorry buckandball, I am afraid that is all that has happened here, nothing unusual, just a botched attempt at restoration. And, while it may be safe to fire with blanks, I wouldn't recommend it, even with a lightened mainspring that hammer still puts a lot of pressure on the cone and will eventually cause a blowout.

[buckandball]

Re: Need help with belgian conversion musket, conversion is buggered up...

Mr Hern, I was noting that myself. Hard to tell, but it bears consideration. The underside of the barrel shows evidence of what was probably a wire or abrasive wheel. But there is no evidence of pitting or rust. So perhaps just "cleaning it up"? I wonder if this was originally browned. Though it post dates when 1816's should have been. However, I know the earlier Waters contracts called for the muskets to be browned... Wonder if someone thought it was all rust or patina and tried to remove it. So you may be correct. But I was not expecting this coversion to be a rare item. I figure it is something that happened post conversion, hence my desire to restore it to a suitable and shootable state. Though Mr. Fox's post makes me curious.

Mr. Whitacre has expressed interest in my bringing it by his shop for evaluation. So while it may be a week or more before I can do so, I will be sure to report his finding.