Bulldog fodder

[tokguy]

This is a re-hash of an older existing thread.
This is a Forehand & Wadsworth 'British Bulldog' Fine looking little gun IMO.

You can't tell from this picture but the hammer is missing the bottom half.
Gone.
Bought it with the 'Best of Intentions' but soon it was delegated to the back of the safe. Couldn't get a hammer and absolutely cannot figure out what it shot!
So a parts gun which seems to match is enroute via Canada Post. Got to do some head scratching as to what it fires.
It chambers 44 Russian and will fit an empty 44 mag shell. They fit nice, so that makes the front of the Cylinder at .452 " It must have had a heeled bullet as the 'Forcing cone on the bbl starts at a .452 and reduces to about .405' The 5 groove rifling makes the .405 muzzle dimensions vary somewhat ( I know there is a formula, at this point it's somewhat irrelevant)
Yes you read that right. I've never heard of; let alone seen an 'a bbl with a forcing cone'. Let alone one that reduces in diameter .045 in 2.5"
44 American seems a bit brisk ( although it would likely fit the cylinder like a charm) and I don't think it was intended to squeeze down to .405 before exiting the bbl.
Any thoughts as to the caliber of round it fired?

 

[Tyockell18]

Boy is that ever bizarre!

Yes, it must have been either a heeled or hollow based bullet. Perhaps an experimental gun?

Very Strange measurements.

 

[tokguy]

Those measurements are from a bbl casting too.
Check out the muzzle; it's oval. Really it is oval. 0.405 side to side and about .385 top to bottom.
And please, don't tell me the "you are measuring land-to-land & groove-to-groove to get that measurement"
It's got 5 groove rifling so unless one tries; it is always land-to-groove
Factory flaw I figure. Counterboring it carefully ought to clean it up a tad. Or knocking off the end 1/2" with a saw of some sort. I'm not guessing that'll ruin the pinpoint accuracy.

 

[Tyockell18]

Holy hell, look at that.

I think the guy who built your gun just got done with a bottle of grannies finest.

I guess anything is possible considering they were made during that era and quality control was a foreign concept. Every forehand and wadsworth I have had was pretty good quality wise however, they were a step above the average for sure.

All of my antique irons are pretty similar in bore dia in the respective calibers but again who knows!

 

[tokguy]

The parts gun which is on the way has a cracked frame from firing 44 Russian through it, seems awfully similiar IMO. We'll see when it gets here I suppose.

 

[H Wally]

Haha - well that's certainly an interesting critter. I look forward to seeing how this pans out. I guess at worst it could be sleeved to something like .429?

 

[tokguy]

Still have that jump at the forcing cone of .452.
It's about .375 long; the forcing cone I mean. Lose a lot of push on that.
An empty 44 mag case is about 1/8" short of the cylinder length. Wondering if a .43 Pure lead RB (over a small charge of BP) dropped into the case and scalloped in might work out.
The smaller contact surface on a lead ball might be plastic ahead to squash down as the bbl constricts.
Maybe grooved like a shotgun slug to allow it to lose diameter as req'd.
Pretty spooky though; no matter how you slice it.

 

[mkrnel]

There is one exactly the same as your one for sale in the EE at the moment!

 

[tokguy]

That is two antiques I've run across in 'Mystery Calibres' (Like; what's the matter Scooby? Rah-Roof!). I got the other one running; but it's definitely a 'caveat emptor' game, this antique business.
Lots of folks rarely; if ever, seem to shoot their's. Which I do find to be a mystery. Because I shoot mine.

 

[Tyockell18]

That is two antiques I've run across in 'Mystery Calibres' (Like; what's the matter Scooby? Rah-Roof!). I got the other one running; but it's definitely a 'caveat emptor' game, this antique business.
Lots of folks rarely; if ever, seem to shoot their's. Which I do find to be a mystery. Because I shoot mine.

It's a mixed blessing, the less people shoot them, the more life is left in them for people like you and me.

 

[Max Power]

I have one of these as well. There have been a few threads on how strange they are. Chamber a .44 shell, yet the barrel is closer to .40.

When I slug mine I get .402. However mine doesn't seem to taper like yours does, or at least not as radically. Hell, the nose of a .44 SWC doesn't even make it in the cone of mine.

I'm either going to sleeve the cylinder and use some trimmed .41 Mag or make up some custom bottle necked brass out of .44 (as a couple guys on here suggested). Its a project I never seem to find the time for. There was a guy on the S&W forum (?) that went the sleeve route. Worked well by his account. I'll try and find a link.

Too bad it isn't just a .429 barrel eh? Would be a wicked little piece if it was...

 

[tokguy]

I got home and assembled mine yesterday and got it throwing lead too. Just a couple careful rounds; ok, really careful rounds. Like heavy welding glove and welding hood, lol.
Here is what I did to get it going. Cast off a half dozen pure lead .451 RB's. Sized them down to about .405 and gave them about 6-8 ad-hoc Brenneke grooves on the nose and shoulder. Put about 17 gr BP into a Star-line 44 Russian case and a wax impregg'd felt wad between lead / powder.
I didn't have any 44 Russian dies and needed a more aggressive taper anyhow, combed through the die drawer and found that a .303 Br sizing die has the correct taper for this 'Mutt'.
Geared up and popped a rd into the horse-trough at a 45° angle. Retrieved the slug and had a look.

Now that it has been est. that it is possible to get it going, a person could look into a more easily load-able slug. A mold styled after the Remington Foster slug for a 410 is a .405 dia and about 96 grains which would be ideal. But as my mother would say " If wishes were horses, beggars would ride " If anyone here has access to a 410 slug mold, it'd be interesting to get the dimensions on the slugs it throws, Lee comes to mind as I recall having seen one at WSS, but if anyone has a suggestion I'd be listening.
But I do want to keep the grain-age low; around 100 tops, these pistols are old and it makes no sense to beat them up. But it would be a way to get these 'Mutt's' up and running.
Oh and realizing it takes more than 2 rounds to est a pattern; but...I think thinning the rim from the front like building 455 Webley from 45 Schofield would be a plan too

 

[Kid]

So I'm not the only one who insists on shooting antique guns that probably shouldn't be shot.

My revolver is a ".38" with a .353 bore. I shoot .369 soft lead (resized from .376"), but I'm looking for some .355. (And there appears to be a crack on the lower front of the frame that is most concerning to CGN... probably from someone using smokeless)

I'm not sure how I would measure the forcing cone, as you did. How did you measure that? Just from the opening? My forcing cone is upwards of .376", likely into the .380+" range, but I don't have calipers. I just assumed that was to compensate for minor variations in cylinder lockup. What's your cylinder diameter, on the front end?

Does anyone on CGN actually know anything about the original sizes of lead bullets, a hundred years back? Has anyone actually got out their calipers on a few 120+ year old boxes of ammo from various manufacturers? Were they actually within +/- .002" like they are today, or were they oversized external lubes? I'm specifically interested in .38, but whatever you've got......

 

[tokguy]

So I'm not the only one who insists on shooting antique guns that probably shouldn't be shot.

My revolver is a ".38" with a .353 bore. I shoot .369 soft lead (resized from .376"), but I'm looking for some .355. (And there appears to be a crack on the lower front of the frame that is most concerning to CGN... probably from someone using smokeless)

I'm not sure how I would measure the forcing cone, as you did. How did you measure that? Just from the opening? My forcing cone is upwards of .376", likely into the .380+" range, but I don't have calipers. I just assumed that was to compensate for minor variations in cylinder lockup. What's your cylinder diameter, on the front end?

Does anyone on CGN actually know anything about the original sizes of lead bullets, a hundred years back? Has anyone actually got out their calipers on a few 120+ year old boxes of ammo from various manufacturers? Were they actually within +/- .002" like they are today, or were they oversized external lubes? I'm specifically interested in .38, but whatever you've got......

Is this where I'm supposed to be offended at this statement? I'm slightly taken aback; but I recall the events preceding this, your 23rd posting and realize your intent...which I will do my best to disregard.
As to your question about the forcing cone...I did a bbl casting. The proper way is with Cerrosafe, but I just grease up the bbl ( or chamber ), plug it with a rolled paper wad and use a ladle of molten lead. The grease stops the lead from adhering to the bbl; although one day it may stick and then I'll feel silly..
The cylinder dimensions are in the initial post actually.
Calipers are about 13 $ at Peavey Mart BTW
And the parts gun has a bore that isn't a 'Friday afternoon job', nice and round.
The F & W posted (The Mutt), I opened up the bore slightly with a Rattail; it's round now & its not as though it's awesome accuracy potential is compromised. Not with a 2.5" bbl, lol
The parts gun has a nice single line 'Forehand and Wadsworth' stamping on the bbl top...it's a 25000 S.N. range. The 'Mutt' is a 2500 S.N. range and has no stamping, which is a pity. It would make authenticating much easier. But the parts interchanged very well.
I could not be bothered to eke a few bucks out of the parts remaining; but should anyone need a part or two shoot me a line. If I can help I likely will.