Any Suggestions for building a ramrod?

[Eddiehorror]

I am trying to build a ramrod to go with my new Napoleon. it is a 2.25" Bore so i was going to go with a 2" ramrod to give room. We pack a bread load in the barrel to make a good boom. any suggestions on what to use as a head?

Oh and the pictures of my old cannons remains are soon to be posted! as in tonight i hope.

[Artilleryman]

Do not use a head on a rammer that is used for seating powder and wad.  The idea is that if you have a premature firing the rod slides through your fingers minimizing your injuries (which will be bad) where a rammer head would take off your hand or worse hyper-extend your arm (pull your arm loose).  The latter injury is more likely to happen as the bore size goes up.

You need to construct a sponge head to clean the bore and to kill any embers.  On a small bore you can cover the rod with appropriate material.  For a large bore you would have to have a sponge head that would be covered.  I use carpet material for my 3 & 4.62 inch bores.

A historical note:  The first battle for Fort Sumter (1861) ended with no one killed.  Two men were killed after the battle as they were firing blank charges to salute the American flag before they left the fort.  This happened during the loading process.

[GGaskill]

If you are not trying to have period implements, you should consider a safety rammer which is shaped like a cane.  You insert the long leg into the bore and hold the short leg.  If you have a premature discharge, (a) your hand is not in front of the muzzle and the fire coming out of it, and (b) the rammer leaves your hand nearly immediately with no head or other enlargements to tear your fingers off.

If you need a period rammer, I would consider using steel tubing for the shaft with a soft or collapsible head.  In case of premature discharge, the head would break up into small pieces and/or blow down the middle of the tube, the tube would not pick up much velocity because it presents a small cross-section to the expanding gas, and most of the gas would be vented down the middle of the tube.  You may get some complaints that the steel shaft could cause sparks but I think that unlikely.

[dominick]

I would not use a head on a rammer either.  I use 1 1/4" diameter dowel rod (available at lowes or Home Depot) and make safety rammers for 2.25" cannons. Here's how.  Use 2 pieces of 1 3/8" x .058 wall tubing, 2" long each.  Set them parallel to each other about 5" apart.  Weld a piece of 3/8" diameter round stock between the tubes to connect them together, insert a short piece of dowel (8" long) into one tube and a long dowel (bore length plus 2") in the other tube.  Drill thru each tube 3/16" dia. and insert screws with nuts to hold dowels in place.  Very simple safety rammer.  If you don't have the exact size tubing, get something slightly smaller then sand the dowel to fit.        Dom

[Cat Whisperer]

I like the j or u shape for safety.  

Consider 3/4 (or so) diameter copper tubing and two 90 degree elbows.

[Double D]

If you need a period rammer, I would consider using steel tubing for the shaft with a soft or collapsible head.  In case of premature discharge, the head would break up into small pieces and/or blow down the middle of the tube, the tube would not pick up much velocity because it presents a small cross-section to the expanding gas, and most of the gas would be vented down the middle of the tube.  You may get some complaints that the steel shaft could cause sparks but I think that unlikely.

Don't use steel. Sparks!!!

You are hoping that the head fragments go down the tube.  The head would have to be smaller than the tube and even then you are only hoping the fragments go down the tube.  Further the tube would have be almost or  bore size to even have remote chance of catching the fragments.  

Even then if it did catch all the fragments the tube would also most likely expand and get wedge in the bore or split itself  unless it was extremely heavy walled. Then it might be to heavy to use.

Doesn't seem to me to be a safe or viable method to me. Could be wrong

[GGaskill]

I think the hard copper tubing suggestion is the best, but use a T for the connection to the long piece and use big diameter tubing.

[Santa Dave]

for my lil-cannon (golf ball bore) I will use a walking cane , it is always handy! just mark it so the cartridge & projectile get  all the way Down!
Dave

[Cat Whisperer]

I think the hard copper tubing suggestion is the best, but use a T for the connection to the long piece and use big diameter tubing.

I can agree with neither steel nor the Tee shape.

a) sparks - even if only ONE, the purpose is for safety, let it be safe.  At the arsenals ALL the hand tools are bronze - even the claw hammers!

b) The Tee would fullfill its function only if accompanied with two 90's to bring the holdable-section back around - it MUST be able to slip.  This is from someone else's published experience (hearsay) of it going off and the safety ram rod bring torn from his hands.  If it was just a Tee, he'd have lost fingers.  It all happens in mili or micro seconds.

UNLESS you're meaning that the Tee would be used with the long part going straight through and the short part to bring a stub off to ONE side to a 90 and back down to the grip.  That would make sense.

[Cat Whisperer]

for my lil-cannon (golf ball bore) I will use a walking cane , it is always handy! just mark it so the cartridge & projectile get  all the way Down!
Dave

Excellent suggestion!

Two marks - empty and loaded.

[GGaskill]

The T would be at the outside end of the bore leg with a short piece of tubing in the center hole going perpendicular to the bore and an elbow facing towards the breech on the end of the short piece, although another T here would be a good idea, too.  Then you have a handle piece going back toward the breech.

The reason for the T's is to let any gas that gets into the rammer escape away from the loader's hands rather than being routed around the elbows and out the end of the tube that is passing through the loader's hands as it flies downrange.

------------------------
                     |
                     |
             --------|

[Double D]

George the thing will burst or split in the bore.

[GGaskill]

Since the goal is to prevent injury to the loader in the event of a premature discharge, the loss of the rammer is acceptable.

[Double D]

The lose of the rammer is acceptable. The rod is still going to get ejected out the barrel. But if the thing splits or burst it is going to send shrapnel all over the place and what's to say the burst or split  and its sharpnel is going to be contained with in the barrel.  
 Nope just don't see this as good idea.  I don't think there is historical background to show that the idea is practical or safe.

Further copper tubing is not going to  have the strength to stand up the pound if being a ram rod any way.

Historically the issue was recognized and address in two ways that I am aware of; the Mississippi rammer which is I believe is the shepards crook style and a rammer that was a long wooden taper to force the hand open as it blew out.

[Artilleryman]

The Mississippi rammer has the long taper to it.   In constructing a straight rammer is to not have a head on it that can catch your hand.  You are still going to be injured by the blast.  

That being said it becomes very important to properly thumb the vent with a thumbstall, worm the powder bag foil out, damp sponge, and dry sponge the bore.

[Eddiehorror]

Thanks for the tips. I like the Idea of a curved ram rod, Saftey is key after the last mishap. Is there anywhere you can see historical ramrods, just for refrence. I am thinkng more naval than civil though.

[GGaskill]

Check out this thread discussing a naval rammer/sponge.