Author Topic: 45/70 Rolling Block (Read 1187 times)

jh45gun · « **on:** July 03, 2004, 01:31:58 PM »

Shot my 45/70 Rolling Block today and resighted it in after I did some work on the tang sight making the hole a bit bigger for faster sighting. It is still small but better than it was. Using a 32 inch full octagon barrel Made by Green Mountain on a origional # 5 smokeless action . Here is a pic of the target after I got it sighted in a 50 yards. Shoots about 2.5 inches high at 50, Puts then right in there at 100 but not as good as 50 as I cannot see the target as well as I used to at 100 with my 50 plus eyes. This target was shot at 50 yards:

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #1 on:** July 03, 2004, 05:00:55 PM »

Nice shooting. I have a Rolling block in 45-70 also. It is the calvary carbine. I have been thinking of installing a tang sight, but I would have to drill mounting holes and I do not think I want to drill my rolling block. I also have a Shiloh Sharps with a globe front sight and I also installed a tang rear sight. The gun shoot extremely accurate groups at 100 yards. I am working on the rear sight adjustment for further shots for accuracy. At 200 yards I can hit a 12 X 18 inch steel plate all day. But on paper I have a large spread, do to me getting use to the distance with open sights.

JCP · « **Reply #2 on:** July 03, 2004, 05:08:04 PM »

Good shooting. I'm 51 yrs. myself and can't see the 100 as good as I used to either. I've been using 40 grs. of 3031 behind a 405 Rem. bullet and it looks like it's going to be real accurate also.
I think Green Mt. will replace my crooked barrel . The first barrel was put on my Rolling Block, And the bad one was for my son. Wish it had been the other way around. Right now he's a little discouraged but i'm sure everything will work out.
Do you have any other good loads for the N0#5 action in 45/70 for jacketed 405's?
George Nonte states that the N0#5 action is good to 45,000psi. They must be about as strong as a Marlin 1895. I'm not planing on loading anything hot for it at all but it's nice to know you have a good safety margin.

jh45gun · « **Reply #3 on:** July 03, 2004, 06:01:07 PM »

Glad to hear what Nonte says! Thats what I figured as the gun used to be chambered for the 762x54 which is almost as strong as a 06 and the 8mm lebel and 7x57 ect. I contacted Steve Garbe of SPG fame as he does a lot of singleshot shooting and the Black Powder Cartridge shooting and he told me that I could shoot the lower loads for the marlin easily with my Roller with no problems as it is a stronger action than the trapdoor expecially the # 5 since it was made for smokeless powder. The 40 grain load is about all I have used into that range as it is just over Maximum for Trapdoors which is 39 grains of 3031. With that kind of accuracy and enough omph to hunt with I just may stick with that unless I try some new powders. :wink: Jim

JCP · « **Reply #4 on:** July 03, 2004, 06:36:26 PM »

I agree, i've tried all the hot stuff with my marlin 1895 cowboy and it's just not very much fun getting the heck pounded out of my shoulder for nothing. I'm going to stay close to trapdoor loads, it's just hard to find good loads for them with jacketed bullets because there just supposed to shoot lead because of soft steel in the barrel as I understand it.

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #5 on:** July 04, 2004, 01:04:21 AM »

After reading the post again, I see your using smokeless powder. I only shoot black powder cartridges with paper patch or grease grove lead bullets in my 45-70 Shiloh Sharps and Remington Rolling Block. My Rolling block is an original and I would never shoot smokeless in it. The only 45-70 I have that shoots smokeless is my Marlin in 45-70.

jh45gun · « **Reply #6 on:** July 04, 2004, 01:49:48 PM »

Quote from: Redhawk1

After reading the post again, I see your using smokeless powder. I only shoot black powder cartridges with paper patch or grease grove lead bullets in my 45-70 Shiloh Sharps and Remington Rolling Block. My Rolling block is an original and I would never shoot smokeless in it. The only 45-70 I have that shoots smokeless is my Marlin in 45-70.

Depends I suppose what your origional is? If is a black powder era receiver than yea I suppose black is a good idea though low power smokeless loads would be safe it it of trapdoor velocities after all people buy factory loads which are mild in respect for the older rifles and they are safe to shoot in trapdoors and ANY Rolling block is stronger than a trapdoor action. On the other Hand the # 5 action was made for smokeless and is a stronger action do to stronger steel used for smokeless. Any way you look at it either powder will work and smokeless will with mild loads that will equal black or black substitute. All in all it boils down to a matter of choice. I shoot smokeless as I do not mind black as I shoot several muzzle loaders just that I can get the job done with smokeless so that is what I use as long as I can use it safely. Jim

jh45gun · « **Reply #7 on:** July 04, 2004, 01:54:33 PM »

Quote from: JCP

I agree, i've tried all the hot stuff with my marlin 1895 cowboy and it's just not very much fun getting the heck pounded out of my shoulder for nothing. I'm going to stay close to trapdoor loads, it's just hard to find good loads for them with jacketed bullets because there just supposed to shoot lead because of soft steel in the barrel as I understand it.

Shooting jacketed is harder on any barrel compared to lead! Look at old 22 rifles with hundreds of thousands of rounds through them and they still shoot good due to just using soft lead bullets. The corrosive priming and powders of the old days was more rough on a barrel along with inproper cleaning methods than most any bullets were though. I would think a Newer Marlin Lever could digest either bullet with out any problems. Jim

popplecop · « **Reply #8 on:** July 04, 2004, 02:31:53 PM »

Good looking target, now show us again when those eveys are over 60. At least that's my excuse. I shoot to original 45-70, a 84 Springfield and 78 Sharps and use only cast bullets in these. Save the jacketed stuff for my Marlin and Ruger. Even got a scope on the Ruger, old eyes.

JCP · « **Reply #9 on:** July 04, 2004, 04:18:51 PM »

I was probably a little misleading in my last post. The marlin 1895 can shoot jacketed or lead. It's the old guns that has the soft barrel steel. I really would like to get into casting my own and just shooting lead in my rolling block. I'm going to break it in with jacketed bullets though.

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #10 on:** July 04, 2004, 04:21:15 PM »

Quote from: jh45gun

Quote from: Redhawk1
After reading the post again, I see your using smokeless powder. I only shoot black powder cartridges with paper patch or grease grove lead bullets in my 45-70 Shiloh Sharps and Remington Rolling Block. My Rolling block is an original and I would never shoot smokeless in it. The only 45-70 I have that shoots smokeless is my Marlin in 45-70.

Depends I suppose what your original is? If is a black powder era receiver than yea I suppose black is a good idea though low power smokeless loads would be safe it it of trapdoor velocities after all people buy factory loads which are mild in respect for the older rifles and they are safe to shoot in trapdoors and ANY Rolling block is stronger than a trapdoor action. On the other Hand the # 5 action was made for smokeless and is a stronger action do to stronger steel used for smokeless. Any way you look at it either powder will work and smokeless will with mild loads that will equal black or black substitute. All in all it boils down to a matter of choice. I shoot smokeless as I do not mind black as I shoot several muzzle loaders just that I can get the job done with smokeless so that is what I use as long as I can use it safely. Jim

Yes it is black powder era. It was made in 1862. It is a number 1 action.

jh45gun · « **Reply #11 on:** July 04, 2004, 06:46:56 PM »

Redhawk, As long as you are shooting black powder and comfortable with it I would see no reason to change. Probably for the better since only the # 5 action is made of steel the black powder versions were made of iron. I do think that low power smokeless could be shot safely in it if they mimiced black powder pressures and power. Oh and your date confuses me as I do not think they had a rolling block that early did they? Unless it was a prototype as I have the book on Rolling Block Rifles by Konrad F. Schreier Jr. and he shows a drawing and a Pat. date of Jan 27 1863 by Geiger who invented the action. Civil war Carbines were split breech in design and until after 1865. After that Rider made improvments on the Geiger pat to make what we know today as the Remington Rolling Block. Acoording to the book Military #1 actions started about 1867 with the carbines about the same time. The sporting models started about 1868. So I just wondering about that date and is yours a split receiver? Jim

jh45gun · « **Reply #12 on:** July 04, 2004, 06:50:31 PM »

Popplecop, If I am still around by then It may be wearing one of those old repo brass scopes. :grin: :shock: :roll:

JCP · « **Reply #13 on:** July 05, 2004, 02:54:20 AM »

jh45gun, That's a great looking rifle. Where did you get that stock? and if you don't mind what kind of tang sight is that? It looks kinda like a High wall sight.

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #14 on:** July 05, 2004, 04:00:42 AM »

Quote from: jh45gun

Redhawk, As long as you are shooting black powder and comfortable with it I would see no reason to change. Probably for the better since only the # 5 action is made of steel the black powder versions were made of iron. I do think that low power smokeless could be shot safely in it if they mimiced black powder pressures and power. Oh and your date confuses me as I do not think they had a rolling block that early did they? Unless it was a prototype as I have the book on Rolling Block Rifles by Konrad F. Schreier Jr. and he shows a drawing and a Pat. date of Jan 27 1863 by Geiger who invented the action. Civil war Carbines were split breech in design and until after 1865. After that Rider made improvments on the Geiger pat to make what we know today as the Remington Rolling Block. Acoording to the book Military #1 actions started about 1867 with the carbines about the same time. The sporting models started about 1868. So I just wondering about that date and is yours a split receiver? Jim

You are correct Jim, I was in a hurry and put the wrong date. It is 1867 and mine does not have the split receiver. :oops:

jh45gun · « **Reply #15 on:** July 05, 2004, 11:28:18 AM »

Thanks Redhawk, Thought it might have been a transposed #. Even so that is a old one I bet if it could talk it would have tales to tell. 1867 is the first year the #1 action appeared in rifle and carbine so yours is one of the first ones made so I bet it has some good collector interest!

Mine was a # 5 in 7x57 military musket. I suppose it was in some South American Country as the bore was really in bad shape so that is why I rebarreled it to 45/70 and redid the wood in a sporter configurion. Jim

jh45gun · « **Reply #16 on:** July 05, 2004, 11:40:10 AM »

Quote from: JCP

jh45gun, That's a great looking rifle. Where did you get that stock? and if you don't mind what kind of tang sight is that? It looks kinda like a High wall sight.

JCP, The forearm is made from scratch and the silver front end of the forarm is made from solder 50/50 and shaped to fit after it was poured in place so it would fit the octagon barrel. Then I just shaped it to look as it is now. The stock is a black bought from Numerich gun parts that was a blank for a Winchester/Marlin that was not inleted so I could inlet it to fit the Remington. With the regular butt plat it is reminisent of a shotgun style target stock. The tang sight is just a cheap Italian Repo I think I paid 39 bucks for it and that is what they still cost I think. ( I ordered it out of Dixie and I bet other places carry it as well. It is no 200 dollar tang sight but it does the job! It does have adjustments for windage besides elevation. If you loosen the aperature you can move it from side to side. Front sight is a standard globe sight with a fine post not as fine as I would like but I guess it does the job. :grin: I also drilled out the aperature a bit bigger so it was faster to get on the sight picture but it is still fine enough for accuracy work. Jim

Redhawk1 · « **Reply #17 on:** July 05, 2004, 01:10:24 PM »

Quote from: jh45gun

Thanks Redhawk, Thought it might have been a transposed #. Even so that is a old one I bet if it could talk it would have tales to tell. 1867 is the first year the #1 action appeared in rifle and carbine so yours is one of the first ones made so I bet it has some good collector interest! Mine was a # 5 in 7x57 military musket. I suppose it was in some South American Country as the bore was really in bad shape so that is why I rebarreled it to 45/70 and redid the wood in a sporter configurion. Jim

The collectors value is not there now. I got the gun and it had been reblued and the stock has some brass inlay. The barrel is in great shape. I wish the stock was left alone and not reblued. :cry:

JCP · « **Reply #18 on:** July 05, 2004, 03:28:45 PM »

jh45gun , I think I just found another good load for my Rolling block today. I tried starting load of 31.5 grs reloader 7 behind a 405 gr. rem. bullet, OAL is 2.700. That's about .035 off rifling. I got that load off the paper that came with my lee loading dies. First try was a 4 shot group that measured 3/4" high,and 1" wide at 100 yds. I also have a tang sight and a lyman 37A front globe. Of coarse this was shot off of a bench, I probably couldn't hid a peck bucket off hand.

jh45gun · « **Reply #19 on:** July 05, 2004, 05:09:00 PM »

Sounds like a good load I have never used any Reloader powder yet but will have to keep that one in mind. I also use Lee dies in fact that is all I will buy after having bad expirience with Hornady 45/70 dies. Bought some Lee and a factory crimp die for it and have not looked back. Now I have Lee dies in 45/70, 30/30, 308, 8mm, 762x54. Will probably get some in 6.5 swede some day also. I really like the factory crimp dies. Now I have to get a die to bell the mouths of the other dies I have for loading cast in the other calibers I have. Jim

JCP · « **Reply #20 on:** July 10, 2004, 04:21:42 AM »

jh45gun, I recieved my 405 gr. lee mold like yours yesterday from Midway, 2 of my sons and myself cast about 50 bullers (our first ever) and 42 was perfect as far as looks go. I lubed with liquid alox and this morning I loaded up 10 using 27 grs. of H4198 and shot a 1" three shot group at 100 yds with no leading at all. I think it's when you and your sons can do something like this togather and share in the good rusults, Things like this keep the family close as our children get older.

jh45gun · « **Reply #21 on:** July 10, 2004, 05:43:16 AM »

Great Group sounds like ya got a winner and the Lee Bullet works for you also. What kind of target do you use at 100 yards? I find that the target I showed in my Pic is not good for shooting if you do not have a scope. Too hard to see at a 100. I think I will have to make up some solid black round bulls for that. Jim

JCP · « **Reply #22 on:** July 10, 2004, 07:55:38 AM »

The target that I used today is one that we made ourselfs. We downloaded the ram drawing from www.bpcr.net and scaled to 1/5 it's normal size. That makes it 5.3 inches tall and when set at 100 yds it should look like the ram full size would look at 500 yds. This morning the sun was at our back and the target was fully lit by the sun making it pretty clear in my small rear aperture. Most of the time we shoot at a 6" black dot that we print out on regular printing paper. I usually print one then take it to a local store and have them to print about 20 for 10 cents each.

jh45gun · « **Reply #23 on:** July 10, 2004, 08:40:02 PM »

Yea I do the same thing it is a lot cheaper than printer ink!! Jim