Author Topic: Micro groove or Ballard? (Read 3277 times)

Idaho Ron · « **on:** March 23, 2009, 02:28:24 PM »

How do I tell if my gun has the micro groove? I don't see it written on the barrel. The first letter of the number is a M. Thanks. Ron

Old Grizz · « **Reply #1 on:** March 24, 2009, 12:54:23 AM »

What model is it etc. ?

Mikey · « **Reply #2 on:** March 24, 2009, 01:28:46 AM »

Look down inside the barrel. If it has 6 lands and grooves it is Ballard rifled. If it has 12 lands and grooves it is Micro-groove rifled.

Idaho Ron · « **Reply #3 on:** March 24, 2009, 12:17:02 PM »

Quote from: Old Grizz on March 24, 2009, 12:54:23 AM

What model is it etc. ?

Sorry for the mix up. It is an "M"
I am thinking it is a Ballard. Ron

brianscott12 · « **Reply #4 on:** March 24, 2009, 12:33:09 PM »

What caliber?

Idaho Ron · « **Reply #5 on:** March 24, 2009, 01:23:12 PM »

It is a 30-30. Ron

Old Grizz · « **Reply #6 on:** March 24, 2009, 01:29:50 PM »

Chances are that's a micro-groove unless it's old. Like Mikey said, count the grooves.

anuguy · « **Reply #7 on:** March 28, 2009, 06:58:13 PM »

Which is better rifling in a 30-30?

Old Grizz · « **Reply #8 on:** March 29, 2009, 02:29:31 AM »

Don't quote me but I believe the ballard rifling was made to shoot hard cast bullets where the M-G rifling was made for copper covered bullets.

Badnews Bob · « **Reply #9 on:** March 29, 2009, 03:33:52 AM »

Quote from: anuguy on March 28, 2009, 06:58:13 PM

Which is better rifling in a 30-30?

I have never had any problem with either, Micro groove works just fine with cast out of mine and I can't tell any real diffrence with jackets .

crash87 · « **Reply #10 on:** March 29, 2009, 03:42:35 AM »

The mico-groove vs. ballard controversey will probably go on forever. For some reason the gun writers of yesteryear "looked" at the shallow grooves and deemed the Micro-groove unsuitable for cast. In ensueing years it has been repeated over and over until it rolls off the toungue like "I love you..BUT" does to ones mistress. In actuality micro-groove shoots cast as good or better, depending on the barrel of each. I believe, but can't prove, that Marlin changed to ballard because of this urban myth. So to answer the question, "One is not better than the other". You can quote me on the above as I don't believe in repeating what these "gunwriting hacks" (that would be present day writers) say in print. My own experiences with my own Marlin micro-groove barrels prove them wrong. CRASH87

jd45 · « **Reply #11 on:** April 26, 2009, 05:50:04 AM »

crash87,....."I believe, but can't prove it, that Marlin changed TO Ballard because of this urban myth". I could be wrong but the Ballard rifling was REPLACED by the Micro-Groove rifling. I have a '51 336A with Ballard & a '59 336RC with M-G rifling. What do you think? jd45

Alan4620 · « **Reply #12 on:** May 15, 2009, 02:34:29 PM »

Not sure when they changed to the micro groove barrels but the letter in the serial number is the year.I remember that "P" is 1957 cause that is the one I have and it is a micro groove.You can sing the alphabet and figure out what year your's is too.

Or do a web search and read for yourself.

I shoot mostly cast bullits and find they are as accurate as jacketed ones.
Can't speak for factory,haven't shot any yet.I only have 700 loaded so far and a 2# coffee can full of extra brass,maybe next year.

Old Griz · « **Reply #13 on:** June 02, 2009, 05:18:25 PM »

I bought a 1895 (SS back then) in Nov. of '99. Marlin had just gone back to Ballard rifling, however, mine turned out to be Micro-groove. Since I don't reload, all of the ammo I buy is jacketed, so it doesn't really matter.

Waldo Pepper · « **Reply #14 on:** August 12, 2009, 01:09:59 AM »

I was changing my front sight on my 1894C yesterday and in the process of fondeling the gun realized mine does not have a rebound hammer like my friends 39A and then I checked my 94M and 94P and neither had that rebound hammer. What is the deal here, did they not put the rebound hammer on those guns?

Brian in FL · « **Reply #15 on:** August 31, 2009, 05:31:55 AM »

The key to using cast bullets effectively in Micro-Groove barrels is to use bullets sized two to three thousandths of an inch over normal.

Hank08 · « **Reply #16 on:** August 31, 2009, 06:35:07 AM »

I recently traded for a micro grooved M94 in .44 mag. It shoots jacketed great but it throws cast bullets all over the place. I've tried light and heavy, slow and fast, different diameters,
100 yds. cast is about 12" where jacketed is about 2". I was trying to finds a load that would shoot well in a super blackhawk and the M94, The super would shoot just about any cast load but not the microgroove. I've seen 30/30s microgrooved that shot OK but not this .44.
H08

gypsyman · « **Reply #17 on:** August 31, 2009, 08:34:39 AM »

I had a .44 with the micro groove barrel about 15 years ago. Wasn't real happy with the accuracy, so I sold it. All I tried to shoot out of it was my cast. Wouldn't mind finding another one, if the price is right, try it out, and if not happy, switch barrels.
Funny thing, 7-8 years ago, had a Freedom Arms in .44 for silhouette. It shot jacketed bullets just fine, but couldn't get cast to shot worth a hoot, so sold it to. Talked with several other silhouette shooters at the time, and they couldn't get their .44's to shoot cast either, but the .357's did real well. gypsyman

Swampman · « **Reply #18 on:** September 10, 2009, 07:18:28 AM »

http://www.leverguns.com/articles/fryxell/microgrove-barrels.htm

All you ever wanted to know about Micro-groove barrels

jlchucker · « **Reply #19 on:** September 10, 2009, 11:32:31 AM »

This subject comes up periodically, and gets discussed deeply over on the "cast boolets" forum. My own experience started with a Marlin 45-70 that I bought around 1982. Microgroove, of course. Over the years I fired both cast and jacketed handloads through that rifle, and never even realized there was supposed to be a controversy until just a few years ago--after the cowboy shooting sport started generating attention. I've never noticed any difference in accuracy either way--both can be exceptional if you take care with your handloads. Of course my only Marlin experience along these lines has been with 45-70, 35 Remington, and 30--30. My 44 mags are a Winchester trapper and an EMF Hartford rifle. Neither has microgroove. I've never been interested in the cowboy thing, but that's just me. Those folks are to be commended for reviving lots of interest in the old, still very good calibers and lead bullets. As I said earlier, the cast bullet websight discusses the microgroove issue from time to time in great depth--and a lot of genuine cast bullet experts post over there.

luvs2hunt62 · « **Reply #20 on:** September 22, 2009, 11:39:25 AM »

I had an issue with cast bullets with my 450 Marlin. I used factory bullets, then had a muzzle brake fitted. It was then that i tried my reloads. they worked great for about 10 rds, the scattered all over the place. I initially suspected the brake, and the gunsmith who installed it went nuts trying to firure it out, then we went to factory ammo and all was well. I called Marlin, and the customer service guy informed me i had to clean the barrel way often if I wanted to maintain any accuracy with lead bullets in the micro groove barrel.

wreckhog · « **Reply #21 on:** September 23, 2009, 06:32:02 AM »

This is my challenge with cast and Microgroove. The cast need to be bigger diameter. Maybe big enough to bulge the neck and not feed right. So I shoot jacketed.

Marlin XLR's are the only Marlins 30-30's currently made with Ballard bores that I know of.

peternap · « **Reply #22 on:** September 30, 2009, 02:19:25 PM »

Quote from: wreckhog on September 23, 2009, 06:32:02 AM

This is my challenge with cast and Microgroove. The cast need to be bigger diameter. Maybe big enough to bulge the neck and not feed right. So I shoot jacketed.

Marlin XLR's are the only Marlins 30-30's currently made with Ballard bores that I know of.

I cast my 45/70 bullets and size .460. I'm real happy with the accuracy but like you aid, itis a challenge to get right.