Author Topic: rolling block question (Read 2559 times)

montana wolfer · « **on:** May 03, 2005, 06:51:57 AM »

This is probably a dumb question, but I just bought a Rem. rolling block in 7X57 caliber, and while I was researching loading data I ran across a caution from Speer bullets never to use their reloads for any rolling block rifle. This is a number 5 action with the Pat. Date Oct 22, 1901 on the tang. The wood is pretty banged up but the action is tight and the bore looks perfect.

On one hand, I cant see how I cant shoot a 7X57 in a rifle chambered for 7X57. On the other hand, things can change a lot in a hundred years, and maybe the reload data Im looking at is for modern actions. Speer hasn't returned my call yet. Does anyone have any thoughts on this? What pressures are acceptable for a roller in good shape, and how do I measure pressure.

I should probably add that I'm new to smokeless powders, having gone thirty-plus years with black only. I have a Pedersoli roller in .45-70 and another number 5 action chambered in .40-70. I thought it would be fun to keep this rifle original and shoot smokeless occasionally. Thanks for whatever information you can give me.

Mike

John Traveler1 · « **Reply #1 on:** May 03, 2005, 04:04:11 PM »

I would heed Speer's advice. It is based on Remington, NRA Technical Advisor, and Cartridges of the World information.

The problem with firing modern factory ammo (or reloads) in a 7x57 Remington Rolling Block rifle is that the chamber and ammo manufacturing standards were changed slightly in the early 1920's.

The cartridge was standardized for European use in 1892 before SAAMI specifications were developed. The old 7x57 chamber and cartridge headspace dimensions are somewhat longer than the modern SAAMI dimensions, with the result that firing modern factory or reloaded cartridges in the old RRB chamber results in some 0.012-0.016" excessive headspace.

There was a Rifle Magazine article on this very subject a couple years ago that documented the dimensional differences between original 100-year old German 7x57 cartridges and modern 7x57 cartridges. When modern ammo is fired in an otherwise excellent condition RRB, the excessive headspace condition will exist, causing case separations.

I have fired older european military 7x57 in tight-action RRB with no bad effects, but upon gaging the fired cases in a Forster headspace cartridge gage, there is the obvious elongation of the shoulder-to-head length. The only way to correct this is to first obtain or make longer shoulder-to-head length cases, and then neck them down to fit the chamber before reloading.

This caution applies to jacketed bullet full loads. Cast bullet loads can normally take the excessive headspace without problems because of their much lower pressure.

montana wolfer · « **Reply #2 on:** May 03, 2005, 05:36:45 PM »

Thanks, John Traveler. That was good feedback. I appreciate you taking the time to share your knowledge. I'll see what I can locate in the way of cast bullets.

Regards,
Mike

jh45gun · « **Reply #3 on:** June 08, 2005, 04:58:27 PM »

That is the reason I had my 1902 action rebarreled to a 45/70 as I had read the same info that John said. The other was the bore was a typical bore from a south american country that was not taken care of it was not good. This started out as a 7x57 military: Total cost I have into it is a little over 650 bucks which is a lot cheaper than a new Remington and thats having the gunsmith do the work except for the stock and forarm I did that.
Jim

montana wolfer · « **Reply #4 on:** June 18, 2005, 07:57:32 AM »

Hi, Jim:

That's a sharp looking rifle you have there. I've toyed with the idea of building a Carlos Gove underlever if I can ever find some plans, but I'm not sure I want to put it on a #5 action. Seems kind of chunky for the rifle I have in mind. Meanwhile, the 7x57 is sitting in the corner waiting for me to decide what I want to do with it. I kind of wish it was in worse shape than it is, so that I wouldn't mind stripping it down.

Best,
Mike

jh45gun · « **Reply #5 on:** June 18, 2005, 12:43:12 PM »

Mike, Thanks for the Compliment. I suppose if you can figure out how to get the right sized brass you could shoot it as is. I suppose a cast load would size the brass to fit the chamber? But not sure on that. Steve Garbe ( SPG Lubes) (Black Powder Cartridge News) is really good on these rifles and other old single shots maybe he can answer your question on how to get the right sized brass. Here is his email addy. Jim

spg@smtp.180com.net

Web Page http://www.lonestarrifle.com/spg.htm

You may know this info already about Garbe but I thought I would post incase you did not.

montana wolfer · « **Reply #6 on:** June 19, 2005, 12:43:46 PM »

Hello, Jim:

Thanks for the suggestion about Steve Garbe. I have some once fired brass that should work, but I haven't been able to locate any cast bullets on the Internet. I'd rather not make any big investment, including buying a mould, until I have some idea of how this rifle is going to shoot. Meanwhile, somehow or the other it's become mid-June and I've only shot my flinter a handful of times. That's why I set the 7x57 aside for now. There will be plenty of time this winter to work on that.

Good shooting and best regards,
Mike

jh45gun · « **Reply #7 on:** June 19, 2005, 05:49:35 PM »

Cast rifle bullets seem to be harder to find than pistol bullets. Go to www.castboolits.gunloads.com and ask there some one probably would sell you a few to try it out. Tell them whats up and ask a good group there. Jim

montana wolfer · « **Reply #8 on:** June 20, 2005, 06:52:29 AM »

Jim:
Wow, looks like a great site. I'll spend some time there. Thanks for suggesting it.
Best,
Mike

marlinman93 · « **Reply #9 on:** June 26, 2005, 01:08:02 PM »

MW,
The #5 action can be made a lot less chunky with a small amount of hand work, and then it would be a great candidate for a underlever style sporting rifle.
Most good gunsmiths lighten them up by cutting the receiver tops to the octagon shape used on sporting models. Then they cut the hammer down, reshaping it into the smaller sporting style too. The edges of the receiver top are also beveled to clean them up, and the frame sides end up stepped in the process. When it's done right, it's hard to tell them from Sporting Rollers.
At the same time you can replace the trigger spring with a piece of .053" piano wire, which will bring the trigger pull down to a very nice 2-3 lbs, without anything else done! SSDave turned me onto this trick, and I found a local hardware store that sells the wire for $5 a pound. Enough to do tons of triggers!
Good luck!

jeff · « **Reply #10 on:** June 28, 2005, 01:56:49 PM »

You may want to visit Lee Shaver's web site. He's got some nifty stuff and more particularly he's well versed in 'smithing rollers. He also shoots them.

http://www.egunsmith.com/

montana wolfer · « **Reply #11 on:** June 28, 2005, 03:59:24 PM »

Marlinman93 and Jeff:

Thanks for the feedback and advice. The trigger pull sure needs to be lightened. It has to be close to ten pounds. I'm also concerned about the tangs, which seem not only wide, but too short. Of course, maybe I'm nitpicking here. I'll give Lee Shaver a call when I'm ready to proceed. He did some work for me last summer and I was well pleased with the finished product.

Best regards,
Mike

Brithunter · « **Reply #12 on:** July 31, 2005, 10:35:14 PM »

Hi All,

I must say I am little confused here

you obviously have an original Military Rolling Block in 7x57 Mauser so why alter it is my first question? If you don't want it in it's original configuration, surely there is a collector who would! :wink:

The other thing I do not understand is this about changes in the chamberings on 7x57 rifles. I have 3 DWM made Boer War Mausers, they are Model 93 Mausers with the square bolt face and providing I do use high pressure ammunition which it was never designed to handle. There is no problem at all, now I realise that these rifles were made in Germany and not in the US so perhaps it's a problem with Remington not using the correct chamber specifications like it seems most US ammo companies do. I have noticed that an awful lot of cartridges are made undersized and not to specs. The 303 British is certainly amongst these as is the 6.5x55 Swedish. I use the undersized 303 cases from RP to trim down and fireform to 6.5x53R as the solid web area is undersize and just right for the smaller 6.5x53R case.

How come SAAMI specs are different from the designers, 7x57 has been about since 1892 at least, long before SAAMI so surely they should have adopted Paul Mausers specifications and not altered it to suit themselves :roll:

I did try some modern Brazilian ammo in my Mausers but in one it showed excessive pressures ( a shooting friend who also has a couple of Boer Mausers recommended it), this was red boxed ammo with the headstamp TAP and is loaded with a 162 grn BT match type bullet. I also have some RWS commecial hunting ammo with the 175 grn H-Mantle bullet but there is no way I would fire this high pressure ammo through these old Mausers instead I save it for my BSA CF2 hunting rifle :wink:

Lone Star · « **Reply #13 on:** August 01, 2005, 05:35:27 AM »

Besides the well-documented chamber dimensional differences (Q: why should the US copy European specs? A: the not-invented-here syndrome.), chamber pressures can be vastly different. Original pressures for the 7x57 were in the range of 42,000-46,000 cup, while some modern loading data reaches 50,000 cup ( Speer data for example: http://www.speer-bullets.com/pdf/ReloadingSupplementalDATA/7X57_tb.pdf ) Given the relatively soft steel in the No. 5s and the headspace issue, using modern data in the old RBs requires considerable care.

Brithunter · « **Reply #14 on:** August 01, 2005, 10:32:40 AM »

Hi Lone star,

Sorry but the "not-invented-here syndrome" does not cut it really as the reason for the USA's interest in the 7mm Mauser was of course it's superior effectiveness when it was used against the US troops in Cuba. Which of course also led to the adoption of a Mauser derived rifle the Springfield 03 and the mauser cloned cartridge the 30-03 for which royalties were paid to Mauser. So after copying the rifle and the cartridge design why not make the commercial ammo to the same size as it was meant to be? Remington of course was just trying to sell as many rifles to as many governments as they could at that time.

Yes the early Mausers like the 93/95 and to some extent the 96 were designed around the pressure of 43,000 CUP. This was mainly due to the powders available at the time as they were all designed/developed in the last decade of the 19th century, now of course performance can be improved whilst still keeping with in the original pressure limits although it seems that certain commercial ammo in 7x57mm is made to higher pressures now. The strange thing is that the European makers do not seem to specify which rifles their amunition is used in unlike the US ones.

marlinman93 · « **Reply #15 on:** August 01, 2005, 05:15:39 PM »

The 7x57 is a great cartridge, and the problem with Rollers in this caliber is not a problem with all guns chambered for 7x57, nor a problem with US made rifles. The problem is with the pressures of the 7mm in a Rolling Block action, or any roller rifle. The action can't handle the pressure of the 7mm, with the normal clearances built into the design of the rolling block. It tends to develope excess haedspace, and over time possibly case head separation in extremely worn actions.
Mausers are well built, well designed rifles, and able to easily handle the 7mm without developing any problems. But Mausers aren't Rollers.

Brithunter · « **Reply #16 on:** August 01, 2005, 08:24:39 PM »

Ahhh Thank you Marlinman,

I was going under the assumption that they were better built after reading the report of the Belgian proof test of the Rolling Block. Of course Belgium then was a rival for arms sales and they tried to discredit the Rolling Block as weak so they actually filled the barrel with powder and lead balls until it was full, but the action did not give. The powder alone filled up about 8" of the barrel :eek: I suppose it's possible that Remington may have prepared a special rifle to submit for the proof test, but somehow I doubt that.

ssdave · « **Reply #17 on:** August 02, 2005, 01:25:05 PM »

Brithunter,

The excessive proof tests that were done were done with black powder. The burn rate of black is such that essentially any quantity can be put in the barrel and not raise the pressure appreciably above a normal charge. It is quite easy, however, to exceed the capacity of this action with smokeless powder. I really like this action, but it is not the strongest available. With blackpowder cartridges, it is suitable for anything out there. But a modern smokeless shooter it is not.

On the collector question: I'll put the challenge out here as I have to this same question elsewhere.

I cut down good collectible rifles all the time to make shooters. I have over 20 rolling block actions and rifles in my hands now to make projects. I have some 7mm's with perfect bores, some in .43 spanish, and some that I have no clue what they are chambered in, and not enough interest to check. I have some with very good wood. They will all make nice 45-70's and 50-70's!

I will gladly trade a complete rifle for the equivalent in parts:
for example: Trade a 7mm with good barrel and good action and fair wood for: Repro action from Lone Star or similar (or original military action of same model and condition as the trade), plus unfinished octagon barrel blank from quality maker, plus semi-inlet wood from Crossno or Treebone.

If a piece is collectible, it ought to be worth at least the cost of unfinished parts that make up the whole!

I have the rolling blocks in my hands, right now, to back up my offer. In over 5 years, I have had exactly one person take me up on this offer, and he eventually converted the rifle to a sporter himself.

dave

ssdave · « **Reply #18 on:** August 02, 2005, 01:28:09 PM »

After I pushed the send button, the popup with the house rules made me think, to satisfy the owner, I should have included the following:

"Firearms must be shipped FFL to FFL or sold face to face in state when and where legal."

Not that I really expect an offer to trade seriously, but the rules are the rules! Most RB's are antique anyway, except for the later 7mm's.

dave

Brithunter · « **Reply #19 on:** August 02, 2005, 10:07:44 PM »

Hi ssdave,

I am sorry to hear that, Rolling blocks have never really appealed to me although of course they do to others. So while I do really feel it's a crying shame to destroy good original rifles there is nothing I can do about it, and after all there are yours and as such you can do as you like with them. Not only do they not fit in with what I really do like, but our restrictive laws also make it extremly difficult

as it is the local Police think I have far too many guns now as it is :roll:

I am trying to get in touch with some one fairly local to me now who managed to buy up the entire Greener parts and tooling for the GP guns. I hear he has 500 unfinished guns and all the tooling, stocks etc. Dependign on what he says price wise the idea of building a nice Sporting rifle on a new action is very appealing to me also it's not altering an original as let's face it they are not finished so........... :wink: and I do rather like the Martini actions :-)

Oh I can think of a couple of folks here who would really like a good rolling Block but again restrictions on both sides of the pond gets in the way :roll: It's a nightmare trying toget any gun related stuff out of the US now. last year I wanted to buy a scope but could find no one willing to get the export permit now required and ship one to the UK

Cottonwood · « **Reply #20 on:** August 13, 2005, 08:59:55 PM »

I love Rolling Block rifles, here is a pic of my original 1876 action in 45-90.

marlinman93 · « **Reply #21 on:** August 14, 2005, 05:24:56 PM »

Hey Montanan, I like those sporting rollers too! Nice gun you've got there!
Here's a picture of my all original #1 Sporting Rifle in .44 Sharps Bottleneck!

Cottonwood · « **Reply #22 on:** August 15, 2005, 03:13:00 AM »

Quote from: marlinman93

Hey Montanan, I like those sporting rollers too! Nice gun you've got there!
Here's a picture of my all original #1 Sporting Rifle in .44 Sharps Bottleneck!

That is a very nice #1 you have there. I have been thinking about adding a #1 in the .44 Sharps Bottleneck as my next Rolling Block. There are those that love the Sharps rifles... that is fine, those that are made today are but a copy of the real rifle.

We on the other hand, have the real deal.

Actually I would like one in .40-70 Bottleneck, .44-77, 45-70 and .50-70 all #1 Sporters. But the ol pocket book prevents this at the time. I'm blessed with just the one.

marlinman93 · « **Reply #23 on:** August 15, 2005, 02:45:37 PM »

Thanks Montanan! I sure like your's too! Wish mine had the cheekpiece on the stock. I also wish I could put a tang sight on it, but it was never d&t for a tang sight, so I don't want to change it.
Friend found this at a local shop, and called me. I raced over after work, and found it still there. Negotiated a great price, although if the guy had known how bad I wanted it, I'd have never done well!
I've got a #2 sporter, and a #3 Hepburn, and I sure like Remington sporting rifles! Wish they weren't so scarce and spendy, I'd have a lot more, and be a lot broker!