I have been visiting as a guest, checking out the comments about various actions and I thought I would throw out a question or two since I like the way some of you think. I have been looking around trying to decide what type of single shot I could get that would be fun to shoot and hunt with. I like late 1800's actions, and don't mind reloading, but reloading is not what I really enjoy. I have always liked the 9.3x74 and thought that would be the cartridge I would use, but with an older style action. I began seeing some posts about the Borchardt action and remembered that I had gotten one in a trade years ago. I had started to fix it up after "Bubba the Gunsmith" had tossed everything but the action, but I lost interest. It has a 45/70 barrel and a partially finished butt stock on it now. I would like to end up with a mainly iron sight rifle in the business rifle style, but with the option of installing a low power scope. Do you think an old Borchardt is up to it? Any good gunsmiths around that like to do this kind of work? This is what I have to work with.
(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)

Harry

Thanks for the quick response Harry. I had serious doubts about the 9.3x74 and the Borchardt. From the comments I have been reading, I thought that someone would know for sure if it would work or not. The barrel is going to need to be changed to get the look I want, so it was a chance to get the caliber I wanted too. I want something different from a 45/70, which is one of the reasons the Sharps ended up in the back of my closet to start with. Looks like I need a newer old style action to build this rifle on and I will need to save the Borchardt for a later project. Maybe a 40/70 or a 40/65 would do the trick. Thanks again for the information.

Harry  

I think either the .38-72 or .40-70 Sharps Straight would make an excellent choice.

Reckon I better hang up my own Borchardt 300 Mag. Man, what a downer! I been shootin' that rifle for a number of years now but little did I know how close I was to disaster!

All kidding aside, IMO Harry is being a trifle conservative. I have one unbarrelled Borchardt remaining, and one of my possible caliber choices is the 9.3x74R. Another good one would be the 40-70 SS if used with the .408" groove diameter since it's basically just a 405 Winchester with smaller-diameter bullets. Moulds for the 9.3's 0.366" groove specification are pretty scarce while both a wide variety of moulds and also some excellent jacketed bullets are available in the 0.408" size.

It is imperative, I repeat imperative, that a qualified single-shot gunsmith examine and update your action before barrelling to any smokeless cartridge. Not just any gunsmith will do, nor will just any single shot gunsmith be OK. You'll need a smith that's familiar with the Borchardt and please be advised that the 1878 Borchardt is one of the most-misunderstood of all the single shots, so qualified knowledgeable smiths are few & far between. I can recommend both hst and Buchsenmacher, both of this board.
Good luck, Joe

westerner wrote on Jan 26^th, 2007 at 2:30am:


Hello Joe and JD.

You forget I am several hours ahead of you in time. When you wrote your posts I was already in bed. As I write this, you've both got several hours of sleep left to enjoy.

O/k, Perhaps I am being conservative, but I see no sense in using high pressure cartridges in weapons that weren't designed to take anything like the pressures developed by them. The 45/70, 45/90 or 45/110 black powder rounds have much lower breech pressures than the .25 Krag Imp or .300 mag. These latter rounds are very likely to generate twice the breech pressure than the old BP rounds.

Old steels, unlike many wines, do not improve with age. The metalurgical qualities of 1870's steel leaves a lot to be desired by modern standards. Even modern rifles blow up. Sako recently had to recall a large number of rifles because several had blown up with factory ammo.

No one would expect the Wright Brothers 'flyer' to break the sound barrier or a 1920's Model 'T' Ford to win this years Le Mans 24 hour race, common sense says they weren't designed to do so.

Now it may well be that both of you are lucky, in that nothing has happened so far to your rifles, but are you using light loads just to be on the safe side? If so, then consider what might happen in a few years time when these rifles belong to someone else and they load cartridges generating higher pressures than you are using.

The USA doesn't have 'Proof Houses' so testing of weapons is very much a hit or miss affair with no real standards to set a guide. On various other boards I have seen suggestions that people who build their own rifles should fire a couple of rounds using a 10% over maximum powder charge, preferably pulling the trigger from a distance by means of a string. Hardly a scientific method of testing. No one seems to recommend checking on dimensional changes that may have taken place after 'proof' firing. That is a standard practice in European Proof Houses, along with a lot of other checks involving computers and chronographs etc. 

The cracking of actions under the stress of a high pressure load may not be noticed as they can be microscopic, the next couple of rounds may may blow the action apart. 

The cardinal rule of shooting is SAFETY in all things pertaining to the sport. I have to ask, is shooting a high pressure cartridge in a 120+ year old BP action safe? I don't honestly think so.

Harry

Hello Joe,

Regarding American 'Proof Houses'. I'm fairly sure that US Government Arsenals did carry out proofing on weapons they made or refurbished and that most manufacturers tested their own weapons for sale. Each would have their own standards as to what a proof load was. But there ism't a standard set across the board for all to adhere to.

What I was getting at was there isn't, and as far as I am aware, has never been an independant 'Proof House' governed by US Law which would test and proof fire all firearms either manufactured, imported or gunsmith made or altered, prior to them being sold.

The U/K has had such Proof Houses for a couple of hundred years. They were originally set up to weed out those manufacturers who made their firearms out of weak materials. Even today not all manufacturers are infallible. I must admit I'd rather a gun blew up in the proof house than when I squeezed off a round.

Re .303 British chambers, if your referring to the military rifle, this was produced in several countries all over the world including the USA. It was in service with the British armed forces from the 1880's to the 1970's and was probably the most widely used military rifle and calibre in history. Wartime production in both World Wars a little sloppy compared to those made in peacetime. 

Manufacturing and chambering tolerances varied considerably and I don't think anyone knows how many Marks of ammunition and variants of the same were produced. The rifle had to stand up to usage in just about every environment in the world, from the snows of northern Europe to the deserts of Africa and the tropical jungles of Malaya, and had to work reliably. It's still in service even today in several ex colonial countries. I've met a good number of different marks of the .303 rifle with tight chambers.

After the 100mph gales of last week, it is cold here now, it was -7 when I got up this morning. However it's only -3 in my living room. If it gets any colder I'll have to light the fire. lol.

Harry

Maurice Ottmar, since gone to his Great Reward, was one of the finest (IMO) gunsmith/stockmakers of the last century. He was a Guild smith, and built some of the best-looking rifles I've ever seen. I would not presume to question many of his choices, and the 25 Krag on a Borchardt is one that I consider to be as safe as any other cartridge that must be handloaded.

Please note: as safe as any other cartridge that must be handloaded.

In such a case, safety is totally dependent upon the practices of the handloader and IMO the action is a fairly minor factor in the overload equation, as long as the loader is knowledgeable and careful. Repeat: as long as the loader is knowledgeable and careful.

Yes, smokeless pressures can easily be double the BP pressures. So what? The only reason that pressures were lower back then was 'cause the BP simply wouldn't generate any higher pressures, not because the steel wouldn't stand it. True, the old steel has few if any alloying (strengthening) elements and so is normally case-hardened, but many of the modern SS actions are made from similar non-alloyed steels and are also case-hardened. Yes the old steel can be weaker but so can the new stuff.

Harry mentioned Sako rifles blowing up. This is true, and it was due to faulty barrel steel, could happen to any manufacturer who didn't take proper precautions with materials.

The much-vaunted European proof procedure didn't seem to help the Sako situation, did it?

I'll ask a very simple question: has anyone on this board ever seen or even heard of a Borchardt action blowing up or failing, in any way? Not saying it couldn't or hasn't already happened, just asking if anyone has ever seen it. I have my own theories as to the possible results but would welcome any hard information at all, since I've never read or heard of any sort of a Borchardt blowup of any kind other than primer piercing due to a non-bushed block.

John Buhmiller deliberately and repeatedly attempted to blow up a high wall, and only succeeded in blowing the firing pin out of the block even with the heaviest overloads. I personally consider the Borchardt to be stronger than the wall in every respect except possibly gas handling, and this lone area of concern is a function of the design rather than the age or the materials.

I don't limit the pressures in my Borchardts and high walls except the normal concern for flattening primers and swelling case heads & primer pockets. Like the man said in the Country song, "You keep going your way, and I'll keep going mine".
And of course YMMV, Joe

Thanks for all the comments about the Borchardt action. I have decided to look for some other action for my 9.3x74. I would not want to have to load it down and something just doesn’t seem right, to me, about using a metric cartridge in a Sharps rifle. Thanks again for all the information.

Harry