frnkeore wrote on Oct 6^th, 2011 at 11:28pm:



Frank,

Anecdotal, but my own experience:  A #5 action is very hard to machine, and through hardened.  A #1 action is surface hardened, but once you get through the skin, it machines easily.  There may not be a lot of difference in the steel, but there is a huge difference in the heat treatment. 

I've heard the same from others that had the same experience.

On the smokeless question:  There are so many good rifles out there, why shoot smokeless in a rolling block?  The rolling block is definitely designed for lower pressure loads.  It cannot safely handle gas leaks.  If you have a compulsive need to shoot smokeless, it is relatively easy and cheap to buy a more appropriate .45-70 rifle that is definitely safe with smokeless.   

You can get away with it if you stick with trapdoor loads.  If you have a #5 action with small firing pin, correctlly fit up with a modern barrel, you can push that up a bit.  But, it will never be as strong or as safe as a high wall.  I have shot well over 10,000 rounds through my .45-90 rolling block.  But, I'm too conservative to shoot smokeless out of it, and it is a more modern smokeless action.  When I want to shoot smokeless .45-70, I use My Browning BPCR or Browning 1885 hunter model.   

An incidental reason to not use smokeless .45-70 loads in a Rolling Block:  I shoot IMR 4198 smokeless .45-70 in my BPCR.  A few years ago, we needed 400 rounds for a match at the last minute.  My son and I set up loading assembly line fashion, and drop measured the powder.  Some powder must have hung up, as we got light loads that hit low.  Others were very hot.  Not double charge, but hot.  I'm sure glad they weren't fired in my rolling block.

dave

I'll continue to use smokeless in anything I want. It is far less destructive that BP.  I can load it to lower pressures than BP.  

It's not dangerous unless you double or triple charge a case or do something else dumb.  You'll have very similar bad results in a Ballard, Hepburn, Sharps, Maynard, Stevens, Lowall Tisdel, or even a hiwall or Ruger. 

So why single out the rolling block?  A safety feather in your cap? That is the politically correct thing to do these days. Warn us all of the dangers. 

How bout preaching safe loading procedures to earn your safety feather rather than vilifying one of our truly great and historic rifles? 

          Joe. 

Some people have a difference risk tolerance than others.  Joe Westerner chooses to shoot smokeless in anything; I do not.  I don’t ride motorcycles; millions do.  I have an employee with a son in a wheelchair, unable to talk, eat, or help himself.  Motorcycle accident last August.  Acceptable risk to many, not to me.

In reference to millions/billions of smokeless rolling block loads fired, remember that the 7mm has a smaller case head, stronger brass, and that the military loads were tailored for that rifle, with pressures within the specific action capability and tested for such.  That history does not equate to shooting smokeless in any cartridge in any rolling block.  We don’t have the capability to test load our cartridges, but have to rely on very spotty data done by powder manufacturers.  And, the .45-70 case has considerable more base area.

The main problem with the rolling block is not strength, but gas handling.  I have had 3 case separations in mine, 2 leaked gas into my face.  Starline brass instead of stretched .45-70 cured that, but that has emphasized the design shortcoming to me.  The rolling block does not have a well sealed breech.

Loading safety is one part of the equation, in my case I choose to build in safeguards in my case selection, load selection, and action selection to further that safety.  I choose smaller cases that won’t double charge for smokeless loads.  I choose actions that have the strength to handle accidental overloads to give me an additional factor of safety.   

At the risk of being heretical, Frank DeHaas was a better writer than gun engineer.  Some of the things he advocated we would not readily accept today.

Bottom line is, the safety of, and limitations of an action are a legitimate part of a discussion.  By all means shoot smokeless in your rifle if you are comfortable doing it, and know how to safely.  But, do it with some idea of the risks and factors involved.

Dave

Frank,

I'm not sure what you're trying to help me out with, i don't believe my rolling blocks have a problem.  I don't even bother to bush the firing pin small, that's not a particular problem area for a rb.  Why would you drill a hole into the firing cavity of a gun?  I guess I would have to know what the firing cavity is also, as I'm not even sure what that is.  In any case, I can't see how drilling holes in a rolling block is going to improve it, it's about as good as it can get with it's design now.

My rifle doesn't stretch brass, as it is tight breeched to the rim, so as long as i stay below the pressure limits of the action and keep the inside of the cases clean, no problems there.  I had some problems in the past with buffalo arms stretched brass being pulled too thin, that has been fixed with starline brass.

The weak spot on a rolling block isn't the barrel diameter.  You're right, modern steel has fixed that, and the RB has plenty of barrel diameter anyway.  The few blowups I have seen on rolling blocks have been on Swedish and Danish re-heat treated actions, and one #1 that must have had a huge overcharge because it blew the top off the action ring.  The weak spot is the inevitable gap between the breech block and the barrel.  It is a gas leak IF a case problem occurs.  I agree that a rolling block is unlikely to blow up.  It is likely to leak gas into your face if it ruptures a cartridge for any reason.  It is also subject to springing of the breech block with excessive case pressure.  Again, won't blow up the gun, but can cause case rupture and gas leakage.   

I guess the bottom line is if you want to fire smokeless in your rifle, you can.  I'm conservative, and choose not to do so.  My recommendation is that if someone wants to use higher pressure loadings, use an action that can handle them better if something goes wrong.  Each person can evaluate the risk level they are comfortable with, and decide what to do individually.    

dave

ssdave wrote on Oct 18^th, 2011 at 10:29am:


Dave, I respect your opinion, especially on Rolling Blocks, but comparing risks of motorcycles to reloading smokeless just doesn't make sense. If somebody else on the road does something stupid and you get paralized or die, it's beyond your control. In the case of reloading we have complete control of the process, and no external variables that others can do to change that.
Lost my mother in law to a drunk driver back in 1978, but my wife and I still drive our cars and take our chances. If you had a collision would you stop driving?

I think I fall into that last categorie; "other people may rely on care in loading as adequate protection". I'm always careful with all my reloading, but more so with any of my really old guns.
Regardless of what powder I choose I can't be careful enough when reloading for a really neat old singleshot rifle!

Ziggy,
Thank you VERY much for your offer analyze the RB metal. We could shortly obtain the answer to this old nagging question. A good friend has donated a black powder RB for metallurgical testing. If you will PM your address to me, I'll send a big piece to you.

Does anyone on the forum have a piece of a 1897, 1902 or a #5 sporting that is ruined and can send a piece of it to Ziggy?

Frank