Vall, I did a comparison between the thickness of the hammer and that of the sidewall on (the photo of) this rifle vs my Ballard. This one was 74% and mine was 85%. Has it been thinned enough to remove the rebate? Also, in the top view notice the shape of the flat crescent on the sidewall next to the hammer/block and compare it to one on a rebated sidewall.

I've measured dozens of my Ballard rifles, and what Marlin described as "heavy receivers" might be a bit deceiving, as those with a step seem to measure very closely to those with flat sides. It's my opinion after measuring a lot of them from early 2 and 3 digit flat side "heavy" receivers, to rebated or stepped side, that the stepped side is pretty much the same width.
So Marlin simply added the step for aesthetics, and they weren't really any lighter in width. Mine measure as small as 1.255" wide, to as large as 1.285" wide for a flat side early receiver on an AW Peterson Ballard. But most of mine are in the 1.265"-1.275" range.

I don't think Joe's receiver has been reduced in width at his measurement, so I'm unsure if it ever had the normal JM Marlin stamp? Or maybe if it was a heavier 1.285" wide, it could have only been polished on one side to remove the JM Marlin stamp, and not on the right side.

I wonder if Overbaugh as a firearms notable, with his own shop, and contacts in the trade, had enough pull to request a half dozen semi finished, or unfinished receivers from Marlin, and then do final shaping himself? Maybe even order them internally machined and breech blocks fitted, which would explain them being serialized?

This is a real mystery rifle, and I'm excited to see something so unusual, and speculate on how it came to be! I really like the custom gun maker's work on Ballard rifles, and that's a neat example of it!

Overbaugh had the pull and the talent to get those 73 Sharps "German target rifles" made.  So I wouldn't be surprised if Marlin might have accommodated him as well.

By the way, Joe, is it a cast or forged receiver?

Bill Lawrence

Vall, it is just that the "flats" on my rifle look like 1/4 of a pie whereas these look like half an isosceles triangle but with the long side slightly rounded.

It is my understanding that Charles E. Overbaugh is also generally given credit as the designer of the ultra-graceful Model 1877 Sharps.  But as a Sharps employee, he was a traveling salesman and an exhibition shooter; he did his actual gun smithing and gun building privately.

In short, Vall's suggestion that he would've had a relatively easy time getting favors from Sharps is likely valid.  But Overbaugh's reputation and obvious skills were just as likely known to John Marlin, too, perhaps well enough for Marlin to sell him a few not-fully-finished Ballard actions.

Bill Lawrence