Thanks for information. I am going to go ahead, cautiously, and build up some light loads to shoot. Thanks all.

Not really relevant but maybe still a bit interesting in regards to the first mass produced using smokeless powder and just something that I was also a bit curious about. 

(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links).

oneatatime wrote on Mar 29^th, 2021 at 11:59pm:


A few Ballards I've handled (mostly Civil War jobs) were quite loose. I've read this is simply wear in the link which ties the breech to the lever. Ballards usually wedge the top of the breech into place, plus the link and its two pins take some of the breech thrust. With the older steels, wear is the result in the link joints. Replacing the link and pins will fix that flop.

As I recall, Dutcher wrote all Marlin Ballards use the forged breech, so the weak spot will be the two back corners of its mortise in the cast receiver. They didn't understand then that radiusing this corner would improve the fatigue life quite a bit. Ruger casts such a radius into the receiver of their No.1 single.

I've read some Civil War reenactors who chamber the Civil War carbines in 44 Mag loaded with BP have managed to crack their receivers. I think the thinner WCF brass won't load breech as much.

I saw some proper lab pressure data for BP in the 44 WCF. I'll see if I can find it for you.

In my experience with droopy levers, or slightly loose Ballard actions, the vast majority were tightened up just replacing the lever screw, and the two link screws. I've almost never had one so loose that it needed a link. I believe the links are harder than the screws intentionally, so that if it wore the screws would be much easier to produce, and not be as critical in length as the link is!
Links come in all sorts of minute sizes when comparing them hole to hole length. I think that workers in the Marlin factory likely had bins of assorted length links sitting in front of them, and as they assembled Ballard rifles they simply tried a link and if the lockup didn't have the proper crush, or didn't center on a primer, they swapped another link from a bin to adjust it.
In taking a bunch of my actions apart one day, I compared links using new new screws to align the holes, and found a pretty good variety among about 20 Ballard rifles I checked. I'd guess there was a half dozen or so different lengths as far as I could tell. Some had slight wear, so I didn't hold much regard to them in comparison. But those that showed no wear still showed enough difference to indicate a number of different lengths were used.
I've often wondered if those late Ballard actions assembled in Cody were adjusted with varying length links also?

I did record Dutcher's comments on the 44's used in the early Ballards, which had both cast frames and breeches. The regular had 28 gr under 210 gr, the Long 33 under 250, and the Extra Long 46 under 216. He also records a 46 RF as 57 under 305. Missing from this is powder granulation and compression, so we can only guess as to relative pressures. The 44 WCF was nominally 40 under 200, but it's said that varied.

I haven't seen any estimates of the number of old Ballards which cracked their frames firing factory RF loads, if any. The ones we find today will be ones that didn't. Clearly, though, the early Ballards were taking some healthy loads. Whether Marlin's frame castings were as good (or better), I have no idea.

I've owned cast Ballard rifles chambered in calibers I wouldn't consider making up myself. But I never felt concerned about shooting them, and did shoot them a lot. Not just factory calibers, but also larger rifle calibers too!
I've owned a deluxe #2 Ballard done similar to a high grade Union Hill for some years, and chambered in .32-40 Ballard. It was not a recent rework, and the barrel is original to the gun. But someone opened up the bored and re-rifled it, then chambered it to .32-40. I shoot it as a breech seater, with smokeless powder, and loads in the BP range. 
I'm only guessing it was rebored based on it being marked as a "32 Long" on the barrel, but having a larger .317" bore. I they could have followed the existing rifling, but don't think so since the twist rate is faster than what Marlin used for their .32 Long. Marlin used a 1:22" twist for .32 Long, and this is a 1:15" twist. And of course the dimensions are larger than the original .32 Long also.
At first glance you'd assume it was a nickeled frame Union Hill, but the 3 line address, caliber stamp, and cast frame tell the truth of what it is.

(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)

art_ruggiero wrote on Apr 1^st, 2021 at 1:43pm:


My wife thinks I do! Actually they're stuffed into 3 safes like cord wood. Some butt down, and the next row butt up, just to make the best use of limited space.