uscra112 wrote on Oct 24^th, 2022 at 8:11pm:


Even those built later by Red River, and Ballard Rifle Co. didn't change the design to eliminate the problem. But I really don't think it's an issue unless things go sideways when someone overloads the Ballard, or rebarrels it to a modern cartridge, or too big a cartridge.
The design has held up well for over 130 years, with the only failures being attributed to mistakes by owners, or gun tinkerers.

Prior to Marlin taking over production of the Ballard rifles, none of the previous makers offered the Ballard in a forged steel receiver. Of course all the previous makers only offered pretty anemic cartridges, and the majority were rimfire cartridges also.
John Marlin's success with the Ballard rifles was partially due to the forged actions, which allowed Marlin to expand the cartridge selection, and the models he offered. That and things like his automatic extractor and other small changes also made the Marlin Ballard a big success, and insured he didn't go bankrupt making Ballard rifles like all the predecessors had done.

In my opinion, the extractor components alone are well worth the starting price.

Bill Lawrence

Vall,
I have a question and a comment.  First the question: How do you feel about 25-20 SS in a cast action?  I ask this because I recently saw a Stevens rebarreled cast action in this caliber.  I’ve seen a low wall in 25-20 SS that had “stretched” over time.  Would it be safe in cast, in your opinion?
As for the comment, a real cottage industry has been developing among the North-South Skirmish gang fitting a CF conversion into the space for the percussion nipple on early Ballards and shooting them with 44 Spl or even 45 Colt (IIRC) loads of black powder. 
Your ‘Phibian Phriend

uscra112 wrote on Nov 21^st, 2022 at 5:19pm:


About a quarter century ago (which explains my spotty memory) a friend and I bought what seemed to be original and complete flat side low wall in what was marked, and I assumed chambered, as 25-20 SS.  We got it for parts and he got the barrel, so I can’t check it for sure, but the breech block was loose front-to-rear in the receiver.  The only other such “stretched” low wall I’ve observed (original chambering only) was also purported to have been chambered at the factory in 25-20 SS.  I have no such experience with 25-20 WCF low walls, but I must admit, my sample size of both in sum amounts to only a dozen or so.  I have not experienced frame stretch in any 25-20 WCF low walls.

I’m curious as to whether the cast Marlin Ballard action would be OK for Target power (ie factory equivalent or less) smokeless loads of 25-20 SS.  I have no idea or way of determining what kind of reloads people have used in the past nor can I predict what an overenthusiastic shooter of the future might stuff into the cartridge.

Froggie

The WCF case being larger in diameter at the base, bolt thrust given equal pressure turns out to be about 30% greater than the Stevens.  If a cast Ballard will stand the .32-20, which uses the same basic case, it will easily stand the .25-20 Stevens.   

That said, the current practice of loading 120 grain bullets may be running the pressure higher - if somebody would let me know what muzzle velocity these are being launched at I can approximate the pressure and hence the bolt thrust.   

My .32-20 with a 115 gr. bullet exit the barrel at @1300 fps. Mild load that I shoot in my #2 Roller, and both Ballard #2's.
This is 14,000 psi, 376 ft. lbs. projectile energy, 490 psi muzzle energy, and 1 ft. lb. of recoil.