No Tom, it's not. Ballard set triggers are fitted to a base plate, not built into the breech block halves. And look much different in their parts too. Somebody converted a single trigger to set triggers.

A quick Internet search resulted in the following. "Double set-triggers became a prominent feature on Ballard rifles when they were reintroduced in the mid-1870s following the launch of the "New Ballard" action in 1875."

The design appears to be high-quality & required a lot of work.  Could that be from a prototype rifle when Ballard was designing their double set-trigger?  Any idea when the receiver was made?

Wayne

texasmac wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2026 at 10:05am:


No, it's not some prototype, or factory DST block. I own Ballard rifles down in low 3 digit actions and they all use a removable plate on the breech block that is the DST assembly. There's far more about this assembly that is totally different than anything Marlin ever made. It looks like a very talented gunsmith's work, but not Marlin's work.
Early Marlin DST plates differ from later in only one respect; they hung down slightly below the bottom of the receiver. Later plates sat flush with the bottom.

TomKlinger wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2026 at 10:34am:


Tom, I can't make out the rollstamp on that gorgeous action. Does it read "JM Marlin" or "Marlin Firearms Co."?
If it's a JM Marlin stamp it dates to pre 1881 era.
The lever is the #6 style ball and spur lever.

TomKlinger wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2026 at 11:24am:


Like the DST block, the offset bore to make a CF into a RF i something only talented gunsmiths did in the day! I own a Ballard #6 Scheutzen that was built by Zettler and fitted with a .22 Short barrel offset shank to make the CF firing pin strike the rim of the .22RF. I think mine might have also been a switch barrel once and the second barrel got separated from it. There's a screw on the right side of the receiver designed to secure the barrel and likely also be a hook for a breech seating tool. I really should fit up a nice .32-40 Ballard barrel I have to it so it's a set again.

Interesting! Someone sure put a lot of skilled work into this one…

Thanks for your help and information



Tom Klingef

The original DST sear spring was simply curved down to touch, not the C shape Bob's sear spring has. Although I think Bob's version would likely work even better than the originals do.

I'm curious about the C shaped trigger return spring sitting in the left side of that breech block in your first image Tom? That's for a single trigger action, and doesn't appear to have any function to this nicely modified set trigger action?

Very interesting.  Assuming it’s not a prototype, & the one thing that suggests it’s not is the 92XX serial number.  Of course the block may not be original to the receiver.

When comparing it to the improved breechblock displayed on page 296 of John Dutcher’s book, the gunsmith had to mill out the rear of the block to make room for the new main trigger spring, make the main trigger spring, modify the hammer, make a fly, modify the main trigger & make all the components of the set-trigger assembly including drilling out both sides of the block to accept the trigger pivot pin & the screw to hold the set-trigger spring.  It appears he used the original trigger screw for the set-trigger.  Since there was no longer material to hold the sear spring found in factory set-triggers, the original trigger spring was repurposed into the sear spring.  All that took a lot of planning and gunsmithing talent.

Wayne

TomKlinger wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2026 at 1:28pm:


That makes sense! Thanks.

texasmac wrote on Jan 23^rd, 2026 at 8:35pm:


Ballard rifles by Marlin were serial numbered on the receiver, both breech block halves, the tang, buttstock and forearm, barrel, and buttplate if it's metal and not hard rubber. The stock and forearm were serial numbered on the ends that butt up to the receiver.

Tom, that is really nice.

Did you go lite on the polishing of the frame because of the engraving?  Or is it just the picture showing a more matte finish than the lever.
Bob

I like the toned down colors for an engraved action. It doesn't conceal the engraving like vivid colors do. I love vivid case colors on non engraved actions though.
I think the factories did something similar also as engraved rifles in high condition always appear to have lower level case colors often.

Wayne, 
I use #15819 clear bake on at 300* for 30 min.


Tom

TomKlinger wrote on Jan 25^th, 2026 at 9:19pm:


Thanks Tom.

Wayne

texasmac wrote on Jan 25^th, 2026 at 11:40pm:


I don't know for sure, but since we take such good care of our rifles I can't imagine it's not a good protective coating? I've been coating my stocks and metal on my hunting rifles for decades prior to taking them out in the fall for deer and elk hunting. Even in pretty ugly conditions the water beads up and runs off. And those rifles still look great.

chipmaker-1
I could have easily done that if that’s what the customer wanted!



Tom Klinger

Just don't wax or lacquer the CCH until it fades to the point where it looks good with the engraving.

Just keep buying Ballards at 10 years a pop!