Chamber Re-Lining.

[Ugly Sauce]

I just "restored" (well...fixed up) a pre-1915 J. Stevens & Co. Model 44 falling block. The gun was originally a .25-20, but sometime in it's past the bore was bored out to .410 (smooth) and it was re-chambered to .410. The bore is beautiful, the chamber is messed up.

I just did a lot of work putting a new butt-stock on it, (came out really nice) and I'm sure I shot it in the past and the shell extracted normally. It might have been a half-inch paper shell.

NO, it is NOT a 2" chamber. No need to tell me: "it's probably a 2" chamber, and you are firing 2.5" shells." It is a 2 &1/2". Firing current 2.5" shells will not extract. Takes a rod to knock them out. Even very light .45 colt shot loads, same thing. I can't imagine it being chambered for anything else, and the father in law used it to shoot birds for his taxidermy hobby when he was young. He used regular .410 shot shells. Possibly 2".

I spent hours polishing the chamber, very little, teeny tiny improvement. Shells come out quite swelled. I tried a .303 British case (cut down) with a light shot load, thinking the heavier brass would not expand so much. It extracted about 1/16th of an inch, but was just as stuck after that small initial movement.

My question is: Can just the chamber alone be sleeved? If so, who does it? Can do it? It's a beautiful piece, and with all the stock work, I don't want to just shelve it.

TIA.

Ugly

 

[Big Bore 44]

Yes the chamber can be sleeved. Maybe Bobby Hoyt can/Will do it. If not He'll probably know who will.

 

[Jim Watson]

Maybe you have an application for a dinky .410.

Me?
I'd have it lined back to a light rifle caliber, .32 SWL most likely.

 

[Jackrabbit1957]

It sounds like the chamber is oversized or worn...which would be a bit odd imho. Have you attempted to measure it at all? Did you see any score marks on the brass cases? If so where and what do they look like?

 

[Ugly Sauce]

It sounds like the chamber is oversized or worn...which would be a bit odd imho. Have you attempted to measure it at all? Did you see any score marks on the brass cases? If so where and what do they look like?

Yes, score marks on the brass, and machine marks in the chamber. (I have polished the chamber within an inch of it's life, can still see "rings") What I've kind of discovered, or have come to the conclusion of, is that the chamber is tighter right at the end, where the case head sits, when the case or shell is chambered. So the cases are swelling more ahead of the case head, which is normal, but then the the forward part of the case is bigger than the very end/rear of the chamber. Kind of like a bottle neck. The chamber is oversized, for sure, but that in it's self should not cause very difficult extraction. I'm sure now it's the "reverse bottle neck" syndrome. !!!

The score marks on the brass are all ahead of the small portion of solid case-head. I believe that shows they are from being forced through the tight spot at the very beginning of the chamber.

I have not measured anything, and I think a chamber cast would not drop out of the chamber, it would have to be forced out which would destroy it, as far as getting a true measurement of the chamber. ?

"Therefore", with the chamber being already oversized, I don't think it would be a good idea to ream it out so that it's one consistent diameter. ? I'm not seeing any easy solution other than some kind of re-chambering.

What is truly odd, is that a partial box of 410's came with the gun, and I remember shooting it a few times (without a butt stock) and as I remember, the shells extracted normally. However, that was so long ago...maybe I didn't?? !!!! I seem to recall they were paper hulls, and maybe 2" shells. ? Perhaps very low brass, that didn't expand into the chamber? But heck, my memory has failed me before.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

Maybe you have an application for a dinky .410.

Me?
I'd have it lined back to a light rifle caliber, .32 SWL most likely.

I have thought about that. But, the muzzle end of the barrel looks quite thin to me. But, (two butts!) I don't know very much about re-lining, aside from the basics. Don't know how thin of a liner one could get away with.

Indeed, re-lined and re-chambered in any variety of cool old calibers would be super-cool. .25-20 would be neat, as that's what it says on the barrel. The trouble is, I went to all the trouble of restocking it (before testing it)(since I remembered shooting it before) as I thought it would be super-cool for the grandson to learn shotgun on. That was the whole idea. For my own personal use, yeah I'd love it in any .32 pistol caliber. Could be a winner in .22 Hornet.

The good news is, the barrels on these things come right off, really kind of a "switch barrel" gun. So I can send the barrel out by it's self, no receiver to require a FFL transfer. I'm kind of keeping an eye out for used barrels, but these guns had such a long production run that I'd have no way of knowing if the barrel would fit, until I actually tried putting it on.

So yeah, may have to do that, and pick up a cheap NEF or something like it in .410 for the grandson. (ten years old, not a big kid)

 

[Ugly Sauce]

Yes the chamber can be sleeved. Maybe Bobby Hoyt can/Will do it. If not He'll probably know who will.

I shall hunt for a chamber re-sleeving most likely. Should not be too expensive, and the barrel alone is easy to ship.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

Interesting development. I tried 4 grains of unique under some shot in a cut-down .303 case, and the darn thing extracted. Had tried 7 grains, then 6, then 5 with no extraction. Seems to be hitting hard enough to kill a grouse or wabbit, but that remains to be tested. (on water bottles and aluminum cans)

Same load in a nickel plated .45 Colt case extracted even better, but does not lock up/close up the action as well as the .303 case. (yeah, a bit too much headspace as well)

There may be hope, although I'd much prefer regular power 410 shells.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

Have you attempted to measure it at all?

The brass on a 410 shot shell is .474" by my reckoning, the expanded .303 brass ahead of the head measures .4845". ? !!!! The .303 case-head measures .450". Case head of the .45 Colt is .475", so it appears a little less expanded than the .303 brass. The .303 rim is bigger, and head spaces better than the .45 Colt. Oh well, what to do, what to do?

 

[StrawHat]

I have thought about that. But, the muzzle end of the barrel looks quite thin to me. But, (two butts!) I don't know very much about re-lining, aside from the basics. Don't know how thin of a liner one could get away with.

So, make sure your liner is just big enough to slip in the shotgun bore. You can ream the chamber area, (maybe .500”) and used a stepped liner.

Indeed, re-lined and re-chambered in any variety of cool old calibers would be super-cool. .25-20 would be neat, as that's what it says on the barrel. The trouble is, I went to all the trouble of restocking it (before testing it)(since I remembered shooting it before) as I thought it would be super-cool for the grandson to learn shotgun on. That was the whole idea. For my own personal use, yeah I'd love it in any .32 pistol caliber. Could be a winner in .22 Hornet.

I am not familiar enough with the Stevens nor what era that rifle is from, was it chambered for the 25-20 Winchester or the 25-20 Single Shot? Two entirely different cartridges.

A .32 S&W long would be almost quiet. A Hornet would not be too loud.

Heck, make it a 38 S&W Special and consider it an American Rook rifle.

Kevin

 

[Ugly Sauce]

So, make sure your liner is just big enough to slip in the shotgun bore. You can ream the chamber area, (maybe .500”) and used a stepped liner.


I am not familiar enough with the Stevens nor what era that rifle is from, was it chambered for the 25-20 Winchester or the 25-20 Single Shot? Two entirely different cartridges.

A .32 S&W long would be almost quiet. A Hornet would not be too loud.

Heck, make it a 38 S&W Special and consider it an American Rook rifle.

Kevin

Kind of my thoughts, the word "Rook" did come to mind. In .22 Hornet, I would load it down. In any of those calibers, .32 Long, etc., it would be as good on small game as a 410. Although with our game laws, only shotguns and .22's (including the Hornet) are legal on most edible small game.

Anyhow, I thank everyone for their help and comments. All things considered, I don't think I'll put anymore time or $$$ into it, aside from making some shot loads in the .303 cases. I think (but will test) the 4 grains of Unique and 200 grains of shot is hitting hard enough for grouse, squirrels and rabbits. So, it will still be a functional gun. If I ever find any 2" shells, perhaps they are loaded down enough to work. If my memory can be trusted, I'm pretty sure (not positive) that I shot it, and it ejected, 2" 410's just fine. Rumor has it that the Rooskies make them, under the "Brown Bear" brand. But, for some reason any 410 is hard to find right now.

At any rate, it does pattern very nicely, even with the loads in the .45 colt and cut down .303 cases, and of course with the 2.5" 410 shells...which...don't...EXTRACT!!! And it looks very nice now with the butt stock I got from Macon gun stocks. They really helped me figure out what stock it needed, sent me a super nice piece of wood that I got to match the fore-stock, and it was even close enough that I could do the final fitting. !!! And the price was right.

For the grandson, I think I'll just start looking for an inexpensive single shot 410. Perhaps an over-100 year old classic shotgun wasn't really the best choice anyhow.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

was it chambered for the 25-20 Winchester or the 25-20 Single Shot?

No idea. All evidence has been removed. !!! Barrel is just marked "25-20". I think there existed a "Stevens .25-20", which could be the same as the .25-20 single shot. There was also a .25 Rimfire chambered in the early J. Stevens rifles, but this has an unmodified center fire breech block.

It's a beauty aye?

 

[Jackrabbit1957]

I just now read the measurements on the cases, something is definitely off. Cerrosafe is a casting material that shrinks in order to remove it from the chamber, about a half hour later it expands to the cast size. Might be worth trying, plus it's reusable.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

I just now read the measurements on the cases, something is definitely off. Cerrosafe is a casting material that shrinks in order to remove it from the chamber, about a half hour later it expands to the cast size. Might be worth trying, plus it's reusable.

Okay...didn't know it shrank. Wonder if it will shrink that much. ?

 

[Ugly Sauce]

But, considering the expanded cases are going .484", .485", do you think I need to do that?

 

[Jackrabbit1957]

Might give a more definitive answer as to why it's sticking cases. Are there any signs of a burr in the chamber?

 

[Ugly Sauce]

I could, and still see "rings" in the chamber. I polished the chamber quite aggressively but could only use a bore brush with steel wool and valve grinding compound on it, and then Scotch Brite with valve grinding compound on it, then oiled Scotch Brite. It made a small difference. I wasn't able to get any kind of sandpaper to stay on a jag, and do that. .50" jag was too big, .45" jag too small and I didn't have anything in between.

There are no "rings" imprinted on the cases, but there are very noticeable striations on the brass. I think the chamber has a "bottle neck" or is slightly tapered.

 

[Jackrabbit1957]

I see, maybe best bet is to have it relined.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

That's what I think would be best. The chamber is certainly over sized, and you know what they say, you can take metal off, but you can't.....well you know. I don't think it would cost too much either. Just need to get some leads as to who does that type of work. However, for now it might just go on the wall. Got other fish to fry. I think I'll just start the grandkids on a little 20 gauge I have, and that I have 410 chamber inserts for. (little skeeters) Probably the better idea in the first place, but I'm glad it's got a nice butt stock on it now, and it functions...just doesn't extract. But, the light loads do work and maybe I'll shoot a grouse with it. If I ever find some 2" shells, perhaps they so extract. If there was a .410 shell with a very short brass head, that might work.?

 

[Big Bore 44]

Odd idea. Take a 45-70 reamer to it, or have it chucked in a lathe and opened to take a straight wall .45 basic case. (unformed .45-70, 90, 120 case)

 

[StrawHat]

I could, and still see "rings" in the chamber. I polished the chamber quite aggressively but could only use a bore brush with steel wool and valve grinding compound on it, and then Scotch Brite with valve grinding compound on it, then oiled Scotch Brite. It made a small difference. I wasn't able to get any kind of sandpaper to stay on a jag, and do that. .50" jag was too big, .45" jag too small and I didn't have anything in between.

There are no "rings" imprinted on the cases, but there are very noticeable striations on the brass. I think the chamber has a "bottle neck" or is slightly tapered.

With those methods, all you have done is to ”polish” the imperfections. To remove them you need a reamer. Best to save this one until it can be done correctly.

Kevin

 

[Jackrabbit1957]

I just looked at Brownells website, they show a .410 forcing cone reamer for 66.00$. That might be the answer to your problem. It will cut the chamber to right length for 3 inch shells plus get rid of the short forcing cone. Reamer is on backorder but I imagine they will get some in fairly soon.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

With those methods, all you have done is to ”polish” the imperfections. To remove them you need a reamer. Best to save this one until it can be done correctly.

Kevin

Truth. Just had to give it a try. It did make a teeny-tiny difference, but not enough difference to make a difference. I think the combination of the chamber being oversized, and the imperfections compounds the problem. And as you know, reaming it now would mostly make it even more oversized...one step forward, two steps back. !!! Or, the cure being worse than the disease.

 

[Ugly Sauce]

I just looked at Brownells website, they show a .410 forcing cone reamer for 66.00$. That might be the answer to your problem. It will cut the chamber to right length for 3 inch shells plus get rid of the short forcing cone. Reamer is on backorder but I imagine they will get some in fairly soon.

the trouble I see there is that as the chamber is well oversized, the reamer would only cut the forcing cone, would extend the length, but would not remove any metal in the chamber as far as diameter...and with too much diameter to begin with....!!! Would not want to increase it anymore. ? Don't know what the standard diameter of a 410 chamber is supposed to be, but the brass on a current Remington shell is .470" by my measurement. This chamber is at least .484" or at least that's how the fired shell comes out of the chamber at. Taking some "spring back" into consideration, that chamber is even bigger than .484". ??

 

[Ugly Sauce]

I just looked it up. For a 2.5" shell, the SAAMI chamber size is .478". So yeah, we be a bit too big. !!! But, it is .481" for the 3" shell, so perhaps a 3" reamer would clean the chamber up okay. I wonder if 3" shells are larger in diameter? Anyone have one laying around to measure? I could always load a 3" down to 2.5" levels. Could be a possible cheaper solution. ?