New Rolling Blocks!

[Panzerschwein]

Hey everyone,

I don't know about you but after watching some vids on YouTube about Remington Rolling Block rifles, I want one. They just seem so cool to me, and are very historic. They were made in a large number of calibers and used by numerous militaries around the world, and are regarded as one of the best single shot rifle designs ever made.

I especially want one in 7.62x54mmR because I have so much of that round. I also think a version in .308 Winchester, or .30-06 Springfield or even .223 Remington would be pretty cool.

I say this because the design itself seem very simply. It has few parts and supposedly is very strong. With modern metallurgy and some updates to the design, could the Remington Rolling Block be chambered in these rounds? I hope so!

I think we should start lobbying a company to start making modern, affordable Rolling Blocks in modern smokeless cartridges. I think H&R/NEF would be an excellent canditate because they have a great deal of experience making inexpensive but good quality single shot rifles and shotguns.

What so you on this? Am I crazy, or would you to like to see new Remington Rolling Blocks in modern cartridges?

 

[Gordon]

I love me some rolling blocks and have them in 7x57, 25-20, .357 and .22 . I think .303 british and certainly 30-40 pressure range (under 48,000 psi) would be ok especially with modern steel and CNC. HOWEVER they are no where near as strong or with safety margins as is a rotary bolt or an enclosed rear receiver . If something ruptures or lets go it is coming straight back at you. The actions are a bit springy too, as my excellent shape 1902 7MM shows on it's cases and of the 3 other 7mms I own this one does it the least! Navy Arms had one for sale a few years back as did Remington itself in a high end target version.

 

[Edarnold]

I believe Remington made some military rifles for the Czar, certainly in 8mm Lebel for the French around WW1. So rimmed rounds should be good to go. I suspect the 'springy' effect with rimless rounds may be more due to the extractor design than to actual movement of the breechblock. Mauser-style extractors hold the case in place on firing against the impact of the firing pin and the extrusion of the primer, before the internal pressure pushes the case back against the bolt face. The Rolling Block extractor is pretty loose when the breech is closed, which means the case may slide farther forward on firing and show more stretching. Going to a linear extractor with a larger hook, in place of the small hook on the rotary 1902 action might solve the problem. Or, just stick with rimmed cases.

 

[BCRider]

The classic old originals are only good for up around 26K worth of pressure. But as you say with modern steels I don't doubt that we could have a modern rolling block that handles modern cartridges.

And yes, my rolling block is every bit as much fun to shoot as you think it is. Mine is an antique Swedish receiver dated 1873 with a Shilo Sharps barrel on it. I've got mine set up for long range BPCR style shooting with a set of Pedersoli long distance peep sights.

 

[Don McDowell]

I wouldn't trust a roller to contain the pressures of the modern cartridges.
Even in the days of the big bore blackpowder cartridges they were said to "shoot backwards from time to time"

 

[Jim Watson]

Remington made the No 5 Sporting Rifle and the 1902 Military Rifle in calibers up to 7x57, .30-30, .30-40, and 8mm Lebel.
The Danes converted a lot of bigbore black powder rolling blocks to 8x58R.

I don't know if "modern metallurgy" would make them suitable for .308 etc. Dave Higginbotham sure wouldn't, and he built Rolling Blocks probably better than Remington.

Nobody is going to start building new rifles so you can shoot foreign surplus ammo like 7.62 Russian.

 

[Slamfire]

I think the Remington Rolling block a superior blackpowder single shot design from the aspects of simplicity, manufacturing and operation. Once you cock the hammer it is obvious how to empty and load the thing. It is not a strong design and I would be very leery of one in an high pressure application. You can look at the thing and see that the load is carried through the block pins, which are not all that rigid. Also, I have read of the breech block opening after firing due to weak mainsprings. Evidentially there has to be a certain amount of mainspring force, transmitted through all the cams and lever angles, to keep the block closed during firing. The rolling block does not provide as good of gas protection from gas coming out of the breech as does a falling block action.

Some of these issues could be addressed in a modern redesign, but not all.

 

[BCRider]

With modern metals and a re-design to allow for larger pins to better withstand the pressures I suspect that a modern rolling block would be useable with a pretty fair number of modern cartridges up to a .308.

But really if we're going with this sort of route then why not just re-make a falling block action and avoid such issues?

Of course there are a few such. They just aren't cheap in the H&R/NEF sort of way. We've got various Sharpe clones, Pedersoli makes clones of both Remington rolling block rifles as well as Browning/Winchester Hi Walls. And of course Ruger has their Farquarson falling block Number 1's and 3's.

But of course none of these options comes with the attractive H&R/NEF like price tag. Why? I'm not sure. It doesn't take much more to make a rolling block action than a break action. And I suspect that with only a little imagination a fairly easy and low parts count falling block action would not be out of the question. And I know that even if such options were to cost 50% more than their current break actions I'd happily pay for the difference.

 

[tark]

I have a rolling block chambered in 30-06. It was proof tested at 80,000 PSI . I know because I made it myself out of a block of 4140. It was heat treated to a hardness of 40. It is a direct copy of a Remington #5 sporting rifle It features thicker sidewalls, larger diameter pins and the breech block and hammer are no wider than they have to be, resulting in shorter (stiffer and stronger) breech block and hammer pins. The chamber is very tight and fired cases can be resized in a full length die with very little effort. There appears to be very little or no "springing" of the action.
I guess it pretty much demonstrates that a modern rolling block, made properly CAN handle modern cartridges and pressures. The proof round, curiously enough, was a German round, steel cased and marked as " 7.62X63" which is what the 30-06 is called in Europe. After doing the math, converting kilograms and square centimeters into pounds per square inch, it worked out to just under 80,000 PSI. After firing, the round extracted normally and the gun showed no increase in headspace. It is a good shooter and will hold minute of angle out to 200 yards.

 

[d2wing]

It costs a lot more to make that design strong enough for higher pressure cartridges. I don't see the point of useing a Vintage action for a modern cartridge.

 

[BCRider]

Tark, your words are "music to my ears". Or perhaps more accurately "art for my eyes"

Any chance of some pictures of your new age rolling block? Or a link to a thread where you show it off with a bunch of pictures? I have to admit to contemplating something of this sort myself.

 

[HOOfan_1]

I have an old custom German. 22 rimfire rolling block. I prefer falling blocks for centerfires though.

 

[rcmodel]

The Remington Rolling-Block has excess headspace by design.
It was designed for low pressure Rimmed black-powder cartridges when they first came about.
Excess headspace didn't matter with them.

The hammer runs under the breech block as it falls to prevent it blowing open.
And there has to be a certain amount of 'slop' built in to prevent the hammer extension from dragging on the breach block locking extension as it falls.

Then there is flex in the pins & receiver walls that can't be overcome.
No matter what modern steels they are made from.

It is what it is.
And can be nothing more.

It was ingenious & plenty strong in black powder days.
Now with 65,000 PSI smokeless cartridges?

Not so much.

rc

 

[BCRider]

RC, for this one time I don't agree. Oh I will grant that we won't be able to make the old roller strong enough for the more powerful rounds. But with some re-designing to cut down the headspace issues by a slight trimming to make it more acceptable and with a heavier wall receiver and bigger pins with more bearing area on the walls and maybe a press fit into the rolling block and hammer I don't see why we could not shoot .308, .30-06 and the like from an updated roller. Compared to the original it would look like a body builder on steroids but it would still be fairly svelte compared to a long length bolt action receiver.

 

[HOOfan_1]

. But with some re-designing to cut down the headspace issues by a slight trimming to make it more acceptable and with a heavier wall receiver and bigger pins with more bearing area on the walls and maybe a press fit into the rolling block and hammer I don't see why we could not shoot .308, .30-06 and the like from an updated roller.

Someone would need the motivation to redesign it though. With falling blocks like the Ruger No. 1 and Winchester 1885 already capable of withstanding the pressure of the likes of the .300 Winchester Magnum, and break opens being able to withstand high pressures, I don't know that anyone would be willing to redesign a rolling block to withstand higher pressure.

 

[tark]

BCrider, I wish I knew how to post pics of my rolling block, but I am 65 years old and this is my first computer. My son had to drag me, kicking and screaming, into the twenty first century. I am totally computer stupid, but I have figured out my I-phone pretty well. If you will text a message to 309-502-9871 I can text you back pics of the rolling block.
The 30-06 is not the only rolling block I have made, I also have made a 45-70 . It was made out of 1045 carbon steel and properly heat treated. It was proofed with a 70 grains of RE-7 and a 500 grain jacketed soft point. That is a .458 load and develops over 50,000 PSI. Neither one of the two is excessively large or bulky. The actions are very slightly larger than the originals. There would be no new engineering or design problems to overcome, just use good quality materials. The only reason I picked the rolling block action to copy was the fact that it is simple, with very few parts. The only thing I changed was the springs, my rifles have all coil springs. Ill be looking forward to texting you those pics.

 

[Don McDowell]

One of the offshore rollingblock importers decided to change the spacing etc on the pins on their version of the gun. A few years back there were 2 or 3 of those things being used in bpcr matches loaded with blackpowder that spit the cases right back in the shooters face. The manufacturer decided that it was to much lubrication on the pins that caused the problem.
Be very careful about doing a Rolling block in the highpressure cartridges, and always keep in mind Remington themselves were still building rollers when the 30-06 and the like were introduced, but yet opted out of chambering those cartridges... Just some food for thought.

 

[BCRider]

Those old cast steel receivers didn't have a whole lot of meat to them. I know because I've got one and I've looked inside it. So I'd not want to go for a high pressure in the originals either or a faithful copy even in newer steels either. But a change to a more solid forged frame and bigger pins with the support closer in to the block and hammer so the pins are loaded more in shear than bending could work for a lot of stronger pressure chamberings. Oh, perhaps not the ones that are up well over 55K. But that still leaves us with a lot of classic and popular hunting rounds to consider.

Is it better than the Ruger or Winchester/Browning falling block design? No, of course not. But it could prove to be a very useable option. And sometimes it's as much about using something different for fun as anything else.

Tark, I'm off to a weekend if cowboy shooting in about 20 minutes. I'll text you early next week and with your permission I'll post the pictures to this thread... if I can figure out how.

 

[tark]

Hi BC It is 4:14 (central std time) on a fri afternoon. I just sent you (I hope) a bunch of pictures of both rolling blocks. Hope they get to you. At least my I phone didn't tell me I screwed up so I have my fingers crossed. Of course you can put them on the forum. Give me a call sometime and I can discuss them at length.

 

[tark]

RCmodel, you need to read my first post. A rolling block using modern steel and chambered for a modern (30-06) cartridge already exists because I made it! And it passed proof at 80,000 PSI. There is no longer a question of "is it possible?" It is

 

[Scooter22]

"Passed proof at 80,000 PSI"". Great but how long will it shoot multiple rounds at 50-60K PSI before it loosens up?

 

[Bullet Bob]

And out of curiosity, where was the proofing done?

 

[tark]

apparently for quite some time, scooter 22 .The gun has several hundred rounds through it by now and the headspace is unchanged. Ive been checking it from time to time. I know a Remington or Winchester 30-06 will pass the same proof, but how long before it loosens up with a steady diet of 50,000 PSI loads? It won't, for the same reasons my rolling block won't. The 50,000PSI loads won't stretch anything because they aren't STRAINING anything. It is the pressure the gun was DESIGNED to operate with. No difference with my Rolling Bloc.

Bullet bob, the rifle was proofed in my back yard. I worked for Les Baer for 22 years and I got the proof round from one of our German customers. Of course the gun was tied to a tire and I pulled a lanyard from around the corner, sweating bullets the entire time! The hammer cocked rather stiffly after firing, which is a rolling block's way of telling you your loads are getting stiff. The case extracted normally. Ten more Factory 150 gr factory rounds were fired and headspace was rechecked. It was 1.9463 before the test and 1.9463 after it. The gun was disassembled and the receiver, breechblock, hammer and both pins were magnafluxed to check for cracks. There were none. I declared the gun as having passed proof.

I am hoping the pics I E-mailed BCrider came through so he can post them I also sent him pics of my other rolling block, also hand made, in 45-70 I made it out of 1045 carbon steel and it was also professionally heat treated . IT was proofed with a 458 load. loaded in a Remington case.(the thickest and strongest available.) A 510 grain Hornady softnose was tapped into the leade of the rifleing ., leaving just enough room to seat the Remington case behind it. The charge was 70 grains of Rx-7 , a 458 load developing 50,000. I used the same proceedure as the 30-06 with the same results. I use it today for BPCR matches so it most certainly isn't being strained.

Rolling blocks are most certainly capable of handling modern, high pressure rounds, if made correctly using good quality steel. I think my two guns prove it.

 

[Panzerschwein]

That sounds awesome Tark, I want one!

 

[tark]

Wish I could build you one, but I don't have a Manufacturers licence. I can only build guns for myself. The ATF is very strict about this.! If I build you a gun and even if I GIVE it to you, I am still in violation of the law. #@$%&*%$(*