Hopkins and Allen 922

[tim338]

I recently picked up a H&A 922 falling block for cheap. It's in great shape other than the 22 LR barrel is rough. I plan to reline it but I got thinking a switch barrel rifle might be a fun project. I have read these actions are fairly easy to convert back and forth from rimfire to centerfire by making a longer link to reposition the block up or down. Would this action handle a 25/20 single shot or a 32 S&W? I definitely don't want to do anything marginal safety wise.

[Bent Ramrod]

I have most of a M&H "Junior," made by H&A before the reorganization, with an original .32-20 barrel on it. But none were made on that frame size after the company reorganized, only .22 and .32 rimfire calibers. The time period coincided with the advent of factory smokeless powder loads, so it's easy to connect the dots and see the conclusions the manufacturers came to.

You might get away with .32 S&W Short or Long for a centerfire, but the mid-size frame H&As are really the way to go for centerfire calibers. They were the ones with the two holes in the link for switching from rim- to centerfire.

The 922s, 932s, 1922s, etc, do look stout with their genuine falling blocks, but somebody on the old Shooter's site rebarreled one to .22 rimfire Magnum and peened the block and frame back to excessive headspace in four or five shots.

[tim338]

I guess I will err on the side of caution and leave it in 22 LR only. Too bad the 17 HMR2 is practically dead that might have been a good choice for a second barrel.

[John Taylor]

The book says the 22 mag and 22 long rifle both have 24,000 psi, same as 17 II and 17 HMR. The old H&As were not heat treated and are not very hard. While the design is not bad the metal used is not very strong. Several years back I took one of the 12 gauge actions, threaded it and screwed in a 32-40 barrel. This had less bolt thrust than the 12 and it worked out well but I never cared for the looks.

[pietro]

The old H&As were not heat treated and are not very hard.

While the design is not bad the metal used is not very strong.

It will pay anyone to heed the voice of experience - Thanks, John !


.

[Drm50]

I had a 922 than had been 32 RF. & coverted to 32SW short. Shot it a lot with factory loads, no
problems. My old man traded it for a bolt action single shot 22, I think he was tired of buying
the 32s. I think they were only about $2.50 at the time, but 22 shorts were only about .29 a box.

[tim338]

32 S&W short sounds like fun!

[John Taylor]

Someone gave me an H&A action a while back. Thinking about having it case hardened, might look good and function better. Probably go with a 22 LR barrel.

[tim338]

Can't beat the good ol 22lr.

[Hooker53]

I have the 722 and the 922. IV had the same Kind of thoughts along the same lines as you. So far it's still a 22 LR. Ha. I would love for it to be able to stand up to 17 HMR but do t think it will. They are fun little rifles. Keep shooten Folks.

Roy
Hooker53

[tim338]

I'm still thinking 32 S&W would be alright but I don't want to risk ruining a good rifle.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

They look good, and should be one of the cheapest ways of getting a genuine old falling-block rifle. I would say they are well worth relining if the bore is bad. But I believe they are made of malleable cast iron, like the Stevens Favorite. I would be very wary of higher pressures than the original rimfires, and certainly not the .22WMR or .17 rimfire.

I can't see you getting into trouble with non-+P loadings of the .32 S&W rounds, even the Long. It should transfer more of the load to the barrel, by the adhesion and tenacity of the brass, than the .32 rimfire did.