Ballard Pacific .40-85 Everlasting

[marlinman93]

Thanks Vall. I’m wondering whether I should just have a little bit of TIG welding added to increase the “bite” of the extractor. My bore is just marginally acceptable, and I’m trying to decide whether to have it bored out to 45-70 or relined to 38-55. Oddly enough, the gun is all matching numbers except the barrel and fore end that have their own (matched numbers. Also, the barrel has all the usual Marlin markings except it is totally unmarked for caliber(!?!). I’d like to find out for sure whether it will shoot acceptably with the current caliber, then decide whether to keep it as is or rebore/reline.

Froggie

PS I like your hot rod too! I can visualize it either as a sedate mid green with dark green fenders or red with flames. Do you plan to to drive it to church?

"Usual Marlin markings"??? Usual for a Ballard was nothing but a serial number under the forearm on JM Marlin made Ballards. On later Marlin Firearms Co. made Ballards they added serial number, and caliber.
But I've never seen a Marlin Ballard with anything more than serial number and caliber. Does yours have more than a serial number?

If the bore is bad, I'd not waste time on reworking the extractor myself. I'd have it bored or relined, and then make the extractor match the new bore and chamber. Since it's a .40-85 now, I'd have it relined to the same, but have the chamber cut to use 9.3x74R brass formed out to .40-85. This way the extractor, and the chamber would fit perfect, and it would remain the original marked caliber.
I'm contemplating fitting a spare extractor to mine to fit the 9.3 case rim better. Then put the original extractor in the safe and mark what it's for.

[Green Frog]

Maybe I came through a little too negative with regards to the bore... it’s a reasonably good shooter grade bore, I just don’t know how it would do for long range accuracy. That’s why I want to try it. If I do go with a liner, it will probably be a smaller bore such as a 38-55 or even 33-47 since the barrel isn’t marked at all for caliber. Of course a rebore to 45-70 would mean I could use it for BPCS and get brass easily. I’ll have to go into the safe and check for other markings... but I thought there was a roll mark on top... but no caliber marking.

More later.
Froggie

[Argentino]

Nice rifle and nice car too. Almost any mechanical device capable of burning either powder or fuel has my attention.

I´ve watched a lot of videos from that channel and I always enjoy them. Didn´t know you were a member here too.

Keep it up.

Argie.

[marlinman93]

Maybe I came through a little too negative with regards to the bore... it’s a reasonably good shooter grade bore, I just don’t know how it would do for long range accuracy. That’s why I want to try it. If I do go with a liner, it will probably be a smaller bore such as a 38-55 or even 33-47 since the barrel isn’t marked at all for caliber. Of course a rebore to 45-70 would mean I could use it for BPCS and get brass easily. I’ll have to go into the safe and check for other markings... but I thought there was a roll mark on top... but no caliber marking.

More later.
Froggie

I like to maintain the original caliber if brass is easy to get. But I understand wanting to go to a caliber that is cheaper, and easier to get brass for.
I personally love old .40 caliber cartridges in my single shots, and much more so for long range shooting than I do my .45-70 caliber guns. Even with heavier bullets like my 415 gr. Snover in my Pacific .40-85, it still is easier on my shoulder than my .45-70 is with equal weight bullets, and a little more accurate.
But my favorite bullet with my various .40's is something in the 315-360 gr. range, and have found they're very close to the heavier Snover, without the felt recoil of the 415 gr. bullet. I rarely shoot my .45-70's much, and seem to always grab either my .40-85, .40-65, or .40-63 rifles.
My latest infatuation is the .40-50SS cartridge. I picked up a Rolling Block Sporting rifle from Ed Curtis at Denver a couple years ago, and it turned out to be such a great smokeless cartridge that I decided my in progress build of my Creedmoor "style" Rolling Block Sporter got changed from a .40-65 Win. to a .40-50SS chamber. I'm still working up and perfecting loads for the Roller's 34" barrel, but it shows a lot of promise with my 315 gr. bullets at long distance.

[Green Frog]

Vall, I finally went to the safe and got out my Pacific. You were right... no barrel markings. In fact, there was nothing at all on top, not even a caliber marking. Underneath, after removing the fore end the only marking was the serial number. 6869. My memory was faulty though, as the fore end itself was unmarked. The receiver and block as well as everything else that gets numbered is all marked 11074. The bore is so dirty right now I really can't tell what's left, but I hope get that taken care of tomorrow night. I measured it many years ago and the bore is unusually large, but it so happened that Jim Borton had a mould in the right diameter from the time he and Barry Darr were making moulds together, so if I can get the brass (and extraction) problems dealt with, I just need to know whether the bore is going to be up to the job. BTW, I have one of the Lyman tang sights with the windage block on top (sorta like the Pope type) called a #52A and I've got a couple of globe front sights to choose from... that will come soon.

Froggie

[marlinman93]

Charlie, the forearms are stamped on the back edge that butts to the receiver. In the case of a Pacific they often did part of the serial number on either side of the wiping rod hole, so it might have a couple digits of the number on each side.
Since your barrel is a mismatch number, and no caliber marking, there's no harm in making it whatever caliber you want now.

[Green Frog]

Charlie, the forearms are stamped on the back edge that butts to the receiver. In the case of a Pacific they often did part of the serial number on either side of the wiping rod hole, so it might have a couple digits of the number on each side.
Since your barrel is a mismatch number, and no caliber marking, there's no harm in making it whatever caliber you want now.

That was my feeling, and since I’ve never had a good 38-55, that’s one possibility if I line it. Either that or the modern version of the 40-70 made out of Krag brass. Reboring to 45-70 would probably be about as simple, and I could then recut the same extractor.

Froggie

[marlinman93]

Reboring to .35-70 would be cheapest and easiest. And would make it a great BPCR or BPTR rifle.

[Green Frog]

“Reboring to 35-70...“. Is this a typo? I assume you meant 45-70. I’m guessing there’s enough heft to the Pacific to handle the recoil this will give me, right? Was the 45-70 chambering commonly available in (original) #5s? I’m thinking it would be a “safe” investment to make altering this unmarked barrel. Also, as previously mentioned, this would let me recut the original extractor. Sounds like win-win!

Froggie

[marlinman93]

“Reboring to 35-70...“. Is this a typo? I assume you meant 45-70. I’m guessing there’s enough heft to the Pacific to handle the recoil this will give me, right? Was the 45-70 chambering commonly available in (original) #5s? I’m thinking it would be a “safe” investment to make altering this unmarked barrel. Also, as previously mentioned, this would let me recut the original extractor. Sounds like win-win!

Froggie

Yes, mistype on my part. The .45-70 was a common caliber available in a Pacific, and my first one was in this caliber. I traded it off for my Pope Ballard 3 barrel set a couple years ago, since I had my .40-85 that was much nicer.
I assume yours being a .40-85 barrel that it has plenty of meat to go to .457" bore. If it was a smaller caliber like .38-55 it might be a lighter barrel profile, and then it might not handle recoil well in the .45-70 caliber.
A reline will likely set you back about $500-$550, but you'd have to check to see for sure what it costs. I think rebores are still under $200, so a lot cheaper, and since there's no liner or caliber marking the value is much better.

[hawkenhunter50]

Here's another video from the same shoot as the Hepburn. If it looks like I'm fumbling with loading a little, I am! I use 9.3x74R cases fire formed to .40-85, and the case rims are slightly smaller. So I'm trying to ensure the extractor stays under the rim as I chamber them.
This is at 650 yds. also, using factory Ballard tall mid-range vernier tang sight, and fixed globe front sight.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJGl...brushLongshots

And this is off topic, but my ride to and from the shoot. 1200 miles on my recently road ready '39 Chevrolet coupe. 18 months of rust and rot repair, and all new drive train and suspension. Hope to paint it this winter.

Man am I jealous at you guys that have access to shooting distances like that. Cool video, thanks for sharing.

[marlinman93]

Man am I jealous at you guys that have access to shooting distances like that. Cool video, thanks for sharing.

Thanks!
Well it's an all day drive for me to get there, so not exactly close access, but worth the trip! My gun club has 1000 yds. but it's usually went on this side of the state, and misses are tough to see! Over East we get great dust to see if you miss!

[Green Frog]

My earliest high wall with an original barrel has what is referred to as a “salt and pepper” bore. In 32-40 it shoots cast bullets with moderate fixed loads (185-200 gr bullet over 13.6 gr 4759) surprisingly well, but doesn’t like BP at all. I’m wondering whether I’ll experience the same thing with my 40-90. Time will tell.

Froggie

[marlinman93]

My earliest high wall with an original barrel has what is referred to as a “salt and pepper” bore. In 32-40 it shoots cast bullets with moderate fixed loads (185-200 gr bullet over 13.6 gr 4759) surprisingly well, but doesn’t like BP at all. I’m wondering whether I’ll experience the same thing with my 40-90. Time will tell.

Froggie

I've not shot much BP in .32-40 even with good bores. Just never found it to work as well as smokeless.

[Green Frog]

I've not shot much BP in .32-40 even with good bores. Just never found it to work as well as smokeless.

I guess the real questions I’m left with are whether I could find suitable smokeless loads for those huge cases and whether I would have any hope of finding a mild smokeless load that was also accurate with that salt and pepper barrel.

I don’t want to stress that old warrior with too hot a load (even if it is a forged action) but I also don’t want to waste a lot of time and effort working with something that has no hope of success.

Am I going to need to go hard, medium, or soft with my alloy, and will I need something other than my standby lubes like Emmert’s?

[marlinman93]

I've tried everything from 30:1 to 15:1 and not noticed any difference with mine. But my bore is perfect, and looks unfired when I bought mine. It had a very gentle life, and saw little use.
I only shoot smokeless, and at first was concerned with the huge case, and how it might work. But I have other .40's with large cases I shoot smokeless in, so just used loads I'd worked up for them, and went from that point. I started with a load I used in my .40-65 Rolling Block, and it's pretty mild for that gun. My loads are around 1350 fps, with the 315 gr. bullet, and comfortable.
A lot of my old guns I've used the old Ideal loading manual data for. Some of the loads are pretty warm, so I wont try them, but others proved to be great.

[Green Frog]

Well, just for grins and giggles I ran some JB’s Bore paste through the Pacific’s barrel and it came out a lot nicer than I expected. it actually looks a little nicer than the high wall did. I guess I’ll have to cast up some bullets and lube them and see what kind of results I can get before I make any changes to the gun.

Now I have to find a safe smokeless load for Norma brass and one of the 40 cal bullets I have on hand. I’d like to find one for either 4759 or AA #9 since they are what I use in other BP cartridges.

Froggie

[marlinman93]

Well, just for grins and giggles I ran some JB’s Bore paste through the Pacific’s barrel and it came out a lot nicer than I expected. it actually looks a little nicer than the high wall did. I guess I’ll have to cast up some bullets and lube them and see what kind of results I can get before I make any changes to the gun.

Now I have to find a safe smokeless load for Norma brass and one of the 40 cal bullets I have on hand. I’d like to find one for either 4759 or AA #9 since they are what I use in other BP cartridges.

Froggie

What weight bullet Charlie?

[Green Frog]

What weight bullet Charlie?

I thought I had some, but now I need to do some casting... I’ll have to get back to you.
In the meanwhile, that old #5 sure does look a lot better after just a minimal amount of TLC!

Froggie

PS I would love to find a Pacific-style lever for a single trigger gun to use on my Franken-Smith. They just look right! Does anybody make one these days?

[marlinman93]

Froggie

PS I would love to find a Pacific-style lever for a single trigger gun to use on my Franken-Smith. They just look right! Does anybody make one these days?

Before Marlin incorporated in 1881 and went from JM Marlin Co. to Marlin Firearms Co. all levers for the single trigger hunting models were ring levers. Then after 1881 they became the common S lever we see so often. So what you need is the early JM Marlin lever, which are rarely seen for sale separate from guns. Maybe Rodney Storie could cast some if there was enough requests for them?
This is my early gun with ring lever: