Ballard #2 rimfire conversion questions

[akajun]

I have the opertunity to purchase a cast frame ballard 2 in 38 caliber at an attractive price. The downside is the gun is in rough shape externally and bore wise. The bore is unshootable as it is severly pitted, is ringed about 2/3 of the way down the bore, and the crown is severly dented in from what appears to be a drop on the muzzle. There is no blue left, and there is rust pitting on the barrel and reciever abotu .010 deep. The wood is in ok shape, just needs re finishing, and the mechanisim still locks up tightly with no pitting on the breech face. I would like to convert the gun to .22 rimfire with either the use of a liner or machine a new barrel. However I forsee a few issues that I need clarification on.
1. the extractor. Ballards use either a 1 or two piece extractor for 22, does the #2 use a one or two piece extractor for 22? I have read that the extractor cut for 22 is difficult to cut. While I can handle installing and chambering a liner or barrel blank is this extractor cut something I can handle with a manual lathe and vertical mill? I ve made extractor cuts before for m70's and yugo mausers, is it the same?
2. The bore for the rifle is currently 38 caliber. Redman .22 liners are smaller diameter than that. I have seen conversion kits for large .40 and .45 bpcr rifles that use bushings every 5-6" inches or so for a temporary conversion. Of course this conversion would be epoxied in, would I obtain better accuracy by using a sleeve the entire length of the liner?
3. Should I choose to farm this work out, who would you guys recomend for the following ,
color case hardening the reciever
extractor cut/chambering a barrel blank/ liner.
4. lastly, should I choose to keep in in .38 caliber, what do you guys think of using a modern .356 dia bore with a .38lc chamber? This would allow me to use .356 bullets but by cutting the chamber short, would prevent someone from inserting a .38 spl in the gun.

[Bigslug]

I'd start by getting in touch with John Taylor: http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?259969-Ballard-Caliber-Question

He did a #2 Ballard for my Pop that had similar bore damage. We went with .38 Long Colt for the rechamber for the reasons you outline in #4 and are shooting the Accurate 36-155C at .358" over Hodgdon Triple 7 (I want to say he's got it at 11-12 grains). You have to look REALLY hard to even perceive this work was done, and even still, you notice mostly because you KNOW it was done. It wasn't cheap but it WAS done right, and you don't get second chances when you start grinding out major portions of steel. It is now a tack-driver turning in roughly 2MOA groups, and would certainly do better if we swapped the nearly invisible original sights for a Marble's peep/17-A combination. Still in committee on that subject. We're zapping dog food cans and small drinking water bottles with impunity from the 100Y line, so are a little hesitant to mess with the original look.

The modern bore diameter is worth doing. The original Ballard .38's used a .375-ish diameter heel-based slug. That's worth putting up with if you've got a clean original tube, but if it's thoroughly toasted anyway...

The only slight issue on our sleeving is that you need to ensure that you push the extractor forward with the round, otherwise it's possible to get the rim ahead of the extractor. Then you need to catch the rim gently with a pocketknife to rectify.

I wouldn't do it as a .22 rimfire. You run into the issue of a new extractor, and then you run into availability of rounds these days. Small pistol rounds cost so little to feed with scrounged lead, you're basically dealing with a .22 at old prices anyway. There's new Uberti low wall clones to be had with set triggers and all the trimmings if you want a rimfire. Loading the .38LC with this LFN-type bullet to something like the original Ballard spec gives you a pretty fair small game rifle that you could take a deer with if you were hungry enough. A .22 won't have that mass-inspired versatility.

The end result is one of the most stupidly fun firearms we've handled in years. Recommend it highly!

[Ballistics in Scotland]

I'd agree that a larger caliber than .22 would suit this rifle better. Plenty of people still say what was true in the 1930s, that the .22 rimfire is the most highly developed cartridge we know. But centrefire components and loading techniques have come along quite a bit since then.

www.trackofthewolf.com (http://www.trackofthewolf.com) are well worth checking out for rifled barrel liners. Some of their .22 rimfire ones are 3/8in. diameter, and .25 etc. are 7/16in.

[carbine]

I picked up an 1865 Military Ballard last year chambered for 44 Rimfire. sent it out to Richard Schoenberger in Indiana to have it converted to centerfire. Can't recommend him highly enough
Richard Schoenberger
8984 E. County Road 1600W.
Sunman IN 47041
Tel 812-623-4881

Still working up loads but the guns shoots 10 shots into 2 square inches at 50 yards.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

I don't remember who made the 1865 Ballard (Merrimac Arms?) and this would probably be fine for a wide range of cartridges, within the limitations which the Ballard always had. I'm a long way from my guns and my books at the moment. But the really early Ball and Williams Ballards (I've got mine!) were probably malleable cast iron, and should be limited to very mild pressures. About as much as a black powder .44 Russian would probably be all right.

[StrawHat]

The #2 Ballard was built around a cast frame. Ballards are a weaker design and the cast action is the weakest. I had one in 32 Long RF/CF and have one in 22 WCF. Keep loads on the soft side.

[carbine]

The ballard responded very well to 15-16 gr FFFg in the 44-40. 10 shots into 2 square inches at 50 yards. Need to work on the rear sight. put a peep in a replacement leaf and it is waaay to big.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Yes, that sounds like the sort of load that should be fine in any sound Ballard, and there is quite a bit you can do with it. A lot of Ballards were converted into .22 target rifles, because they were thought to improve accuracy by driving the bullet into the rifling. But your project sounds like a much better way to go nowadays.

[Hooker53]

Jane at The Rifle Shop sent me a center Fire breech block the other day so will be changing my 38 Ballard over after I get by the Holidays. Very nice casting that will clean up real well. If anyone needs one of these, now would be the time to call while she still has them on hand.

Roy
Hooker53

[Hooker53]

You know, looking over some of my OLD post I know IV called Mod # Rem roller as a # 2 Ballard. Or a # 2 Ballard a roller. Ha. Ha. These old guns are totally new to this old guy and I Will get it sorted out. Ha. Im trying to seek out and find some books that will sort this out. Please forgive.

Roy

[John Taylor]

http://www.ebay.com/itm/THE-BALLARD-SINGLE-SHOT-RIFLE-/311242835474?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item487784c612 Lots of stuff out there.

The book I have
http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_odkw=ballard+rifle&_from=R40&_osacat=0&_from=R40&_trksid=p2045573.m570.l1313.TR0.TRC0.H0.Xballard+t he+great+american+single+shot+rifle&_nkw=ballard+the+great+american+single+shot+rifle&_sacat=0

[Hooker53]

Thanks John. Good stuff. I have found two books that are all about them but this mag art looks great.