Stevens 44

[Hooker53]

Ok folks have a question for you 44 collectors. I have what I BELEIVE is an early 44 action. IV finally got it broke down and in the idle of cleaning it up. IV been looking at that this thing for the last few days and wondering. What holds the lever and the breech block in place when ready to shoot it? Mine has no lever plunger nor lever plunger spring. Not even a drilled channel for it to reside in. Do you literally have to hold it in battery or???
Thanks for your help on this.

Roy
Hooker53

[Bent Ramrod]

It holds together by what they used to call "cramp in the link," i.e., the cumulative flex of all the linkage parts when the lever is tight against the tang and the breechblock is tight against the barrel. The same thing that gives Vise Grips their "grip," or those CabineTree mould handles their tightening, or a Ballard action the snap on shutting.

After a little wear of the parts, either the 44 or the Ballard, then your hand holds the lever shut. The linkage is still over-center, so you aren't directly holding the breech shut.

[Hooker53]

You made that perfectly understood. Thank you for explaining that and posting here Bent Ramrod. I was very afraid that the Lever Plug, spring, channel and all had broke out somehow years ago and I had a wall hanger. Ha. Now all I have to do is deside to either convert my rimfire breechblock to CF or beat the woods and see if I can find one. I think it's enough web on the top of the RF block to do that and not mill out of the firing pin channel. Thanks again.

Roy

[pietro]

Now all I have to do is deside to either convert my rimfire breechblock to CF or beat the woods and see if I can find one.





IMO, you might want to first check out what Mr. Single Shot (Frank DeHaas) had to say about converting the various RF Stevens rifles to CF.



.

[elk hunter]

IMO, you might want to first check out what Mr. Single Shot (Frank DeHaas) had to say about converting the various RF Stevens rifles to CF.

Very good advice!

The 44 is not a very strong action.

[Hooker53]

Yes, your correct. IV been running down the info on that and checking CUP for it. I don't plan a very big Cal for that action. In fact, I'm thinking something as low as a low CUP .38 Spl load for it or smaller. Just want to put it back in service with something. Thanks for all the post.

Roy

[marlinman93]

The 44 is not an extremely strong action, but they were chambered in numerous CF pistol calibers, including the .44-40! I owned one once in .44-40 and shot it quite a bit with light to medium hand loads of cast bullets. The .38 Spl. is an OK choice as long as someone doesn't run +P loads through it.
The pivoting block of the 44 and 44 1/2 don't allow for a mortise for the block to travel in. Wouldn't be possible for the action to work as designed if it had a mortise. But one of the advantages of the design is if a round is not fully chambered, the block can lever the cartridge home. There's enough lever advantage to seat a cartridge, as long as it's close and not too much resistance.

[Hooker53]

Hello Marlinman. Were those 44-40 light to Med loads with BP or smokeless? The 44-40 did pass my mind as I have a Rem #5 roller in that Cal. I have a J Stevens Arms and Tool Cat #52 Circ 1909 as well as J Grants books and if I'm not Mistaken, both were siting CUP at 30,000 for the loads in that action. I know you have to consider the diff between BP loads and smokeless but this action saw both. I know also the old guns as much as we love them, don't have the metals in them a modern rifle firing 358 mags and such but if you keep it low, you can still have a lot of fun with the old ones. Keep them coming. All good points.

Roy

[pietro]

In fact, I'm thinking something as low as a low CUP .38 Spl load for it or smaller.




While you might think a low CUP .38 Special loads is OK, you might want to consider what might happen if some innocent chambers a high-performance load, in your absence.

I considered just that, when I wanted to upgrade my .32RF solid-frame #4 Remington rolling block "boy's rifle" - so, I used a cartridge that there were no existing commercial high-performance loads made.

I hit the EASY button, and simply converted the firing pin from RF to CF so I could shoot the commercially-available (Winchester) .32 Short Colt (cartridge) in it.


.

.

[marlinman93]

Hello Marlinman. Were those 44-40 light to Med loads with BP or smokeless? The 44-40 did pass my mind as I have a Rem #5 roller in that Cal.

Roy

I shot only smokeless mild loads in my 44 in .44-40. My load was a cast 200 gr. bullet at around 950 fps.

[slumlord44]

The 44 makes a good rimfire rifle. .22 LR, .22Mag, .17HRM. Centerfire in the right caliber and right light loads are fine. Easy to create an unsafe condition if the gun ever gets the wrong centerfire ammo in it. Your choice.

[Hooker53]

I ever intended to be very careful not only with this old action but even the newer ones. I always run a load down and study it to extent before I uncover my RCBS 505. Ha. Most all of my loads for my old guns, and most of my guns are old collectsbles, I hand measure each load. Not because I don't trust the load for my gun but because I want each and every one to be the same. Plinking loads for 9 mm and stuff like that is the only loads I run through my Lyman 55 or my auto-disk. it's long and drawn out but if I get a flyer, I want to know it was the old gun or me. Lol. Having a multitude of load books on a shelf can give one a feeling of safeness. At this point of my reloading experience , I think that's wrong to do most of the time. With these old guns if you are converting one you at at the pentacal of doing something the majority of the shooting public will never do. You have to learn to run down the CUPS and compare. With this old 44 that is still not enough for me. I detect and maybe I'm wrong at this point but the CUP's arrived at between black powder and smokeless can be a deserning factor for should I or shouldn't I? Ha. It must be something that few has done with this action because so far, a yo e thats done it has not posted here.

Slumlord, a .22 mag in fhis action and project would be a fun Cal. I have a Mossburg 640 that is a lot of fun. The only drawback to me is you can'tload for it. I'v even kicked the idea around of a 25 ACP or a 32 ACP. I would love to do a 327 Fed Mag, but do t think this action would hold up to that. A 32 H&R??????? Don't know. I would think that would evenbe to much. Keep shooting folks.

Roy

[Chev. William]

Consider,if you please, chambering your Stevens in ".32 Long Colt" or even ".32 Extra Long" in CF.
This is the SAME Case diameters as The ".32 Long" Rim Fire rounds. Bullets can be 85 grain to 105 grain. Preferably Heeled design, of around .311" to .315" Maximum diameter and if fired in a .308" Groove diameter barrel do preform well. in a .311" groove Diameter barre, a little less well MOA wise.

And J. Stevens Originally Chambered both the Favorite and The Model 44 in .32 :Long along with the Model 44 in .32 Long Colt.

From many others experiments I have read that the 85 grain Hollow base bullets in .32 Long Colt reduce shooting accuracy compared to heeled bullets of the same weight. It seems the change was to put the Lube inside the case for 'neatness' rather than Improved Accuracy.

Just Something to consider.

I have Used .32 S&W Long cases Swaged down to .32 Long Colt Diameters and at about .930" maximum Case length with an Accurate Molds "311090A" bullet of .311" Driving band, .302" heel diameter and with the Lube groove in the Heel.
I load to about 1124fps out of a 22" barrel.

Best Regards,
Chev. William

[Hooker53]

Chev. That's the very meat I was looking for. Thank you very much for posting this info. I knew if you weighed in, it would give me a new channel of thought. Ha. I have no problem wifh heeled Boolits. You and a few ofhers got me straightned out with that on my Rem #2 Roller in .38. RF. Jacks had a CF Breech Block that fit like a glove and Montana Boolit Mould made me a combo mould with a 125 and a 150 grn cav. Iv yet to work up a good grouping with it but its still not bad with 4 grns of Trail Boss. Cant get much more than that in a case. Have a Great Labor Day.

Roy
Hooker53

[marlinman93]

As much as I love the .32 Long, and have several old Ballards I shoot it in; I wouldn't saddle myself with the hassle of forming brass or heeled bullets. Instead I'd simply chamber it for the .32 S&W Long and get cheap brass ready to load. Standard bullets, and inexpensive loading dies. You can load it to the same velocities as the .32 Long, and also not worry if someone later put factory .32 S&W in the gun and fired it.

[Hooker53]

Even more good info. Seems I have some Weighing and deciding to do. Since I have to line the barrel anyway, I could go anyway the thought strikes. Thanks Marlinman.

Roy
Hooker53

[Chev. William]

Comments:
.32 Long as built by J. Stevens, according to the Barrels I have 'slugged' run between .304" to .309" Groove diameters with most at .306" to .308" Groove diameters. The .32 Long RF and ORIGINAL .32 Long Colt CF used Soft Lead Heeled Bullets that ran between .310" to .315" Driving Band diameters.

By using his 'tight bores' he insured that bullets fired from his barrels swaged to fit tightly in the bore/groove dimensions. Other manufacturers seem to run toward .313" Groove diameters with some indication of Leading and deteriorated Accuracy (according to contemporary Books I have read from the 1890-1900 era).

If you are relining your rifle please consider the above as a recommendation for a .308" groove Diameter Liner of more than era Twist rates. I am having a 'takeoff' .308 Win. Barrel cut back and fitted to my Stronger Model 44 action. That is a 1:12 twist nominal.

Yes, i am probably 'over stabilizing' the bullets I fire but it also is mostly Moot as my range firing is typically 110 yards or less due to problems getting my target frames out to longer ranges, then retrieving them at the end of a session.

this twist would also Stabilize heavier bullets if I decide to try longer ranges when the opportunity presents itself. And I don't have to worry some future owner of the rifle will 'mistakenly' chamber a .32 S&W Long+P+ round with Problematic results.

Best Regards,
Chev. William

[Hooker53]

Well. After reading a lot of info on this action, at this time, I think I'm gonna go with a 25-20. Some were chambered in this and even 25-20 smokeless at the end of production. It's o e of my Fav's and have some of the most casted. Olds for this sooooo. Only makes sense. This could change since I have plenty of time for thought before I start on it. Thanks for all your input.

Roy
Hooker53

[Ballistics in Scotland]

I'd probably settle for a converted or replacement breechblock and the original chambering. Originality is worth keeping if it does you no real harm, and although someone in generations yet unborn could still do himself damage by irresponsible loading of the .32 Colt rounds, you wouldn't have met him halfway.

There is a possible difference between the .32 Long Rimfire and the .32 Long rifle introduced in about 1900. The original .32 Rimfires, Long and Short, were heel bullet rounds which corresponded perfectly with the Colts. But they changed to inside lubricated in different ways. The Long Rifle adopted a smaller bullet which probably corresponded closely to the .309 grooves I found in a table of 1909 in Colonel Brophy's book on Marlins. It was hollow-based for expansion in older rifles, and either-way interchangeability was probably possible without grave loss of accuracy.

That isn't the case with the .32 Long and Short Colts, however. They changed to a .299 inside-lubed bullet, probably to keep the brass thicker. This won't work in the .32 rifles. In fact it probably worked rather badly in revolvers of the old bore dimensions, but with a close-range pocket pistol, probably few people noticed.There was never a .32 Short Rifle, so owners of rifles chambered for the Short were left without a centrefire that would work.

I've been told that Stevens diameters for the Favourite were .2985 land .314in. groove, but I have slugged my own late Favourite at .303 and .308. So it may be that Stevens made a similar transition to Marlin.

177004177005

[Hooker53]

Hello B in S. the orig chambering is 25 RF. that's why I was trying to stay with the smaller Caliber. If I went 32, I would have to line it. I think if decided to line it, I would be enticed to go. 22 LR or .22 Mag. Don't think it would take. Uh of an adjustment to the present block to stay RF. I have awhile before I get to this one so will roll all the info around before deciding. Thanks as always for your info.

Roy

[marlinman93]

If you have it rechambered to .25-20, and keep the .25 Stevens bore, then you may suffer poor accuracy with bullets for the .25-20WCF! The .25 Stevens RF is a true .25 caliber at .251" bullet diameter, but a .25-20 uses a .257" bullet and will be much too large for your Stevens bore. You could have the bore re-rifled deeper to handle the larger bullet.

[Hooker53]

Yup. I thought about that right after I hit the post button. Ha. The very first thing I was gonna do before I did anything is pound a soft Boolit down through the barrel to see what I have. Just kicking things around now. I need to start asking myself on all these RF projects is, did this thing have a heeled Boolit? If so, then the barrel rifling is not going to be conventional. Thanks for making think some more.


Roy

[Bent Ramrod]

I've modified most of my Stevens 44s, and my Favorite .22s, in this manner.

177030 177031

Addition of metal to the top of the lever so that it props the bottom of the breechblock shut when closed approximates the original specification of the O. W. Horr patent (US 323,936, May 1885) upon which the Ideal Side Plate rifle was based. Having extra metal on the top of the lever to prop the breech block shut when the linkage is overcenter allows the thrust of the cartridge case on the breechblock to be borne by the lever and breechblock screws (or bolts) and the frame, rather than by the lever and breechblock pins and the link. Making new lever and block screws (or bolts) out of drill rod or tool steel may serve to strengthen the breeching further. (It can't hurt, anyway.) The link and its pins then function only to open and shut the breechblock, and have no load bearing function themselves.

It is a rather tedious to disassemble, spot, file, fit, and reassemble and test to get the lever extension to slide smoothly under the breechblock while still allowing the lever to contact the tang when the breech is closed, and it is obvious that this hand fitting was the reason the Side Plate model was so expensive. However, the home mechanic, if he is careful and takes his time, can accomplish this and amortise the work with the shooting he does afterwards.

These modifications will not turn a Stevens 44 into a 44-1/2, (or even a 44-1/4 ;)) but will allow more shots to be fired with the mild loadings suitable to the 44 action before the lever starts to droop. More yet can be fired before the headspace will start to increase.

When I rebuilt my first Favorite, I made the biggest link that would fit out of tool steel, and lever and link pins (and block and lever screws) out of drill rod, hardened and tempered. Figured I had a gun for the ages, then. One carton of High-Speed .22s and the rims started bursting out the back. I did the lever modification (and went to Standard Velocity) and the gun is still tight a couple of cartons of ammo later. YMMV, of course.

[marlinman93]

Really great info Bent Ramrod!

[Hooker53]

That's for sure. Good stuff here. I will incorporate that. Now that we are into the lock up info, let me ask. You folks that have the 44's, when your barrel is screwed all the way in correctly, where is your barrel end, in relation of your action? I know this determans your squish or lockup and your headspace in some cases. The barrel I have for this is not orig to the action and when I screw it up as far as it will go, I still need about 1/8th or a turn or, one flat. This will be a touchy Feely thing when I get at it. When I indicate it up in my lathe, I'm not gonna take but a few thousands off the thing before trying it. At its point right now the barrel face is already protruding a small bit past the action. I have not tried the lock up at this point to see if it will. Keep it coming guys and Keep shooting.

Roy
Hooker53

[marlinman93]

The factory original 44's will turn up so sights are vertical, and the barrel snug against the receiver by hand. Then the setscrew simply goes into the hole in the bottom of the barrel. Headspace is perfect at that point.
If yours isn't this way, then it will need the barrel faced to fit against the receiver. But need to ensure the hole in the bottom of the threads lines up with the screw also, and headspace is perfect. Donor barrels rarely headspace and fit up correctly.

[Bent Ramrod]

Hooker53,

If your aftermarket barrel came on the action, it might have been fitted in a vise with a wrench. Some gunsmiths didn't like the easy takedown of the Stevens and used the conventional method of attachment. If you have a barrel vise and an action wrench, one-half to one flat off is about right for final wrench tightening.

My 44s only have maybe 0.015" barrel protrusion past the frame, at most. Once I replaced the action pins and did whatever else, I would just screw the open action (minus extractor) onto the barrel in by hand and keep trying to close it to test the lockup as the barrel got close to bottoming out. Once it felt nice and snappy, without straining my hand, I figured that was it. The octagon is handy for this, as a partial flat is easy to convert to approximate degrees, and to thousandths from the barrel threading. Then you face off half or less material that you calculated, either from face or shoulder, try the action again, and sneak up this way in stages.

I once took a trashed up Winchester High Wall barrel down to the Stevens 44 shank and threading and managed not only to get it to screw into the frame properly with the top flat horizontal, but to get the Winchester extractor notch to line up with the (slightly modified) 7:00 Stevens extractor so the barrel didn't need rechambering or even a headspace adjustment. I had more numbers in my head than H&R Block at tax time, and I was sweating bullets in that nice air-conditioned Shop class, but I got it done. If I can do it, anybody can do it.

I have a nearly unrecognizable 414 in .22 RF that has slightly loose lever and breechblock bolts. I've never done the lever modification on this one; there was plenty enough else to fix. When I ran the barrel in, I did the above fitting but because of this slight looseness was also able to jam the block shoulders against the rear of the frame as well as getting a tight fit against the barrel face, and no lever drooping. The little clunk shoots like a house afire, probably because of the Stevens barrel and also the fully supported breeching. Feels a little loose and rattly when it's open but it closes up tight and hasn't shown any signs of droopitis leverosis yet. A lot of 44 blocks are only casually acquainted with the rear of the frames when the action is closed; if you can improve the contact here as well as all the other stuff, it definitely helps.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

Hello B in S. the orig chambering is 25 RF. that's why I was trying to stay with the smaller Caliber. If I went 32, I would have to line it. I think if decided to line it, I would be enticed to go. 22 LR or .22 Mag. Don't think it would take. Uh of an adjustment to the present block to stay RF. I have awhile before I get to this one so will roll all the info around before deciding. Thanks as always for your info.

Roy
Ah, it somehow slipped my brain that it was others who brought the .32s into it. Yes, .22LR sounds like a good way to reline it. I would actually feel quite happy with .22 WRM, which offers a pretty good chance of not having to do anything at all with the firing-pin. The SAAMI maximum pressure is 24,000, but that is on a small area of the breech face. It works out as not much over half the total thrust of the standard .38 Special, and the case is stronger than .22LR.

Nail-gun cartridges are also a possibility for your unaltered rifle. You would have to find out about this, but I think those described as 6.3mm., such as some SPIT products, are probably right for the chamber. A hollow base bullet could be stuck to the blank with wax, but the Stevens action is well suited to a separate breech seating device, such as was often used in target shooting.

http://www.spit.com/en/

[Hooker53]

With all the input from my good Freinds here and your last post B in S, I think IV just narrowed it down to the .22 Mag. I even have a new Clymer finishing reamer for it I can break in. Ha. Now the one thing that comes to mind, is a Reg .22 RF liner going to have the best twist for what I'm doing? If I have a choice, then why not consider the fact there's more .22 Mag ammo offered then ever has been. There's some really good Mag offerings out there now then say 20/30 years ago. I have a Moss 640 Chuckster in .22 mag that's a Lot of fun and groups right well for what the rifle is. Thanks as always for all the good info guys. Keep shooting folks.

Roy
Hooker53

[marlinman93]

The .22LR and .22 Magnum use the same 40 grain bullets, unless you get into the hyper velocity stuff that uses 30 gr. bullets. There are also some pretty high velocity .22LR that are in the standard .22 Mag velocities. But the hyper velocity .22 Mag rounds approach 1800-1850 fps, and will challenge most rifling to get accuracy.
I personally wouldn't go the .22 Magnum route, as the ammo has less selection options, and is more expensive. I'd stick with .22LR where there is a huge assortment of makers, velocities, and different loads too choose from. Once the right target .22LR and right high velocity .22LR are chosen, you can probably get some very good accuracy, and also a good hunting round for small game. If your choice is based on having a finish reamer to save money, it might not work out in the long run in savings.

[Ballistics in Scotland]

As you have .22WMR cartridges for the Chuckster, it shouldn't be hard to determine whether the existing firing-pin, or at least the existing firing-pin tunnel, would give an acceptable strike on the rim. The block, even if blued, is very likely case-hardened, and it might be difficult to enlarge the tunnel.

Frank De Haas advises quite strongly against the use of the .22WMR in the smaller Favourite when the original .222 grooved barrel is used. I don't think he much likes it for rebarrelling with the correct dimension, but he regards it as acceptable for the 44 action - which is considerably larger and threaded for the barrel, although I don't believe it is a superior metal as some suggest.

Here are the liners made by TJ's, and also available from them direct. The liner described as being for the .22 Winchester (i.e. WRF, not the longer WMR) has .226in. grooves, which might work fine, but I don't trust it with the 224 jacketed bullets of the .22WMR. The centrefire liner, with .224in. grooves, and 14in. twist, should be just what you need. The only relatively minor snag is that a half-inch hole is a somewhat more demanding drilling job than a 3/8in. one.

If you decided to go the .22LR route, I found CCI Stingers gave good accuracy in the Brno .22 I bought for a hard scraped-together £30 ten shillings and sixpence in 1970. Where they do fall down, though, is on the terminal performance that is supposed to be their strong point. These pictures are my experiments with .22 Eley High Velocity in water, the solids hitting rock much harder than the hollow-points, which remained stabilized due to their shortened length. Stingers disintegrated after a much shorter distance, with the largest piece being a little button of about 7gr. which used to be the base. Add that the increased energy is about gone at 100 yards, due to the lighter bullet, and they slightly increase, not by much, the size of varmint you can shoot, but not the distance you can shoot them at.

[Hooker53]

Well. Well. Almost forgot about this good thread. Thought I would give an update. I bought another barrel to work with and low and behold, turned out to be the 25-20 Single Shot. This was a new one for me. I've since then found brass and an old Lyman hand sizer and been having a ball with this abscure cartridge. It has amazed me in more then one way how well this load still shoots in this old barrel. The bore is not perfect but so far, it's my third most accurate gun in the OLD GUN line up. I do have another barrel that I intend to use some of the suggestions in this thread on. Just thought I would update. Keep shooting folks.

Roy
Hooker53.

[arlon]

The old single shots are fun. I have 2 44s, 38-55 and .22lr and one 52 (44 action) in 38-55. I shoot them very gently and so far they have held up pretty well.

[uscra112]

If you have it rechambered to .25-20, and keep the .25 Stevens bore, then you may suffer poor accuracy with bullets for the .25-20WCF! The .25 Stevens RF is a true .25 caliber at .251" bullet diameter, but a .25-20 uses a .257" bullet and will be much too large for your Stevens bore. You could have the bore re-rifled deeper to handle the larger bullet.

Been to that well, as I have been fooling with a way to make new .25 Stevens rimfire cartridges by reforming .17 WMR. It turns out that the .251 number is wrong. I believed it, too. It has been widely propagated by an error in Barnes. Every .25 Stevens RF I have, (and I now have four), has ~.257 groove diameter. Breaking down some old ammo confirms that the bullets were .257 to .258. So if you've got a good .25 RF barrel, go right ahead and rechamber it.

A properly set up Model 44 is stronger than many people think. I have had one survive a double charge of AA#9 (in a .25-20 Stevens load. Yeah I screwed up. Don't ask.). Quickload calculated 80,000 psi, and the calculated velocity was very close to the 2300 fps that my Chrony reported. Damage to the gun was.......nothing. Longer term, the problem is that repeated high pressure loads will slowly but surely batter the holes in the link oval, and as a result headspace opens up. The looser it gets, the faster it gets loose, too.

My survey of 44s indicates that the .25-20 Stevens CF was the most popular chambering after .22 LR. The .25-20 WCF should be avoided. SAAMI allows the WCF version to be loaded to nearly 40,000 psi, and that will loosen up the action. The .25-20 Stevens, shooting cast boolits at 1400 fps or so, keeps the pressure to about 15,000. The rifle will handle that almost indefinitely. As soon as Captech makes another run of brass, it will be plentiful again.

For common modern cartridges, .32-20 would be great, if you stay away from the old "High Speed" loadings.

Another possibility would be to mimic the .38 S&W. Shorten a .38 Special chamber to .770", (use a normal .357 groove barrel) and load any .35 caliber cast boolit that pleases you to no more than 1100 fps. from a 24" barrel.

All for now. Got lots more to say about how to set a 44 up properly, but this post would become a short novel.

[Hooker53]

Very good info. USCRA112. You go right ahead and write that novel. That's the reason for this thread to gather and read all the info that could be out there on these fine O'l guns. I know when I bought the barrel off Fleabay, I didn't know what I had. Only a 25-20 WCF would not chamber in it. Ha. Thanks for posting.

Roy
Hooker53

[Hooker53]

The old single shots are fun. I have 2 44s, 38-55 and .22lr and one 52 (44 action) in 38-55. I shoot them very gently and so far they have held up pretty well.

Hello Arlon. I had no idea that those barrels were chambered in 38-55 but then you could write volumes on what I still have to learn about these 44's. I have a spare barrel and a 38-40 chamber reamer but just have not decided what way I want to go on this. Are you shooting modern powder in yours or BP? Keep Shooting.

Roy
Hooker53

[skeettx]

YES, we have a 38-55 and a 32-40 in Stevens 44s, in the Model 45 configuration
Mike

[Hooker53]

Hello Mike. Good to see ya around. I see right now I'm gonna have to hit J Grants books and bone up a bit. Ha. I like these 32 and 38 old ones.

Roy
Hooker53

[blackbahart]

I aquired a winchester in 25 stevens RF long ,the barrel is serviceable so changed it to CF and made up the cf version of the stevens rf and shoots great 208785

[Hooker53]

blackbahart, that's what I call bringing one back to live again. Good for you. I didn't know they made levers in this Cal. Glad you posted that. What loads do you shoot in it???

Roy
Hooker53

[blackbahart]

Its a winchester m1885 made in 1908 208803208802

[blackbahart]

Its a winchester m1885 made in 1908 208803208802208804

[blackbahart]

having a lil trouble attaching pics ,but I got her
22 hornet case reformed to 25 stevens dimensions /4.5 gr unique and 85 gr .258 cast bullet

[marlinman93]

Been to that well, as I have been fooling with a way to make new .25 Stevens rimfire cartridges by reforming .17 WMR. It turns out that the .251 number is wrong. I believed it, too. It has been widely propagated by an error in Barnes. Every .25 Stevens RF I have, (and I now have four), has ~.257 groove diameter. Breaking down some old ammo confirms that the bullets were .257 to .258.

Don't have any old Stevens rifles, but I do have a Ballard #3 with a Stevens bore! The gun is in .25 Stevens RF, and marked "Re-rifled by J Stevens Arms" under the forearm, and "25 RF" in Stevens script. This particular bore is like new and measures .255", groove diameter. I also own 6-7 boxes of late mfg. Cannuck .25 Stevens RF ammo. Bullets I pulled to check diameter on measured .2554" and shoot extremely accurate in my little Ballard. They are a hollow base design bullet, so maybe made to bump up and seal well if fired in a larger .257" bore?
My Ballard also has a full length Stevens scope that I'd guess might have been purchased when the rebore was done at Stevens?

https://i.imgur.com/wxFtfYol.jpg

[blackbahart]

nice ballard
as usual

[uscra112]

Well, I just took apart two Canuck cartridges, one long and one short, and sure enough THEY both measure .255 on the bullet. So I sacrificed one of my rare blackpowder cartridges, Remington labeled on the box. Also .255". So my usually reliable source for the .257 bullet dimension must have been measuring something else. I carefully cut away the crimp in my lathe, so I think I'm getting the actual diameter on the grooves, not something distorted by yanking it through the crimp.

This whole thing is getting weirder and weirder.

[Hooker53]

Uscra112, had to go back and read your #34 post. That's just unreal and the reason I say that is The only time I ever double charged, (I think) a case was one of my 25-20 WCF. It actually blew the primer. It was being loaded a very low charge anyway but I consider myself lucky. If it wasn't double charged it was the first time I ever had a blown primer. What made me really think was, I have a ritual I use on my loading block to keep this from happening and if that's not enough, I take a flashlight and look over into every case in the lineup. It was also before I owned my Lyman auto powder measure and all loads was hand measured and trickled. I'm still in the "load 10 test rounds" and try them stead of loading a complete ammo box of 50. Ha. On your above post #46, it goes to show ya the closer you think you are, the farther away you just got. Ha. I have no doubt that you will solve the Weirdness.

Roy
Hooker53

[uscra112]

Mine didn't pierce the primer, but it fell right out of the case when I opened the action, and I had to drive the case out with a cleaning rod. But it had no effect on the gun. NOT that another one like that wouldn't! What it did show is that the 44 doesn't necessarily blow up under a heavy load. Hoop strength of barrel and action was sufficient, breechblock held, frame behind it held. I should caveat that this was a fresh rebarrel job, and I had taken pains to make the breechblock fit back against the frame shoulders on lockup. It had a new link made from O-1 flat stock, (but not hardened), and the new-made firing pin was a good fit. The .25-20 cartridge is small diameter. An old, worn gun would not have fared so well. I don't want to think about a heavy charge in a .32-40 or .38-55.

(MY failing was letting myself be distracted by onlookers while loading at the range. Usually I have the club to myself on weekdays, but this time a gaggle of AR-15 types had shown up, and were curious. I had a single case in the loading block, and charged it twice during a long conversation. AA#9 is not bulky enough to overflow if a second charge is poured in.)

Bent Ramrod's post #27 gives you the exact method I use to face off the end of a barrel to get a proper lockup. I will only add that I FIRST make sure that there is enough play in the breechblock pivot to allow the block to shift to the rear and make contact with the frame shoulders. Stevens often finished the gun so that all the thrust had to be taken on the pivot screw, especially on the later rimfires. This needs to be checked with a VERY thin feeler. I use .0005" thick cellophane.

I also like Bent-Ramrod's idea of the addition to the lever. Stevens actually tried something like this, but never carried it to production. Too fussy to fit, I imagine.

[Hooker53]

That's good info on the feeler gage. I will pull mine down and check everything this winter before shooting it again. I also thought that Bent Ramrods improvement to the screw was a very good idea as well and will do that. I hate to admit it, but my 44 was made up of parts that's I could find at the time and never knew I was headed into the New World of 25-20 single shot. The barrel was sold to me off of another site and was sold as a 25-20 WCF. When I tried to chamber the later, you can imagine what went through my head. Lol.

Roy
Hooker53

[marlinman93]

I would wonder how the accuracy might be with the .255" bullets and larger .257" bore? But if the hollow base allows the bullets to expand and seal, they might still shoot well.

[Chev. William]

Uscra112,
After reading back through the posts on this thread, I will need to revisit slugging the .25 Stevens Barrels in my "collection" as I had originally slugged them and read them as .249"-252" Groove diameters with Lands in the .246"-.248" range.

I also have one Favorite Action, a 1915 version, that has a Breech Block that fits Tightly against The Receiver shoulders when it is closed. In my case there seems to be no clearance at lock up but it does move freely once out of lock. It is presently in my gunsmith's hands getting a CF firing pin fitted to it (been there about a year now as it is a 'low budget job').

I also have a few incomplete Model 44 Actions that are slowly being pieced together to be resurrected into firing rifles again as a gathering of parts over time. One Model 44 is also at the gunsmith's for conversion to CF. It will have interchangeable barrels for .25 Stevens as Cf and .32 Colt.

In the interim I have a Custom converted Ruger Single Eight in .25ACP with a 10-5/8" barrel (12 inches from muzzle to recoil plate on frame) made from a Used Convertible Single Six.
The heaviest Charge/Load I have fired through it so far is 3.0 grains of BE-86 behind a 63 grain Lead FN bullet from a Nickel plated G.F.L. .25ACP case (.612' long) and .905" COAL.
The Muzzle rise was about twice that of Factory PPU .25ACP 50 grain FMJ ammo fired the same day.

Best Regards,
Chev. William

[Hooker53]

Chev. You sound like me. Several piles of projects to work on and one little place to stand and work on them. Lol. Good to see ya around!!!!

Roy
Hooker53

[Chev. William]

Hooker53,

Laughing, yes I do have many "projects" in many "subjects" spread around me. Unfortunately as a retired person I have much more Time but little money to support the "projects" with.

Best Regards,
Chev. William

[Hooker53]

Chev. I understand what you're saying here. I have just two more years before I walk off the job at least a full time one anyway and I'm already seeing stuff I want to buy NOW and stock up on it so I can have it for awhile anyway. E. I. All the parts for my projects we are talking about. Lol.

Roy
Hooker53

[Bent Ramrod]

As long as we’re on the general subject of Stevens 44s, it may be of interest to some that S&S Firearms sells aftermarket mainsprings for the 44 for $27 a pop plus shipping. Such is my dislike of spring making that I bought three of them, and they fit the two actions I’m restoring just like the original ones. Nice and “springy,” too. These are the type that abuts the stud in the tang; no hole for a screw.

Some guy had been offering Favorite mainsprings that could be used in 44s in a pinch, but he ran out of them several years ago and decided not to offer them any more. S&S mostly offers parts and stuff for obsolete military guns and re-enactors; glad to see their offerings are branching out this way.

The third spring is a fallback for the ones I’ve done for other actions. I have to admit that I only get something resembling a spring about once every four tries, each “try” meaning all the measuring, cutting off, drilling (if necessary), bending (hot or cold, as directed), shaping, hardening and tempering. Generally, I either get a spring-shaped piece of linguine, or something that breaks after a year’s use.

Particularly exasperating to me are the writers that heat their springs to a “cherry red,” quench in oil, put the oily spring in the rear driver side hubcap from a 1928 Hupmobile, set the mess on fire, and when it burns out, they have a spring that works right forever. Guess I just can’t find the proper hubcap; that technique never works for me.

[uscra112]

Wisner's also has that "arch" style spring, listed as a Favorite spring, but it's much too stiff for a Favorite. Spring stock the maker used is about .020 thicker than OEM springs, so it's even stiff in a 44. I've been narrowing them on a belt sander to get what I like.

[Chev. William]

I have one Stevens model 44 barrel that is marked ".25 R F" that i have 'slugged' again and it measures .246" bore and .250' groove diameters. I used a fairly new "Lyman" Dial Caliper to measure the slug. the bottom of the barrel is marked "3582(?) 2 L. G." and has a patent date of "APR. 17, 94" on the top flat of the half Octagon. This Barrel has a "6 O'Clock" extractor cut.

It seems My, and Uscra112 barrels, differ in Bore / Groove dimensions.

Now I wonder Why? Why would J. Stevens use tow differing Bore and groove dimensions for the "same Cartridge"?

I have had this barrel chamber reamed to take my wildcat .250ALRM Cartridge which uses .250"-251" diameter bullets in a 1.250" long CF case of .276", or nominal .278", Body diameter (my sizing dies yield a .276" diameter case from my swaging down .22 Hornet cases or 5.7x28mm cases).

Best Regards,
Chev. William

[Bent Ramrod]

It may be the “Monday and Friday” syndrome. Stevens rifles were built to a price, and they put all their effort into their barrels, which set many records. Once done, even they could be mismarked, or grabbed out of the wrong stock bins for chambering and fitting. To say nothing of the other parts. It’s amazing that they are as good as they are.

I have a .32-35 Stevens 107 that has a 0.319” bore, rather than the specified 0.311” diameter. Couldn’t understand why it wouldn’t hit a tea saucer at 50 yards until I put one of my boolits, cast in the mould on my Ideal Tong Tool, into the barrel breech and saw daylight all around it. A switch to the Winchester 0.319” 165-gr boolit for the.32-40, and the accuracy went from dismal to impressive. Somebody likely grabbed the wrong .25 caliber barrel stock for the occasional .25 Rimfire in the same way.

My 414 came with the forestock and rear sight missing and a hideous job of aftermarket threading on the chamber end of the shortened barrel. Home Depot nuts and bolts fit more precisely than this mess did. I cut the chamber end off, turned the shank to the proper diameter, threaded it correctly, and found it wouldn’t screw into the receiver. I kept deepening the threads and trying the fit. Finally, the thing screwed home, and the fit was as loose and rattly as the original breech was.

I looked closer in the receiver and realized that it had been bored straight for the barrel, but the tap had been run in for the barrel threads off-center, so unless I annealed and rebored it, any barrel that fit would “laloop” it’s way home. I could see why Harry Pope couldn’t wait to leave the Stevens factory.

Just to get the parts together, I finished the gun, figuring I’d unload it at the next Gun Show. I fixed it up with an old Weaver scope in Stith mounts, and a short forend with a band and sling swivel, like the one Allyn Tedmon did up in the ‘30’s. Somebody had bored the breechblock pivot hole larger (and off-center), so a new block pin, which was a good fit in the hole, thrust the breechblock against the back of the receiver so the action wouldn’t close. I carefully spotted the back of the block, filed it for a start of a tight fit, and lapped the surfaces together so the action closed easily. Then I did the final fitting of the barrel breech to a nice, snappy closure for the lever. This was a wrench job, of course, just to make it tight. It would have wobbled all over as a takedown. The set screw in the receiver is just a decoration now.

Since the barrel was off-center, I had to add weld to one side of the extractor to get it under the bore. By this time, I realized that I had a tiger by the tail, but it was too late. I got the extractor in and chambered the barrel with my .22LR Match reamer. I’d never felt a reamer cut like that in any other barrel. It had a very smooth, voluptuous feel to it, and the chips were like the particles you get off steel wool when you use it. I surmised that if the rifling cutter had gone the same way, this would be a fine, smooth barrel, anyway.

I was still determined to get rid of this misbegotten abortion as soon as possible, but I figured after all this work, I might as well see how a gun that was wrong from the get-go would shoot. That was a mistake. With Wildcat .22s, $9.50 a carton back then, anything on the top of the post of that little Weaver scope was in serious trouble. Until the guys at the local .22 Silhouette matches geared up with good scopes and Space-Gun rifles, I was a major irritation, often doing third or second place against pretty expensive equipment. I would always tell them that I had about $120 in the gun. Anyway, Old “Cattywompus” looks cute, shoots great, and I don’t have the heart to get rid of it.

[Chev. William]

It may be the “Monday and Friday” syndrome. Stevens rifles were built to a price, and they put all their effort into their barrels, which set many records. Once done, even they could be mismarked, or grabbed out of the wrong stock bins for chambering and fitting. To say nothing of the other parts. It’s amazing that they are as good as they are.

I have a .32-35 Stevens 107 that has a 0.319” bore, rather than the specified 0.311” diameter. Couldn’t understand why it wouldn’t hit a tea saucer at 50 yards until I put one of my boolits, cast in the mould on my Ideal Tong Tool, into the barrel breech and saw daylight all around it. A switch to the Winchester 0.319” 165-gr boolit for the.32-40, and the accuracy went from dismal to impressive. Somebody likely grabbed the wrong .25 caliber barrel stock for the occasional .25 Rimfire in the same way.

My 414 came with the forestock and rear sight missing and a hideous job of aftermarket threading on the chamber end of the shortened barrel. Home Depot nuts and bolts fit more precisely than this mess did. I cut the chamber end off, turned the shank to the proper diameter, threaded it correctly, and found it wouldn’t screw into the receiver. I kept deepening the threads and trying the fit. Finally, the thing screwed home, and the fit was as loose and rattly as the original breech was.

I looked closer in the receiver and realized that it had been bored straight for the barrel, but the tap had been run in for the barrel threads off-center, so unless I annealed and rebored it, any barrel that fit would “laloop” it’s way home. I could see why Harry Pope couldn’t wait to leave the Stevens factory.

Just to get the parts together, I finished the gun, figuring I’d unload it at the next Gun Show. I fixed it up with an old Weaver scope in Stith mounts, and a short forend with a band and sling swivel, like the one Allyn Tedmon did up in the ‘30’s. Somebody had bored the breechblock pivot hole larger (and off-center), so a new block pin, which was a good fit in the hole, thrust the breechblock against the back of the receiver so the action wouldn’t close. I carefully spotted the back of the block, filed it for a start of a tight fit, and lapped the surfaces together so the action closed easily. Then I did the final fitting of the barrel breech to a nice, snappy closure for the lever. This was a wrench job, of course, just to make it tight. It would have wobbled all over as a takedown. The set screw in the receiver is just a decoration now.

Since the barrel was off-center, I had to add weld to one side of the extractor to get it under the bore. By this time, I realized that I had a tiger by the tail, but it was too late. I got the extractor in and chambered the barrel with my .22LR Match reamer. I’d never felt a reamer cut like that in any other barrel. It had a very smooth, voluptuous feel to it, and the chips were like the particles you get off steel wool when you use it. I surmised that if the rifling cutter had gone the same way, this would be a fine, smooth barrel, anyway.

I was still determined to get rid of this misbegotten abortion as soon as possible, but I figured after all this work, I might as well see how a gun that was wrong from the get-go would shoot. That was a mistake. With Wildcat .22s, $9.50 a carton back then, anything on the top of the post of that little Weaver scope was in serious trouble. Until the guys at the local .22 Silhouette matches geared up with good scopes and Space-Gun rifles, I was a major irritation, often doing third or second place against pretty expensive equipment. I would always tell them that I had about $120 in the gun. Anyway, Old “Cattywompus” looks cute, shoots great, and I don’t have the heart to get rid of it.

Very good Article on your Experience, it left me smiling!
Chev. William

[NoZombies]

I've modified most of my Stevens 44s, and my Favorite .22s, in this manner.

177030 177031

Addition of metal to the top of the lever so that it props the bottom of the breechblock shut when closed approximates the original specification of the O. W. Horr patent (US 323,936, May 1885) upon which the Ideal Side Plate rifle was based. Having extra metal on the top of the lever to prop the breech block shut when the linkage is overcenter allows the thrust of the cartridge case on the breechblock to be borne by the lever and breechblock screws (or bolts) and the frame, rather than by the lever and breechblock pins and the link. Making new lever and block screws (or bolts) out of drill rod or tool steel may serve to strengthen the breeching further. (It can't hurt, anyway.) The link and its pins then function only to open and shut the breechblock, and have no load bearing function themselves.

It is a rather tedious to disassemble, spot, file, fit, and reassemble and test to get the lever extension to slide smoothly under the breechblock while still allowing the lever to contact the tang when the breech is closed, and it is obvious that this hand fitting was the reason the Side Plate model was so expensive. However, the home mechanic, if he is careful and takes his time, can accomplish this and amortise the work with the shooting he does afterwards.

These modifications will not turn a Stevens 44 into a 44-1/2, (or even a 44-1/4 ;)) but will allow more shots to be fired with the mild loadings suitable to the 44 action before the lever starts to droop. More yet can be fired before the headspace will start to increase.

When I rebuilt my first Favorite, I made the biggest link that would fit out of tool steel, and lever and link pins (and block and lever screws) out of drill rod, hardened and tempered. Figured I had a gun for the ages, then. One carton of High-Speed .22s and the rims started bursting out the back. I did the lever modification (and went to Standard Velocity) and the gun is still tight a couple of cartons of ammo later. YMMV, of course.

Could you give a little more detail of this modification? I've got several favorite and 44 actions that are sitting under the bench...

[uscra112]

Speaking as one who spent his career in one part or another of the manufacturing world, I stand in awe that Stevens managed to have such wild variation in bores, and yet their barrels were well reputed for their accuracy. But they sure do vary. My standout is a .32-20 with a groove diameter of .309", slugged and re-slugged because I didn't believe it. Even in the 1890s the tooling should never have allowed it.

When Irving Page took over in 1896, the shop was still under 100 men, by all accounts, and yet in five years he was claiming to be the largest sporting firearms mfgr. in the world, with hundreds of thousands of square feet and a thousand men at work. You don't do that without problems. I've been speculating for some time that he must have done it on huge amounts of borrowed money, (he was after all Joshua Stevens' financial hand, not an engineer). I further speculate that the reason he lost the company to Westinghouse in 1915 was that the bankers had him by the short ones.

Speaking to Bent Ramrod's Favorite: I believe that one huge reason it "shot loose" is that the links in the '94 models were never more than low carbon steel stampings, case hardened if they were hardened at all. They yielded like butter. (BTW that same is true of triggers and hammers. I cite an article reprinted in Kimmel's book as authority.) Adding metal to the lever to take the load off the linkage can do nothing but good. Chuck Deets did a set of force-vector analyses a while ago that show how the geometry of the action puts 70% of the thrust at the breech face onto the link!

[Bent Ramrod]

The stingy little links in the original Favorites were just a stamping of low-carbon steel, case-hardened. My replacement was a piece of tool steel, with drill rod link pins, that just cleared the top of the lever and the bottom of the block. It also took up all the space possible that still allowed the lever to close. Even it wasn’t up to the task, at least with Hi-Speed ammo.

I don’t like the looks of the 1915 Favorite, but it at least has a slightly thicker link, and so should hold up better.

A lot of those Kid Rifle designs were a tribute to what could be gotten away with if all you had were black powder .22s.

What I do for the prop on the lever is to put the pins through the block and lever and insert them in their holes on the outside of the frame. The necessary metal thickness that would fill the space between bottom of block and lever top is measured with a caliper, and the radius of the top of the lever gauged likewise.

I drill a piece of drill rod with a hole close to the diameter of the curvature at the top of the lever, then turn it down so the thickness of the remaining metal is that of the measurement I took between block and lever top, with a little extra, just in case. I cut the resulting tube off so it is just slightly wider than the bottom of the block.

I lay the lever against one end of the tube, mark the slopes to the top of the radius, hacksaw and file off stock until the rest of the tube sits on top of the lever with full contact on both sides. I solder the piece to the top of the lever, and then hacksaw away the web over the link slot. I file the inside smooth so the link will rotate and file any excess on the outside of the lever until it fits in the receiver.

I have on occasion made two “washers,” as shown in the photo, but soldering them on top of the lever, and getting both exactly right without leaning or twisting, is more work than cutting the excess off the one piece version. At least for me, anyway; a soldering/welding artist I am not. I even have trouble with glue sometimes. :razz:

Then I reposition the lever/link/block assembly on the outside of the receiver again, using the new pins or bolts I have made, and see how much needs to be roughed off before the lever has a chance of closing. When that is done, I put Prussian Blue on the bottom of the block, put the assembly inside the frame, and keep trying to close the lever. I file ahead of the blue spots on the lever bolsters, feathering into the heaviest part of the blue spots, so that eventually the lever slips under the block with full contact. When the arrangement goes overcenter and the lever hits the tang, the job is finished. It can take a while.

The rifles, so modified, have a definite change of feel when they are fired. With your fingers curled around the end of the lever, you can feel the shock of firing, even with a .22 Favorite.

[Chev. William]

Noted: I saw, and thought I saved, a Vector force analysis of the "Favorite" Action that indicated about 140% of the Breech face thrust was resisted by the Breech block Pivot bolt/Pin due to the angles and leverages in the mechanism.

Best Regards,
Chev. William

[uscra112]

That was the analysis that Chuck Deats did about a year ago. It assumes that the rear of the breechblock is not in contact with the shoulders in the frame. As time wore on, Stevens made less and less effort to establish this fit, especially for the rimfire models. When properly fitted, the breechblock pivot gets almost no load at all, (2nd drawing), but the link still gets hammered.

[Chev. William]

Yes, that is the vector analysis diagram I remembered.
Thank you for Posting both Diagrams again.
Best regards,
Chev. William

[NoZombies]

That's very interesting. Do you know if he did an analysis of the 44 action with the hammer lug by chance?

[uscra112]

Yes. Here it is. Needs to be qualified by saying that the hammer lug cannot be line-to-line with the underside of the breechblock, so there will be some displacement (and hence stress on the toggle) before the lug starts to take any load. Another point that needs to be made is that the breechblocks used for the six o'clock extractor are not suitable for the hammer lug. The underside contour is such that you get only line contact. The side extractor block was machined differently, (see the catalog cut).

[NoZombies]

Interesting, I've got a pretty late #44 with a 6 O'clock extractor and a lug on the hammer. It's definitely not like the lugged hammer from the diagram, and it certainly seems to have done the job on the action it's part of, as it's about the tightest #44 actions I've handled, but this action has obviously seen a lot of use.

[uscra112]

Interesting, I've got a pretty late #44 with a 6 O'clock extractor and a lug on the hammer. It's definitely not like the lugged hammer from the diagram, and it certainly seems to have done the job on the action it's part of, as it's about the tightest #44 actions I've handled, but this action has obviously seen a lot of use.

Please, please post some closeup photos of the underside of the breechblock where the lug would bear. I have logged other lugged-hammer 44s with the six o'clock extractor, and I'm anxious to know if they machined that differently from the normal central-extractor breechblocks. Have yet to see one in the flesh. If they did it right, the machining should look something like the catalog cut I posted.

[Chev. William]

Unsupported Theorizing:
Perhaps a Lugged 6 O'clock Extractor type model 44 might have a modified main cut with a small second cut to give the "lug" a place to fit with good bearing area?

Best Regards,
Chev. William

[bob208]

well think about this what is eaiser to replace? a pin or some other major part. I can replace pins all day long. but to have to make a breach block or leaver while is doable. I would rather put new pins in.

[NoZombies]

Please, please post some closeup photos of the underside of the breechblock where the lug would bear. I have logged other lugged-hammer 44s with the six o'clock extractor, and I'm anxious to know if they machined that differently from the normal central-extractor breechblocks. Have yet to see one in the flesh. If they did it right, the machining should look something like the catalog cut I posted.


It'll be a couple of days, but I'll get some photos once I'm done recovering from having all the family over for the Holiday.

[NoZombies]

Well, I managed to pull the old 44 out and tear it down to get some photos, but while doing so realized it's a substantially different beast internally than any other 44 I've messed with.

To start out, the hammer is lugged, as mentioned, though it's a small undercut lug. The breach block does seem to be machined to provide contact along the top surface of the lug. I thought I had gotten a better photo of the underside of the block, but apparently I didn't, and the rifle is back together and in the safe again now, so I'll have to do that the next time it's out.

But perhaps more interestingly, this action does have a spring and plunger assembly in the lever to keep the lever tight against the action, and provide a 'snap' when extracting the cartridges. Part of the plunger is visible in the first photo, with the second photo giving a clearer view of it.

The plunger works very well in conjunction with the small lug, as I said, the action is as tight as I've ever felt on a 44. it's kind of reassuring having the tang 'snap' back into place as you raise it.

http://nozombies.com/st44/1.JPG
http://nozombies.com/st44/2.JPG

[uscra112]

That plunger in the lever setup was standard issue in the 44 1/2 design, and it turns out that the only other difference in the levers is the lever pivot hole. If you take a 44 1/2 lever and open the hole up for the 44 pivot bolt, it will fit right in. If the rifle was built in the factory after 1903, the feature could have been included along with the lugged hammer. (I'm more than a little sure that a lugged hammer combined with the six o'clock extractor would have been a custom build at that late date, so anything's possible.) OR it could be a gunsmith's improvement, being so easy to do.

[samaddy1]

I have one Stevens model 44 barrel that is marked ".25 R F" that i have 'slugged' again and it measures .246" bore and .250' groove diameters. I used a fairly new "Lyman" Dial Caliper to measure the slug. the bottom of the barrel is marked "3582(?) 2 L. G." and has a patent date of "APR. 17, 94" on the top flat of the half Octagon. This Barrel has a "6 O'Clock" extractor cut.

It seems My, and Uscra112 barrels, differ in Bore / Groove dimensions.

Now I wonder Why? Why would J. Stevens use tow differing Bore and groove dimensions for the "same Cartridge"?

I have had this barrel chamber reamed to take my wildcat .250ALRM Cartridge which uses .250"-251" diameter bullets in a 1.250" long CF case of .276", or nominal .278", Body diameter (my sizing dies yield a .276" diameter case from my swaging down .22 Hornet cases or 5.7x28mm cases).




Best Regards,
Chev. William

I have been following your developments for the 25 stevens rf.. I have three barrels one model 44 pre 1916 as reads stevens a and t co. vary worn bore, slugs 243 with micrometer.. a favorite barrel that only states 25 rimfire vary good to excellent bore, slugs 257 and finally a marksman barrel that only states 25 rimfire, with a good to vary good bore that slugs at 257.. I am using 55 grain cast 257 bullits that measure just under 258 with my micrometer to slug

[uscra112]

And just to muddle the waters still further......I took delivery today of a very, very nice 44 in .25 Stevens. So nice that I'm ashamed to say how little I paid.

Bore is virtually mint, rifling still sharp, and it slugged .255, like some others that have been reported here.

Phil

BTW I'm finding 44s with the Stevens stamp on the side of the receiver, which ought to be a sure sign that it's a post-war build, yet they have the pre-war rollstamp on the barrel. Not just one - two or three. Was Savage using up pre-war barrel stocks? Seems so.

[uscra112]

BTW I have also acquired a near-mint 44 in .32-40 with the central extractor. Underside of the breechblock is cut just the same as every other central extractor block I've eve3r seen. So they didn't, at least on this one, make any change to the breechblock machining to give the lug something to get purchase on.

[uscra112]

(I'm more than a little sure that a lugged hammer combined with the six o'clock extractor would have been a custom build at that late date, so anything's possible.)

My log has blown that theory out of the water. By far the most .32-40s I've logged since I wrote that are in fact in the 27000 to 30000 range, and have the central extractor.

[Chev. William]

Adding to the "Mess", I purchased a Barrel marked "J. Stevens Arms Co." and "25-STEVENS" for a 'Favorite' Action that my Gunsmith 'Slugged' and measured it as having .250" Bore and .254" Groove diameters. Very clean and shiny rifling full length with a conical champfered muzzle crown.

Confusing and Intriguing Measurements.

I also found on Ebay, and bought, some new Manufacture CNC machined 4140 cr alloy 1915 Favorite Breech Blocks. I am having two modified by adding 'weld pads' added to the rear side edges to allow tightly fitting them to the rear Action shoulders in the receivers. At the same time he is supposed to convert them from .22RF to CF firing pin tip position.
There are still some up for sale on Ebay as of last night.

If anyone is curious, .22 Hornet or 5.7x28mm cases CAN be swaged down to .22 Long rifle RF cartridge diameters successfully. This is a confirmation of a Project started by 'NoZombies' and documented in another Thread on this Forum. Also .25ACP can be swaged down to the same .22 Long Rifle Rf diameters and if you stop at .250" diameter, they can be used to make either .221 Atkins (CF) or .22 Winchester Auto. (RF) CF conversion cases.

Chev. William

[uscra112]

I used one of those new 4140 blocks to convert a .32 Long RF 1915 to centerfire. Guy did a fine job on them. He had 'em on Gunbroker, happily. I won't do business with evilBay.

Unless you are needing to preserve headspace to an existing barrel, better to just elongate the pivot hole by a few thousandths so the block can set back into contact with the shoulders. I did a 44 by the weld-up method some years ago, and what an awful chore it was, trying to fit it properly. I never did get it really right, and eventually binned it.

I'm going to have to beef up the hammer spring on this new 44. The .17 WMR ammo I'm converting to .25 Stevens has thicker/harder brass than your ordinary rimfires, and the hammer blow from the OEM Stevens spring isn't enough to fire it reliably. Fortunately I have some springs from Wisner's which are stronger. If I can find them.

[samaddy1]

can you please tell what powder loads you are using in 17wsm converted ammo and did you reform the necks or cut them down.. ive got 55gr. .257 cast bullets from gunbroker. and test fired a cut down case yesterday in my 44 with Lees smallest scoop .17cc? of trail boss. sounded like a bb gun lol. couldn't of been going vary fast

[uscra112]

Long story short: I'm modifying the .17WSM brass to duplicate the full length of the .25 Stevens cartridge. This is very involved, since the brass is not annealed, nor can it be, so expanding the neck is a royal PITA. It can be done, but yields have been poor. I'm using a 65 grain bought-in bullet, and the load I've used is 2.2 grains of Herco, or 1.7 grains Bullseye. Data is thin on the ground, I've been working through knee surgery and recovery since April. Only a dozen or so rounds in the back yard I'm keeping these just barely subsonic, partly for neighborhood reasons. 1.9 grains Bullseye went supersonic.

Your 1.7 of Trail Boss in a full length case should yield about 900 fps, according to my Quickload model.

Using a short case isn't optimal for the .25 Stevens, since it's not a heeled bullet like the .22 LR and .32 Rimfire. The chamber is therefor much larger than the bullet. From a short case, the bullet has to traverse some distance floating in the discharge gases before it encounters the rifling, during which time it is unguided, and will more likely than not hit the throat crooked. I know that several ammunition makers sold .25 "Shorts", but Stevens themselves said they should not be used in Stevens rifles, and that's why.

I don't know of any rifle, period or not, that was purposely chambered for the .25 Short, but I've been sorely tempted make one. That would eliminate the hassle of expanding the .17WSM necks, and with modern powders the reduced powder space won't be any issue. (Remember that the .25 Stevens was originally a black powder number, that's why the case is so long.) Maybe next winter. I could then salvage all the cases that split when trying to expand them, and get some use out of them.

[samaddy1]

I started this venture expecting to use 22 hornet cases and or 5.7x28 fn cases and have about 30 22 hornet cases formed so far but have not modified a block to centerfire yet so started experimenting with the 17wsm as a parent case .While the 25 Stevens "MEDIUM" Rimfire made from a reduced length 17 wsm case is not ideal as Chev Williams pointed out because the 25rf does not use a healed bullet, their for the bullet has to travel a bit in the chamber loosely, surrounded by gasses before encountering the rifled bore. the stevens short had a .599 case length and the long a 1.125 case length and .251 65 grain bullets. early barrels were .251 diameter and at some point appears went to .255 barrels so slug your barrels
Let me state that I am new to reloading and this is my first venture. My venture into the 25 rimfire begins with a stevens 44 that slugs at .255 with a worn bore, not great but not bad. To date I have loaded 10 rounds with two different case lengths from the parent 17 wsm case, they are 7 .970-.980 cases cut at the bottom of the of the shoulder and 3 1.080-1.070 cases cut at the top of the shoulder. I am using .25 caliber (.257) hollow point cast lead bullets 55 gr and sized and lubed to .258. I am using a gift of some Trail Boss as my powder. unless somebody knows what powder Winchester uses in their 17 wsm's as I have a small supply after pulling bullets for my cases.
I have shot 10 rounds out the side door of my garage at a large tree I hung my target on, distance of 25 feet, with me using the side of the door frame to steady my rifle and open sights through trifocal lens glasses. The sight picture I get is always fuzzy at some part of my alignment picture, sucks getting old lol. of the 10 rounds 7 are touching .080 wide by .060 tall. group with three fliers. The first flier was a .970 case .17cc/.8gr of powder and was left of group 1 inch sounded like a bb gun. the next 6 shots were all .970 cases with .3cc/2.3gr of powder with one flyer left of group 3/4 inch, these were subsonic. The last three were 1.075 case lengths with .5cc/2.3gr of powder these 3 all cracked out the barrel so went above subsonic with 1 flier 1 inch above the group. All cases seamed to expand to chamber diameter and seal the gases with the .3 cc loads about 1/3 way from top of the case and the hotter .5 cc loads 1/2 to 3/4 from top of case
AS Chev Willams pointed out this not an ideal solution because the bullet does not fit tight in the chamber, but one that I for one am finding viable at this point with minimal amount of case prep just having to pull cut and trim to length then expand the case neck to .257 ideally for the bullets I am using. at this point my methods are crude and unrefined as I am learning the whole loading process and attribute the last two fliers more to my case prep and bullet seating . all my expander tools so far have been home made and am using a 25 acp die set to load with.. I found the longer case length harder to form concentrically. maybe going to a 2 or three step sizing process with a 22 hornet fl die to open first to .22 then a .257 Roberts neck sizing ball/rod for final
For now I have 25 cases at .1000 case length cut just above the shoulder and formed out to .257 neck diameter ready for more tests, these are more consistently trimed and sized than my learning curve first 10 attempts. At a point in the futre I plan on repriming the once shot rf cases. Four solution mixes can be had for $20 PrimeAll I believe is the source.

a hearty thanks goes out to Chev Williams for allowing us to follow his 25 cal adventures on this forum:)

ps is their a secret to uploading pictures I attemted several times but it keeps but keeps telling me unable to is a jpg file

[uscra112]

Well, you certainly could have picked an easier project for your first reloading venture! Kudos!

Picture files have to be below a certain size to upload successfully. If you are using your camera on a high resolution setting your files may be too big.

300 MB and 800 x 600 pixels are the limits.

Even my "new" 44 is having trouble getting these to fire, due to the thick brass. I'm getting misfires about half the time. A second strike always fires them, though. This even with a new mainspring. How are you doing in this regard?

[samaddy1]

I have had no problems but my action really really closes closes tight and makes a significant dent in the case

[uscra112]

Mine locks up nice and tight, too, but now I'm thinking to check how well fitted my extractor is. It was not one of Stevens' better ideas to have the rimfires' firing pin hit on top of it. The old models where the extractor was at 7 o'clock are better in this regard. In the 1930s when the Model 417 target model was introduced, they moved the firing pin to 9 o'clock, so it would have solid metal behind the cartridge rim.

[Chev. William]

If I remember Correctly from the Reloading .32 Rimfire Thread, PTL case rims are about .045" thick with The case wall about .015" thick. When Fired, the Indent measures about .030" thick so it seems the rim is crushed to the point that the two walls are solidly together.

IF the .17 Rimfire cases are similar, then an indent of about .030" thick would also indicate the two wall thicknesses are solidly crushed together.
Perhaps the .17 rimfire is drawn somewhat 'harder' than the typical PTL blank case?
IF this is so, it would help explain Phil's misfire problem.
Another possible cause would be the firing pin tip contour and exposure.

As the Stevens Firing pin is at an angle to the Breech Face, it is hitting the rim at an angle rather than 'square on' so may NOT be fully crushing the rim and primer mix.

Best Regards,
Chev. William

[uscra112]

Changing the shape of the tip occurred to me, too. Last night I pulled the pin out and stoned off the sides to make it a "chisel" shape. Viola! Only get one misfire in ten, now, (using up cases spoiled in the neck-expanding, of which I have far too many).

Measuring the fully indented rim, I get about .053 +/- .001, suggesting the the brass in the rim must be .025 thick. When I say fully indented, that's four strikes on top of one another to make sure it's crushed all the way. The virgin rim measures about .068" thickness. An unfired UMC copper case cartridge measures .057

Found an interesting feature in this one. Some long-ago gunsmith made a new firing pin for it, (well and truly hardened, too), and in the process replaced the cross-pin that retains the firing pin with a neat little shoulder screw!

[Chev. William]

What does the Case sidewall thickness Measure?
Is it also in the same range as the inferred Rim wall thickness?

Chev. William

[uscra112]

One .17WSM sample, cut back to .750 OAL, measures .015" side wall. Sectioning the head with a file, I get about .023 using a caliper. I could do that better with a 3/4" long pin and a micrometer, but I'll have to make the pin. Nothing handy in my junk drawers.

The copper UMC sample measures about .011" wall.

[Chev. William]

Hmm. That infers that the .17 cases are Drawn with a thicker base than the upper sidewalls. That would also explain the thicker rim walls.
Also, it would also help explain your misfire experiences.
Chev. William