Hopkins and Allens 32-20 antique falling block ??????

[uscra112]

DeHaas had one of the medium frame rifles, but you may have the "large frame" that has "cheeks" on the side for the wider 12 gage breechblock. Try posting a photo so we can see.

[RustyReel]

It does have the cheeks. Haven't done anything to it other than cleaning off the barrel markings. As you can see, missing some parts.

[uscra112]

Yah, it's missing the breechblock and the link, and the extractor. I will be amazed if anybody is offering those parts for sale. Hopkins & Allen guns were for all intents and purposes disposable. Use 'em up and throw 'em away. The parts you need aren't hard to make if you have access to a milling machine. The link and extractor are flat, with some holes. The curved surfaces on the back of the breechblock can be approximated with a corner-rounding cutter. Otherwise it's a simple rectilinear shape.

[RustyReel]

Yah, it's missing the breechblock and the link, and the extractor. I will be amazed if anybody is offering those parts for sale. Hopkins & Allen guns were for all intents and purposes disposable. Use 'em up and throw 'em away. The parts you need aren't hard to make if you have access to a milling machine. The link and extractor are flat, with some holes. The curved surfaces on the back of the breechblock can be approximated with a corner-rounding cutter. Otherwise it's a simple rectilinear shape.

Thank you! Wall Hanger it is, if I ever come up with enough wall space.

Did see an H&A breech block for sale on evilbay but don't know enough about these to know if it would fit. Thanks again.

[Jedman]

Here’s a picture of the shotgun action. The breech block is a pretty simple design and could be made with a hacksaw , files, and a drill but you would have to really want it to go to that bother.
I have a former 16 ga. H&A that is now a 50-70. I had to make the extractor and the barrel is soldered in and the takedown screw is epoxied so the barrel is fixed. It’s a great shooting rifle but with iron sights it’s no longer one I hunt with. JedmanAttachment 321036

[xtriggerman]

Hello all, I stumbled onto this sight looking for info on a H&A med frame 38 Garden gun I picked up a few years ago. I see in an original add, it was infact chambered in 38-55 and thats quite the stretch to think this rather weak looking action was ever strong enough for that cartridge even in its BP factory loadings. Iv toyed with the idea of rebarreling the 38 to a 25-20 since I like that cartridge in a Sav 23B that I have. Iv fired CCI 38/357 shot loads and it handles those with no issue except for the fact the extractor is missing. I'm hesitant to barrel the med frame in 25-20 for standard smokeless untill some one who knows these actions could validate its use as a more than adequate action for the modern 25. Any comments on that?
Another interesting read here was the 22 mag story. Years ago, I reworked a 922 I have with an octagon barrel relined to 17HMR, threaded the action and barrel shank and also fit a Savage 1903 but stock to it. At first, I was getting some blow out bulges on the FP dent that would keep the action from opening. I thought the FP hole was a bit to large in the first place so thought I should bush it. But after a number of rounds latter, the FP hits settled down to not showing pressure and ejection was auto and smooth. After a few hundred rounds, this is the master sour Orange blaster. My longest dismemberment particle of a small orange was a paced off 60 Feet, (NOT yards as earlier brain fart stated). I didnt like the 22mag for this action since its just too much pressure recoil. Incidentally, the only one to put any work into is the later version that has the ejector screw close to the lever pivot screw. Those ejectors are stronger and the bolt recoil shoulders are improved over the bore slightly. A great shooter in 17HMR.

[uscra112]

The breech thrust of the .25-20 WCF calculates out to be less than the .32-40/.38-55, so no worries there.

The weakness in the medium frame is not the receiver but the rebounding hammer design. Without the mass of the hammer backing up the firing pin, it will get driven back and maybe even lead to blown primers when subjected to smokeless pressures. You can help by bushing the firing pin smaller, and doing it Mann-Niedner style so the pin is backed up by the breechblock. Having done that, .25-20 WCF would be fine.

I'll assume that it has that inadequate "tangent blade" extractor. This has to be fitted very snug in the barrel slot, or it will slip past the rim if there is any resistance to extraction. I'd convert it to a dog-leg extractor like a Ballard or the early Stevens 44s.

Lastly, that removable taper pin barrel retention kit should go. I've got one where the smith who built it reamed everything and drove a solid pin in tight. Or you could thread the action and the barrel.

[xtriggerman]

USCRA112 Thank You for your thoughts on all this. Bushing in a smaller flush to face FP sounds like the best idea yet on this action. I'v often debated the idea of thrust forces vs pressure spiking of smokeless in relation to the strength of older actions. The point is smokless's ability to produce its own oxygen for a very fast pressure spike early on on the breach vs the slow push of a full length barrel pressure build. Now add to that the questionable amount of hardened carbon in the recoil shoulders and breach block.... gives me a long hummmm. Will fast, short stabs of smokeless at the recoil shoulder push open head space or crystalline what ever carbon in the cast material and crack it? On the surface I think thrust forces is a key aspect for sure but just how much does the "slow push" vs "fast rap" measure in all this. As you illuded to pressure containment on every aspect of the brass is of first concern for sure but still no one has published the most obvious metallurgical content of these turn of the century cast receivers. I wish I had a medium frame H&A to test with maxed out smokeless pressures just to see if the ol girl will open up or suddenly crack and publish the results. Once I had a H&A 12 g falling block with a shoulders receiver and just to see if it would hold up to light low brass skeet type loads. It only took about 5 rounds to show evidence of opening head space and a tiny fracture crack starting at the top of the recoil shoulder. I have a very nice 12g Davenport that I believe was what the H&A originated from. I'd love to sleeve it for a 28g but scared to damage it! I tell myself maybe a 410 would be the best bet for a shooter but 28 would be super neat to bang threw it. IDK..... Shooting these old antiques has an unexplainable calling for some reason. Any way, heres a few shots of the XL

[uscra112]

Hopkins & Allen, Stevens, "cast" Ballards, et. al. were malleable iron. White iron castings that were soaked at high temperature in an oxidizing matrix, (they used mill scale and raw iron ore), for many hours. This removed much of the carbon, leaving a material with mechanical properties of mild steel. Enough carbon was left behind in the form of "temper carbon" that it can't be welded, however. Malleable was still used for some shotgun frames up into the 20-"oughts". Maybe later - I haven't been keeping up.

Black powder also brings its' own oxygen to the party. And depending on grain size, compression, case volume and shape, and bullet sectional density the pressure rise can be as quick as the faster smokeless powders. Recent tests with modern equipment yielded pressure of 20kpsi for a .38-56 load, too. Not as simple as we thought. Good advice for smokeless loads is to use the slowest powder that will yield decent SDs. In the .25-20, Red Dot and Bullseye will give much higher peaks for a given MV than, say, 4227 will. I liked AA#9 when I was still shooting my .25-20s.

William Davenport was a prolific designer of shotguns, but he was also responsible for the Bay State rifle in 1886/88. When the Bay State folded, H&A bought the design and fixturing, and Davenport came along with the deal. After a time he left H&A, and on his own produced that shotgun you have.

[xtriggerman]

OK then! Thats pretty interesting for sure. 20K for a BP load is pretty hot no matter what cal. since literature has settled on a basic 7K range in general for original BP loadings that I'v read. I will certainly keep AA#9 in mind when I get around to the 25-20 loads. Yup, that Win 92 octagon 25-20 barrel I have would look pretty nice on the H&A since the 38 smooth bore shows years of neglect. And Thanks again for putting your knowledge on the board. I'm sure others will benefit from it as well.

[uscra112]

A recent and most informative thread:

https://forum.assra.com/cgi-bin/yabb...num=1684379223

and:

Here are the bulk of the tests I said I would make earlier.
Powder Schuetzen FFFg. Primers Either Remington 6 1/2 or 9 1/2. Loading Density 100%, i.e., to the base of the bullet, no compression. Chambers are SAAMI std. i.e., for lever guns. Barrel length in ().

25/20 wcf (22.5) 15.6g 98g Lyman 25720 1252fps 17150psi

32/20 wcf (21.5) 17.0g 115g Lyman 311316 1154fps 6850psi

32/20 wcf (21.5) 11.0g 155g Lyman 311466 807fps 6850psi

32 Winchester Spcl. (20) 41.0g 178g RCBS 32170FN 1287fps 19750psi

38/55 (1.125case) (26.5) 39.0g 272g Lyman 375296 1216fps 12400psi

38/56 wcf (26.5) 50.0g 330g Accurate 38-325G 1282fps 19300psi

38/40 wcf (21.5) 31.0g 198g NEI 401200BB 1124fps 6200psi

44/40 wcf (23.5) 33.6g 230g Lyman 429434 1125fps 7400psi

At a later date I will also post for 30/30 & 33wcf.
One side note that I found is when the bullet sectional density goes up the standard deviation of both velocity & pressure goes down. This is not the case with smokeless. As I stated earlier I am a novice with black powder as I only shoot smokeless of which I have shot many thousands of rounds testing. So it was strange to me but maybe not to those familiar with black powder. I hope this is of some use to all interested.
Harry

[Bent Ramrod]

I’ve got one of those H&A medium frame .38-55 shotguns. Had to solder a shim into the rim seat to “adjust” the headspace for modern shells; apparently the folded-head shells of the era had thicker rims. Without it, I had to point the gun straight up to set off the primer, which worked fine for fireforming shells but not so much for use otherwise.

With .38-55 shells, I use a Large Rifle primer, 6.5gr Unique, a 0.375” card wad over powder, two 0.375” 0.200” thick felt wads (punched out of weatherstripping dipped in molten wax), #6-#8 shot to top of shell, and another 0.375” card wad, crimped in with a homemade roll crimper.

Using .30-30 shells, blown out straight, it’s 5.0gr Unique with the same setup. The shot column is shorter here, of course.

I cut the wads with a #14 Osborne wad cutter and crimp with a cap I made that turns over the mouths, the cap dropped into a .38-55 Winchester tong tool. A squeeze of the handles and the mouth is rolled over the wad.

With these loads, I used to stand on the roof of the trap house, call for a bird, and generally manage to chip it before it got out of range. Patterns at ~15 yards look adequate; at ~20 yards they’re pretty sparse. I don’t think the thing has any choke. Nothing has come loose with these loadings, so I’d assume they are OK, in my gun at least.

The shoulder compression on the 922 was reported by the builder. I don’t recall any photos he posted of the damage; for that matter, I can’t recall any photos posted on the Shooter’s site. Those were primitive times.

I have an extra shotgun breech block, if there’s any interest, PM me. It fits in the 12gauge shotgun action I have, but of course the serial number is different. I bought the barreled action only because it was so cheap I figured if I turned down their largesse, I would incur the wrath of the Gun Show Gods, and I wouldn’t find anything even remotely interesting again for a long time. Been there, done that.

It’s kind of a shame that in these days of replication of such things as Stevens Favorites, Maynards, Little Sharps and other novelties (including a C. Sharps Arms made H&A 922), that nobody has seen fit to replicate the medium frame H&A, or better still, the Bay State. Made of modern cast alloy, like used in Ruger and Shiloh frames, with a threaded-in barrel (takedown or not), it would probably sell like nuclear reactors, but it would be certifiably Cool.

[Walker.]

The H&A falling blocks came in three sizes. The small size is relatively common and was mostly used for rimfire cartridges, but some few (marked with Merwin&Hulbert as the distributor, IIRC) have been observed in .32-20 caliber. These would be rarities to a collector and command a premium, but I can't imagine paying $1000 for one myself.

The medium size is the "adult" size, as the Stevens 44 was the "adult" sized Favorite. These are less common than the small sizes, or (IME) the large sizes either. They look neat, but are made of malleable iron castings with slip-fit barrels held by a set screw, so are about the same quality as a Stevens 44. There was a "Scheutzen" model, with a Swiss buttplate, that might command a premium, but I still don't think money is worthless enough (yet) for one to ask $1000, unless, maybe it's a pristine specimen in perfect condition. But I wouldn't pay that much.

Finally there was the large size, which was typically made into 12, 16 or 20-gauge shotguns. Sometimes a rifle barrel shows up that fits as well. Again, nowhere near worth $1000.

Of course, condition and finish plays a part in the value. The ones I see are generally no better than NRA "Fair" in finish, brown patina on the metal, darkened and dinged stocks, with shot-out barrels and maybe a few parts needing replacement. I'd grab these up for no more than $125, back in "the good old days." One still needs the innards for the peculiar trigger-adjusting mechanism some of them had.

The predecessor of the medium size H&A was called the Bay State. They were made of better materials to a nicer finish. Somebody might be justified in asking $1000 for one, but they've always been out of my price range, for the few I've ever seen. Very rare.

I think, though, that the fact the rifle has sat for a month with no nibbles answers the question of what it's worth better than any appraisal.

I have this rifle, Hopkins and Allen 32-20/16 guage;falling block, interchangeable barrels
do you think that it has any value?

[Bent Ramrod]

Certainly it has value. How much depends on condition, provenance, matching serial numbers on extra barrels (indicating the set was factory made, rather than cobbled together aftermarket), and finding the elusive collector who wants it badly enough.

Hopkins&Allen doesn’t seem to have the collector’s cachet that Stevens, Marlin, or even Mossberg has. Charles Carder did his best to amp up such interest, even publishing a H&A Collector’s newsletter for a while and writing his two books and many articles on them in gun collector magazines, but, outside of the odd hunter-gatherer who will scarf one up because it looks “neat” and the price is right, there doesn’t seem to be a solid “market” for the things. Even the Davenports, made on much the same pattern and much “rarer,” don’t seem to attract much attention. I bought a Davenport .22 a while ago that looks like a H&A 922 except the barrel sits in a cradle ahead of the breechblock instead of being enclosed in a frame, for a pretty nominal price. Nobody else seemed very interested.

Maybe it’s because of their relative scarcity (especially in “collector condition”) and the fact that nothing of particular consequence can be rebuilt on one, like a varmint or black-powder target rifle.