Rolling Block Creedmoor Long range

[marlinman93]

Just picked up my holy grail (for me!) of Remington rifles! A very early Creedmoor Long range rifle!









I've lusted for one of these for too long to even recall? But with so very few ever made, I was sure I'd never be able to afford one without selling a lot of other guns.
This one is earlier than Major Fulton's Creedmoor rifle #3314, or Custer's #3300; both made in 1874. It's in the #1500 range, so a full year before the model was offered in the 1874 catalog. It has the typical 34" barrel, pistol grip stock, single non set trigger, and 10 lb. weight limit prescribed by long range rules.
It also is missing all the sights, and spirit level. But I have most of those things to replace them. One thing it's cut for, and I may never have is a spirit level 1/8" dovetail above the chamber area!



That's got to be an impossible item to find, and may be almost as hard to have a spirit level modified to fit into a 1/8" dovetail too! Will see what I can do.
The 34" round barrel is extremely rare, as is a full octagon on this model. Fulton and Custer's rifles were both full octagon, but as far as I know only a few were full round? The majority were half octagon shaped to keep the weight down.
The bore on this rifle is amazing! No sign of corrosion, or pitting, and rifling is very nice. It's of course marked "44 S" for the .44-77 SBN chambering all the early Creedmoor rifles were in.

[171evergreenfkl]

Nice find. Does it posses the mount for an adjustable rear sight on the rear top of the butt stock?

[marlinman93]

Nice find. Does it possess the mount for an adjustable rear sight on the rear top of the butt stock?

Yes and No. I see Creedmoor rifles with either a base at the heel position, or just two holes in the stock at the standard 1.937" spacing. This one has just the two holes indicating it did have a heel sight base once. I have a spare base, so I will install it using those holes, just to make it more complete.

[JimMill]

Great find. I am still looking for mine.

Jim

[marlinman93]

Great find. I am still looking for mine.

Jim

Good luck! I hope you find yours!
Hope to get my reproduction tang sight from The Original Sight Co. soon, so I can get it out to do some load work.

[marlinman93]

I ordered a replica long range sight for the Creedmoor from The Original Sight Co., and it came today! The quality, and exacting dimensions are remarkable! If it wasn't for it being perfect and brand new you'd be hard pressed to discern it from an original Remington sight!

[jon_norstog]

That is really sweet! FWIW, the 44-77 is basically the same round as the .43 Spanish, same chanber ... the .43s I have had experience with all had the same bore diameter as the .44-77. I think it was probably a marketing call - same round, just a more acceptable name.

jn

[marlinman93]

That is really sweet! FWIW, the 44-77 is basically the same round as the .43 Spanish, same chanber ... the .43s I have had experience with all had the same bore diameter as the .44-77. I think it was probably a marketing call - same round, just a more acceptable name.

jn

I haven't had any .43's, but have two originals in .44-77 now. A couple friends have .43's and theirs are much smaller bores than either of my .44-77's. Mine both slug the usual .452" groove diameter. Theirs both slug around .440", so not even close to my guns. But looking at their brass and mine, all I see is a smaller neck diameter.

[jon_norstog]

I never knew the 44-77 was a .45! When we were kids we all bought those Argy rolling block carbines and rifles. The surplus ammo was hit or miss, so we figured out how to reload the cases, using RWS berdan primers. It worked well as long as we used black powder but with smokeless loads the bullets went every which way. The 5-groov barrel wasn't easy to measure but when I did I found the bores were .445-.447. The Lyman mould cast out at .439 and the smokeless just didn't give enough of a kick to upset the bullet base and fill the grooves. We ordered a Lyman mould for the 44-77 and problem solved! Those bullets cast at .446 diameter and shot great with smokeless loads. I did some research and found the case dimensions were about identical between the two rounds, .43 Spanish and 44-77 Remington.

I think what happened is when the Argentine rifles were refurbished at an arsenal down there, the barrels got broached out. The guns were just like new when they showed up on the US market.

The .43 Spanish in its original configuration (not the "reformado" variant) was a great round. It has enough taper as not to cause extraction problems such as plagued the 45-70 eg. in the fight at Greasy Grass. The bullet was a little lighter and the case held a little more powder for a somewhat higher muzzle velocity.

jn

[marlinman93]

The case dimensions are indeed identical between the .43 Spanish, and the .44-77 Rem.-Sharps. But the information in Cartridges of the World, or other references stating the rifles use a .446" bullet is somewhat incorrect as it pertains to groove diameter.
The original cartridges were loaded with paper patched bullets, so they did not have grease grooved bullets. And since the bores run around .451"-.452" groove diameter, you need a .446" bullet to get two wraps of paper around it, and fit the groove, and the case neck.
But shooting a .446" bullet with smokeless down the .452" bore will only shoot well until the rifling leads up, and then it goes to heck. I have a .446" hollow base mold I bought that's stated it's for the .44-77, but it is marginally accurate, and not for long. I bought it following information I got that it was correct, and should have slugged the bore first on my first .44-77 Rolling Block. It didn't take long to lead up the bore, and I stopped using it after spending a good amount of time getting all the lead out.
A good friend chuckled when I told him what happened, and told me to slug my bore, as he said almost all the old BP .44's were .452" and really .45's, not .44's. He was right, and my other rifles chambered in old .44 chambers all have a .452" bore also. They are a .44-100 and a .44-75.

[jon_norstog]

Those were the days! We used up all those old balloon-head cartridges. After a few firings, the little primer tit would break out or the primer pocket would get so loose the primers fell out. Dad converted his .43 to .44 mag, mine got stolen by the guy I left it with when I went in the service, my middle brother ringed his barrel somehow and my baby brother kept his infaNTry rifle stock but ran out of shells.

None of us would bother loading smokeless into a BP rifle any more. IO had a 'smith in Albuquerque who had a .45 whitworth pattern barrel blank turn it to match the old carbine barrel my brother left me and put into my dad's old action. It is now a .45-70 and only gets shot with BP. It doesn't foul up unless you shoot a box or more without cleaning. It looks original and is extremely accurate despite an incredibly heavy trigger. The .457 bullets are just right.



jn

[marlinman93]

I've never loaded anything but smokeless loads in my old rifles, but of course using appropriate powders that have low pressures, and at BP velocities. Some loads when run through Quickloads have pressures well below BP, and are extremely safe. Just have to know the right powders, and use normal caution when loading smokeless in old guns.
That said, I'm just getting started on my adventure into loading BP in this Remington Creedmoor rifle, because I plan to shoot it, and a couple others in our 1000 yd. BPCR matches at our gun club. I want to fit in with others as they all shoot BP, and was told I could shoot my smokeless loads, but my scores wouldn't count. So I'd just be shooting for fun only.
I'm stunned by the info I'm getting concerning loading BP, and all the variables involved. Even more surprised by all the various techniques used between shots by various very good BP shooters! So I'm on a steep learning curve now, and still accumulating all the pieces to begin loading BP cartridge ammo. After almost 50 years of smokeless loading, this is a big undertaking to switch a few to BP.

[marlinman93]

The restoration work someone did on the stocks of this Creedmoor Roller was not to my liking. They did great to not sand the wood, and get it low to the metal. But then they put no stain or color on the stocks, and the finish was just plain flat and colorless. Nothing like what Remington did originally on these rifles!
So it finally bugged me enough to get off my lazy rear and redo the finish. I put a chemical stripper on it, but there wasn't much finish to remove. Whoever did it must have been in a hurry and given it a single coat. I let it dry for days, and then stained it with a dark mahogany stain I colored with some red dye I had. Then using Minn Wax Wipe On Poly, I wet sanded on several coats, and wiped the stocks dry after each coat soaked in. Allowed the finish to dry for weeks and harden, then rubbed it out using rottenstone on a damp rag. After that I used paste wax applied with my fingers, and then buffed the finish with a soft terrycloth towel.
It looks much better, and more like what it should be if Remington did it back then.