I believe what we have here is a model 2, but from all the model 2s I've seen they do not have a rounded top receiver.
All matching serial number 1709. Barrel is stamped "38" which doesn't help to indicate 38-40 or 38-55. Also stamped below the forearm with the serial number and "FW", what is "FW"?
Several pictures included. Any help would be greatly appreciated friends!!
Rolling Block Help No.2 ??
-
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2025 2:31 pm
Rolling Block Help No.2 ??
- Attachments
-
- 1000023372.jpg (3.13 MiB) Viewed 155 times
-
- 1000023373.jpg (3.36 MiB) Viewed 155 times
-
- 1000023374.jpg (3.97 MiB) Viewed 155 times
-
- 1000023376.jpg (2.85 MiB) Viewed 155 times
-
- 1000023377.jpg (3.2 MiB) Viewed 155 times
-
- 1000023375.jpg (3.54 MiB) Viewed 155 times
-
- 1000023371.jpg (4.09 MiB) Viewed 155 times
-
- Posts: 440
- Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 10:47 pm
Re: Rolling Block Help No.2 ??
The #2 is a much smaller frame with octagon top and curved edges on each end of the receivers. They are sort of a fancy smaller variation.
My #2 in .32-20WCF:

What you have is an early round top #1 Rolling Block, and it's likely in .38 Long which could be a rimfire or centerfire version. But it also appears to have had some work done to it, so no telling what was done and whether it's still a .38 Long, or something else now. Only a chamber cast will tell you for sure, and that's something that should always be done after a gun is 150 years old and not knowing what changes have been made.
My #2 in .32-20WCF:

What you have is an early round top #1 Rolling Block, and it's likely in .38 Long which could be a rimfire or centerfire version. But it also appears to have had some work done to it, so no telling what was done and whether it's still a .38 Long, or something else now. Only a chamber cast will tell you for sure, and that's something that should always be done after a gun is 150 years old and not knowing what changes have been made.
Re: Rolling Block Help No.2 ??
Hi There,
Your rifle looks more like a No. 1 than a No. 2. The back of
the frame where it meets the butt stock is all wrong for a
No. 2. You should measure the thickness of the frame.
Cheers!
Webb
Your rifle looks more like a No. 1 than a No. 2. The back of
the frame where it meets the butt stock is all wrong for a
No. 2. You should measure the thickness of the frame.
Cheers!
Webb
-
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2025 2:31 pm
Re: Rolling Block Help No.2 ??
Thank you for the input!
I had put the idea of the No 1 aside after not finding any .38 calibers listed for it. And the forearm resembled the No 2.
Again, any idea on the "FW"? I figured it was probably the gun smith who did the rebuild.
...Wouldn't that be something if Frank Wesson had a Remington in his collection!?
Thanks again friends!
I had put the idea of the No 1 aside after not finding any .38 calibers listed for it. And the forearm resembled the No 2.
Again, any idea on the "FW"? I figured it was probably the gun smith who did the rebuild.
...Wouldn't that be something if Frank Wesson had a Remington in his collection!?

Thanks again friends!
-
- Posts: 440
- Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 10:47 pm
Re: Rolling Block Help No.2 ??
The steel schnabel type forearm tips were used almost exclusively on all Remington Sporting rifles built prior to 1886 or so. Only rifles that didn't use them were the little #4 and #6 versions. #1, #1.5, and #2 all used them unless it was a special order stock that might have a horn tip.