Rolling Block Carbine id help needed (w/pictures) - updated

[alouw]

Hi Guys,

Recently I received a rolling block carbine, and I'm still puzzling it out.
There's a Number 4 stamped in the barrel ring, buttstockplate (inside) and even on the buttstock screws !
The addressline is not very clear anymore and I can't find any signs that there was even was a rear sight on it.
The slotplate has some number in it and most likely MM.

I haven't figured out what caliber it is, but it's about 2 mm larger than a 45-70 GOVT shell (in diameter)..

Please see the pictures for more info (they're large, so be a bit patient)..

http://www.antiquefirearms.eu/misc/Addressline.JPG
http://www.antiquefirearms.eu/misc/BarrelRing.JPG
http://www.antiquefirearms.eu/misc/Buttstock.JPG
http://www.antiquefirearms.eu/misc/Overall.JPG
http://www.antiquefirearms.eu/misc/Screws.JPG
http://www.antiquefirearms.eu/misc/Slotplate.JPG

Any help, ideas on this would be appreciated..

Extra Update (2007-07-19):
- The forewood is stamped with a 4 under the barrel
- The barrel itself is stamped with 4 and MM under the wood.

- Update (2007-07-23)
http://www.antiquefirearms.eu/misc/AL00 ... lstock.jpg (new picture)
http://www.antiquefirearms.eu/misc/AL0002/barrel.jpg (new picture)
- Also the cartridge extractor has a marking of MM on it.. the other parts are perfectly moving but the screws are stuck like a rock... hopefully a good deal of balistol will loosen them somewhat.
- One of the screws of the rear slingring is also stamped 4 (the other one won't let go right now)

Thanks,
Albert

[ehull]

Albert: The lack of a rear sight, or a saddle bar & ring, and the presence of the sling swivels makes this appear to be a cut down (or re-manufactured) rifle. The pin-plate is not the same as on the standard Remington rolling block. The style and patent dates place the manufacturing date of the frame post 1874 but prior to 1879/80. The "4" and "MM" markings would appear to have been applied by whoever did the rework. What is the barrel length? If different than 20-1/2 inches total then this is another clue it may be a non-standard carbine. Is there any indication of a filled ramrod groove in the forestock?

[alouw]

Albert: The lack of a rear sight, or a saddle bar & ring, and the presence of the sling swivels makes this appear to be a cut down (or re-manufactured) rifle. The pin-plate is not the same as on the standard Remington rolling block. The style and patent dates place the manufacturing date of the frame post 1874 but prior to 1879/80. The "4" and "MM" markings would appear to have been applied by whoever did the rework. What is the barrel length? If different than 20-1/2 inches total then this is another clue it may be a non-standard carbine. Is there any indication of a filled ramrod groove in the forestock?

The barrel is approx. 22" (56cm) in length, but there's absolutely no traces of ramrod placement/grooves in the forestock. Still a pretty regular barrel size..
I'm also still wondering about the caliber, a 45-70 is too small and a 50-70 is a tad to big.. the rim appears to be about 17mm and the base about 14mm ..

About the rear sight, it apears there's been one (or something) on the barrel at the block's end. There's three little dents/dots in the metal on two scratched lines about in the middle of the barrel. Still wondering however how it would have been fixed there, there's no trace of that.

It's still a mystery to me to what the rifle really is. Also noticable is the upper left screw (left view) of the block which I've only come across on scandinavian models.. and the firingpin indicator (which is missing, but surely was there once upon a time)..

But then, you've been a good help at positioning the carbine in a specific time period. I was thinking about Dutch area (the Dutch also bought a bunch of carbines around 1871 to 1873 and rechambered those to the 11x52R Beaumont caliber after the 11x45R Remington caliber).. which seems unlikely now.

Please see the original post for some updated info (2 more images) and the marking MM found on the cartridge extractor..
It does look a lot like the US NAVY M1867 ... But still hard to really explore without breaking the screws at the moment..

Thanks,
Albert

[ehull]

Albert- The added photos show that the block on the bottom of the barrel, to hold the stock in place, is very non-standard and crude--definitely not a Remington product.
Ed

[Greg T]

How many holes are in the face of the breechblock? If there is a hole for both the centerfire pin and the rimfire pin, I'd vote that at least the breechblock is Danish, perhaps started out as the Danish Model 1867 rollingblock.
Greg T