Model No. 1 1/2 Rolling block
Model No. 1 1/2 Rolling block
Did a search and couldn't find any information on the 1 1/2 action. Anyone have one and/or what can you tell me about it?
Never mind the mule, just load the wagon.
Re: Model No. 1 1/2 Rolling block
This must not be a very active forum or newbies are just ignored. I found out what I needed to know on another forum. Thank you.
Never mind the mule, just load the wagon.
-
Dick Hosmer
- Posts: 164
- Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 8:15 pm
- Contact:
Re: Model No. 1 1/2 Rolling block
Sorry you were not made to feel more welcome.
I'm kind of a 'fringe member' here myself as my only interest in Rems is those martial RB models made under license at the Springfield armory 1867-1872.
I did not answer your question as I have no knowledge of the 1-1/2, but I certainly hope the "problem" was due to your first guess as opposed to the latter. You are right in your observation that this forum is not a hotbed of activity!
Perhaps a regular contributor with broader interests has something to say?
I'm kind of a 'fringe member' here myself as my only interest in Rems is those martial RB models made under license at the Springfield armory 1867-1872.
I did not answer your question as I have no knowledge of the 1-1/2, but I certainly hope the "problem" was due to your first guess as opposed to the latter. You are right in your observation that this forum is not a hotbed of activity!
Perhaps a regular contributor with broader interests has something to say?
Re: Model No. 1 1/2 Rolling block
Hi Dixiejack,
Im sorry to hear you received little response on your inquiry. Though these variants are out of my area of specialty, I can give you some basic info here. The No.1-1/2 Remington Sporting rifles were made in both rim and centerfire calibers; .22 being the smallest with the .44-40 Winchester as the largest. It was produced from about 1888 when the Remington company was reorganized as the Remington Arms Company, and they were discontinued I believe in 1897 just before the War of 1898. Interestingly the Remington Lightweight "Baby" Carbine utilized this action, but is considered a scarce variation itself, and has a round top frame. Most if not all of No.1-1/2 rifles have 'knoxform' style upper frame (with 3 upper flats). Several thousand were produced in the near decade long production period and from good to excellent condition can reap anywhere from 700 to 2,000 dollars depending on grade, special features, bore, and remaining finish.The medium weight octagon barrels ran from 24 to 28 inches, but as with any custom department of the period, customers could literally special order anything they were willing to pay for. Meaning that one with original tang sights, checkered stocks, etc. could bring far more than current book value. I hope this is of help in your quest for info.
Best,
George Layman
Im sorry to hear you received little response on your inquiry. Though these variants are out of my area of specialty, I can give you some basic info here. The No.1-1/2 Remington Sporting rifles were made in both rim and centerfire calibers; .22 being the smallest with the .44-40 Winchester as the largest. It was produced from about 1888 when the Remington company was reorganized as the Remington Arms Company, and they were discontinued I believe in 1897 just before the War of 1898. Interestingly the Remington Lightweight "Baby" Carbine utilized this action, but is considered a scarce variation itself, and has a round top frame. Most if not all of No.1-1/2 rifles have 'knoxform' style upper frame (with 3 upper flats). Several thousand were produced in the near decade long production period and from good to excellent condition can reap anywhere from 700 to 2,000 dollars depending on grade, special features, bore, and remaining finish.The medium weight octagon barrels ran from 24 to 28 inches, but as with any custom department of the period, customers could literally special order anything they were willing to pay for. Meaning that one with original tang sights, checkered stocks, etc. could bring far more than current book value. I hope this is of help in your quest for info.
Best,
George Layman
Re: Model No. 1 1/2 Rolling block
George, Thank you for replying to my post. Since the initial post I have bought and have been reading your book. The only reference to my action is on page 30 regarding the "Day extractor". I have compared my action to every action image and unless I have missed an image the photo in upper left hand corner looks like the screw and pin configuration of my action.
As I stated, the gentleman I bought this action from thought it to be a 1 1/2, but you refer it to be a "#2) and also a size 5. The markings on the tang have been ground or polished off and the only other marking is a series of numbers on the upper tang looking at left side of action 5152 and the an obscure number. On the lower tang on the left side is a series of numbers 3713. Unfortunately, there are no other markings.
Again, the gentleman I bought the action from said it had a single set trigger which I cannot get to work. There is an adjustable set screw threaded into the rear of the trigger.
If I can get some photos down loaded maybe they will help identify the action. Pardon the tape. No pin or screw under tape on upper part of action, but a screw is covered by tape on lower part of action.
Again, I appreciate your reply to my rather terse post.
Regards,
George Carter
As I stated, the gentleman I bought this action from thought it to be a 1 1/2, but you refer it to be a "#2) and also a size 5. The markings on the tang have been ground or polished off and the only other marking is a series of numbers on the upper tang looking at left side of action 5152 and the an obscure number. On the lower tang on the left side is a series of numbers 3713. Unfortunately, there are no other markings.
Again, the gentleman I bought the action from said it had a single set trigger which I cannot get to work. There is an adjustable set screw threaded into the rear of the trigger.
If I can get some photos down loaded maybe they will help identify the action. Pardon the tape. No pin or screw under tape on upper part of action, but a screw is covered by tape on lower part of action.
Again, I appreciate your reply to my rather terse post.
Regards,
George Carter
- Attachments
-
- RB 5.jpg (249.52 KiB) Viewed 10357 times
-
- RB.1.jpg (117.26 KiB) Viewed 10400 times
-
- RB2 top view.jpg (170.1 KiB) Viewed 10400 times
Last edited by Dixiejack on Mon Jun 09, 2014 9:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
Never mind the mule, just load the wagon.
Re: Model No. 1 1/2 Rolling block
DixieJack,
I will not represent myself to be an expert on rolling blocks but I will make the following comments.
1. The receiver is not a No.1 as all number ones have the sliding extractor as indicated by the extractor retaining screw in the upper left of the receiver. The lower tang on Number 1 sporting receiver is longer than the upper
2. It is not a 1 1/2 as all of them have flat sides and a three facited top on the receiver. The receiver should measure 1.14" thick on the 1 1/2.
3.It is not a number 2 as the rear of the number 2 has unique quarter circle shape at the receiver/stock intersection.
4. The flute on top of the receiver would indicate to me that it is a shotgun or " foraging rifle" receiver.
5.The robust hammer and rolling block dimensions indicate that it is of military origin.
6. My best guess is 1868 military.
Now let the more knowledgeable people chime in.
Rider
I will not represent myself to be an expert on rolling blocks but I will make the following comments.
1. The receiver is not a No.1 as all number ones have the sliding extractor as indicated by the extractor retaining screw in the upper left of the receiver. The lower tang on Number 1 sporting receiver is longer than the upper
2. It is not a 1 1/2 as all of them have flat sides and a three facited top on the receiver. The receiver should measure 1.14" thick on the 1 1/2.
3.It is not a number 2 as the rear of the number 2 has unique quarter circle shape at the receiver/stock intersection.
4. The flute on top of the receiver would indicate to me that it is a shotgun or " foraging rifle" receiver.
5.The robust hammer and rolling block dimensions indicate that it is of military origin.
6. My best guess is 1868 military.
Now let the more knowledgeable people chime in.
Rider
-
31rst Virginia
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2014 10:45 am
Re: Model No. 1 1/2 Rolling block
Im also new here,i believe i have Saddle ring carbine,barrel is 20-1/2 inches,has the number 139 stamped on receiver and a B on the barrel also 43218 on the tang..we think its a 45-70,can anyone tell me what these numbers mean?Dixiejack wrote:Did a search and couldn't find any information on the 1 1/2 action. Anyone have one and/or what can you tell me about it?
Re: Model No. 1 1/2 Rolling block
31 rst
You can measure the bore diameter, measure the chamber length and diameter. Google for .45-70 dimensions and that would give you a pretty close idea of the caliber. Numbers, sorry I can't help you there.
rider
I have definitely ruled out a 1 1/2 action and if I read Mr. Layman's book right, there were no official #2 Rollies (more of a collector's designation of a 2nd model #1).
I don't think the flat on top of the action at the breech means it is a shotgun. Most all the round breech ends have that flat. Mine has an index mark that is center of that flat but on the front edge.
The action is the size of a #5, but what puzzles me is there are no upper action pins that I normally see on military rifles..
You can measure the bore diameter, measure the chamber length and diameter. Google for .45-70 dimensions and that would give you a pretty close idea of the caliber. Numbers, sorry I can't help you there.
rider
I have definitely ruled out a 1 1/2 action and if I read Mr. Layman's book right, there were no official #2 Rollies (more of a collector's designation of a 2nd model #1).
I don't think the flat on top of the action at the breech means it is a shotgun. Most all the round breech ends have that flat. Mine has an index mark that is center of that flat but on the front edge.
The action is the size of a #5, but what puzzles me is there are no upper action pins that I normally see on military rifles..
Never mind the mule, just load the wagon.
Re: Model No. 1 1/2 Rolling block
DixieJack,
I would suggest that you try to find a copy of Roy Marcots' book "Remington Rolling Block Rifles, Carbines and Shotguns.If nothing else the photography is exceptional. From my point of view it is an excellent source of information on the six models of true rolling blocks. They include the No.1, No.1/12, No.2, No.4, No.5, and No.7. He also explains some of the military designations.
I would suggest that you try to find a copy of Roy Marcots' book "Remington Rolling Block Rifles, Carbines and Shotguns.If nothing else the photography is exceptional. From my point of view it is an excellent source of information on the six models of true rolling blocks. They include the No.1, No.1/12, No.2, No.4, No.5, and No.7. He also explains some of the military designations.
Re: Model No. 1 1/2 Rolling block
Rider,
I have Roy Marcot's book (full of information and beautiful photos) and George Layman's book on military RB's (also full of information and great detailed photographs). Both are must have books, if one is interested at all in civilian and military RB's.
I have Roy Marcot's book (full of information and beautiful photos) and George Layman's book on military RB's (also full of information and great detailed photographs). Both are must have books, if one is interested at all in civilian and military RB's.
Never mind the mule, just load the wagon.
Re: Model No. 1 1/2 Rolling block
Hello George,
I have been away here for a bit...Anyhow it seems your action as shown has no Remington tang address and from my view, it appears to be a late Whitney type 2 action. If the extractor has an "S" configuration, that would be it, not to mention that they snap back like the later 1902 Day type extractor. Whitney seemed ahead of Remington as far as extraction improvement is concerned as when the Rider patent expired, Whitney introduced the "Improved Whitney Military Rifle" (and action) around 1882 to supersede the overly complicated Laidley action known as the Whitney Type 1. The position of the extractor screw beneath the front breechblock pin is the giveaway. Another oddity is that most Whitney rolling block actions both early and late, had the "button" retainer adjoined to the hammer and breech pins, but very late in time, perhaps just before Whitney's 1888 bankruptcy, simplified things by using breech pins held with the convention Remington style button retainer. By the way, any evidence of a serial number on the bottom of the tang, worn down, even appearing "scrubbed" or rubbed off? Thank you for the comments on my book, and I apologize for space reasons in the book, I could not elaborate on the Whitney as much as I wished. Perhaps in a revised edition we will be able to cover much more territory.
Best,
George Layman
I have been away here for a bit...Anyhow it seems your action as shown has no Remington tang address and from my view, it appears to be a late Whitney type 2 action. If the extractor has an "S" configuration, that would be it, not to mention that they snap back like the later 1902 Day type extractor. Whitney seemed ahead of Remington as far as extraction improvement is concerned as when the Rider patent expired, Whitney introduced the "Improved Whitney Military Rifle" (and action) around 1882 to supersede the overly complicated Laidley action known as the Whitney Type 1. The position of the extractor screw beneath the front breechblock pin is the giveaway. Another oddity is that most Whitney rolling block actions both early and late, had the "button" retainer adjoined to the hammer and breech pins, but very late in time, perhaps just before Whitney's 1888 bankruptcy, simplified things by using breech pins held with the convention Remington style button retainer. By the way, any evidence of a serial number on the bottom of the tang, worn down, even appearing "scrubbed" or rubbed off? Thank you for the comments on my book, and I apologize for space reasons in the book, I could not elaborate on the Whitney as much as I wished. Perhaps in a revised edition we will be able to cover much more territory.
Best,
George Layman
Re: Model No. 1 1/2 Rolling block
George, I too, apologize for not replying to your last post. Thank you for shearing more light on identifying my Whitney RB action. The extractor screw below the breechblock pin had me puzzled. I never could find a #5 action with the extractor screw in that location. In fact, it appears to be an exclusive feature of the Whitney, as you stated. On page 30 of your book show such a screw, but no reference to Whitney.
One other "oddity" I have found is an adjustment screw running horizontal through the upper part of the trigger. It has a slotted head, but there is hardly room for even a jeweler's screw driver to fit the slot. The gentleman I bought the action from said it had a single set trigger that I cannot get it to set. I'm thinking this might be some type of trigger pull weight adjustment screw that was added later by a gunsmith or possibly this action is not a military action and this could have been a factory option. I have no proof--just conjecture on my part.
One question. Are the Whitney's value more, less, or on par with the Remington Rolling Blocks?
Thanks for all your help.
Regards,
George C.
One other "oddity" I have found is an adjustment screw running horizontal through the upper part of the trigger. It has a slotted head, but there is hardly room for even a jeweler's screw driver to fit the slot. The gentleman I bought the action from said it had a single set trigger that I cannot get it to set. I'm thinking this might be some type of trigger pull weight adjustment screw that was added later by a gunsmith or possibly this action is not a military action and this could have been a factory option. I have no proof--just conjecture on my part.
One question. Are the Whitney's value more, less, or on par with the Remington Rolling Blocks?
Thanks for all your help.
Regards,
George C.
Never mind the mule, just load the wagon.
-
Dick Hosmer
- Posts: 164
- Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 8:15 pm
- Contact:
Re: Model No. 1 1/2 Rolling block
Do you have a copy of "Single Shot Rifles and Actions" by the late Frank DeHaas (Gun Digest 1969, 340 pages, softcover)? I'd imagine you could find one on Amazon.
The book is written from the gunsmith and mechanical design aspect, rather than a history book - it's short on pictures and is a pretty 'dry' read, but, It has extensive coverage of the rolling block varieties, including the Whitney versions, even two good sectional drawings of the latter.
The book is written from the gunsmith and mechanical design aspect, rather than a history book - it's short on pictures and is a pretty 'dry' read, but, It has extensive coverage of the rolling block varieties, including the Whitney versions, even two good sectional drawings of the latter.
Re: Model No. 1 1/2 Rolling block
Hello George,
Thank you for the reply...Say I really don't know about that added screw feature as its sort of something new to me regarding the Whitney as I have never taken notice of such a feature on the military size action. It MIGHT be a gunsmith addition but I honestly cant answer that. Pricewise complete Whitney military RBs are right up there in price and do indeed have a following, as well as from myself too. On the whole, the later version seems scarcer than the earlier Laidley-Whitney type one, however in fine condition or (especially with the Mexican RM cartouche in even fair condition), one can find them to reap $1100 to $1500.00. However I have found more RB collectors seem to be after the Remington than the Whitney. I have always been a fan of the latter with equal liking. Hope this is of help.
George
Thank you for the reply...Say I really don't know about that added screw feature as its sort of something new to me regarding the Whitney as I have never taken notice of such a feature on the military size action. It MIGHT be a gunsmith addition but I honestly cant answer that. Pricewise complete Whitney military RBs are right up there in price and do indeed have a following, as well as from myself too. On the whole, the later version seems scarcer than the earlier Laidley-Whitney type one, however in fine condition or (especially with the Mexican RM cartouche in even fair condition), one can find them to reap $1100 to $1500.00. However I have found more RB collectors seem to be after the Remington than the Whitney. I have always been a fan of the latter with equal liking. Hope this is of help.
George
Re: Model No. 1 1/2 Rolling block
George--You have been a great help in identifying my rolling block action. I appreciate you taking time from your busy schedule to share your knowledge on Whitneys. Now that I know what I have, I will start pulling single shot books off the shelf and start doing some researching. Thanks again.
George
George
Never mind the mule, just load the wagon.