Another RB identification post

Topics related to Pre - 1898 Remington Rifles
Post Reply
Cwc
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2025 12:46 pm

Another RB identification post

Post by Cwc »

I just got the receiver in the picture. I’m trying to figure out what it is. No 1, 1 1/2, or 5? Military or sporting? I’m not certain that the lower tang/trigger guard, hammer, and breech block are original to the receiver. The only markings I can find are three lines on the upper tang:
REMINGTON ARMS COMPANY ILION, NY
PAT MAY ?? 1864 MAY 7th JUNE 11th NOV 12th DEC 187?
DEC 31st 1872 SEPT 9th 1873 JAN 12 MARCH 18th 1874
Attachments
IMG_1681.jpeg
IMG_1681.jpeg (4.24 MiB) Viewed 318 times
IMG_1671.jpeg
IMG_1671.jpeg (4.7 MiB) Viewed 318 times
IMG_1672.jpeg
IMG_1672.jpeg (4.56 MiB) Viewed 318 times
JimF
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2026 8:56 am

Re: Another RB identification post

Post by JimF »

My guess is:
A #1 Military . . . .with the earlier “long” lower tang.
Looks like it was cleaned up a mite.
marlinman93
Posts: 488
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 10:47 pm

Re: Another RB identification post

Post by marlinman93 »

I've never seen a military Rolling Block #1 with the longer Sporting Rifle tang? And the military Rolling Blocks had thicker and wider tangs than Sporting had, and those tangs appear to be the thinner Sporting style.
I think this action is the early Sporting round top #1. There should be a serial number on the lower tang near the furthest rear screw hole.
Cwc
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2025 12:46 pm

Re: Another RB identification post

Post by Cwc »

JimF wrote: Sun Aug 09, 2026 10:05 am My guess is:
A #1 Military . . . .with the earlier “long” lower tang.
Looks like it was cleaned up a mite.
I didn’t realize the military versions ever had a “long“ lower tang. The lower tangs are interchangeable, correct? I was thinking it was likely that the tang came from a different gun, and was not original to this action.
Cwc
Posts: 6
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2025 12:46 pm

Re: Another RB identification post

Post by Cwc »

marlinman93 wrote: Sun Aug 09, 2026 10:24 am I've never seen a military Rolling Block #1 with the longer Sporting Rifle tang? And the military Rolling Blocks had thicker and wider tangs than Sporting had, and those tangs appear to be the thinner Sporting style.
I think this action is the early Sporting round top #1. There should be a serial number on the lower tang near the furthest rear screw hole.
When I bought it I also was thinking it was an early sporting action. Once I received it and saw the markings on it I realized that it was late 80s at the earliest, based on the “Remington Arms Company” stamp.
marlinman93
Posts: 488
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 10:47 pm

Re: Another RB identification post

Post by marlinman93 »

Cwc wrote: Wed Aug 12, 2026 7:39 am
marlinman93 wrote: Sun Aug 09, 2026 10:24 am I've never seen a military Rolling Block #1 with the longer Sporting Rifle tang? And the military Rolling Blocks had thicker and wider tangs than Sporting had, and those tangs appear to be the thinner Sporting style.
I think this action is the early Sporting round top #1. There should be a serial number on the lower tang near the furthest rear screw hole.
When I bought it I also was thinking it was an early sporting action. Once I received it and saw the markings on it I realized that it was late 80s at the earliest, based on the “Remington Arms Company” stamp.
Yes, you're correct. That rollstamp would make it a late 1880's action, so likely someone swapped in an early Sporting tang. I have three of those, but mine are early military actions with pistol grip Sporting tangs added.
Post Reply