Unknown Falling Block Rifle

I did see that, Jim, but I KNOW that I have seen this configuration before -- the shape of the hammer and the block, the number and location of screws/pins, the overall shape of the body of the action, and the track on the block tail that is shown when the action is open (later picture).
 
It looks like a one of a kind gunsmith made with leanings to Stevens rifles,never seen one quite like it but it also seems to mimic Frank de Haas's style.
 
It looks like a one of a kind gunsmith made with leanings to Stevens rifles,
Click to expand...

I'm leaning that way as well. The brass on the bottom of the barrel looks like a muzzle loader rod holder used to be there. My bet is that it is a converted muzzle loader, by an unknown smith. It makes sense that it was cheaper to convert a muzzle loader than it was to have a barrel made. Not unlike sporterizing an old Arisaka or Mauser.

Don't give up on finding a maker yet. Even if it is a conversion it is a unique piece of history and I think it is worth investigating further. Thanks for sharing your pictures.
 
I looked real hard at the cam track in the bottom of the breechblock and that was my main focus when leafing through DeHaas. Nada.

It looks almost like the "receiver ring" is a separate part from the action body. Is there a takedown screw somewhere under there?
 
This is fascinating. Your picture 22 is very telling. The breech block comes straight down and the hammer is cocked when the lever is lowered. This is classic Winchester (Browning) 1885 operation. It is quite unlike the Stevens. The receiver appears to be two pieces, which is odd. The barrel fits into one piece which is then somehow attached to the lower part of the receiver. This is a big clue if you are looking to find old, obscure rifles that might be related, but nothing comes to my mind.

I have two suggestions, one of which is exciting. How Browning worked when he developed a design is well known. He often hand-made a series of prototypes in his shop until he got one that he thought was the best he could do. Could this piece be such a prototype? Having no marks would be consistent with the idea. The receiver configuration is quite similar to the 78/85, but looking a little more like a lo-wall than a hi-wall. The trigger angle looks identical, which indicates to me that the internal action geometry is very similar. The lever looks close to what you see on real 78/85s. Being a .45-70 shows it was done after 1873. Browning began work on his single shot design a couple of years before his patent in 1878, If this were true. the gun is a priceless treasure, but I don't know if it could be verified.

The other possibility is that it is someone's attempt at a copy of the 1878/1885 Browning/Winchester, which is interesting, but not exciting. This is perhaps more likely.
 
Last edited:
At first glance, it looked a little like a Hopkins & Allen large action, but not quite.
My guess is that it's a "home-made" (i.e. gunsmith produced) rifle; maybe from parts, maybe from scratch.
 
Yes, it does look like the H&A. I'd thought about that one, but had rejected it fairly early on.

I was mulling this over in bed last night, sort of 3/4ths asleep, and had one of those "bolt out of the blue" moments...

My mind flashed "It's a Burgess!"

Then the rational part of my mind flashed "It's not a Burgess. That was a repeating rifle. Dumbass."

And then I rolled over and went to sleep. :D
 
The chamber measures .50 inches but the bore is too corroded to get an accurate reading. It looks like its in the .45 inches range but I can't be sure.
 
That receiver ring has me baffled and wondering just how strong that action might be. If there are only screws or a few pins holding the receiver/barrel top to the base, there is not a lot of metal to shear.

The whole thing looks home made.
 
At this point, I've exhausted all of my limited resources, and I've got nothing.

I continue to think, though, that I have seen one of these before.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top