Rolling block “locking action” . . .

[JimF]

I have two RBs . . .
A Springfield-made, 1870 U.S. Navy rifle and a NY State militia model.
The militia model has the “locking action” while the Navy model does not.
Did the 1871 Army model (Springfield) have the “locking action”?
When did the “locking action” come into being?
Inquiring minds, etc., etc. . . . .

[aardq]

Hi Jim,

What is a "locking action?" I'm just familiar with the basics of the Rolling Block rifles,
and haven't heard of a "locking action."

Thanks,
Daniel

[JimF]

I believe this is a term coined by Norm Flayderman (maybe/probably others) and refers to a safety device incorporated in the later RBs.
Somewhere, I read some foreign users of this action FAILED to maintain these rifles adequately . . . .allowing the fire-pins to “freeze” in the forward position.
This allowed the rifle to fire when the breeechblock was snapped closed on a chambered round, BEFORE the hammer could lock the block closed! (Very bad JU-JU!)
So-o-o . . .
Remington engineers devised a safety device which . . .when the block is closed on a chambered cartridge, it automatically drops the hammer to a “safety” notch . . .necessitating “recocking” the hammer before it can be fired.
Of course, this slowed the rate of fire somewhat, but kept the users’ face “intact!”

My apologies for posting this in the wrong forum area.

[aardq]

Hi Jim,

Now I'm really confused. Remember I don't know much about the RB rifle, so I'm easily confused. My 1910 RB doesn't lower the hammer at all when the breech block is closed on a round.

You also said that you had 2 RBs, and one was made at Springfield, but I am unaware that any RBs were made at Springfield. Was this a special contract of some kind?.

Thanks for bearing with me,
Daniel

[JimF]

Daniel . . .
I’m not at all sure what caliber (or frame size) you have in your 1910 RB.
Dunno’ if the smaller caliber/frame size have the locking action, but I do know the big, #1 frame does have BOTH normal (early) and locking (later) actions.

Springfield made at least two runs of RBs . . .
The 1870 Navy models . . .and the 1871 Army models.
Google is your friend to see them both!

[aardq]

Here we go. The 1910 is with a friend right now so I can't check it. It is a No 1 frame chambered for 7x57.

I have learned that Google can give lots of "hits" but when it comes to remmies, most of the info is bad. Or Google will list the same "hit" several times, leading to a waste of time. But you never know, so you have to check every one.My RB rifle source is out of town or a week or more. He has the 1910.

Was this safety used only in the rifles, or was it also used in the pistols? I have two Army models, which were improvements on the Navy models. What do I look for to see if they have the safety?
Thanks,
Daniel

[JimF]

What little I know of the 7mm Mauser chambering, is that headspace is “generous”.
I have no knowledge of the RB handguns.
If possible, I suggest you acquire a copy of Norm Fladermans’ “Guide to Antique American Firearms” . . . and see particularly description #9A-397 (Navy) and #9A-399 (Army).

I think your 7mm RB is also listed in this publication as a “Number 5” . . . .
These #1 actions were hardened for smokeless powder ammo and are described in description #5E-100, 5E-101, and 5E-102.
These were the last of the RBs produced by Remington.

[aardq]

Hi Jim,

Thanks for the additional info. I have Flayderman's book so I'll look it up, but Flayderman isn't always right, and he often repeats 60-70 year old info that has never been verified, so I always want a second source, that doesn't use
Flayderman as a source.
This is getting interesting.n
thanks,

Daniel.