Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5 Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Stevens Favorite (Read 3931 times)
vapodog
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 29th, 2017
Stevens Favorite
Jul 30th, 2017 at 2:51pm
Print Post  
I know there are at least three elderly models....1897, 1894, and 1915 and others later.

Mine is a 1894 with the wire loop through the knob that retains the barrel....it's chambered for .25 Stevens rim fire.

I want to rebarrel it (not using a liner) and thread it to the receiver and install a new extractor.  The barrel was ordered weeks ago in chrome moly 1-9" twist.

I'd like to chamber it to .17 mach 2 or .17 HMR

Can someone lend advice on doing either of these two cartridges.....the HMR  ammo is far more available and that would be preferable....but I have 14 boxes of the Mach 2 ammo and can backorder it for a future need.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
jy3855
Senior Forum Member
****
Online



Posts: 327
Location: California
Joined: Jul 13th, 2015
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #1 - Jul 30th, 2017 at 3:21pm
Print Post  
The 17 Mach 2 shares the same SAAMI pressure specs as 22 LR (24K psi Mean Average Pressure) so I wouldn't expect it to be any harder on an old Favorite than the 22 LR.  The 17 HRM has a MAP of  26K psi. I think that this difference is significant enough that I wouldn't chamber an old Favorite for the 17 HRM. I would expect the 17 HRM to accelerate the wear and loosening of the action.

I don't think that it would blow up on you, but I would expect it to be hard on the rifle.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
vapodog
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 29th, 2017
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #2 - Jul 30th, 2017 at 11:03pm
Print Post  
jy3855 wrote on Jul 30th, 2017 at 3:21pm:
The 17 Mach 2 shares the same SAAMI pressure specs as 22 LR (24K psi Mean Average Pressure) so I wouldn't expect it to be any harder on an old Favorite than the 22 LR.  The 17 HRM has a MAP of  26K psi. I think that this difference is significant enough that I wouldn't chamber an old Favorite for the 17 HRM. I would expect the 17 HRM to accelerate the wear and loosening of the action.

I don't think that it would blow up on you, but I would expect it to be hard on the rifle.


My calculations show the .17 HMR to be 35% greater force on the action than a .22 LR.....and a .22 WMR to be 25% greater force on the action due to it's slightly larger case diameter.  That said.....The gun can't tell the difference between shooting a .17 Mach 2 and a .22 long rifle.

Do you see anything particularly difficult with hardness of the metal in the receiver as I want to thread the barrel and receiver together to get rid of the barrel screw which I find of poor lines of the action.  I think I can get a new extractor from Wisner's.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
slumlord44
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 2455
Location: Lebanon, Illinois 62254
Joined: Dec 21st, 2007
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #3 - Jul 30th, 2017 at 11:08pm
Print Post  
I have to agree that the .17 HMR is too much but the Mach2 wiykd be a better choice.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
WCFMetalsmith
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 33
Location: Washington state
Joined: Feb 2nd, 2011
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #4 - Jul 30th, 2017 at 11:58pm
Print Post  

You should check how much or little in the case  of the 1894 receiver side wall thickness at the barrel vs side walls, very thin, and would require a odd diameter and small pitch tap.

The 1915 is a much better choice to tap, as the receiver is wider, also a bigger dia breech bolt screw .218 vs the .193 of the earlier models.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
frnkeore
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 5817
Location: Central Point, OR 97502
Joined: Jun 16th, 2010
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #5 - Jul 31st, 2017 at 1:35am
Print Post  
I'm going to do something similar, to my wifes 1894 Favorite.

I bought a 11/16 x 24 used tap of of Ebay, it cost me $16 with shipping.

If your receiver looks like the picture below, you can also do this.

The .695 would serve as a aligning diameter to the threads and you would have at least .900 of thread engagement that's plenty strong.

The correct hole size for that tap, is .646 (approx 75% thread) but, you would be ok, if you drilled it with a 41/64 (.641) drill. It would most likely cut at least .002 oversize. Or, you can bore it to size.

I'm doing it so she can shoot breech seated bullets with me and that will require pressures a little over standard 22RF.

Frank
  

ASSRA Member #696, ISSA Member #339
Back to top
YIMAIM  
IP Logged
 
slumlord44
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 2455
Location: Lebanon, Illinois 62254
Joined: Dec 21st, 2007
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #6 - Jul 31st, 2017 at 11:54pm
Print Post  
Threading it for a barrel seems like a good idea but probably not realy necessary. The Favorites and also 44s were not threaded and worked just fine.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
jy3855
Senior Forum Member
****
Online



Posts: 327
Location: California
Joined: Jul 13th, 2015
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #7 - Aug 1st, 2017 at 12:24am
Print Post  
According to de Haas' "Single Shot Rifles and Actions" the Stevens 44 barrel was threaded 16 V. TPI on a .80" shank.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
uscra112
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 1989
Location: SE Ohio Hill Country
Joined: May 7th, 2007
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #8 - Aug 1st, 2017 at 2:54am
Print Post  
I love gunsmithing the Favorites; I've got six of 'em, two .22s have been relined, one .22 has been rebarreled, a fourth has its' barrel in the lathe at this very moment being drilled for a liner.  Two are too good to touch, so I'm looking for yet another one to convert to centerfire so I can shoot .32 S&W. 

I'm mighty skeptical of upping the pressure in an 1894 with the two-diameter barrel shank, but Frank's tap size would be the right choice if you must.  I'd thread only 2/3 of the length of the .630 diameter, leaving the back end alone.  Thus the barrel is aligned both in front of and behind the thread, making the assembly stiffer in pitch and yaw. Both unthreaded diameters should be line-to-line fit in the receiver.   Look carefully at how the Model 44s were done.  I think this is one reason why the 44 design was so accurate.

I'd then keep the barrel retention screw feature, just as Stevens did for the 44 1/2.   

You're going to have to tighten up the linkage as much as possible, and I can offer a tip there:  Drill and ream all the holes .1570", and use 4mm pins.  That gives you a light press fit all around.  Open the holes in the link by about .0003" to ease the fit a little.  The one I just did is very stiff to operate.  (I had to buy 50 pins, and can send you a few.  I'll never use 'em up! )

The breechblock shoulders must be in contact with the receiver when the action locks up.  Otherwise all the thrust is resolved through the breechblock pivot screw, which in the 1894 ain't very robust.  This may involve actually elongating the breechblock pivot hole so the block can shift to the rear a few thousandths.  There's a very specific sequence to finishing the barrel shank and headspacing to get this 100% right. Too much to detail here. 

Even with all that, I'm still mighty skeptical of using the .17HMR cartridge.  The linkage in the 44 and Favorite is at a considerable mechanical disadvantage, and adding more pressure just doesn't seem to me to be a good idea.  If you must, you'll need a .25 RF breechblock.  The .22 firing pin doesn't line up with the rim of the .17HMR case very well..  (Already studied that while working out how to rebarrel a .22 action to .25 for this new-made .25RF ammo project.  Gave it up and bought a .25 Favorite instead.)    
  

Jack of All Trades - Retired
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
jy3855
Senior Forum Member
****
Online



Posts: 327
Location: California
Joined: Jul 13th, 2015
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #9 - Aug 1st, 2017 at 9:25am
Print Post  
If your main objection to the barrel retention screw is that it spoils the outline of the action, why not have a set screw made to replace the offending loop and big head. I don't know what the screw/thread size is, but if an Allen set screw could be found or made to the right size, it would work very nicely.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
vapodog
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 29th, 2017
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #10 - Aug 1st, 2017 at 10:57am
Print Post  
jy3855 wrote on Aug 1st, 2017 at 9:25am:
If your main objection to the barrel retention screw is that it spoils the outline of the action, why not have a set screw made to replace the offending loop and big head. I don't know what the screw/thread size is, but if an Allen set screw could be found or made to the right size, it would work very nicely.

A superb idea.....I can make that one myself.....and it saves me from tapping the receiver.....
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
frnkeore
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 5817
Location: Central Point, OR 97502
Joined: Jun 16th, 2010
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #11 - Aug 1st, 2017 at 11:49am
Print Post  
I did some more figuring on this conversion yesterday. When I bought my tap, I choose the extra fine pitch for the 11/16 thread. I new I would be able to find a tap for that.

After I did the math for corser pitches in 11/16, I found that a 18 pitch will require a hole size of .632 so, if you get a 11/16x18 tap, you will only need to tap the receiver.

(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)

Tap it all the way through or just short of it, if you don't want the threads showing at the chamber. When you tighten a thread, it picks up the center of the threads and give a fit similar to a press fit and will always align. Make sure the receiver face is square and the hole is centered by indicating to the spindle axis. And you will have as good a fit as can be had. it will be at least as good as a 44 and maybe better, regarding the fit and alignment.

Frank
  

ASSRA Member #696, ISSA Member #339
Back to top
YIMAIM  
IP Logged
 
Redsetter
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 2019
Location: New York
Joined: Aug 6th, 2013
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #12 - Aug 1st, 2017 at 12:00pm
Print Post  
vapodog wrote on Aug 1st, 2017 at 10:57am:
jy3855 wrote on Aug 1st, 2017 at 9:25am:
If your main objection to the barrel retention screw is that it spoils the outline of the action, why not have a set screw made to replace the offending loop and big head. I don't know what the screw/thread size is, but if an Allen set screw could be found or made to the right size, it would work very nicely.

A superb idea.....I can make that one myself.....and it saves me from tapping the receiver.....


Why retain the take-down feature at all?  (A holdover of course from the time when most folks traveled by train and other public conveyances.)  Seems Locktite, epoxy, etc., would produce a more rigid assembly.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
vapodog
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 29th, 2017
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #13 - Aug 1st, 2017 at 4:27pm
Print Post  
Redsetter wrote on Aug 1st, 2017 at 12:00pm:
vapodog wrote on Aug 1st, 2017 at 10:57am:
jy3855 wrote on Aug 1st, 2017 at 9:25am:
If your main objection to the barrel retention screw is that it spoils the outline of the action, why not have a set screw made to replace the offending loop and big head. I don't know what the screw/thread size is, but if an Allen set screw could be found or made to the right size, it would work very nicely.

A superb idea.....I can make that one myself.....and it saves me from tapping the receiver.....


Why retain the take-down feature at all?  (A holdover of course from the time when most folks traveled by train and other public conveyances.)  Seems Locktite, epoxy, etc., would produce a more rigid assembly.


I expect to get my chrome moly 17caliber barrel from E R Shaw end oft his week.....I do appreciate all the ideas set forward here.....but will wait until I get the action voided of it's parts and will see what I have then.  The idea of a "takedown" rifle does appeal to me.....I can make a fitted case for it.

At this juncture, I don't see an advantage to me in the .17 HMR over the .17 Mach 2....except for ammo availability.  There's a lot of good advice here.....as I was told I'd find here.

Thanks all.....
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
marlinguy
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline


Ballards may be weaker,
but they sure are neater!

Posts: 7283
Location: Oregon
Joined: Feb 2nd, 2009
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #14 - Aug 1st, 2017 at 6:06pm
Print Post  
My personal feeling is why disable the takedown feature when it's already there. Since you're starting with a brand new barrel, you can make the slip fit to very tight tolerances, and even polish out the bore of the receiver if it needs it. Having the takedown system wont make a difference with your caliber choice, especially with a good Allen screw to keep it tight.
And as you say, you can make a nice fitted case to give the rifle some extra eye candy!
  

Vall
(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
Send TopicPrint