Page Index Toggle Pages: [1]  Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Stevens Favorite (Read 3936 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
*****
Online



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
*****
Online



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
 
kensmachine
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 193
Joined: Nov 21st, 2012
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #15 - Aug 1st, 2017 at 10:49pm
Print Post  
1894's are know to shoot loose with High Velocity 22LF.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
vapodog
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 29th, 2017
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #16 - Aug 2nd, 2017 at 3:27pm
Print Post  
kensmachine wrote on Aug 1st, 2017 at 10:49pm:
1894's are know to shoot loose with High Velocity 22LF.

Thanks for the info.....as luck would have it.....I just traded (even up) for a heavier version....the 1915 model.

I'm learning a lot here as I was told I would!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
uscra112
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 1989
Location: SE Ohio Hill Country
Joined: May 7th, 2007
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #17 - Aug 2nd, 2017 at 4:32pm
Print Post  
Good move.  The 1915's link is thicker than to 1894, better able to handle the pounding it gets, even though the pins are the same size.   

Downside is that they made no attempt to get the breechblock shoulders to bear in the frame, so the breechblock pivot screw carries all of the load.  But the pivot screw is bigger - about .217" vs. the .187 of the 1894.
  

Jack of All Trades - Retired
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
BP
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 5633
Location: Westside
Joined: Aug 27th, 2006
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #18 - Aug 2nd, 2017 at 6:43pm
Print Post  
Here's a real strange Favorite that might handle the .17 HMR...
I'm not sure what Stevens was thinking...
  

There are three kinds of men: The ones that learn by reading, the few who learn by observation, and the rest who have to pee on the electric fence and find out for themselves.
Proud Noodlehead
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Redsetter
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 2019
Location: New York
Joined: Aug 6th, 2013
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #19 - Aug 2nd, 2017 at 10:17pm
Print Post  
That trigger arrangement takes it beyond strange.  But despite the buttplate, no real Favorite ever had, or needed, a falling-block for such anemic cartridges as .32 L. Got to be some experimental model on which, for convenience, a Favorite plate was attached.

Have you searched Grant for any mention of such a model?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
slumlord44
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 2455
Location: Lebanon, Illinois 62254
Joined: Dec 21st, 2007
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #20 - Aug 2nd, 2017 at 10:46pm
Print Post  
The frame looks like a 44 1/2 but the triger droping down with the action open sure isn't 44 1/2. The barrel screw with the loop is Favorite. Got me confuses on this one.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Redsetter
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 2019
Location: New York
Joined: Aug 6th, 2013
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #21 - Aug 2nd, 2017 at 10:57pm
Print Post  
No mention by Grant, but check out Dutcher's description in the Jan '98 ASSRA News--another one just like it, except .25RF.  Says it was designed by Stevens man Bill Goyette.  Purpose of trigger design was to allow breech mechanism to be removed in one piece.

Doubt it could have been mfg. at a cost acceptable for a "boy's rifle."  Scaled up, it would have been an equal in strength of the 44 1/2, but since that model was already in production, maybe Stevens thought Goyette's design was redundant.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bill Lawrence
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 207
Joined: Mar 17th, 2014
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #22 - Aug 2nd, 2017 at 11:43pm
Print Post  
If Dutcher's .25 RF example also appears fully and so nicely finished, tabbing the two rifles as experimentals or prototypes seems to me a stretch.  And why build examples only as rimfires when the action appears easily able to handle at least .22 and .25 CF cartridges? 

BP, is your example a boy/lady-sized gun?

Bill Lawrence
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Deadeye Bly
Oldtimer
*****
Offline



Posts: 533
Location: Stephens City
Joined: Feb 25th, 2011
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #23 - Aug 3rd, 2017 at 7:44am
Print Post  
It looks like a cross between a Page-Lewis and a Favorite. The Page-Lewis breech block was totally enclosed as is this one. It all dropped out of the action similar to a Ballard. Perhaps Mr. Lewis took this idea with him when he and Page were let go from Stevens.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
vapodog
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 29th, 2017
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #24 - Aug 3rd, 2017 at 8:47am
Print Post  
went to the woodpile and got some boards.....getting started is the trick.....
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Redsetter
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 2019
Location: New York
Joined: Aug 6th, 2013
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #25 - Aug 3rd, 2017 at 9:24am
Print Post  
Bill Lawrence wrote on Aug 2nd, 2017 at 11:43pm:
And why build examples only as rimfires when the action appears easily able to handle at least .22 and .25 CF cartridges? 



Too bad Mr. Goyette did not apply his mechanical ingenuity to the design of some kind of dual-use firing-pin, such as used by Marlin & Wesson--a lot more useful than a one-piece breech.

Dutcher found fault with the position of the hammer-spring, thought it should be re-designed. 
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Redsetter
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 2019
Location: New York
Joined: Aug 6th, 2013
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #26 - Aug 3rd, 2017 at 9:27am
Print Post  
vapodog wrote on Aug 3rd, 2017 at 8:47am:
went to the woodpile and got some boards...


A woodpile like that ought to be stored in a bank vault.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Redsetter
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 2019
Location: New York
Joined: Aug 6th, 2013
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #27 - Aug 3rd, 2017 at 1:18pm
Print Post  
Deadeye Bly wrote on Aug 3rd, 2017 at 7:44am:
It looks like a cross between a Page-Lewis and a Favorite. The Page-Lewis breech block was totally enclosed as is this one. It all dropped out of the action similar to a Ballard. Perhaps Mr. Lewis took this idea with him when he and Page were let go from Stevens.


Lewis, not Goyette, must be the true inventor.  Dutcher assumed Goyette was the inventor because his gun came from Goyette's family, and that's what the family told him.  (As Antiques Roadshow demonstrates over & over again, always beware of "family traditions"!)

However, Lewis has at least 20 pats. to his credit, but I found none for Goyette.  The one pertaining to this design is #1,459,108, granted 6-19-23, assigned to Page-Lewis, along with another for the P-L rear sight.

Most of Lewis' other pats. were assigned to Stevens, but I found none that resembles the design of these two falling-blocks, which look like they were mfgd. BEFORE the Savage take-over, after which Lewis left Stevens for P-L, then Winchester.

Dutcher didn't like the vertical hammer spring, but DeHaas didn't criticize it--in fact, spoke rather well of the whole gun.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
desert-dude
Senior Forum Member
****
Offline



Posts: 250
Location: Selah
Joined: Jul 23rd, 2013
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #28 - Aug 4th, 2017 at 10:45am
Print Post  
I've seen a Favorite that was chambered for 25-20. I assume it was the WCF
but didn't ask. It was in a gunsmith's shop for a second try at the breechblock.
The replacement block was 4140 and it failed so that certainly sets a point to avoid.
The 25-20 SS has about half the breechthrust so that MIGHT be an alternative.

A nice project for someone would be to make a nice alloy ( 4140 or 8620 ) version of the whole action.  It would be a labor of love since one certainly couldn't make it
pay.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Redsetter
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 2019
Location: New York
Joined: Aug 6th, 2013
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #29 - Aug 4th, 2017 at 12:47pm
Print Post  
desert-dude wrote on Aug 4th, 2017 at 10:45am:
A nice project for someone would be to make a nice alloy ( 4140 or 8620 ) version of the whole action.  It would be a labor of love since one certainly couldn't make it
pay.


Isn't that what Savage did with their "improved" Favorite, the Model 30G?  Or has it gone out of production?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
uscra112
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 1989
Location: SE Ohio Hill Country
Joined: May 7th, 2007
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #30 - Aug 4th, 2017 at 1:38pm
Print Post  
desert-dude wrote on Aug 4th, 2017 at 10:45am:
I've seen a Favorite that was chambered for 25-20. I assume it was the WCF
but didn't ask. It was in a gunsmith's shop for a second try at the breechblock.
The replacement block was 4140 and it failed so that certainly sets a point to avoid.
The 25-20 SS has about half the breechthrust so that MIGHT be an alternative.

A nice project for someone would be to make a nice alloy ( 4140 or 8620 ) version of the whole action.  It would be a labor of love since one certainly couldn't make it
pay.


I seem to recall from Grant that there was a Ladies Model on the Favorite action that was .25-20SS. 

John Taylor has posted a photo of a 44 breechblock that pulled apart at the pivot eye.  This should not happen, and won't if the breechblock sets back far enough that it is in solid contact with the frame shoulders when the action is closed.  Better material won't solve this problem, but it can't hurt.  I'd love to see the trigger and hammer made of tool steel and through-hardened, like the Page-Lewis.  The case-hardened Stevens parts wear, and the trigger pull goes to heck, or the hammer won't stay cocked at all.  Ditto the link, which is the weak spot in the whole design.  But whittling the frame from solid 4140 seems to me to be major overkill.      
« Last Edit: Aug 4th, 2017 at 1:48pm by uscra112 »  

Jack of All Trades - Retired
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
frnkeore
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Online



Posts: 5817
Location: Central Point, OR 97502
Joined: Jun 16th, 2010
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #31 - Aug 4th, 2017 at 2:32pm
Print Post  
It's all, wishfull thinking but, 2 things that would bring it up to small CF strength, would be 5/16 pressfit pins and a full rolling block type hammer, that goes under the BB, 1/4 to 3/8's, using a new BB, possibly one like Rodney made for the 44's. I don't know if the Favorite pin geometery would allow the RB type hammer to work though.

I kike the PL action better, gets the hammer out of the way of the cleaning rod and could (if it isn't) be made to cock on closing like a HW.

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 #32 - Aug 4th, 2017 at 3:05pm
Print Post  
frnkeore wrote on Aug 4th, 2017 at 2:32pm:
I kike the PL action better, gets the hammer out of the way of the cleaning rod and could (if it isn't) be made to cock on closing like a HW.

Frank


Cock on closing is what I don't like about the Win. SS!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
uscra112
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 1989
Location: SE Ohio Hill Country
Joined: May 7th, 2007
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #33 - Aug 4th, 2017 at 3:21pm
Print Post  
frnkeore wrote on Aug 4th, 2017 at 2:32pm:
It's all, wishfull thinking but, 2 things that would bring it up to small CF strength, would be 5/16 pressfit pins and a full rolling block type hammer, that goes under the BB, 1/4 to 3/8's, using a new BB, possibly one like Rodney made for the 44's. I don't know if the Favorite pin geometery would allow the RB type hammer to work though.

I kike the PL action better, gets the hammer out of the way of the cleaning rod and could (if it isn't) be made to cock on closing like a HW.

Frank


5/16 pins, Frank?  I think maybe you meant 5/32". 

Yes, a lugged hammer could be made to work in a Favorite. It would IMHO need a breechblock machined to have some meat for the lug to bear upon. 

I'm fond of the Page-Lewis action, too.  But it needs a stronger barrel attachment design.
  

Jack of All Trades - Retired
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
bpjack
Oldtimer
*****
Offline



Posts: 764
Location: East Olympia, WA
Joined: May 18th, 2008
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #34 - Aug 4th, 2017 at 4:02pm
Print Post  
My 1885 HW has a second de-cocking fly on the full cock notch so the hammer drops on cocking. It can be disconcerting if you are not used to it.  I have thousands and thousands of rounds through it with no issues.

Jack
  

ASSRA # 11318
Yesterday I did nothing and today I'm finishing what I did yesterday.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
frnkeore
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Online



Posts: 5817
Location: Central Point, OR 97502
Joined: Jun 16th, 2010
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #35 - Aug 4th, 2017 at 5:34pm
Print Post  
uscra112 wrote on Aug 4th, 2017 at 3:21pm:
frnkeore wrote on Aug 4th, 2017 at 2:32pm:
It's all, wishfull thinking but, 2 things that would bring it up to small CF strength, would be 5/16 pressfit pins and a full rolling block type hammer, that goes under the BB, 1/4 to 3/8's, using a new BB, possibly one like Rodney made for the 44's. I don't know if the Favorite pin geometery would allow the RB type hammer to work though.

I kike the PL action better, gets the hammer out of the way of the cleaning rod and could (if it isn't) be made to cock on closing like a HW.

Frank


5/16 pins, Frank?  I think maybe you meant 5/32". 

Yes, a lugged hammer could be made to work in a Favorite. It would IMHO need a breechblock machined to have some meat for the lug to bear upon. 

I'm fond of the Page-Lewis action, too.  But it needs a stronger barrel attachment design. 


No, I mean two .3125 dowel pins, with a .0005 press fit in the action and a .001 slip fit, for both hammer and BB, combined with a 5/8, threaded shank.

You want it to not loosen and I think that would handle it, long term, using the 25/20SS.

Do the same thing to the 44 but, use 3/8 pins and limit it to the 357 Mag/Max case head, using BP pressure/velocitys.

Frank
  

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



Posts: 5633
Location: Westside
Joined: Aug 27th, 2006
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #36 - Aug 4th, 2017 at 7:33pm
Print Post  
Interesting that the bottom front of that experimental block has the same radiused profile as the 44 1/2 (0-44 1/2) block.
  

There are three kinds of men: The ones that learn by reading, the few who learn by observation, and the rest who have to pee on the electric fence and find out for themselves.
Proud Noodlehead
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
uscra112
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 1989
Location: SE Ohio Hill Country
Joined: May 7th, 2007
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #37 - Aug 4th, 2017 at 8:21pm
Print Post  
Frank, I have to suggest that there's a better way.

The first Model 44 that I rehabbed, I did just that.  Breechblock pivot pin a press in the frame, slip fit on the breechblock.  Ditto the lever pivot. But reaming the BB out left less metal around the hole to carry the tension load, and that bothered me.  It was a long time before I realized that that's bassackwards.  The breechblock pivot should be loose enough that the block can move to the rear until the shoulders bear.   I'm attaching two force resolution diagrams that Chuck Dietz did a couple of years ago, for the case where the shoulders don't bear, and the case where they do bear.   Notice that in the first case the breechblock pivot takes a huge tension load, but in the second case it takes next to nothing.

Setting up the action, you first have to determine whether the breechblock can contact the frame shoulders. Fiddle the pivot until it does. Then tighten up the toggle linkage.  Last, fit the barrel so that on lockup the breechblock wedges tightly between the barrel face and the shoulders.  I like about .003" interference at the barrel face.   
 
The Favorite is just a scaled-down Model 44, and sets up the same way.

And do it all to a 1915, because the link is much stronger, being so much thicker.

Phil
« Last Edit: Aug 4th, 2017 at 8:32pm by uscra112 »  

Jack of All Trades - Retired
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff_Schultz
ASSRA Board Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 677
Location: Ransomville, NY
Joined: Apr 25th, 2004
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #38 - Aug 4th, 2017 at 8:48pm
Print Post  
  Very cool! Thank you for sharing that! I am enlightened! Smiley
  

"We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo
"The education of a man is never completed until he dies." Robert E. Lee
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
J Louis
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 3209
Joined: Apr 8th, 2009
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #39 - Aug 4th, 2017 at 9:11pm
Print Post  
Yes indeed and by far the better way!

JLouis
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
uscra112
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 1989
Location: SE Ohio Hill Country
Joined: May 7th, 2007
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #40 - Aug 4th, 2017 at 9:56pm
Print Post  
Glad to be of service.  Just as a validation, a while ago I was doing initial testing of a 44 chambered .25-20SS that I'd set up that way, and managed to fire a double charge of AA#9 in it.  Embarrassed  Aside from having to drive the case out with a cleaning rod, there was no damage to the rifle.  Quickload said 80,000 psi, and the Crony agreed with the calculated velocity.  The link in that one is heat treated 0-2.  The standard link probably would not have come through so well. 

If a 1915 Favorite were set up that way, with the barrel threaded in, I'd be much less apprehensive about the O.P.'s plan to barrel one for .17HMR.


 
  

Jack of All Trades - Retired
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
frnkeore
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Online



Posts: 5817
Location: Central Point, OR 97502
Joined: Jun 16th, 2010
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #41 - Aug 5th, 2017 at 12:37pm
Print Post  
This is what I had in mind.

The red lines are extentions to the hammer. The hammer with be full width of the BB from the red line down to the pivot and would look much the same as a RB hammer does. The brown line, is the axis between the C/L of the bore and the hammer pivot, a much more direct path.

This eleminates the linkage, taking most of the pressure at a acute angle. The linkage, then becomes a support to stabilize the bridge between the two 5/16 pins (front pivot pin and bb pin).

The hammer might have to be cocked, before opening the BB if, the link couldn't be made to move it, the required amount or, it could be made to open like a Bullard.

Chuck, thank you VERY much, for the time you spent, drawing these diagrams.

Frank
  

ASSRA Member #696, ISSA Member #339
Back to top
YIMAIM  
IP Logged
 
uscra112
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 1989
Location: SE Ohio Hill Country
Joined: May 7th, 2007
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #42 - Aug 5th, 2017 at 2:33pm
Print Post  
For reference, here's the third of Chuck's force resolution diagrams, showing the lugged hammer.
  

Jack of All Trades - Retired
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Chuckster
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 1390
Location: Colorado
Joined: May 15th, 2008
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #43 - Aug 5th, 2017 at 2:55pm
Print Post  
You are welcome, but Phil drew the picture. I just put numbers on it.
Note there is still significant vertical load on the pivot pin. Just oversizing the hole could cause problems.
Chuck
« Last Edit: Aug 5th, 2017 at 3:38pm by Chuckster »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
vapodog
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 29th, 2017
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #44 - Aug 5th, 2017 at 4:23pm
Print Post  
That hammer spur (lug) is true genious.....I like it a lot.....It can beef up the action immensely.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
uscra112
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 1989
Location: SE Ohio Hill Country
Joined: May 7th, 2007
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #45 - Aug 5th, 2017 at 4:39pm
Print Post  
Chuckster wrote on Aug 5th, 2017 at 2:55pm:
You are welcome, but Phil drew the picture. I just put numbers on it.
Note there is still significant vertical load on the pivot pin. Just oversizing the hole could cause problems.
Chuck


Right.  It should be elongated.  Minor diameter of the oval being line-to-line with the pin diameter.
  

Jack of All Trades - Retired
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
frnkeore
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Online



Posts: 5817
Location: Central Point, OR 97502
Joined: Jun 16th, 2010
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #46 - Aug 5th, 2017 at 6:52pm
Print Post  
While elongating the BB pivot might help, using the BB that came with a rifle. If you start with a new, water cut BB, you can fit it with contact to the frame but, the forces on the BB, try to rotate the BB down and away from the pivot, pushing it away from the contact area so, there is no direct resistance. The loads will be shared by both link and BB/frame contact. My guess is, because the contact, is on a angle (down and away), the link will still take most of the force.

If a RB type hammer is used, there is direct resistance. The wider contact area (full bb width) and larger pins, distribute the loads, over much a wider area, amounting to much better wear resistance.

The press fit pins, take out any impact wear, caused by clearance, between parts and would help prevent "creep" in the soft frame material (look up metal creep) and a heat treated BB and hammer would minimize it, on the contact surfaces between them.

I have two 44's (both 32/40) with a hammer lugs. the contact surface, is very small and the one that had been used more (newer one with "bolts"), makes contact but, the clearnance has open and does not hold the BB from moving, until the clearance has been taken up. HT surfaces would make that last longer but, there is not much contact surface, to begin with.

I re-barreled it, in 32/20 and it stretched cases with 1300 fps, 180 gr loads. 30K by QL. I believe the RB type hammer would have kept that from happening in that pressure range. the rifle is now a breech seating 22RF, w/o issue, as would be expected.

Frank

  

ASSRA Member #696, ISSA Member #339
Back to top
YIMAIM  
IP Logged
 
uscra112
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 1989
Location: SE Ohio Hill Country
Joined: May 7th, 2007
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #47 - Aug 5th, 2017 at 7:42pm
Print Post  
Yah, therein lies the problem with all rolling blocks.  If there's clearance enough for the hammer to fall freely, then the breechblock must deflect a little before it encounters any support. In our case, if the linkage is properly preloaded on lockup, this has to come from elastic deformation of the linkage parts. All we can do is minimize it by very careful fitting of the hammer lug.  No wonder Stevens didn't make many of them.
  

Jack of All Trades - Retired
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
frnkeore
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Online



Posts: 5817
Location: Central Point, OR 97502
Joined: Jun 16th, 2010
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #48 - Aug 5th, 2017 at 8:35pm
Print Post  
uscra112 wrote on Aug 5th, 2017 at 7:42pm:
Yah, therein lies the problem with all rolling blocks.  If there's clearance enough for the hammer to fall freely, then the breechblock must deflect a little before it encounters any support. In our case, if the linkage is properly preloaded on lockup, this has to come from elastic deformation of the linkage parts. All we can do is minimize it by very careful fitting of the hammer lug.  No wonder Stevens didn't make many of them.


With the RB type lock up (not hammer lug), the geometery can be set, so that there is a camming effect, as the two substanually larger surfaces, come together and in the last part of the travel, it can take up, all clearance, and still not have enough friction to stop it's movement.

This, of course, requires a high level of accuracy, fitting the parts but, with todays CNC machining, it wouldn't be a problem.

A problem with multiple links, is that they all have to have clearance to be able to move. Making links slightly longer helps take up clearance but, will add to the wear of each joint.

Frank
  

ASSRA Member #696, ISSA Member #339
Back to top
YIMAIM  
IP Logged
 
vapodog
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 29th, 2017
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #49 - Aug 8th, 2017 at 8:47pm
Print Post  
Lots yet to do but here's the progress report

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
vapodog
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 29th, 2017
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #50 - Aug 8th, 2017 at 8:49pm
Print Post  
more
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
vapodog
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 29th, 2017
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #51 - Aug 8th, 2017 at 8:50pm
Print Post  
more
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
vapodog
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 29th, 2017
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #52 - Aug 8th, 2017 at 8:51pm
Print Post  
wish I knew how to post all photos in one post.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
vapodog
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 29th, 2017
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #53 - Aug 9th, 2017 at 7:45pm
Print Post  
getting to be a long project
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
vapodog
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 29th, 2017
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #54 - Aug 10th, 2017 at 5:12pm
Print Post  
now only missing a firing pin.....and bluing and checkering.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
vapodog
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 29th, 2017
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #55 - Aug 12th, 2017 at 1:40pm
Print Post  
I ordered a new extractor and firing pin from Wisner's INC....Jim also recommended his high tensile screws for the breech block and lever which I agreed to.....His thoughts were that the action should be fine with the mach 2 cartridge.

I'm going to try to broach the extractor cut in the chamber when the new extractor arrives.  I've made a single point broach for the milling machine.....photo available if anyone wants to see it.

BTW....the gun weighs in at a couple ounces over six pounds.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
vapodog
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 29th, 2017
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #56 - Aug 13th, 2017 at 8:42am
Print Post  
Since I opted for a take down model, I might as well make a carry case for it....here's a start

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
vapodog
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 29th, 2017
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #57 - Aug 14th, 2017 at 12:56pm
Print Post  
box still has a ways to go.....

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
vapodog
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 29th, 2017
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #58 - Aug 16th, 2017 at 7:12am
Print Post  
Very muggy yesterday so I stayed inside where I have some AC.....and did some checkering.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bill Lawrence
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 207
Joined: Mar 17th, 2014
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #59 - Aug 16th, 2017 at 2:40pm
Print Post  
The gunsmithing talent that seems to abound in this group is amazing, at least to me.  And here it's exercised on a 1915 Favorite to boot.

Bill Lawrence
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
vapodog
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 29th, 2017
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #60 - Aug 18th, 2017 at 9:54am
Print Post  
The metal parts have been shipped off to the bluing tanks..... so the checkering is all that I can do while I wait for them to return.

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
vapodog
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 29th, 2017
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #61 - Sep 3rd, 2017 at 9:09am
Print Post  
desert-dude wrote on Aug 4th, 2017 at 10:45am:
A nice project for someone would be to make a nice alloy ( 4140 or 8620 ) version of the whole action.  It would be a labor of love since one certainly couldn't make it
pay.

I've been sitting in front of my autocad software doing exactly that.....however it's easier said than done.  Some design changes will be necessary because I want it to handle the 22 hornet and .218 Bee.....
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
uscra112
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 1989
Location: SE Ohio Hill Country
Joined: May 7th, 2007
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #62 - Sep 3rd, 2017 at 10:19am
Print Post  
The Hornet and Bee are too much for even the full size Model 44 action.   Don't even think about them for a Favorite-sized action.  The weak link is.....the link.  The geometry of the action puts a large compression load on the link with every firing.   Chuck Deats did some diagrams which I can send you.

You can get some small improvement by making the link pins larger, and making the link from through-hardened steel. (The originals were only case hardened!) 

« Last Edit: Sep 3rd, 2017 at 10:29am by uscra112 »  

Jack of All Trades - Retired
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
vapodog
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 29th, 2017
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #63 - Sep 3rd, 2017 at 2:33pm
Print Post  
uscra112 wrote on Sep 3rd, 2017 at 10:19am:
The Hornet and Bee are too much for even the full size Model 44 action.   Don't even think about them for a Favorite-sized action.  The weak link is.....the link.  The geometry of the action puts a large compression load on the link with every firing.   Chuck Deats did some diagrams which I can send you.

You can get some small improvement by making the link pins larger, and making the link from through-hardened steel. (The originals were only case hardened!) 


Thanks for the reply....but I'm considering very considerable design changes.....more of a 1885 style falling block
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Chuckster
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 1390
Location: Colorado
Joined: May 15th, 2008
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #64 - Sep 5th, 2017 at 1:45pm
Print Post  
If you are going to use an 1885 style block, you will need to bring the shoulders of the receiver up to the centerline of the bore to handle a .218 Bee.
Chuck
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
vapodog
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 29th, 2017
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #65 - Sep 5th, 2017 at 11:39pm
Print Post  
Chuckster wrote on Sep 5th, 2017 at 1:45pm:
If you are going to use an 1885 style block, you will need to bring the shoulders of the receiver up to the centerline of the bore to handle a .218 Bee.
Chuck

Thanks for that advice.....I'll accept it as it's intended.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
vapodog
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 29th, 2017
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #66 - Sep 18th, 2017 at 10:19pm
Print Post  
There remains the task of making it shoot little tiny groups.....but other than that this project is about done.

Whattya think?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
vapodog
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 29th, 2017
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #67 - Sep 18th, 2017 at 10:21pm
Print Post  
and more
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
vapodog
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 29th, 2017
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #68 - Sep 18th, 2017 at 10:22pm
Print Post  
one last post.....
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bill Lawrence
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 207
Joined: Mar 17th, 2014
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #69 - Sep 18th, 2017 at 11:24pm
Print Post  
I never thought I would ever see a Model 1915 Favorite that had any class.  Boy, was I wrong!

Bill Lawrence
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
slumlord44
Frequent Elocutionist
*****
Offline



Posts: 2455
Location: Lebanon, Illinois 62254
Joined: Dec 21st, 2007
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #70 - Sep 18th, 2017 at 11:54pm
Print Post  
Beautiful gun. Beautiful work. It amazes me what you have done with an ordinary pain jane Favorite.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
vapodog
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 29th, 2017
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #71 - Sep 18th, 2017 at 11:55pm
Print Post  
Bill Lawrence wrote on Sep 18th, 2017 at 11:24pm:
I never thought I would ever see a Model 1915 Favorite that had any class.  Boy, was I wrong!

Bill Lawrence

Very kind words sir.....thank you very much.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
vapodog
Junior Forum Member
**
Offline



Posts: 32
Joined: Jul 29th, 2017
Re: Stevens Favorite
Reply #72 - Sep 20th, 2017 at 10:47pm
Print Post  
I took the gun to the range today and after a few warning shots at the target managed to get it to shoot fairly well.

It's not suited for telescope sights so I focused at 25 yards with the irons I installed.....and was pleasantly surprised at a few dime sized groups.  It seemed to shoot better as the shooting continued but for now the Hornady HM 2 ammo is  a precious commodity.  I will shoot some more if the 1,000 rounds I ordered ever get here.....

All in all, it's a very pleasing hunting gun and ready to remove a few tree rats from their trees and make some great stew this fall.....
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 
Send TopicPrint