Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Single Shots Need help to Identify

Friend sent photo of unmarked 22 falling block looking for a buttstock. Any help with identification appreciated.
Joe [img:center][/img]


I called him back to clarify that it was indeed a 22 ...#`s somewhat obscured but can make out RF with # before it. Could be a 32. Will have it in hand tomorrow.

tiz a puzzlement. I got curious and did some searching. I found nothing that looked exactly like it.

Is the action reduced in thickness in the center? Or is it enlarged, ala 1874 Sharps? Hard to tell from the photo.

The Frank Wesson single shots were reduced in width, if that's true here then it may be some variant of a Wesson.

It's not a bad looking action. Let us know if you find out.

Thanks....It is a puzzzle for sure.I`ve done the searching for a photo of anything like it also and come up empty. Delayed in getting it in hand today but will have it this week sometime. Maybe we can get to the bottom of it then with some more photos.
Joe

Is that a takedown screw on the bottom?

I don't think it's a Stevens.... I'd be willing to bet a very small amount of money that it's a Bay State Arms or Hopkins & Allen.

Thumbed through my copy of The Rifle in America, but no cigar. Simlilar to a few, but nothing solid.

Handsome lines, whatever it is.

It's the smaller sized Hopkins and Allen takedown rifle. Not near my library but will give you a better reference later. Could be any of the smaller rimfires (.22 Short to .38 Extra Long) or a small centerfire. These are just like the more common large action rifles and shotguns (and rifle/shotgun combos) but a smaller sized action.

These were also sold with many different brand names by various retail hardware chains.

Parts will be hard to find. The big screw in front of the trigger guard is the takedown screw to remove the barrel.

Yes it is definitely a Hopkins & Allen Single Shot. These were made in just about all the Rimfire Cartridges available at the time period.These Actions a little larger were also used for Shotguns.
I have suggested this Action to a couple of Companies to produce new rifles made of modern steels. The design lends itself to easy Casting & Machining methods which would make it a Great Little Rifle.
Bring back some nostalgia in a black rifle world.

I looked these up in my copy of Frank de Haas' "Single Shot Rifles and Actions." (p.207 and ff.) I THINK it's the smallest size H&A falling block action, model 922, but it may, as X1Proto suggests be the next larger, "Middle Sized" action--can't tell without something in the photo for scale.

Seen these in several brand names--"Davenport" and "National Arms." There are many more.

As suggested these aren't made of tough modern steel, so NO rebarreling to hot varmint ctgs! Even the big ones were made for black powder shotgun shells and moderate rifle rounds like the .44WCF and .32-40 and .38-55, maybe the .45-70 (never seen one). I suspect that hot smokeless loads in any cartridge would loosen them up pronto, although I have no proof of that.

Certainly many of the shotguns got shot with smokeless shells for many years (and someplace there is probably still an old guy who shoots one with hot cheapo Walmart Specials meant to cycle even the dirtiest autoloader! And I bet it has the old short 2 5/8" chamber...).

In a modern version I would hope they'd straighten out the action tangs so the stock doesn't have the brutal drop that the big models have--OWWWW! Them old guys were tough! And maybe ignorance IS bliss!

I once had a big H&A in with a .44-40 barrel and a 16 ga barrel (The "Ladies Model"?) Rifle barrel was fun to shoot; the shotgun hurt with high base shells. I can't imaging what a 10ga/.45-70 felt like. Fortunately those guys only shot when there was live game ahead. Range time? Shells cost MONEY.

Just a novice input but the James Grant Single Shot Rifles books I have don't show an H&A that looks like the one here.
Three observations I have are:
1. Stock fit to receiver on the above is crescent shaped. Most H&A look to be a straight vertical meeting of wood to metal.
2. The rear sight placement on the above seems to be far more forward than the H&A's.
3. The H&A's all look to have flat receiver sides; unlike the above with an apparent raised section.

It will be interesting to get a confirmation on what it is.