doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion Classic & Custom Single Barreled Sporting Rifles @ doublegunshop.com Round Block Webley's, how strong?

.

Isn't that the design DeHaas used for his do-it-yourself falling block? Pretty easy to research.

Tough action to analyse. Most of the block support comes from the bottom of the loading trough.
This would cause the block to pivot like a Winchester low-wall.
The high walls provide little support due to outward bulging.
Think I can see bulge gaps at the top of the high walls on the rifle SKB shows.
Believe de Hass provided full support for the round block above and below the bore center-line.
JMHO, Chuck

.

I've got all of his books, but never had much interest in his action. Great reference works!

I also have all his books, and a couple of letters from when I was brash enough to write directly to "authorities." Both he and P.O. Ackley were kind enough to answer my questions in detail, and I treasure their letters.

Like most on this forum, they were part of a real community of interest.

I sure would not have fit up a .240 flanged barrel to one, then again it did pass proof and Holland obviously knew better than me.

.

.

the real Elephant cartridges are better in the large frame Webley actions, this one is a .500 NE I built.

...although the lever is just as ugly, awkward and larger~~

.

Now that is one thing we can all agree upon, the Webley lever is ugly.

For my money no English single shot compares to a Gibbs sporter for feel or looks. The firing pin retraction system on a Gibbs is the weak link. It works OK at best on black powder cartridges and quite poorly on nitro stuff. The best of the lot mechanically is the Westley 1897 with its inline rebounding firing pin and rebounding hammer, they can be beautiful rifles as well, but Gibbs sports make my hear go pitter patter.

You will not find many Westley rifles this embellished. I need to take better pictures of it some day.

Webley claimed they where designed to take .400/.360 to .600 when brought out 1902 .

My friend has a Rigby retailed Webley 1902 chambered in .577 3", 100grs of Cordite and 750 grain bullet. Oh, original scope with it too!

Thanks for the pictures of the Westley, Steve. I like the rib on it, looks very interesting. Someone way back when seems to have known how to do a little fitting and finishing.

The large frame 1902s could probably handle anything. The small frame round blocks may be best with something like what you normally see them in, oddly 32-40. They are nothing like my large 1902 and having fondled one I dearly wish it was mine.

.

30-40 on a round block should be fine.

Going to disagree with the experts.
Would not fail catastrophically but believe it would shoot loose over time.
Just my opinion based on the design. Probably great for a 32-40.
Chuck

The round block '02 Webley wont take a 30-40 without troughing out the top of the block. The rim is too big in diameter and in stock form, the block doesn't drop far enough to allow it.
It may fit if you don't mind holding the lever down all the way when you load it and then pushing the case home against the extractor while closing the action...
I think the 30-40 would be far too powerful for this action anyway.

Interesting, must be close then. The .240 Flanged has a rim diameter of .513 vs .545 for the 30/40 Krag. That is assuming you do not need to hold the lever open on that little H&H rifle. Pretty sure the .240 has a higher operating pressure than the .30/40. Could be wrong though, hard to find much on the .240 online. Will take a look at some of my library and see.

.

hypothetically that is...

.

What kind of pressures did your model use? I see the CIP max for a 30/40 is only 47K PSI, not what I call high pressure.

.

In other words, a Ballard, a Sharps, or a Winchester 85?

I don�t know if your computation can take into consideration, the shape of the cartridge itself.
Assuming, as most I�ve read does, that the cartridge is well adhered to the chamber walls at 10,000psi, a straight walled cartridge would inherently have less back thrust than a tapered cartridge thus imparting less force upon the breechblock for the majority of the pressure curve.
The OD / ID of the barrel shank and how much meat the action adds may be as important to consider in these smaller actions than the block design.
H&H also chambered at least one of these small �02 actions in 22 Savage HiPower. That has 40K + pressure and a very tapered case.

.

Yes. Those three actions have sharp corners in their mortises. Ballard usually gets dinged pretty hard for it, but the other two are generally considered "good engineering and design concepts".

I understand the rationale behind the radiused corners, but I don't seem them in these actions and I could probably find quite a few others as well.

.

Same theory as with the standing breech on a break open gun. Early designs had a sharp corner, it was soon discovered that adding a slight radius, a significant amount of strength was gained and it reduced the incidents of cracks forming at that point. I certainly agree with you on that point LRF. I have been toying with building a Gibbs action and added the radius to my design as well. I do think the round block Webleys actually hold up better than the model projects.

Okay. I just have a hard time wrapping my mind around Sharps, Ballard and Winchester being derelicts is all. They seem to be pretty good at that they did and still do in some cases.

.

.

.

The difference between good enough and a better design. Yes all of those actions and many others held up just fine for BP pressure. There were some failures along the way. A better design can reduce the number of failures. When designing from scratch many decisions must be made along the way, most involving some type of comprise. The designers job is to come up with something strong enough, yet still economical to manufacture. It is not that the Sharpes, 1885 etc were bad designs, but improvements can be made.

Ya think? I'm wondering now, what falling block and tilting block actions have radiused corners. None of the Sharps do (74, 78s, 75s, 77s), Winchester doesn't nor did Browning (now there's a derelict, right? ). My various Martinis from different makers didn't. I'm pretty sure I would have seen it in Henrys and Wessons if it was there, but maybe I missed it.

I don't own a Ruger #1 or #3. What are their mortises like? Rugers are pretty modern and not exactly black powder guns by any stretch.

I can't name even one action that I know for sure has radiused corners. Is there one? (Other than the Webley of course)

at least one, the Steve Earle long rang Wesson. It just makes more sense and is a very small and easy to accomplish change which is beneficial.

I have seen a few or Earle's Wessons, but didn't notice the radius. I'll have to check it out. So, there is at least one.

Rugers? They aren't known to be hell for stout, of course

An interesting thing to look at is the bearing surface of the many different falling blocks as compared to the bearing surface area of say a Mauser �98 or Win. Mod. 70.
Of course they probably offer more camming action when coming to full battery than the average falling block.

LRF, Thank you. Good and not a minor exercise.
Chuck

Thank you Huvius, SKB, Chuckster, Steven, Craig and I may have missed one or two others for your valuable and USEFUL comments. However, one person added nothing and doesn't know how to stay on point and be respectful. I do not need to listen to one "Charmin" from Iowa and his disrespect!
I started this thread in an effort help to revive this forum and was doing that, but then the vileness of that one steps in. NO thanks.

You are the one calling John Browning a derelict gun designer. That's pretty steep.

All I'm doing is that your off the cuff remarks don't much resemble reality.