doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion Classic & Custom Single Barreled Sporting Rifles @ doublegunshop.com Small Frame Martini Question

I'm looking for a small frame Martini action for a small centerfire varmint rifle project and I've been offered two. The first is a pre-1898 Greener centerfire. It has the large firing pin, so it will need to be bushed. The exterior is a bit rough, but should polish out as part of the work. The second is a BSA Model 12 takedown that's been converted to centerfire by grinding the ears of the lever to move the breechblock down to centerfire position. This is the takedown model with two screws, the second of which fits across the breech end of the barrel to prevent it from turning, not the split frame version. It is in better condition, but the firing pin will also need to be bushed. I'm wondering which would be the best choice to start with.

The rifle will be a .22-3000 Lovell (there's a barrel with dies and a take off stock and forend available separately).

I'm wondering if the BSA breechblock would be square to the chamber, given the way it has been converted to centerfire. I'm also wondering if the takedown feature would weaken the barrel at the chamber.

I'm also wondering if the barrel threads on the BSA action would be the same as the centerfire.

Anybody have any words of wisdom or guidance?

Thanks.

My choice would be for you to use the model 12 converted to centerfire to handle the 22-3000 cartridge. The martini model 12 only has a barrel shank that is .750 in diameter. Barrel buldging or swelling of the chamber is to be avoided at all costs. Am I correct in assumeing that your new bbl is of a better grade of steel that was used in the origional bbl and was manufactured at the turn of the century?. Thhe squareness problem when converting 22 rimfire breech blocks should be addressed by the gunsmith doing the conversion. Some members here have made up little laps to be used when they want the breech face to be square with the chamber.They make up a small threaded bushing for the receiver threads and its this bushing that guides the lap while allowing it to square up the breech face. Ask your gunsmith about this. If he shrugs it off as uneeded find another gunsmith. Several of the gentlemen who frequsent this site have the tools and expertise to do this work as you describe.They would be very happy to explain what they are doing and why. Hope this helps. Frank

Remington40x

Get the BSA Model 12. If the Greener is anything like the one in my safe, it will have a much lighter frame and all the components will be fitted to it in the same manner as for the large frame military and sporting action.

The BSA has a heavier frame and was made quite a bit later than the Greener. It is the stronger action. You will have to have someone square the breechblock with the barrel when you have the firing pin hole bushed. Before this is done you should check that the ears that were ground down to lower the breechblock bear evenly on both sides and that they support the breechblock fully.

Your chosen catridge should be fine for the BSA action but might be suspect in the Greener.

Bill

I'm one of the fellows who has made the tooling to square the breechface and locate the new bushed firing pin hole. I've done several of these little rifles and really like them a lot for the right application. I've done rifles with several different takedown designs and rifles with both styles (Francotte removable subassembly and Henry piecemeal) of frames & lockwork and will now give you my opinions(G).

Please remember that these opinions are worth every penny they cost you(BG)!

The barrel tenon thread sizes & pitches are essentially identical, I've found differences of a few thou but that's all.
The limiting factor in this design is the small barrel tenon, the relative strengths of the 2 types (removable lockwork subassembly vs piecemeal disassembly) are functionally the same since the barrel will bulge long before the block fails.
I would be extremely dubious of the altered action, many smiths THINK they know how to do this alteration but are sadly mistaken, it might be fine but it might also need more work.
Both actions will need their breechfaces bushed for a smaller striker tip.

Only a few tips here, all for now since I'm off for another appointment but will be back later. Basically IMO there is no strength difference in the 2 actions and so in my mind the comparative conditions of the 2 actions would be the deciding factor.
Regards, Joe

More tips and opinions.

Inspect the striker for cracks on both one side AND the other of the cut-out center portion. DO NOT dryfire these actions without a snap cap because of this striker design, it's subject to impact-hardening and subsequent cracking which could easily cause an AD.
I like the solid RF-style extractor far better than the 2-leg CF design, it's both stronger and easier to fit for both CFs and RFs(a tip from Ben Shelor The Infamous Engraver).
Shortened Springfield 1903 mainsprings will work in the Cadet breechblock but the ends of the aftermarket springs must often be ground down a few thou for clearance since some of the end coils are swollen where they're terminated.
Cartridges using the 30-30 case are safe up to ~a 45K psi limit and cartridges using the 223 case are safe up to ~a 55K psi limit. IOW the 223/5.56 NATO is safe, the 7-30 Waters is safe but the 225 Win is not safe, it may bulge the barrel tenon at the thread section.
Limiting factors of the action are the small barrel thread tenon, the extremely repeat extremely weak extraction and the OAL-length-limiting awkwardness of the curved path the cartridge must follow to enter the chamber.

I already have an orphan BSA 12 CF action on my shop's project wall, so if you don't want the Greener I may be interested in getting it. PM or email me for more details on any questions you may have, I'll help if I can. IMO these are splendid little actions.
Regards, Joe