doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion Classic & Custom Single Barreled Sporting Rifles @ doublegunshop.com My new project - Westley Richards single shot

I was very fortunate to purchase a Westley Richards 1871 "baby" frame single shot action. This action is very rare, comparable to hens teeth with hens teeth being easier to find.

My good friend, Glenn Fewless, is a great fan of English single shots has seen the action and is very excited to build a rifle based on this action. It is in superb condition considering that it is 150 years old, even the engraving is still very nice. The engraving will need some refresh but I do plan to keep the original pattern it just looks right. The plan for a new buttstock and forend is to use a very nice but not over the top piece of Turkish walnut so as to not over shadow the engraving etc. We, Glenn and I, have decided to use an ovate style barrel. It should look period in our opinion. The caliber will be a .218 bee simply because I have a good supply of new brass. That decision is up for change but it is my rifle.

I've included a couple of photos of the action for you viewing.

This looks like a great project please post progress photos

Make it a 218 Mashburn Bee....greatest feral chicken caliber ever

Great project. For meaningless opinion, possibly a larger bore cartridge might help it balance like a hundred and fifty years ago. Thanks for showing it.

I'm looking forward to seeing this one completed.

Steve

With Glenn doing the work, I'm sure it's destined to be a gorgeous rifle when he's done!

Have fun. Always interesting times with Glenn.

With Glenn's metal work and your stock making skills, this is going to be an incredible rifle. We would love to see photos with updates as the rifle comes along.

I dd forget to mention that this action is pictured in Wal Winfer's "British Single Shot Rifles, volume 4, page 72. the action shows the same frame discoloration spots, engraving pattern, screw alinement etc so I can only assume that this is the action pictured. There are issues with firing pin angle but the gun worked fine then and it will now.

I do plan to set the rifle up with open sights but it will have provision for a scope. I may need this for aging eyes.

Thank you all for commenting on the project.

I share the sentiments of those who feel this is a great project that will have an outstanding outcome. Progress reports would be greatly appreciated by all, I'm sure.

You answered some of my questions when you mentioned the firing pin angle. I couldn't see a hammer, and assumed it must be striker fired. But the action appears so trim and compact that there didn't seem to be much room for a firing pin and it's travel either. I'd be interested in learning more about the design. I assume the bottom lever is to operate the breech block, and the side lever is for cocking. Is there some reference that illustrates the internals?

Keith, The firing pin is mounted on the hammer and the rifle is cocked on opening. The trigger pull is nice and not heavy, I did not check it with my gauge. The lever on the right side a safety and works directly on the trigger its very positive. One thing that is interesting to me is the extractor/ejector, its positive but simple in design. There is a drawing in the Winfer book that shows the internal design and the photos in the book show the actual internal parts. The action currently resides with Glenn waiting for a new barrel so I can't take additional photos. That's ok because my photo skills are poor!

One interesting thing about the action is it has no serial number that can be verified. The number 28 is stamped on various parts and the frame but IMO they are there for to keep the parts together during the manufacture. That's just a guess on my part.

I don't want anyone to think I believe this is the finest miniature action ever made, a Hagn would be a much better choice. This action is just unique and cool!

Doug,
My opinion that the owner of a gun gets to decide what is done to it is well known. That said, I do report that my experience with a 218 Mashburn has been very disappointing. I bought a converted Keilerbusche(?) in the early 90s and using an honest chronograph, never could match the velocities reported for it. I now use it as a cast bullet rifle; it makes a pretty good turtle rifle at the hunting camp pond. Also, if you or your heirs decide to sell it, a "wildcat" will likely be harder to sell than a period cartridge, even an obsolete one. There are a couple Rook cartridges that 218 cases can be used as donor cases for and are pretty good cartridges, in the 25-20 class. It looks like it will be a great rifle, in the end. As I said, it is yours.
Mike
Doug,
If you can find the original barrel, the full serial number might be stamped on it ( the last two numbers should be 28).
Mike

One thing you might want to consider, one time I was in Thomas Bland's shop speaking with the gunsmith and in discussion of my Westley Richards "Improved Martini" of near similar vintage and also with an internal hammer/firing pin he pointed out that the block was soft and he had seen one that had been converted to 22 Hornet have the Hornet's head back right through the block. I suppose that with the block cut to have clearance for the hammer/pin the the area around the firing pin hole is thin on metal and with a small cartridge head supplying concentrated pressure it could give. Maybe hardening would help. Anyway a neat action.

Doug, thank you for taking the time to describe the functional details of this Westley Richards action. I look forward to checking it out more in the Wlnfer book, and following any details you may share while working on the project.

Aesthetics and function aside, I am also curious how you determine a safe operating pressure for an 1870's vintage action like this, and what cartridges would have originally been used with it.

Keith, First of all I apologize for referring to the action as an 1871 it is an 1872, that's what happens when I haven't had my second cup of coffee.

That said this action/rifle is pretty well described in Winfer's book. Apparently it was rebarreled in .222 rimmed and passed London proof @ 17.5 tons. It also had a buttstock and forend also long gone. Wal might know where these items are but he, I believe, is very hard to reach. One other of these actions has I believe been rebarreled in ,22 hornet. The original caliber could have been something in the .310 to .360 but that is just a guess.

BTW, the 17.5 tons proof was from Winfer's book. I can't even imagine firing a cartridge in a rifle that small that generates the recoil that that must produce. I like my retinas where they are at! That must be a misprint.

Doug, 17.5 tons would be 17.5 times 2240 which would equal 39200 psi.

This is based upon a British long ton being 2240 lbs. So 1 ton per square inch of proof or service pressure would be 2240 pounds per square inch. However, it gets confusing attempting to convert the old system of British Proof pressure to the radial piezo transducer system we widely use today. Actually, there is no direct conversion calculation.

I'm not sure what the standard operating pressure of a .222 rimmed would be, but I expect it would be over 39,200 psi since the .222 Remington operates at around 46,000 psi. I found a Thread on the Enfield-Rifles.com forum that has some pretty good information. The first Thread in particular has a copy of a 1967 American Rifleman article that explains how the British measured their service pressures for rifles in the late 1800's

https://www.enfield-rifles.com/british-system-of-chamber-pressure-measurement_topic10711_page1.html

My question about how one would determine a safe operating pressure for these old single shot actions comes from HalfaDouble's earlier remark about the .22 Hornet Martini conversion that had the cartridge head back through a soft breech block. I suppose a lot of the information we do have for various actions came from actual Proof House proof testing. And in this country where we do not have government controlled Proof Houses, much of what we know apparently came from experimentation (or trial and error method) by many of the old wildcatters and rifle builders like Jerry Gebby, C.S. Landis, Harvey Donaldson, Hervey Lovell, etc. There is also information found in some of Frank DeHaas's Single Shot Rifle books concerning action strength, different designs, and suitability for conversions to different cartridges.

Doug, I saw Keith's remarks and I made the same equivalent calculations to PSI. Do you know what 17.5 tons would equate to as PSI? Or anybody else if they know of a formula to equate.

Doug I see what you mean about being 17.5 is way high. Check this picture out of a Ruger #1 in 500/465 3 1/4" @ 14 tons

The force transmitted to the action through a 222Rimmed ( 38 spec. sized) size head at 17.5 tons is likely different than that transmitted through a 500 case size head at 14 tons , and without calculating it, I believe it will be less.
Mike

Sure is...

Force equals pressure times area. So a cartridge with a larger diameter base will exert more force than a smaller diameter base, assuming equal chamber pressures.

One caveat here is that a rimmed case will not exert more force or breech thrust than It's rimless version, again assuming equal chamber pressures. The chamber pressure acts equally on the entire internal area of the case. So the ultimate breech thrust force is only the result of that pressure acting upon the internal area of the base of the cartridge.

The early wildcatters had the luxury of having a supply of relatively cheap and plentiful actions to blow up or beat to death. We have to be a little more careful with our toys.

Sure is...

Force equals pressure times area. So a cartridge with a larger diameter base will exert more force than a smaller diameter base, assuming equal chamber pressures.

One caveat here is that a rimmed case will not exert more force or breech thrust than It's rimless version, again assuming equal chamber pressures. The chamber pressure acts equally on the entire internal area of the case. So the ultimate breech thrust force is only the result of that pressure acting upon the internal area of the base of the cartridge.

The early wildcatters had the luxury of having a supply of relatively cheap and plentiful actions to blow up or beat to death. We have to be a little more careful with our toys.

I wasn't questioning the strength of the action per se but rather the hardness of the steel and its resistance to being deformed. Shank size comes more into play and the hoop strength of the barrel/receiver combo. New strong barrels vs old soft ones comes into play there also.
Go to the Single Shot Rifles link in the H&H/Ruger thread and look at the Farquharson in 7mm Rem Mag.