Entini Rifle

[Allen65]

I’ve got another barrel for a shot gun/ Martini experiment. 24 gauge.
This rifle is bad ass cool , a SG for shooting turkeys would be pretty a nifty venture too I think.
If you ever run across a MH action and feel like making some specialty ammo ,it could be a pretty easy bit.
I’ll shoot Red Dot 180 ers in this one or just stuff them full of black powder maybe.

I've though about that for one of my MHs, but I'd be too concerned about the metallurgy of a 145 year old receiver to trust it with modern shells loaded with fast-burning smokeless propellant. Not a lot of cross-sectional surface area on the receiver sides to hold the block from moving toward my face, and lots of environmental effects could have happened over the years to embrittle the early steel . I'd have to stick with hand loading BP shotgun shells.

So for now I'm still having fun playing with paper patched 577/450 BP rifle loads. Plus it's fun to go to the range and listen to every else's pop-pop-pops and then I go KA-BOOM.

 

[Doco Overboard]

I have some I shoot full patch 303 in but if I said I never thought about it I wouldn't be telling the truth.
What I worry most is, a primer rupturing and how they handle gas in that respect.
You have to make sure the firing pin is right, but thats how I test them for me anyway.
Somewhere I have a picture of a blown one, I'll see if I can locate it or if I misplaced it in an odd ball file.

 

[Allen65]

I have some I shoot full patch 303 in but if I said I never thought about it I wouldn't be telling the truth.
What I worry most is, a primer rupturing and how they handle gas in that respect.
You have to make sure the firing pin is right, but thats how I test them for me anyway.
Somewhere I have a picture of a blown one, I'll see if I can locate it or if I misplaced it in an odd ball file.

Yeah, a primer rupture in an MH with smokeless 303 would be bad. There's really only two ways out of the action, up and down, assuming the receiver didn't fracture. The gas that went up between the block and cartridge faces might not be a problem, but if high pressure gas went down, it'd likely blow out the trigger group by shearing the extractor axis pin. Not good for your trigger finger. The striker is basically a big piston in the block, but it doesn't have anywhere to go except out the back of the block into the rear of the receiver right at the stock bolt.

Still a neat gun and a very modern design for the late 1860s, even if it was quickly obsoleted by magazine rifles and smokeless powder by the mid 1880s. 5 years before the Martini started entering service, the British Army was still using the P1853 rifle musket as its standard issue arm.

 

[Doco Overboard]

Here it (they) is. Looks like a barrel obstruction to me I cant remember any info from when I saved it.
Doesn't look good no matter how you view it.
I would think the horns on the loading lever add to support the breech block to at least some small extent.

 

[Allen65]

Here it (they) is. Looks like a barrel obstruction to me I cant remember any info from when I saved it.
Doesn't look good no matter how you view it.
I would think the horns on the loading lever add to support the breech block to at least some small extent.

Pity. That looks like an original 303 barrel complete with Birmingham proofs.

Cutaway is a Mk IV receiver. Broken rifle is/was a MkIII receiver. MkIII was actually stronger, so if you're gonna blow one up that's the model to do it with.

 

[Doco Overboard]

Actually what I think can be seen on the barrel reinforce left side are production and inspectors marks.
Martini barrels were proof marked on the underside originally and have a feminine crown with a viewers mark in between each proof to the best of my knowledge. A feminine crown like for VR has two lumps on top of it instead of a domed masculine crown such as the GR period which was 1903-4 Maybe?
Proof marks for that period would be crossed flags or pennants the crown being the viewers mark that occurred during manufacture process of the barrels.
The barrels were proofed three times. Un-rifled smooth bored, after being rifled and then once breeched up. ALso you would see a War department broad arrow for when it was accepted. Generally the marks are located about a third of the way down the barrel form the breech and are very finely applied. They also appear in a long line, the inspector/viewers number directly below a crown. Proofs found as 1.P Second 2.P etc
Because that rifle if it has the original stock it also has sold out of service marks. It could be that it has been private proofed at some other time maybe an maybe it was a tad much or so it appears and they were applied to the left of the knox form/reinforce.
I can however see it the picture a Biringham View mark on the action body or it could be London proof house it depends on the intricacy of the crowns interior/other associted marks applied during its history or changing hands privately in the commonwealth.

 

[The Saint]

I've 2 boxes of 24GA Magtech brass still I'd be happy to trade for something of similar value if you need it...I used to reload for my Martini, but no longer own the gun and never used these.

 

[Allen65]

Actually what I think can be seen on the barrel reinforce left side are production and inspectors marks.
Martini barrels were proof marked on the underside originally and have a feminine crown with a viewers mark in between each proof to the best of my knowledge. A feminine crown like for VR has two lumps on top of it instead of a domed masculine crown such as the GR period which was 1903-4 Maybe?
Proof marks for that period would be crossed flags or pennants the crown being the viewers mark that occurred during manufacture process of the barrels.
The barrels were proofed three times. Un-rifled smooth bored, after being rifled and then once breeched up. Also you would see a War department broad arrow for when it was accepted. Generally the marks are located about a third of the way down the barrel form the breech and are very finely applied. They also appear in a long line, the inspector/viewers number directly below a crown. Proofs found as 1.P Second 2.P etc
Because that rifle if it has the original stock it also has sold out of service marks. It could be that it has been private proofed at some other time maybe an maybe it was a tad much or so it appears and they were applied to the left of the knox form/reinforce.
I can however see it the picture a Biringham View mark on the action body or it could be London proof house it depends on the intricacy of the crowns interior/other associted marks applied during its history or changing hands privately in the commonwealth.

Impressive.

 

[Doco Overboard]

Impressive.

Well cut me a little slack, may be one or other very small misquotes in that screed.
English proof marks and the way they were applied changed a few times during manufacture periods from about the mid 1600's up until the period of the early breech loaders and then again late 19th century with the advent of nitro cellulose powders.
When Victoria's reign ended, and George ascended when the period of the great war started, lots of other changes which occurred such as letter/number codes appearing for factory identifications as well as armorers marks that proliferated at the same time which adds greater confusion. Also factories were producing weapons in other areas of the empire like Australia India and even the US obviously outside established territories. Even SOuth Africa and maybe even Siam where N0 1's were made I think.
But anyway, I just dont screw barrels to obsolete weapons systems and hope for the best like a wanna be bubba.
I'm all bubba becuase I have just enough knowledge to be dangerous becuase I read about it one time and committed some of what I learned to memory and more than likely tried it out before the internet in some cases.
When I really need to know when to stop, Ill get a DeHass Vickery or Ackly book out and see what they have to say.
But overall yes, theirs better up and down actions for high intensity cartridges but thats not what I'm working with here.
Thanks for your dialogue, that sort of thing is good to have on a gun forum especially when obsolete weapons systems that spanned the gap between traditional and modern transitional propellant periods I think.

 

[Allen65]

Well cut me a little slack, may be one or other very small misquotes in that screed.
English proof marks and the way they were applied changed a few times during manufacture periods from about the mid 1600's up until the period of the early breech loaders and then again late 19th century with the advent of nitro cellulose powders.
When Victoria's reign ended, and George ascended when the period of the great war started, lots of other changes which occurred such as letter/number codes appearing for factory identifications as well as armorers marks that proliferated at the same time which adds greater confusion. Also factories were producing weapons in other areas of the empire like Australia India and even the US obviously outside established territories. Even SOuth Africa and maybe even Siam where N0 1's were made I think.
But anyway, I just don't screw barrels to obsolete weapons systems and hope for the best like a wanna be bubba.
I'm all bubba because I have just enough knowledge to be dangerous because I read about it one time and committed some of what I learned to memory and more than likely tried it out before the internet in some cases.
When I really need to know when to stop, Ill get a DeHass Vickery or Ackly book out and see what they have to say.
But overall yes, theirs better up and down actions for high intensity cartridges but thats not what I'm working with here.
Thanks for your dialogue, that sort of thing is good to have on a gun forum especially when obsolete weapons systems that spanned the gap between traditional and modern transitional propellant periods I think.

I wouldn't call it bubba-ing at all in this case because the build was essentially identical to an approved pattern. Similar to the MkII Artillery Carbine I built off an original stripped MkII rifle receiver and a Bob Hoyt custom barrel made to pattern dimensions. My only cheat was I didn't want to spend the $$$$ on a Krieger Henry-rifled barrel blank, so I had Bob do conventional rifling.

Unfortunately the JGS chamber reamer I used for finish chambering was more appropriate to Henry rifling with its deep grooves, and I ended up with powder fouling on subsequent shots causing the paper patch to bunch up and prevent the cartridge from fully seating. So me being the stubborn type I am, I had a custom throat reamer made that gave a little extra room around the patch and a gentler entry angle to the rifling.

Once I figured out how to align soldered-on sights, it's a reliable little carbine that is as accurate as I am, makes a huge smoke cloud and kicks like a mule on meth.

I've standardized on a load of 75 grains of 1F with a 405 grain 16:1 tin:lead projectile paper patched to .466 with 100% cotton rag vellum, in Bertram brass. It works well in both my MH rifles and the repro carbine. Paper patching may be extra work upfront making cartridges, but it sure makes cleanup after range time a breeze.

On the metallurgy side of things, if you're looking for an interesting read, pick up a copy of Fighting Iron: A Metals Handbook for Arms Collectors by Art Gogan. It's scary how seat-of-the-pants metallurgical QC was until the early 20th Century when modern metrology started creeping into production processes.

 

[Doco Overboard]

See that’s the thing with a chamber reamers I think that gets lost.
In your case it sounds like the bullet seat ( circular cross sectional area )or lead was cut to a minimum like for a jacketed bullet on the framer but interfered with the paper patch and fouling accumulation becuase of small diameter. Most rifles of the same period originally manufactured are the inverse as is true even today. ie like 314 bullets in a 303 to support the bullet during forcement.
Also, British black powder for the day was significantly better than what’s produced today. And I’m mean like Curtis Harvey and that sort of thing with reduced fouling characteristics.
Just think, if with cordite the condition would remedy itself as the barrel continues to “make itself”.
If you want / need a barrel for shooting I have. #4 barrel with the tenon cut for a Martini and 450 Naa barrel in top shape but it’s full length. My oldest boy did the no 4 and he’s a precision machinist, doesn’t have time for guns.
I’ll probably never do anything with 450 barrel but it would be a shame to cut it.
But then again I have a firearm too from another rifle that should be doing more than just sitting there.
I need a Martini buttstock for the turkey gun I want to build , I have everything else on hand and will trade/ swap gift etc.

 

[Allen65]

I've 2 boxes of 24GA Magtech brass still I'd be happy to trade for something of similar value if you need it...I used to reload for my Martini, but no longer own the gun and never used these.

I appreciate the offer, but I've headspaced my MHs on Bertram brass rims, which are thicker than the MagTechs. If I get my hands on a Snider-Enfield those would be perfect, but if I get caught bringing another gun into the house before I get the rest of the long honey-do list done, I'll become part of MD homicide statistics.

 

[Allen65]

I need a Martini buttstock for the turkey gun I want to build , I have everything else on hand and will trade/ swap gift etc.

I may have a repro MH buttstock and forend somewhere in my shop. It'll be cut for a Mk I//II/III teceiver, not Mk IV, if that's an issue. Give me a few days to dig through some spares boxes to see if I can find it. The forend would fit a Mk I or II, but it hasn't been drilled for a pin yet. A channel for a MK III/IV forend hook could be routed in it.

 

[Doco Overboard]

I may have a repro MH buttstock and forend somewhere in my shop. It'll be cut for a Mk I//II/III teceiver, not Mk IV, if that's an issue. Give me a few days to dig through some spares boxes to see if I can find it. The forend would fit a Mk I or II, but it hasn't been drilled for a pin yet. A channel for a MK III/IV forend hook could be routed in it.

That would be great thank you, just let me know if you want to do anything with it. In the mean time I'm going to pick up a copy of the book you mentioned up-thread. That one seems very interesting tome.

 

[Allen65]

That would be great thank you, just let me know if you want to do anything with it. In the mean time I'm going to pick up a copy of the book you mentioned up-thread. That one seems very interesting tome.

If I can't find the stock, here is where I got it from. Now they're on closeout there.

https://www.atlantacutlery.com/new-stock-set-martini-henry-mki-mkii

If you're a first time purchaser you can sign up for their mailing list to get an extra 5% off.

These stocks don't include metal parts, but butt plates, bands, and end caps aren't that rare online. Pins are easy to make from drill rod.

There were only two parts I couldn't find for sale anywhere. The first was the small steel insert that goes behind the barrel lug to protect the wood end grain from impacts that would risk splits. But that part isn't needed if you are using a Mk III or IV receiver that doesn't need the retention lug on the barrel. The other was the cleaning rod spring. I milled both from steel stock and have 3D CAD models of them I can send you.

The one other stock part you may have trouble with is the stock lever cup and spring. IMA-USA is sold out of their repro parts now, as is Peter Dyson in the UK. These guys in the UK seem to have a stock of repros now:
https://martini-henry-society.myshopify.com/collections/replica-new-parts?page=2

 

[Doco Overboard]

Yes thank you.
I’ve sourced parts from both Peter Dyson and the MHS in the past.
Occasionally, I pick them up from Gun Broker of all places. At times GPC will dig up some bits here and there but they go fast because of the popularity of the company and ease of electronic purchasing.
The challenge with MH parts I find is that when I do find them they are in small lots or bits and often incomplete in the way that’s makes it difficult to complete all but one small faction of a build.
I have all the ancillary parts with the exception of a butt stock, a lever cup and the two course wood screws for securing a forearm under lug to action body front.
EBay every so often will have some parts, but not at all with any sort of predictability.
That’s why I also think for this system it’s probably the type where the purchase of the best example one could find whether for shooting or collecting would be the least cost prohibitive route. At least for those interested in the design and use characteristics.

 

[Doco Overboard]

Still playing around with these old rifles and have neither one of them completed yet!
Now that this one is done, I can adjust the reamer for the barrel in the other one.

This one is a no 4 barrel with tenon re-threaded, and extractor slot cut then final head spaced/ breeching adjusted.
After a bit more work I can fit the sights stock etc. I picked up a vintage PH tang sight and will probably fashion a front site out of a Garand sight base maybe after massaging it a bit then hi force solder it on. A Winchester base is sort of steam punk if you ever studied the ears on one and may go just about right for appearance.

I even thought about a Hi lux short Malcom but not sure if I want to go that route because of portability and reduction of ruggedness. This one will be kitted out with that replacement tropical hardwood product line that was mentioned up thread. Only the buttstock is finished at this time. Forearm still needs to be reduced in length, nose cap barrel bands accommodated barrel channel etc.
Once the fitting is all done, I can take the steps boil them out and color the metal on both of them at the same time and then go back to fiddling with some Krags. Ive got two of those projects paralleing these almost simultaneously.

 

[Doco Overboard]

Well moving right along here. I got my man to apply some flex seal on the barrel reinforce to stiffen it up and waterproof it some and profiled the knox form a little bit to squeeze it in front of the action body.
I thought it needed slimming down some before cutting the rim recess and final chambering
Instead of sawing up that repop chin wood fore-end or whatever is I just used a scrap No 4 forearm tip and alcohol dyed it to match the chin swami wood butt stock. Maybe I'll locate a real one some other time for cheap who knows.
But anyway,
I fashioned a barrel band out of some thin wall tubing and welded a nice lug to the underside of it. Made an internal escutcheon and cut a nice long screw to support the stock pinning at the rear.
A little more profiling to hand guard rear and Bob's your uncle!
Sights are a problem yet. I made a front site from some bar stock but having a time with the geometry for the old Parker Hale backsight I have. So IDK yet Ill worry about that later,= once I blow some full patch through it to see if it blows up or something.

 

[lazarus]

Your work kind of makes me think of the Ottoman Martini a bit, though more English than the German hybrid the Ottomans did.

Primer 181: Ottoman Martini 1874/12 - C&Rsenal

candrsenal.com

 

[Doco Overboard]

Thanks for the video I enjoyed watching it.
For the cut down rifle and after goi g through a couple sight options I have available I did try out out a Mauser band last night just before viewing the video with tangent rear but decided against it because of sight radius.

I thought they were going to go into the bushing in the breech face for the purposes of safety but didn’t to any extent.

Fwiw I couldn’t determine any reduction in firing pin/port diameter with the quick view that was provided although it may have been done to a certain extent.

Both built up rifles are goi g to need this done but I’m going to use a method common to higher velocity cartridge adaptation used by a lot of early gunsmiths when metallic conversions were prominent.

I think for the conversions this is probably the most important measure that needs undertaken rather than being over concerned about the metallurgy of the receivers contents or inconsistency of the steels used in comparison to say a nickle steel receiver developed at least in US arsenals just prior to WWI.

SA technology for the same period was case hardening pressure bearing parts with soft rebar quality metals used in the Krag and early single heat treat 03’s.

However I wouldn’t estimate the quality of materials to be any greater than an action body produced in Great Britain to be any better other than the best quality steels used in gun making due to proof requirements already being established and the need to meet martial requirements such as military trials at that time.

I guess if I wanted to I could send both of them to be proofed so I could really be sure but don’t necessarily feel the need at this point.

Otherwise, that rifle didn’t eject and the adaptation could be due to 303 availability dependent on an opposing governments neglect to provide a cartridge to meet the needs of an opposing force so an alternative /Interim ammunition was necessary.

The reason for a reduction in firing pin diameter if anyone is interested is that because the diameter is larger, the possibility of the pin to drive the outward edge of the primer cup inwards exists as combustion occurs at the same time internally to the cartridge.
Also, lots of early cartridges had domed, larger diameter copper primers vs what we determine as being common today.