October 25th, 2016, 06:48 PM
Join Date: Sep 2007
I've owned a Marlin 1894 Cowboy rifle in .45 Colt, and the Ballard Rifling in it was visibly deep and what you would expect to see if looking down the bore of , say, a Ruger Vaquaro, or Super Redhawk. I currently own a late JM production 94 in .45Colt with current version Ballard rifling, as well as a current "RemLin" ( Marlin by current owner Remington ) 94 .44 Magnum, and a RemLin 1894 .45-70 Cowboy, also with the current version of "Ballard" rifling. I can tell you, the current Ballard rifling is NOT deep as you would expect. It is in fact visibly SHALLOW. Marlin / Remiln likewise had/ has for some time, by design, it seems, considered it favorable to run the bore diameter on these rifles on the large side, to keep pressures down , per internet sources.
I had sent my 94 in .44 mag. back to be re barrelled, as the rifling was that poor. The replacement barrel is arguably better , but then, the first one should never have been installed in a rifle, and the rifle should never have been shipped.
In the .45-70 1895, the rifling is, again, shallow, with many extra machining marks running in the grooves from end to end. I have reason to expect the bore is on the large size there, too.
I do not cast my own bullets, but at least one large on line caster has sizing options for us in this situation, to include some gas-checked designs.
Time to slug some bores and find out what is REALLY needed. Oddly, my single shot .45-70s do not seem to require any such tomfoolery, big may get checked while I'm at it, just to see.