Is C360 brass srong enough for a rolling block receier?  Looking to chamber in .357mag.  Everything I can find makes it look like it will work just fine, but I'm double checking anyway.  

TIA

Why not just use pre-hard 4140 steel? It's probably cheaper than brass and way stronger. It can be easily machined with carbide tooling (HSS will work but if it work hardens, tool is bust)

I think Uberti makes them in .357 with brass receivers. I'm guessing that 360 probably has properties on par with the steel that some of the originals were made of. I think you'll be just fine.

I have a No. 1 rolling block action about 90% modeled right now. I've kicked around the idea of importing it into a FEM program at work and running it. Just for fun -if they were going to break we would have known it over a 100 years ago I guess.

One of these days I'm going to build one in .45-70. Right now it's just a stack of drawings and a block of steel.

I may do both.  So far, I'm not finding 4140 in sizes big enough.  I haven't scoured to the ends of the internet, but my usual sources don't have it that big.

I'd love to see those plans!  I have a couple of #4's to use as a guide, but they aren't quite robust enough for larger calibers.

I started with the plans uploaded at Weaponeer: Rolling block plans

Then started building solid models of the parts and eventually turned it into a pistol frame.

As for the 4140: Midwest Metal Warehouse
The decarb free HT stuff is enough oversized that you would be fine with ordering 1-1/4 thick I think. IIRC the receiver is 1.23" wide.

You got me thinking about this thing again...I went and found my big block of steel:



I kept going back and forth between trying to bore and thread it for the barrel in the lathe, or do it in the mill and tap it. I'm still not sure but I think I want that operation out of the way before I go and put a bunch of work into milling out the rest of it. Milling out the interior of it should be lots of fun, and I'm not even sure yet how I'll go about getting all the corners in there squared up.

Here is where I stopped with the model:



It's been changed quite a bit from the No 1 plans, but the breach block and relative layout of the barrel, breach block and hammer is the same.

Sometimes I wonder if I've ever worked with you before. I'm going to send you an IM. Im willing to bet that if we haven't rubbed shoulders in the past, we at least know people that have.

Since we are on the subject of material strength and such I have a question. There are quite a few firearm designs out there that just will not show good using normal stress analysis methods. Obviously things like the square corner in the rolling block design gives FEM's trouble, but beyond that there are plenty of guns that have been around for a while that should be seeing yield stress during use, but don't have any issues. I read something once that attributed part of this to strain rate. There really isn't much out there on the subject though. Curious if anyone out there actually does this for a living could shed some light?

I wouldn't use it for a receiver.  It's one of the weaker ones out there.   C464,  or C770 would be better.  I guess it depends on what you'll be shooting, and the design also.

I haven't given up in this one yet.  I havent spent any time in the shop thisbsummer, bu as Ohio crap weather sets in, I'll be in the shop a little more.


FWIW, Ohio deer hunting doesn't allow conventional rifles.  They just started allowing "Pistol Caliber Carbines".  .357 mag is plenty for a 180# whitetail and 38spl wad cutters are cheap plinking rounds.  Besides that, I just have a thing for RRB and falling block style rifles.  My old worn Stevens Favorite gets fondled every time the safe door opens.

Now this has me thinking... I have a 45 barrel blank. I may need to look into .450 bushmaster, as that's legal in southern MI.