I often see a rook gun which has been converted to a .410. Is it feasible to line one back into a rook rifle. They seem like a very fun plinking gun. There was even a side by side rook/410 converted double in a recent auction. Getting the regulation back with linners must be difficult. But I’ve know a few hobby gunsmith who liked difficult and seem to do very well with difficult. Can they be lined? Is this just another money pit? Anyone do one or have one done?
They can be lined and be a money pit at the same time. A single shot shouldn't be bad. A double might be right the first time, but maybe not.
Mike
I would not assume it, but if a double rook rifle was originally regulated, likely well done liners would at least point were the original maker intended. As mentioned, lining a single barreled gun might be more likely. I'd fully expect a lined barrel to be minute of tin can all day long.
I think it's not so difficult to find a gunsmith that will do quality lining jobs, at reasonable prices. I don't believe it's anywhere near the value disappointment sleeving tends to be.
So we can assume the current bore is somewhere close to .410" diameter. Can you obtain a liner with an OD close to that? Or is there enough wall thickness to open the bore up to fit a liner? I'd be thinking along those lines first, before worrying about regulation in a double. Of course, with a double, the heat to solder in liners would melt the rib solder joints. That's going to complicate matters.
I think .22 rimfire liners are typically 5/16" OD, so the wall thickness of the liner would be around. 04425". A .38 cal. (.357) liner with a .410" OD would only have a wall thickness of around .0265". And if .32 cal liners are available, chances are the liner OD would be under .410". Maybe the place to start would be a call to Redmond's to see what caliber liners they sell, and what the OD's are.
.22 Liners go into a 410 with enough room for chamber adapter and adjusting concentric on the muzzle end. Biggest issue is if the gun is now center fire or rimfire which may require offsetting the cartridge to get consistent ignition. Anything bigger than a .22 RF liner is not going to give you enough room for the front concentric.
As for soldering, DON'T, use Loctite Black Max, works great with fewer issues....
Been thinking about converting a Rook Rifle myself, just waiting to find the "right" (read as Cheap) donor rifle. Thought a side or underlever would be unique....
Hope this helps...
WBLDon
I think Keith has identified the real challenge. Wall thickness and liner OD. From Redmond’s .22/.311, .17/.311, 38-40/.590, 32-20/.505 and 25-20/.435. Maybe the 25-20 if the .410/rook walls are thick enough. The .22 would require bushings for the liner
And reworking a firing pin. But a muzzle bushing could made eccentric to allow adjustments for regulations. It’s a shame in many ways. The obsolete .300 rook rifle cartridges would make for a sedate plinking rifle.
Did you just buy the H&H rook that had been converted to .410 and reproofed on GI? I was very tempted to buy that myself for use as a .410.
should be relatively easy to convert back to a .22. WBLDonn has the right idea.
You might want to look into T.J.'s Barrel Liners, Alexandria, KY. They offer a wide range of bore and OD sizes. My gunsmith recommends them highly, and he does lots of relining. TJ's phone: 859 635 5560.
What I've found more often is the original rifle has been replaced with a 22cal barrel. It may be less expensive than lining. I have a Sauer rook and a Syst-Aydt schutzen style, both rebarelled and both very accurate.
Why not look for a Sauer Tell rifle. One of the more popular chamberings was 32-20, a nice little cartridge.
They sell in the $600-1000 , so they are not too pricey.
Best,
Craig
I think it would just take someone who understands lining to just measure the the candidate barrel. I don't think this is a situation where a .410 shotgun barrel is being converted to a rifle. It is more likely that a roughly .25, .30 or .38 rifle is just being lined to original or similar bore and groove. The only difference is that at some point a decision was made to leave it at a .410 inch smooth bore for a while.
I will second TJ Liners, have used both and TJ's are by far the nicer ones. Nice folks to deal with as well... Last ones I got from them were for a 32-40 project. When I slugged the bore as soon as the slug got into the bore the weight of the the 1/4" brass rod used to drive it thru was enough to push it thru the entire length of the barrel with no additional help. To say these barrels are smooth & consistent is an understatement.
Great product!
WBLDon
Double rook rifles are very rare. Most were singles. It was common practice here in the U.K. for them to be bored out to .410 but they then usually had the end 3/4 of the barrel turned down from the octagonal to the round to better balance them. If still o.k. but with poor bores it can often be re-lined. Most former .300's are best lined to .32 S&W Long which has similar ballistics. The .360's can be relined for a .38 Special round but loaded light to give similar results to the original. Ironic that the old original rook rifles are now worth about four times what they are when taken to .410. This was done as ammo became scarce. I have one so converted that, according to the proof marks, was done in 1939/40. Lagopus…..
I wish I could find more of those rooks converted to .410. I have seen only one. It went for $850.
https://auctions.holtsauctioneers.com//Full//634/136634.jpg1300 Pounds from the unsold sealed bid items. Not the one I was interested in but still interesting. Just a bit steep for a project gun as a plinking gun. Not bad for hard charging ground hogs I guess. I was looking at a single shot.
UNSIGNED ENGLISH .410 (SMOOTHBORED) ROTARY-UNDERLEVER DOUBLE HAMMER ROOK RIFLE, serial no. 14970, 26in. nitro reproved barrels, smoothbored to .410 from a rook rifle calibre, 2 1/2in. chambers, bored approx. true cyl. and imp. cyl. choke, Jones patent rotary-underlever, carved percussion fences, elongated top strap, unsigned non-rebounding back-action locks with bolted hammers, border engraving, action brushed bright and reblued, the lockplates and hammers with renewed colour-hardening, 14 1/2in. figured pistolgrip stock (cracked through and repaired at hand) with cheekpiece, steel pistolgrip-cap, sling eyes and steel buttplate, weight 6lb. 3oz.
The only ones I have at the moment are a double side by side top lever hammer gun by Rosson of Derby with one barrel .300 Rook and one barrel .410 shot. It was made like that not having one bored out; a sort of mini Cape Gun. The other is a bored out to .410 by Ebrall of Shropshire with a top lever and side hammer. It shoots very well. I did have a nice original octagonal barrel .360 No.5 but sadly it went in order to put towards another gun I was after. They are worth seeking out as they will never be made again. That Holts one above will now be worth a third or quarter of its value than if left original. Lagopus…..
For: KY Jon
I do not think that gun started out as a rook rifle, no matter what they claim. Stalking safeties seem a bit much for a rook rifle. It might have been a mid size rifle that just got reamed out. It was a nice looking rifle but as a .410 it is not much of a looker.
I can't see signs that it ever had a rear sight.
Mike
About three inches past the hinge pin there looks to be a small area on the rib that looks different. At first I thought they might have put a new top rib on the barrels. Perhaps they did. I’d love to see what the proof marks could tell us if they are still present. They might have removed them when they bored it out to .410.
Some of the old double Express rifles were also bored out. I did have a W.Richards double .450 that was bored out to 20 bore. The rear site was removed and a section of rib soldered in and re-cut; not quite invisible but still hard to see. I've never seen a rook rifle with hammer bolts although my 20 still had them. Might have been a .360 Express rifle then made .410 which would make sense. Lagopus…..