The .35 Rem seems to be a bit small for the "Express" gun. I was wondering about having it rechambered to .358 Norma.

Possible? Bad idea? I realize I would have to remove the block they put in the magazine too shorten it but is the bolt face big enough to be opened up for the Norma?

In my opinion, this is the best use of one of these fine, old actions with or without the original barrel. You can quite easily form cases from Winchester .375H virgin brass and I would use the "longnecked" version derived from the .300 Win.Mag. I would load 270 gr. NorthForks and would be very happy with this rifle on any game in North America, period. I would get a top gunsmith like Mark Penrod in the USA or Bill Leeper in Canada to do this so that I had a rifle that functioned flawlessly.

Go for it, it will be a really useful rifle, IMO.

Recoil Bob, Before you get all carried away with big plans you might check the rifling twist in that "Express". The original "plan" was a 1: 16 twist, and since this was made by the parent of the .35 Rem, they just might have followed the original specs, which by measure often and also had a.356 or 357 groove diameter. The bolt head was typical for the '06 and they merely trimmed the special extractors made for the .25 Rem in the same "Express" rifle. If the rifle is in restorable shape it might have more value as a swap to a collector and catch a little
"boot" in the transaction.

" restorable shape"

Actually, the rifle is in excellent condition, definately collectible shape, I just didn't realize that they were in demand for their collectibility. I thought they were more desireable for custom guns.

This particular gun is D&T'd for scope mounts. The only source I have for info about these guns is Sharpes' "The Rifle In America" and he states that they were well suited to use with scopes and could be supplied drilled and tapped for Weaver scopes. The holes are there but the filler screws look as though they've never been removed. Have you seen any 30's D&T'd?

There's no rear barrel sight but it has a Lyman 48.

Perhaps I would be better off to leave it as is.


Thanks, Rob

I also own a mod. 30 express, but in 30-06. Unfortunately it has been defiled by some dip-shit that was incapable of properly mounting a scope.If it was properly drilled and tapped I would leave it alone, but now it is on my list of project guns. My local gunsmith has informed me that this receiver is capable of handling just about any cartridge. He showed me a picture of a .505 Gibbs he built on a model 30 express action. Mine will become a 416 Rigby in a few years. As for your project, I agree that the barrel twist rate is a concern. You would probably be better off with a new barrel.But if it is in good original shape I would leave it alone.

Just curious as to what's wrong with your scope mount holes? My gun seems to have factory drilled holes, the filler screws look as though they've never been touched, there's no evidence that a scope has ever been mounted and since it has a Lyman 48, I can't see why someone would go through the trouble of drilling the holes if they weren't going to use them. So I assume they were done at the factory.

But! The first hole on the front ring looks out of line. Was wondering if yours is similar?

Rob

If I'm not mistaken, the Model 30 was not D/T from the factory.

Recoil Bob, The custom shop had a cast iron fixture which enabled the workmen to drill and tap for the bases used with external adjust long tube scopes such as the Lyman ( ex Winchester) '5& '8, Targetspot, and the Fecker and Unertel. These bases had a skinny footprint. One went on the receiver ring and the other on the barrel. The spacing on the ring-hole centers- was .860". The same fixture could be used to drill holes on the bridge. The ring bases were flat on their bottoms and nestled between the sides of the "squiggle" pathway where this comes up to meet the ring radius. The Weaver base specified to be used was the #11 which had a .504" spacing. I used the ring base for the M- 70, which WAS factory drilled and .860" spacing.
The "round" part of the receiver contour was hand polished on a buffer so if you used the usual gunsmith method of the time involving spirit levels the front hole could be skewed off. I suspect Phil "winged" it just a tad with that remark.
I really cannot recall Weaver bases available before the post WW-II "K" scopes, and that would have involved the M -720 successor to the Mod 30 S.

Sys98,

Thanks for that good info. I just took a closer look at my gun and the screw heads on the front ring look about 7/8" apart, center to center. Unusual but there is only one hole on the rear ring, didn't notice this before as the Lyman covered where the second hole would be.

Any ideas as to why only the three holes?


Thanks, Rob

Rob,
i TOLD you that you woudl be thinking of a big one!!

the 3 holes is due to a refield type single piece base... the enfield and springfield ones have 2 hole on the front ring and 1 on the back

jeffe

Been there, done that, eh Jeff> (g)

You called it, I want more power!..

Thanks for the info on the scope mount.
Rob