Ned Roberts wrote in glowing terms about Milton Farrow's single shot rifle. Has anyone ever seen an exploded view of this action, or have a scource of any dimensional data?

There is an excellent description of the Farrow rifles in Frank de Hass's More Single Shot Rifles and Actions. The book is still available from his son, for about $30.



In looking over de Hass's description, the "final" version Farrow offered might be thought of as a cross between the earlier Browning (High Wall) and the later Stevens 44-1/2 with a dash of Ballard tossed in. It's mostly Browning, but the breech tips backwards after dropping part way down, a'la the Stevens. The trigger is much simpler than Brownings and is hinged high in the receiver.



De Hass thought the action ok, but nothing spectacular. For a target rifle, he much preferred the Ballard, and fine replicas of these in modern steels are available.



If you join the American Single Shot Rifle Association, you can purchase dimensioned drawings of the Farrow for only $10.

The 1963 (I think its '63) Gun Digest had a write-up on Milton Farrow and his rifle. The article had some pictures and drawings; it was a very nice looking rifle and at least looked like a more sophisticated design than the Ballard or other contemporaries.

I'm pretty sure Miller Arms makes these out of stainless blocks. They decided to build this older style action to compete in more single shot matches. Many matches have ruled out the "modern" Miller falling block because nobody else could beat them.

"If you can't win change the rules. If you can't change the rules buy a Miller." This applies to the Schutzen game.

That is my saying not Miller's.

I do think that castings are available somewhere, just not from Miller Arms.

gunmaker

Guys;

If you go to the ASSRA site, Forums, you can find engraver Ken Hurst. Ken seems to know just about everyone making whatever kind of single shot action, kit or castings. It seems like the Farrow is one he has discussed recently.

FWIW, the "Farrow" being made by Miller has caused quite a stir in Black Powder Cartridge Silhouette circles. The rules there were written to preclude the use of "raceguns" and to include only those with an external hammer made before 1900 or replicas thereof. It seems Miller has taken their action and added a "simulated" hammer and called it a Farrow and the powers-that-be have let them get away with it. It is not really technically correct nor is it in the same universe with the spirit of the game. None of this is probably impportant here, just making a point that if you want a Farrow, look elsewhere than Miller.

Woodcutter
from your post
It seems Miller has taken their action and added a "simulated" hammer and called it a Farrow


Nothing could be further from the truth. The only thing the two actions have in common is they are made in the same shop. The Miller has a striker and a very long block and the Farrow has a very short block with external hammer. There must be a number of shooters that couldn't beat a Miller at a Schutzen match with their Ballard or Winny and they are still sore about being beat by a better action. Now they badmouth Miller when he wants to compeat against somebody's Japanese made Winchester copy with his US made Farrow copy. He must still be building winners if people will claim something so far from the truth. Pretty sad!

gunmaker

Mr. gunmaker;
I erred in my post by not stating that I have not personally seen the Miller "Farrow" action and that my statement was based on reports from others.

The Miller action and the Miller "Farrow" are both quite legal in ASSRA schuetzen with the Miller being seen on the line regularly, however there is no pattern of dominance by Miller action rifles. There are simply too many variables for that to be the sole deciding factor. Mostly it is the shooter.

Woodcutter
My opinion is pretty one sided here. I worked for Miller Arms for a year and only built the Miller actions. The Farrow was not in the works while I was there. I have never been to a Schutzen match and have only heard testimony from Dean and Cyle Miller about the dominance of the Miller action. They told me something like the big money/prizes were not given away in the classes that Millers were allowed. Some of their top shooters wanted to compete in the big prize classes and Miller wanted to offer a Miller alternative to fit. That's why they built the Farrow.

Is there a listing online of match results for a few years that shows what classes & what shooters & rifles win and placed available?

gunmaker

gunmaker;

I cannot speak to what is or isn't allowed in ISSA competition; only in ASSRA. There the Miller is legal across the board. It has not even been disallowed in the black powdere only Ballard Match where the winner takes home a new Ballard Rifle Co. rifle. The two organizations are supposedly collaborating on a Traditional class where the Miller would be precluded but so far it is only talk in the ASSRA. At the three big yearly shoots at the ASSRA range in Indiana, one will see a fair number of Millers on the line and they shoot well indeed. I just haven't seen that they dominate. The ASSRA website/ forum would be the place to find out statistics from longer term shooters than I. I do know that among even top shooters one will find strong loyalties to the various traditional actions, including some who shoot up around 2200+ x 2500 offhand at 200yds.
This post is not meant to be argumentative nor even opinionated, just observations from someone new enough to the sport to eagerly observe what others are doing and using.