Are there any references to these guns online...I did some looking but can't find much on what I'm looking for. Father in law says he has an original restored Remington No. 1 but I can find nothing about them online. ...Date of mfg., how to read any markings, etc, etc. ...Remington's site only has information on the No. 4 and No. 6
Any information would be great, I tried a few searches but didn't come up with much.

There are so many variations of Remington rolling blocks and licensed copies you're not going to find much in one place without knowning what you have to begin with.

This website is sorely out of date and has mistakes but it does have a lot of information if you know what you have to begin with. Its easy to mistake one for another:
www.militaryrifles.com/MAINIndx.htm

When you ask about a rifle in a generic manner you can't expect much of an answer. If I was to ask a question like, "tell me about Mauser rifles", how far would that get me?  Details like the country that made it, markings, features, etc, are what's needed. Photos are pretty much mandatory. Rolling blocks, Remington and others, were made into the many millions and used by a huge number of countries. You ask an impossible question. Even rifles with Remington receivers with Remington markings can be from Sweden or Egypt, Mexico or Spain. What markings are you trying to read?

FYI - using the two words, "original restored", is an oxymoron. Its either original or its restored. It cannot be both.

You want to talk about Remington rolling blocks then give me something to go on... No dessert if you don't supply the meat 'n' taters.  These below have been mine and about 25 others. I know a little bit about Remington rolling blocks, and Berdan rolling blocks, and Laidley rolling blocks and Geiger & Rider rolling blocks, also known as split breech.













www.rebooty.com/~dutchman/robl.html

www.rebooty.com/~dutchman/nagant.html

Dutch

Thanks for the information Dutch...yeah I kind of figured it would be like asking "tell me about Mausers" but I was really just wondering if there was a good reference out there. The statement about  original/restored was really just  him saying that it was not a new production gun but that much of it (like the wood for example) may have been replaced before he got it which was quite a few years back....so for all I know virtually nothing on the gun except the barrel and action is original and even that had been refinished as you can see...front sight is definately a replacement though the rear looks like it was pitted quite a bit before it was refinished (whenever that was). Here are a few pictures of the gun...
Thanks again!

Ok. Thanks for understanding the spirit of what I meant by, "tell me about Mausers".

Because the action lacks markings and I don't know if it has Remington patent markings on the top of the receiver tang but since you didn't show any and didn't mention any I'm going to ~assume~ there aren't any... Nothing on either side of the reciever. Yet the barrel is marked .45-70.... And I can say this much, its not an 1867 model. This is evidenced by that little funky thing on the top of the breechblock. That's a firing pin retractor.

The firing pin retractor pulls the firing pin back into the breechblock so that its not sticking out when the breechblock is closed.. What caused this design improvement is the original 1867 design without any firing pin retractor had a bad habit of becoming fouled with mostly powder fouling and rust and sticking in the extended position. Now think about closing that breechblock _hard_ on a live cartridge with the firing pin sticking out of the breechblock. Can you spell fire-out-of-battery?  Big problem and a real surprise to the poor slob holding the rifle. The hammer is in the fully cocked position during chambering and can't "block" the breechblock from opening. It was about the worst safety problem with the rolling block.

Where is the extractor?  Is it a sliding extractor or a rotary extractor?  It doesn't appear to be a sliding extractor as it lacks the retaining screw on the left side of the receiver. So we have to assume its a rotary extractor and along with the firing pin retractor tells us its a later action.

The rear sight is either a 1897 or 1902... pretty sure. But what bothers me is the barrel and caliber. If it was rebarreled why did the builder use the military rear sight? Its not impossible but barring anything else to tell me the barrel isn't original I'm going with that. But again, the .45-70 chambering leaves little room to guess what the caliber was if the barrel is original. The Danish is the closest and could be easily chambered (or mistaken for) .45-70. But the receiver doesn't bear this out nor does the rear sight type. The Spanish were 11mm bores so that doesn't seem plausible unless the barrel was sleeved and that just doesn't seem prudent. Without Remington tang markings there's no reason to think this is an American action in origin. So that precludes this as being an American civilian Remington.

The blueing, to my eye from the photos, looks awfully matte. And the hammer and breechblock being blued suggests a cheap and amateur job overall. The sides of the receiver don't look like they've been re-surfaced to remove marks or pitting. Spanish rifles would appear like that but there are others that could, too.

The thumb lever on the breechblock looks like the 1902 model. The problem is most of the 1902 models and 1897 models are 7mm though certainly not all.

Is it possible that this rifle was built from parts? Yes, very possible. What that allows is the use of a loose rear sight that didn't come from this rifle at all but was installed in order to have a rear sight... cheap. This lets me suggest the barrel is one like Numrich Arms used to sell for the No. 1 rolling block, a .45-70 round barrel threaded and ready to install... except this isn't a No. 1 action, it seems to be a #5 action, the later smokeless action. There were no firing pin retractors on the 1867 models anywhere. It just wasn't a feature that was invented yet. Fact is the Swedish 1889 model was the first and it appeared even before the Remington factory 1897 model firing pin retractor which has always suggested heavily that the Swedish had Remington factory support for the 1889 upgrades but that's almost a no brainer. The fact that the rear sight has pitting also suggests its not original to the barrel. Why no pitting on the barrel or receiver?  Because the rear sight was purchased or pulled out of a parts bin and screwed on to this barrel. It is plausible.

The stocks are certainly amateur made. A decently skilled amateur that had more skill as a stockmaker than blueing. Most garage rifle builders are better at woodwork than metal work. You see why I make that distinction between the stocks and the blueing?  One is much better than the other. A trained gunsmith would never send out a rifle with that blueing or the hammer and breechblock blued like that. Polished or jeweled was the more common method of finishing those two parts. The generic rolling block replacement stock didn't have that cute curvy cheeckpiece and fluted comb. It looks like a nice job but he didn't checker. What does the buttplate look like? Steel? Checkered?  Plastic?  How well does it fit?  Those are points to inspect that'll tell you the level of skill (or lack of) with the person who carved and fit the stocks.

I need you to take your dial calipers and measure the thickness of the receiver.  At the rear behind the hammer or over top of the where the barrel screws into the receiver. Just the thickness of the receiver itself. This will tell me something. Are there any numbers stamped anywhere?  How is the forearm attached?  Can it be removed easily?  Might be some markings on the bottom of the barrel, inspectors or such. On the Swedish 1867 and 1867-74 they're dated and have copious markings. As well, on the side of the rear tang of both the receiver and the triggerguard on Remington-made actions are production numbers that run in series of 10,000. No numbers means its not Remington-made.

A common problem with rolling blocks is its sometimes easier to tell you what it ISN'T than to tell you what it is. I've had this come up before. There are so many variations and with this rifle there's just not enough left that was "original" to say exactly.

I'm curious if its been fired with .45-70 cases and if they look "normal" when fired.

That witness mark on the barrel bothers me. I'd think it wouldn't be there or even put there if the barrel was a replacement. It looks like the original witness mark. Could the builder have sent this barrel out and had it re-bored and re-rifled. Yes, especially if it was done in the 1950s or even 1960s. It wasn't that big a deal and there were lots of custom barrel makers who would do that sort of thing fairly cheap. It is possible but I'd have to see it in-hand. The barrel crown would tell a little bit of the story. The degree of polish on the chamber walls would tell another tidbit of the story. The length and taper of the barrel don't look like an aftermarket barrel. It looks like an original military barrel.

Stick it back in the closet.

Dutch

wow thanks very much for all of the information! I really appreciate you taking the time to type all of that out.

to answer a few of your questions...
yes it has been fired extensively with black powder/pyrodex and all cardridges look normal and have been reloaded.

blueing ceratinly is that matte not a beautiful job but as you said they were much better on the wood side of things.

Buttplate is smooth steel with no markings.

taking the forearm off shows some marks...some hard to make out
bottom of barrel has what looks like an E (and maybe an H) in a few places and a 1-97 (maybe)
looking into the receiver with the wood off there is a 4 digit number on the left side (right side of gun) with another mark I can't make out in front it...might be another number or some kind of or mark...this is on the front face of the receiver.

will measure the receiver and get back to you with a number

I just got a rolling block rifle yesterday and would like some help on identifying it.  On the tang it has:

REMINGTONS ILION N.Y. U.S.A.
PAT. MAY 3D NOV. 15TH 1864 APRIL 17TH 1866

On the side of the tang and on the trigger plate is the number 23909.  Otherwise there are no markings on the rifle except for a U on the barrel band.  The receiver is 1.32" thick.  The barrel is round and is slightly over 23" long.  There is also a witness mark on the top of the barrel matching one on the receiver.  The buttplate is steel.  It appears to be a .45-70.  The previous owner had never fired it and didn't know what caliber it is.  The firing pin is held in by a screw on the upper side.

If you wouldn't mind, please start a new thread.

I'm going to need photos. And more information. Stock configuration, forearm length, bands, bayonet lug, sights front and rear, etc. Show me a photo of the breechblock where you say the firing pin screw is located. A 23" barrel isn't normal for a military rolling block nor is .45-70 caliber. I suspect the model is 1867 based on the patent date but that's about all I can say until I see photos and have more information. Title the new message "another rolling block" or something like that, thanks.

Some identification of rolling blocks is based on some very seemingly insignificant details, such as the shape of the hammer spur or breechblock spur, so good sharp clear photos go along way in helping to see what it is we're looking at.

Dutch

Quoted: I just got a rolling block rifle yesterday and would like some help on identifying it.  On the tang it has: REMINGTONS ILION N.Y. U.S.A. PAT. MAY 3D NOV. 15TH 1864 APRIL 17TH 1866 On the side of the tang and on the trigger plate is the number 23909.  Otherwise there are no markings on the rifle except for a U on the barrel band.  The receiver is 1.32" thick.  The barrel is round and is slightly over 23" long.  There is also a witness mark on the top of the barrel matching one on the receiver.  The buttplate is steel.  It appears to be a .45-70.  The previous owner had never fired it and didn't know what caliber it is.  The firing pin is held in by a screw on the upper side.