Info on a ballard

[GrahamVT]

I am looking at a Ballard and would love to know any more information. Chambered in 22lr, has been refinished, is missing the rear peep sight and the ejector is broken. "Bore is dark but still has decent continuous rifling" Serial # is 32116. I am guessing its not worth much more than $300-400? A quick search tells me its either a #2 or #3f? Looks like those were the only models chambered in 22lr. Any info would be greatly appreciated!!!

Links to photos below;
http://s22.postimg.org/64ywbfs41/20160921_164002.jpg
http://s22.postimg.org/41oh3rsb5/20160921_164036.jpg
http://s22.postimg.org/5urds3dht/20160921_164041.jpg
http://s22.postimg.org/qg65jzv2p/20160921_164047.jpg
http://s22.postimg.org/prxb11wcx/20160921_164113.jpg
http://s22.postimg.org/hnp6wb9xt/20160921_164143.jpg
http://s22.postimg.org/xagg9onpt/20160921_164159.jpg

Thank you,
Graham

[marlinman93]

Not a #2 or #3F. It is a plain #3 straight grip. The #3F was a pistol grip, with small Farrow Swiss buttplate. The two piece ejector may be missing the bottom half that operates off the lever. Jim at Distant Thunder Gun Parts sells them. They need a little fitting, but very nicely made!
I think your estimate is low, if the bore has decent rifling, and the $300 is low even if the rifling isn't great. I'd say it's a $400-$450 gun, and only because it needs an ejector. If the ejector was good, I'd say it's a $500 gun. Your serial number puts it towards the last years of production. Guessing maybe @1888.

[GrahamVT]

Perfect! Thank you!!

[Brent]

Looks like someone dramatically altered the top of the receiver ring (last picture). With a .22 rf, it should be safe, but I'd consider that a major demerit if that is what was done.

[Regnier (gunrunner)]

Brent;

The concave top of that receiver is typical of the Number 3 Ballard rifle. It was a feature of the Number 3 to help with a lower sighting plane and is unique to the Number 3 Ballard rifles.
John Dutcher mentions this on page 123 of his book, and a great photo of the top of the receiver is on page124.

[marlinman93]

The early #3 Ballard didn't have the concave top, but they are rarely seen. I've only come across one, and it's in my safe. The early #3 also did not have thee "tulip" on the barrel, so barrels were heavier, and sights sat higher.

[Brent]

I realize that they are mostly, if not quite always concave on the top of the receiver ring. I used to own one of these. So too is the rimfire low wall Winchester.

But in this case, I think that concavity has been deepened and reshaped. At least to me, it looks that way. That last picture just doesn't look right. The cut looks more V shaped and deeper and wider.

Maybe I'm misremembering or imagining things. Wouldn't be the first time...

This was mine, unfortunately, I don't have a picture of the top of the receiver ring, nor do I have the rifle any longer.

[marlinman93]

I realize that they are mostly, if not quite always concave on the top of the receiver ring. I used to own one of these. So too is the rimfire low wall Winchester.

But in this case, I think that concavity has been deepened and reshaped. At least to me, it looks that way. That last picture just doesn't look right. The cut looks more V shaped and deeper and wider.

I believe you may be right Brent. The concave shape looks correct, but in the next to the last picture there appears to be a notch cut in the bottom of the concave top, like a sighting notch, but the length of the receiver! At least it appears that way to me. Probably not an issue for a #3 in .22LR, but sure strange. Wonder what might make someone decide to do that?