Author Topic: '66 Flatside (Read 20270 times)

Coffinmaker · « **Reply #20 on:** December 20, 2015, 06:08:12 PM »

Because the fore end for a current build version is the same thickness as the "boss" at the front of the frame. When you mill down that
"bulge" at the front of the frame and fit the fore end (like the "real" thing) the fore end is thinner. Ergo, more fragile. I suspect that is
the reason Winchester and Co. put the "bulge" there in the first place. It serves no other purpose.

Coffinmaker

Fox Creek Kid · « **Reply #21 on:** December 20, 2015, 07:10:17 PM »

That makes sense.

Here's a 'flatside' rifle that shows that well:

http://jamesdjulia.com/item/lot-1090-rare-first-model-winchester-model-1866-flatside-lever-action-rifle-47604/

Coffinmaker · « **Reply #22 on:** December 21, 2015, 11:11:32 AM »

Finger Pokin time. Actually nice to see some of the "Big Dogs" can make the occasional mistake too. Listed the Flat Side as "45" Henry RF.

There were also some interesting comments from the "Cataloguer" about the composition of the rifle. New Barrel, New Butt Stock,
artificial "patina" or aging of the frame, barrel, and wood. I wouldn't actually call it a "faque" since "they" actually started with an
actual flat side receiver, there are some inconsistencies. I'd be willing to own it if it were also converted to 44 S&W American or some
such so I could also go out and play wid it. Must be a functioning toy. Dust collectors ........ Phooey.

Well, OK, it functions. But at the current prices for .44 Henry Flat cartridges, some humm dinger expensive to shoot

Coffinmaker

Advertising · « **Reply #23 on:** **Today** at 08:31:36 AM »

Blair · « **Reply #23 on:** December 21, 2015, 01:06:45 PM »

There seems to be a lot that is not quite right about the information posted on that listing.
What is depicted is, a type I or early first model variation of a Winchester 1866 Rifle with the King Pat loading gate.
My best,
Blair

Mike · « **Reply #24 on:** December 22, 2015, 03:11:35 AM »

Been thinking about the 66 flat side a bit the last day or so, to do a authentic copy one would have to start from a cast frame that has had no profiling. The front of the frame is not like a Henry in its finished state, the henry has a scoloped under side to the frame which is flat on the Flat Side..

Blair · « **Reply #25 on:** December 22, 2015, 02:54:55 PM »

I believe the repro '66 is the best firearm to start with on this project.

I bought one of the newer type IV '66 Rifles to build my version of the "flat side" '66 I was wanting.
I soon found out that if I removed the front flaring on the frame to create the flat side, that there would either be no boss for the forearm to fit into, or that it would be so thin as to not offer any support for the forearm wood. (the repro's are too thin in my opinion)
With doing a bit more research I found the Second Model or type II 1866's. (SS#'s for the Henry and the type I and type II overlap during this period)
These, the type II's, introduce the flaring at the front of the frame and the fore stock supporting boss, that will remain on all Winchester Rifle or Carbines afterward.

These are all rather early '66 variations. Not many were made to began with and the survival rate has left us with even few examples of those. Research is a must!
My best,
Blair

Mike · « **Reply #26 on:** December 22, 2015, 03:52:16 PM »

I belive i will look for another Henry and do another transitional with a round barrel and fore

wood and loading gate.

Blair · « **Reply #27 on:** December 22, 2015, 04:08:44 PM »

Enjoy!
Any photos of your past work?
My best,
Blair

Fox Creek Kid · « **Reply #28 on:** December 22, 2015, 04:40:20 PM »

Quote from: Blair on December 22, 2015, 02:54:55 PM

...With doing a bit more research I found the Second Model or type II 1866's. (SS#'s for the Henry and the type I and type II overlap during this period)
These, the type II's, introduce the flaring at the front of the frame and the fore stock supporting boss, that will remain on all Winchester Rifle or Carbines afterward...

This should help, but you will have to enlarge it to see it better. So, one can assume that the 'flatside' had only the barrel band to hold the forearm.

Mike · « **Reply #29 on:** December 22, 2015, 05:59:37 PM »

That great

Coffinmaker · « **Reply #30 on:** December 22, 2015, 08:09:02 PM »

The early "flat side" 1866 almost had to have been built from Henry pattern receivers. A close look will show there are double dovetailed side plates as on the Henry. The very front of the receiver is Henry Pattern as is the top of the receiver at the hammer. The right side of the receiver has, of course, the "improved Kings Patent" loading gate which was simply a flat piece of spring steel. I believe the ladle was
secured by two screws rather than the later single screw. Otherwise, the lower screw at the ladle serves no purpose. There is nothing else but the end of the ladle in there.

All of the barrel pictures I have been able to find of a complete rifle, show the Magazine tube attached to the barrel ala a shotgun type soldered connector. Because of this, I'd bet the fore end wood simply butted up against the front of the receiver and was retained by a
simple cross screw or screws thru estucions the fore end wood. The fore end simply slid back over the mag tube, similar to the fore end provided by Uberti for the Transitionional Henry.

I don't see building a Flat Side 66 out of a 66 rifle as being an option. Has to come from a Henry. One humm dinger of an EXPENSIVE project. Not me (again).

Coffinmaker

Mike · « **Reply #31 on:** December 23, 2015, 03:18:18 AM »

Found this pdf file with any luck it is posted here

Mike · « **Reply #32 on:** December 23, 2015, 11:54:18 AM »

I am trying to find why there are two screws for the loading gate??

Blair · « **Reply #33 on:** December 23, 2015, 12:14:06 PM »

Mike,

One screw is for the flat loading gate.
The second screw secures an additional "support" spring for the loading gate.
There is a reference to this "two" part loading gate in the pdf documents you posted earlier.
Hope this helps.
My best,
Blair

Fox Creek Kid · « **Reply #34 on:** December 23, 2015, 12:14:29 PM »

Quote from: Mike on December 23, 2015, 11:54:18 AM

I am trying to find why there are two screws for the loading gate??

Two retaining screws:

http://milpas.cc/rifles/ZFiles/United%20States%20Rifles/Winchester/winchester%20models/Experimental%20Models/Designs%20leading%20to%20the%20M1866/King/King.html

Coffinmaker · « **Reply #35 on:** December 23, 2015, 12:28:24 PM »

The original "King's Patent" loading gate is the design used by Uberti in building their "Transitional" Henry rifles. It is a true "gate" as opposed to the later "improved" ladle. I really like the original gate.
I was able to secure several of the Uberti copies of the King's Patent Gate some years ago and have used them to build my versions of
the Transitional Henry rifles. The only drawback to the design, beyond complexity, is if one forgets to close the gate after loading, when one runs the lever after the first shot, one's cartridges come spitting out the side of the rifle. DO NOT ask how I know this embarrassing fact

I must admit however, it was fun to watch

Coffinmaker

Fox Creek Kid · « **Reply #36 on:** December 23, 2015, 01:43:13 PM »

Quote from: Coffinmaker on December 23, 2015, 12:28:24 PM

The original "King's Patent" loading gate is the design used by Uberti in building their "Transitional" Henry rifles. It is a true "gate" as opposed to the later "improved" ladle...

Yes, but it only exists in the patent drawings & a few tool room models. Taylor's 'screwed the pooch' on this one IMO. Why on Earth they didn't copy one that was actually made & sold is beyond me.

Oh well, the peak CAS period has passed and we will never see anything like this again out of Italy IMO.

Blair · « **Reply #37 on:** December 23, 2015, 02:35:56 PM »

To me, there looks to be several '66's Transitional models folks maybe looking at here.
None of which are wrong or more correct than another variation.
All I am suggesting is to do your research and then look to the availability of the firearm one wishes to start with.
Some will be a great deal more difficult and expensive to alter and/or modify than other variations.
This is a choice you as the builder will have to make for yourselves.
My best,
Blair

Mike · « **Reply #38 on:** December 23, 2015, 02:48:26 PM »

I agree Uberti built the wrong gun and i belive the do not sell many. The fun is haveing something different and something i have put together

Coffinmaker · « **Reply #39 on:** December 23, 2015, 06:53:37 PM »

Well, yes and no, depending on viewpoint. For the greater portion of the CAS public, yes, it's the wrong gun. Most shooters would have preferred a more "66" style gate (I think). And .... No ..... it did't sell well. When I was talking to the Gals at Taylors, there were only about 250 or so of the Transitionals made. They took for freeking ever to sell. Couple of years. Understanding: The Henry wasn't the biggest brightest bulb on the tree. There are a bunch of "us" who think the Henry is better than the Pop Top, but we are in the minority.

A further unfortunate, CAS, as a discipline and as a market has peaked. The little train that could is on the down side of the hill now and
will only continue to run downhill. For those of us who revel in the guns of the 19th century American West, sad news indeed. It is also
a shame the US Henry picked this late in life to make an appearance. The only other rifle to date with abysmal sales has been the Burgess.
A Novelty, not as interesting as a Transitional Henry.

I too seriously doubt there will be any more "new" offerings in out future. Unless, of course, we build em ourselves. Bummer.

Coffinmaker

News:

Author Topic: '66 Flatside (Read 20270 times)

Advertising