Cas City Forum Hall & CAS-L
Special Interests - Groups & Societies => The Winchester Model 1873 => Topic started by: tj3006 on July 21, 2016, 06:48:10 PM
-
A guy on another sight urged me not to try it.
My load is 13 grains of 2400 under a 205 grain cast, velocity is not going to be much maybe 1000.
Pressure is around 9000 cup.
My hope is to push it up to 15 grains and about 1200 fps. Source is Lyman's 50th manual.. Any opinions
...tj3006
-
I don't shoot any smokeless in mine; I never have and I don't plan on it in the future. I just don't think its worth the risk. Get a '92 if you want to shoot smokeless loads.
-
There are 73s and then there are 73s. The early ones had iron frames and the later ones had steel frames. They were made up into the smokeless era. I have a 73 made in 1876. I would not shoot that one with smokeless and don't even shoot it with BP anymore. Later guns are a little stronger with the emphasis being on "little". A lot depends on the rifle's condition. Without doubt many were shot with smokeless after the turn of the 20th Century. A lot of early smokeless powders were made to be volume loaded with the same volume as BP. Later smokeless powers have a lot more punch and drastically different pressure curves than BP. 10,000 cup with BP is not necessarily the same as 10,000 cup with a smokeless load, When the pressure peaks and the duration of the peak can be quite different. Winchester use to make standard and high velocity .44-40 and .38-40 ammunition and the box stated it was only for use in Model 92s. People apparently didn't read instructions any better than they do now as the HV loads had to be discontinued so people didn't fire them in 73s and other old .44-40 guns. Now to an opinion. I would look at the date of manufacture to see what the frame material is. I would look at the overall condition of the riflle and how tight the links are and whether the head space is within tolerance. I would be loading extremely low powered loads with a high volume powder like Trail Boss. If the goal is to shoot 1200 fps ammo it would be better to buy a reproduction 73 that is made out of modern steel.
-
Well, let's look at the bright side:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/02/140222-artificial-limbs-feeling-prosthetics-medicine-science/
-
A guy on another sight urged me not to try it.
My load is 13 grains of 2400 under a 205 grain cast, velocity is not going to be much maybe 1000.
Pressure is around 9000 cup.
My hope is to push it up to 15 grains and about 1200 fps. Source is Lyman's 50th manual.. Any opinions
...tj3006
tj3006,
Welcome to the forum!
I purchased my original '73 back in 1999. It was made in 1882. Since that time the hammer has fallen on about 3,500 reloads, of which about 2,000 were loaded with smokeless. ;D
Factory smokeless ammunition for the '73 was first introduced in 1895 by Winchester. If Winchester felt it was not safe in their 1873 rifles, they would not have introduced it!
(http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o25/w30wcf/Vintage%20cartridge%20boxes/44-40%2044WCF%20Smokeless.jpg)
These original .44 W.C.F. / .44-40 cartridges were factory loaded with 17 grs. of DuPont No. 2 Bulk smokeless powder. It had a burning rate similar to today's 4227. The difference being that the DuPont powder filled the case capacity while 17/4227 does not.
In time, dense type smokeless powders like Sharpshooter and SR80 were used in factory smokeless ammunition. Both have burning rates similar to todays 2400.
In the 1990's, Hercules Powder Co. tested 2400 in the 44-40 and published a load of 14.5 / 2400 under a 200 gr. jacketd bullet.
Velocity in a 24" barrel was shown at 1,230 fps / 12,500 CUP. I have shot that load in my '73 many times with no issues whatsoever.
I also have used 17/4227 with equally good results.
Today's factory smokeless 44-40 cartridges are loaded with faster burning smokeless powders and are plenty safe in original 1873's since they meet SAAMI specifications which were established with the strength of the 1873 Winchester in mind.
Handloading the 44-40 with faster burning smokeless like Unique is fine within SAMMI established pressure limits but the DANGER in doing so, is that a double charge will fit into the case whereas the 2400 & 4227 loads will not.
Have fun!
w44wcf
-
Count me and my original '73's in with Mr. Kort although I have not (yet) fired as many rounds of smokeless as he. Too many rifles, too little time...
CHT
-
W 44 thank you and the rest of you guys too !
I put 13 grains of 2400 into my star line brass , and will try it tomorrow.
I think there is a certain amount of risk , but life is to be lived.
I will post my results with however many fingers i have left !
...tj3006
-
I can well identify with those who feel life is to be lived. A am still and adrenaline junkie. With a caveat.
When a gun lets go, the barrel is next to MY hand. I only have two.
When a gun lets go, the action is next to MY face. I only have two eyes.
The possibility of an iron receiver, an iron cylinder or bad Damascus barrels just gives me the willies. I'm
aware there are those who load those guns with smokeless. I don't. I don't even think about it. It's just
not worth the risks. The gun only have to fail once to maim or cripple for life. YMMV
Coffinmaker
-
I will have a smith take a look at in my way to the forest.
...
-
The bad news is after shooting smokeless loads in my vintage 1873 44/40 I will be typing with 2 fingers for awhile.
The good news is that's all I ever used anyway. The shoot went great. The thing shoots very well, on par with my newer lever guns.
My load was whimpy, but a good place to start. The factory loads were stouter. there is one less pop bottle to rape and pillage the Oregon coast range as that one has about 10 44 caliber holes in it ...tj3006
-
I'm glad it went well and appreciate your range report.
I don't begrudge folks being cautious but for all the dire warnings of shooting these old Winchesters I've never known of anyone submiitng first-hand knowledge of one being destroyed by shooting proper smokeless loads.
So enjoy your rifle! As soon as temps have begun dropping below 95° by the time I get off work in the evenings I'll start shooting mine again. I've yet to stretch my 38-40's beyond 200 yards so that's next on the agenda.
CHT
-
Regarding smokeless in original 73's.......
We all have choices in life. “To each his own” as the saying goes.
As was mentioned, Winchester developed smokeless cartridges intended for the 1873. After I learned that, I did some investigating on what the original smokeless loadings were. As a result, I believe is perfectly safe to shoot smokeless in my ’73 made in 1882, PROVIDING that the cartridges do not exceed the SAAMI pressure limit for the .44 W.C.F. / .44-40. I also enjoy shooting b.p. as well. ;D
1873 strength
The barrels are made of steel and contain the pressure of the cartridge. There is little bolt thrust since the cartridge case partially locks itself against the chamber walls upon ignition.
In the latest issue of the Winchester Collector, a fellow wrote an article entitled "THE TOGGLE LINK ACTION". He stated that he had been collecting Winchesters for 50 years and had never seen nor heard of an 1873 or 1876 with a blown up action.
Prior to writing the article he had reached out via the internet, questioned fellow associates and did find one instance of a '73 SRC where the barrel had blown out just forward of the rear sight due to a bore obstruction. Interestingly, the action was intact and still working even though the pressure was, no doubt, well in excess of SAAMI specs.
1876 Strength
Shortly after the 1876 Winchester was introduced, there was some concern from some of the shooting public about the rifle being able to contain a cartridge with a 350 gr bullet pushed by 75 grs of b.p. which was considerably more than the 1873 Winchester cartridge.
Winchester responded by testing an 1876 to the point of failure and as you will see, the links and small pins were still intact (!).
The first thing they did was to remove the one set of links, then fired the rifle 20 times. That “Worked Well.” They then replaced the missing links and increased the powder charge to 105 grs of Gov’t powder under two bullets totaling 700 grs. That “Worked Well”. Then the charge weight was increased to 165 grs. and 3 bullets were used. That also “Worked well”.
The powder charge was then increased to 203 grs. and 4 bullets (1,400 grs.) were stacked on top of the powder charge. That also “Worked well”. (Wow!)
They kept adding more bullets until finally, the shell burst, blowing out the side plates, leaving the links and small pins intact and in perfect order.
Who would have thought that was possible.
w44wcf
-
tj3006,
Thank you for the range report. Sounds like you need to up the charge to 14.5, which was the only charge weight of 2400 that Hercules recommended and later, Alliant.
I'm curious to what factory load you were using (?). All of the factory cartridges develop less velocity than 2400.....well at least at 14.5 grs.
http://www.cascity.com/forumhall/index.php/topic,46913.0.html
w44wcf
-
The factory ammo is from ultra max.
A 200 grain load. I did not chrony , but the 2400 load felt like a 22lr. The factory had a little felt recoil. I would let my 8 year old grand son shoot it.
I think I will up the charge to 14. From there i will go up a half grain at a time...tj3006
-
I have an original 73 also made in 1882, it was pitted pretty bad and the chamber was very worn. I had
it relined a few years ago and now it shoots very well, and is MUCH easier to clean. Would the liner make
the barrel weaker? I've only shot black, 2ff Scheutzen, mainly because it's so cool.
BTB
-
Ever since I had my 1886 model '73 barrel lined, about all I've shot is smokeless. No problems whatsoever.
CHT
-
tj3006,
In my testing in the link I posted, I found that Ultramax ammo produced the highest velocity.
For best results with 2400, raise the muzzle momentarily before completely closing the action to place the powder to the back of the case.
The 14.5/2400 Hercules/Alliant data was taken using 200 gr. jacketed bullets and the pressure was a bit over 10% less than the SAAMI pressure.
Ken Waters who wrote many articles for the Handloader, used 16 grs. of 2400 in his original 1873's BUT with cast bullets.
BTB,
Certainly with loads not exceeding the SAAMI 14,000 pressure limit, your reclined 1873 will work just fine. ;D
CHT,
Thank you for your experience. That is mine as well.
w44wcf
-
Concerning the strength of togglelink actions, I ran some tests for an article published in either "Handloader" or "Rifle" magazine, years ago, using smokeless powders, primarily Unique. At one point, I removed one link. I couldn't tell that it had been removed! I removed both links! The action opened about half-way (I did NOT attempt to hold the lever closed). When I first obtained the rifle, before doing these tests, I examined the original links and discovered that one was cracked at the "elbow" joint. Navy Arms had just introduced their Italian-made '73, and I contacted Val Forgett, who was kind enough to send me a pair of the replica togglelinks, which I installed in my rifle. Aside from a little fitting, they fit perfectly. Aside from the accuracy problems due to the .434" groove diameter barrel (not worn, just oversized...very common to Winchester '73's), the rifle was good to go. The thing about radial pressures on the inside of the chamber/barrel is that even with the different pressure-time curves that smokeless powders generate compared to BP, it is the backthrust on the bolt that is the main issue. With the loads listed in the Lyman handbook, the backthrust, with modern brass, isn't that great. I'm not advocating the use of smokeless powder, especially for those rifles made prior to the mid-1880's, but if carefully followed, it shouldn't be a problem. [NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE USE OF THE ABOVE INFORMATION IN GUNS OTHER THAN MY OWN, AND MAYBE NOT THEN! Usual disclaimer.]
-
Concerning the strength of togglelink actions, I ran some tests for an article published in either "Handloader" or "Rifle" magazine, years ago, using smokeless powders, primarily Unique. At one point, I removed one link. I couldn't tell that it had been removed! I removed both links! The action opened about half-way (I did NOT attempt to hold the lever closed). When I first obtained the rifle, before doing these tests, I examined the original links and discovered that one was cracked at the "elbow" joint. Navy Arms had just introduced their Italian-made '73, and I contacted Val Forgett, who was kind enough to send me a pair of the replica togglelinks, which I installed in my rifle. Aside from a little fitting, they fit perfectly. Aside from the accuracy problems due to the .434" groove diameter barrel (not worn, just oversized...very common to Winchester '73's), the rifle was good to go. The thing about radial pressures on the inside of the chamber/barrel is that even with the different pressure-time curves that smokeless powders generate compared to BP, it is the backthrust on the bolt that is the main issue. With the loads listed in the Lyman handbook, the backthrust, with modern brass, isn't that great. I'm not advocating the use of smokeless powder, especially for those rifles made prior to the mid-1880's, but if carefully followed, it shouldn't be a problem. [NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE USE OF THE ABOVE INFORMATION IN GUNS OTHER THAN MY OWN, AND MAYBE NOT THEN! Usual disclaimer.]
That is really interesting information. Thanks so much for posting it!
CHT
-
Concerning the strength of togglelink actions, I ran some tests for an article published in either "Handloader" or "Rifle" magazine, years ago, using smokeless powders, primarily Unique. At one point, I removed one link. I couldn't tell that it had been removed! I removed both links! The action opened about half-way (I did NOT attempt to hold the lever closed). When I first obtained the rifle, before doing these tests, I examined the original links and discovered that one was cracked at the "elbow" joint. Navy Arms had just introduced their Italian-made '73, and I contacted Val Forgett, who was kind enough to send me a pair of the replica togglelinks, which I installed in my rifle. Aside from a little fitting, they fit perfectly. Aside from the accuracy problems due to the .434" groove diameter barrel (not worn, just oversized...very common to Winchester '73's), the rifle was good to go. The thing about radial pressures on the inside of the chamber/barrel is that even with the different pressure-time curves that smokeless powders generate compared to BP, it is the backthrust on the bolt that is the main issue. With the loads listed in the Lyman handbook, the backthrust, with modern brass, isn't that great. I'm not advocating the use of smokeless powder, especially for those rifles made prior to the mid-1880's, but if carefully followed, it shouldn't be a problem. [NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE USE OF THE ABOVE INFORMATION IN GUNS OTHER THAN MY OWN, AND MAYBE NOT THEN! Usual disclaimer.]
With both links removed there is NOTHING holding the action closed. It would not matter if you were attempting to hold the lever closed as with both links removed the lever isn't connected to anything. This is rubbish.
-
With both links removed there is NOTHING holding the action closed. It would not matter if you were attempting to hold the lever closed as with both links removed the lever isn't connected to anything. This is rubbish.
Easy there big guy.....
The hammer spring could/would hold the bolt in place. I could see where with a limited amount of bolt thrust the bolt might only be pushed back to say, the hammers half-cocktail position. Let's not forget, Winchester tried in vain to destroy an 1876 by removing one of the links then firing grossly the rifle with grossly overloaded cartridges.
CHT
-
Easy there big guy.....
The hammer spring could/would hold the bolt in place. I could see where with a limited amount of bolt thrust the bolt might only be pushed back to say, the hammers half-cocktail position. Let's not forget, Winchester tried in vain to destroy an 1876 by removing one of the links then firing grossly the rifle with grossly overloaded cartridges.
CHT
Yes, Winchester did that with BLACK POWDER. BP is basically self-limiting. No matter how much BP you put in a gun it can only generate a certain amount of pressure. Try that same experiment in a 76 with smokeless and see what happens. As far as the hammer spring holding the bolt shut have you tried it? That is baloney. With even light smokeless loads and both links in the rifle if the links are even slightly out of alignment you are going to get a pretty decent smack on your knuckles when the round, BP or smokeless, goes off. Been there done that. With no links you've got a straight blow-back condition. Even half a cocktail won't make your forehead feel any better when the bolt assembly hits you between the eyes. I too have shot lots of light smokeless rounds out of original 73s. However, let's not put stuff on the wire that can get somebody killed. (Oh, when I am using the word "you" I do not mean any particular person. Just the generic "you.")
-
Yes, Winchester did that with BLACK POWDER. BP is basically self-limiting. No matter how much BP you put in a gun it can only generate a certain amount of pressure. Try that same experiment in a 76 with smokeless and see what happens. As far as the hammer spring holding the bolt shut have you tried it? That is baloney. With even light smokeless loads and both links in the rifle if the links are even slightly out of alignment you are going to get a pretty decent smack on your knuckles when the round, BP or smokeless, goes off. Been there done that. With no links you've got a straight blow-back condition. Even half a cocktail won't make your forehead feel any better when the bolt assembly hits you between the eyes. I too have shot lots of light smokeless rounds out of original 73s. However, let's not put stuff on the wire that can get somebody killed. (Oh, when I am using the word "you" I do not mean any particular person. Just the generic "you.")
Au contraire. "Self limiting pressure" is a myth according to those who know more than I :
(pp. 194, right column)
https://books.google.com/books?id=Dzxyneq43AEC&pg=PA194&lpg=PA194&dq=black+powder+100,000&source=bl&ots=6jk5VfyhtX&sig=W07prIcKydA6ca-sXKlQaYtRBew&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiju7zl25nOAhUE3WMKHfqGADgQ6AEIKzAC#v=onepage&q=black%20powder%20100%2C000&f=false.
(pp. 34 left column)
https://books.google.com/books?id=OF7WL7hIhA0C&pg=PA34&lpg=PA34&dq=black+powder+100,000&source=bl&ots=mTlmn7ZiKp&sig=12ql2rGrTiMuZXh-2LKfWJeCs60&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiju7zl25nOAhUE3WMKHfqGADgQ6AEILjAD#v=onepage&q=black%20powder%20100%2C000&f=false
(par. 14)
http://www.chuckhawks.com/blackpowder_pyrodex.htm
Why are different grades of BP? If it were self-limiting in regards to pressure, we could just pour cartridge cases full of 4f and be merrily on our way. Right?
I've read the account of Winchesters attempt to destroy the toggle link 1876 (I'll try to find and post it as its very interesting) and they did so by driving additional bullets down the bore.
I didn't say the hammer spring would hold the bold closed rather it seems conceivable that tension from the hammer spring could limit the rearward travel, or velocity, of the bolt. But then, that's the subject of case head thrust, not chamber pressure. Once the fired cartridge case clears the chamber or the buet clearn the muzzle, whichever occurs first, there is no more pressure.
This is not "the wire", it's the CAS forum ;)
No one is suggesting dangerous loads or practices. If smokeless loads are dangerous in these old rifles, why have ammunition manufacturers been loading them and folks using them for nigh on 100 years?
CHT
-
Dont try any of this at home! Geeze! Lets be reasonable , We all know what the old Winchesters can do and not do. Any load in an original is a risk! BLACK OR SMOKLESS! One thing is for sure , If your firearm is not 100 % up to snuff than you are risking the old rifle /yourself and everyone around you. With that said I take that risk quite often ,but I never push the limits ! My 2 CENTS ,,,DT God Bless!
-
The "BOLT" will not be held by the hammer spring as the bolt is too big to exit the back of the rifle, however the bolt extension can and will exit the back of the rifle with considerable force if an obd occurs OR the links fail which can happen. When WRA did their test with a 76 I'm pretty sure it was with a new rifle or at least one that had been recently manufactured. To say that the hammer spring will prevent the action from opening is just not true. When the links fail or an obd occurs it can bend the lever and still force the action open, This is with BP loads not smokiless. wM1
-
AS THEY SAY..... "A PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS" and here are pics that indicate that a barrel has let go and the ACTIONS ARE SILL INTACT!! For you non engineering types, the cartridge locks itself somewhat in the chamber which lessens the rearword thrust on the bolt. I did a test similar to Trailrider (Thank you) and found that the case head did not contact the bolt upon ignition and that only the primer did.
From the recent issue of Winchester Collector - 1873 Barrel obstruction
(http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o25/w30wcf/Leverguns/1873%20blown%20barrel%202.jpg)
(http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o25/w30wcf/Leverguns/1873%20blown%20barrel.jpg)
From Handloader - 1876 destroyed by a smokeless powder charge that was way overloaded!!
NOTE THAT THE ACTION IS STILL INTACT!
(http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o25/w30wcf/Leverguns/1876%20blown%20barrel.jpg)
w44wcf
-
-
That blown 76 is so sad !
But likly no serious injury !
-
Another story of an overloaded toggle link action that survived: http://www.downeastgunworks.com/salvaging-a-uberti--model-1876/ (http://www.downeastgunworks.com/salvaging-a-uberti--model-1876/)
The barrel split ahead of the receiver, the magazine tube was bent, but the receiver survived.
CHT
-
Interesting read. Did you get far enough in the article to read the last sentence? wM1
-
Interesting read. Did you get far enough in the article to read the last sentence? wM1
Yep!
CHT
-
I found the story on the blown 1876...
by K.S.
I was the shooter and luckily survived the blow up intact. It was a double charge due to a primer feeding problem I had with my progressive reloader. When the primer didn't feed, I ran the press up one more time to check the primer problem and double charged the case.
This gun also shows how the 1876 held up to such a catastrophic failure, yet everyone likes to claim the '76 action isn't strong. I have a copy of an article written about the 1876 action in the 1880's, where they tried many different ways to blow up '76 actions and surprisingly, the '76 held up way beyond expectations.
I wasn't attempting such an experiment, but I can assure you and the photo attests to the strength of that action. The barrel was not only blown off the gun, but it was blown in two at the breach and another round detonated in the magazine, causing the rest of the damage.
Just like the pro's say "Don't try this at home".
No one is suggesting that the toggle link action rifles should be loaded beyond b.p. pressures with smokeless BUT as you can see, loading smokeless in these rifles is not fool proof.....unless one uses a capacity load of the right smokeless powder.
In the 44-40, that powder is RL-7. A capacity load generates a bit less pressure (12,100) than the original b.p. load (14,000). ;D
w44wcf
-
In regards to what w44wcf said about the smokeless powders.....we all have to make our own decisions on what we shoot in our firearms. Some shoot out of ignorance while others research quality information rather than hearsay generation after generation.
In John's reply#4 http://www.cascity.com/forumhall/index.php/topic,57837.msg692499.html#msg692499 he shows a photo of a red label box. The Red label signifies smokeless powder. The label also signifies it was made for the Winchester 73'. Other boxes, maybe even the one he shows included the Winchester Model 92' in smaller letters on the side label. As the powders changed, so did the label nomenclatures.
The Red labels came out on the 44WCF boxes in 1895 when Winchester loaded them with smokeless powder. John explains the different powders used. The first box labels shows Winchester 73" on top and include the Winchester Model 92' on the side label.
1906 introduced label dating and modification file codes listed on the labels. The label change date code on the lower right and the file code on the lower left of the box top label. The side label (seals) also had a date code and were separate dates in nature.
Between 1900 and 1903, the Red label smokeless loads show again the 73' on top but then eventually include both the 73' and the 92' on the top label.
At the same time, the same Red side label shows "NOT TO BE USED IN PISTOLS". Remember, these were deemed safe for both the 73' and the 92' BUT NOT THE PISTOLS indicating that the 73's action was stronger than the thin cylinder walls of some revolvers. Not necessarily Colts. As you already know there were much cheaper pistols that chambered the 44WCF that had much weaker cylinders than the better quality Colt. The Merwin and Hubbard cylinders look much thinner than Colts cylinders.
An early 1909 era "High Velocity" box shows a faded looking top, maybe Lavender color and is printed ".44-40 Model 1892 Special", indication to be used in the Winchester Model 92 BUT does say not to be used in the 73' in small letters on the side label. I for one would never use them in the 73'...my choice. Also no mention of pistols.....but again, even early smokeless non-high velocity loads were not even safe in pistols...common sense should prevail but....human "generation gaps" can cause problems with forgotten information.
1903-1938 High Velocity loads were packaged in Yellow and Lavender labeled boxes. The above aforementioned leads me to believe the early box labels were Lavender while the later boxes were Yellow. John describes one here: https://www.marlinowners.com/forum/cowboy-rifles/31917-44-40-h-v-replication-loads-yesteryear.html#post337207
It is worth noting that the date codes were changed at some point and the sample John shared has a code of K4414T . That box label is about 1930's and specifically denotes NOT FOR PISTOLS on the top label and does say not to use in the 73'. Again, I would not shoot them in a 73'. Remember these are Winchester's manufactured ammunition and would assume catering to their own firearms. However, Lyman 49th handloading manual lists at least nine of nineteen RIFLES chambered for the 44-40 cartridge that are weak that includes the 73'. The Model 92, 94 and Marlin's 89 on up are listed as Strong Actions.
So with all of that being said, sounds to me like the real "weak link" ...and the reason for the SAAMI max of 11,000psi was the thin revolver cylinder walls more than the so called "weak action" of the 73'.
-
Interestingly the Winchester box labels never mention the Winchester Model 94...but it was manufactured specifically for the smokeless powder...so again, common sense must have been pretty widespread back then.
It probably wouldn't have been because the gun itself wasn't really designated as a smokeless only rifle. It was first chambered in 32-40 and 38-55 and around a year later the 30WCF.
It was the 30WCF that was the first CARTRIDGE introduced as smokeless. The rifles were chambered in black powder cartridges along with the 30WCF and 25-35WCF. Then a few short years later the 32 Winchester Special and there are all sorts of speculations on the later about why it and the guns chambered for it were built like they were as far as the rifle twist etc possibly designed with reloading with black powder in mind.
Bottom line is there are plenty of early model 1894's that have had a good diet of black powder in their day.
There probably wasn't much common sense or overall knowledge of smokeless powder during its introduction regarding pressure curves or anything in that day to the common user. Most probably assumed if the cartridges were available and chambered for that gun they were safe and the only thing during those very early days available for reloading was black powder anyway.
-
Brian yours is a very good post. It amazes me that people cling to old, unproven "facts", such as "toggle link actions are weak" for generations when there's really been no proof. One can find many pictures of old Colt revolvers that have been destroyed, but I challenge anyone to find a '73 or '76 Winchester or a facimile thereof in which the receiver has been destroyed. The only one I've ever seen was an 1876 (it may be pictured somewhere in this thread) that was over loaded. It didn't destroy the rifle, but blew the barrel out of the receiver.
CHT
-
It probably wouldn't have been because the gun itself wasn't really designated as a smokeless only rifle. It was first chambered in 32-40 and 38-55 and around a year later the 30WCF.
It was the 30WCF that was the first CARTRIDGE introduced as smokeless. The rifles were chambered in black powder cartridges along with the 30WCF and 25-35WCF. Then a few short years later the 32 Winchester Special and there are all sorts of speculations on the later about why it and the guns chambered for it were built like they were as far as the rifle twist etc possibly designed with reloading with black powder in mind.
Bottom line is there are plenty of early model 1894's that have had a good diet of black powder in their day.
There probably wasn't much common sense or overall knowledge of smokeless powder during its introduction regarding pressure curves or anything in that day to the common user. Most probably assumed if the cartridges were available and chambered for that gun they were safe and the only thing during those very early days available for reloading was black powder anyway.
LOL, not sure what I was thinking there...brain overload!! I need to edit that!!
Cholla Hill Tirador....Brian yours is a very good post.
Thanks Cholla!! John did all the homework with original cartridges and their components. I really miss his posts!!
-
By the way, I don't know if any of you were aware, but John Korth aka w44wcf passed away earlier this year. He was such a compendium of information as he was constantly shooting and testing old black powder cartridges. He will be missed!
CHT
-
By the way, I don't know if any of you were aware, but John Korth aka w44wcf passed away earlier this year. He was such a compendium of information as he was constantly shooting and testing old black powder cartridges. He will be missed!
CHT
https://www.44winchestercenterfirecartridges.com/john-kort
-
Thanks for the link. Miss old John a lot. Still have a few packs of his cast bullets unopened that he sent for testing wrapped in his oatmeal box cardboard . Think he would say open them up and do some shooting . ,,,DT
-
I had a small handful that he had sent me too. I loaded them up and shot them in his honor after his passing.
I miss him too.
CC Griff
-
You oldtimers are rough, looks as though the OP, tj3006, disappeared after this thread became populated by folks with experience. I hope he and his rifles are well. I am going to add my two-cents regarding "weak-action" togglebolt rifles and the much maligned 1st Model. I walked my smokeless reloads right up to 15.8 gr of 2400 under 200gr of pure lead molycoated bullets. Both of my 44wcf rifles are standard 1st Models and after literally thousands of rounds both are none the worse for the wear and I'd like to think I learned a few things. I really prefer shooting Goex 3f, but the 2400 came to me at such a ridiculous price I have filled several 30cal cans with the rounds my son and I build together. I am going to guess that many new shooting enthusiasts have not been inside of these old weapons, (or they purchased new reproductions) for cleaning, inspection, maintenance, or repairs. Without the intimacy that servicing my own rifles has built, I might also fall prey to worries about safety and design strength. Everyone has their own comfort level, but over 4 decades of ownership, my '73's continue to amaze me with the toughness and reliability the original design renders.
-
You oldtimers are rough, looks as though the OP, tj3006, disappeared after this thread became populated by folks with experience. I hope he and his rifles are well. I am going to add my two-cents regarding "weak-action" togglebolt rifles and the much maligned 1st Model. I walked my smokeless reloads right up to 15.8 gr of 2400 under 200gr of pure lead molycoated bullets. Both of my 44wcf rifles are standard 1st Models and after literally thousands of rounds both are none the worse for the wear and I'd like to think I learned a few things. I really prefer shooting Goex 3f, but the 2400 came to me at such a ridiculous price I have filled several 30cal cans with the rounds my son and I build together. I am going to guess that many new shooting enthusiasts have not been inside of these old weapons, (or they purchased new reproductions) for cleaning, inspection, maintenance, or repairs. Without the intimacy that servicing my own rifles has built, I might also fall prey to worries about safety and design strength. Everyone has their own comfort level, but over 4 decades of ownership, my '73's continue to amaze me with the toughness and reliability the original design renders.
Completely agree. For some reason we gunny types seem judge things by how they "look" rather than facts and data.
CHT
-
FACT - 1895: Winchester Red Label cartridge boxes.
Smokeless powder was offered for the .44 Winchester during this year. It is believed that Dupont #2 Bulk powder was used and had a similar burn rate as today's 4227. Dupont #2 was a caseload but 4227 is not. Also "NOT FOR PISTOLS" is noted on the side label. The Nomenclature on the label specifically states "for Winchester Rifle Model 1873"...eliminating the myth that smokeless powders should not be used in original Winchester 73' rifles BUT does confirm smokeless powders should not be used in black powder frame revolvers. Other changes to he labels included Winchester 92 on the side label and eventually both 73' and 92' on the top label.
(https://static.wixstatic.com/media/0907a5_0bfdedaa3c274935b87552d7113c2b9c~mv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_540,h_277,al_c,q_80,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01/44-40%2044WCF%20Smokeless.webp)
I urge these hard core old timers to get a current copy of Lyman's 49th and check out page 299 and page 300.
MYTH BUSTED!
MY LOAD DATA.....my data COULD BE WRONG!
Using factory Buffalo Bore 44-40 "Heavy" as my "Control" @ 11,300 psi...
During my amateurish strain gauge testings, I found that 18.5gr of IMR4227 with a 200gr JHP Speer #4425 (by the book) resulted in 9,205psi. SAAMI max pressure is 11,000 PSI (13,000 cup).
16gr of 2400 with the same Speer 200gr JHP resulted in an average 10 shot pressure of 8,992 psi
Black powder loads, 40gr of Skirmish FFFG, 200gr Biglube = 8,900 psi
Black Powder loads, 32gr Kik FFFG, 217gr 43-215C (Lyman 427098 replica with crimp groove) = 6,043 psi
THE FOLLOWING IS NOT FOR THE WINCHESTER 73'
Lyman 49th also lists high pressure loads NOT for the 73'
10.5gr of Unique with a 205gr Lyman 427098 gave me 17,837 psi...Lyman lists this load @19,700 cup
20gr of 2400 with a Speer JHP gave me 15,618 psi...Lyman lists this load @ 19,000 cup
For a list of Winchester cartridge box color label descriptions and dates, check here: https://www.44winchestercenterfirecartridges.com/44wcf-cartridge-boxs
and here: https://www.44winchestercenterfirecartridges.com/single-post/2018/12/01/Winchesters-Colorful-Cartridge-Boxes
-
I 've been shooting original 1873's for 50 years. The shooters I use most often were made in 1876, 1887 and 1899. The load I use is 7.5 grains of Unique, with a 200 grain hard cast bullet. My rifles and carbines are in very fine condition, so make sure your gun is tight and crisp. There are many other smokeless loads out there for the original 73's. Experiment and pick the one that works best.
-
Here is a letter on using smokeless in the original 73's dated 1907
-
I don’t want to create more controversy ;D
But I have an Iron framed first model 1873 carbine that I replaced the sewer pipe barrel that keyholed every round it fired with a new made 73 carbine barrel from Winchester barrels... I have fired at least 2k rounds through it with smokeless powder.. I use 200 grain cast bullets from a lee mold that I size to .428 and 7.5 grains of Unique... my carbine is pretty darned accurate with the new barrel.
The only problem I ever experienced was with a full magazine of cartridges.. occasionally I get a bullet pushed down into the cartridge case... yes.. I know about crimping it harder... I just load 8 at a time