Cas City Forum Hall & CAS-L

Special Interests - Groups & Societies => The Winchester Model 1876 => Topic started by: KenH on November 11, 2020, 03:54:34 PM

Title: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on November 11, 2020, 03:54:34 PM
Hello ya'll.  This is my first post to the board.  Been reading some and learning about the 1876.  These are photos of an old rifle my son-in-law gave me.  His father purchased it at an estate sale up in Minnesota several (many?) years ago and passed it on to my S-I-L as a wall hanger.   A week or so ago my S-I-L gave it to me as an early Christmas present knowing I like fooling with these old guns.  I've got a few Rolling Blocks (all original), a Trapdoor (original), and a reproduction 1874 Sharps.  I enjoy tinkering around with gunsmith work, casting, and reloading.... and of course shooting :)

As you can see in photos there are parts are missing, but it does seem to be repairable. The bore at the muzzle is .401" and best I can tell the base of the chamber next to the rim portion of the cartridge is .490" diameter.  40-60 cal is stamped on barrel next to receiver.  Bore looks good after I cleaned it up some.  Here's a full length image:
(https://i.ibb.co/47kh4qv/Full-Length.jpg)

This is an angle side view of receiver showing trigger & hammer installed.  They work good along with the lever safety pin.  The rear toggle pin is in place.
(https://i.ibb.co/jrGfm9b/Angled.jpg)

I've got the magazine tube ordered from ebay.  I'll make the magazine plug and follower.  I expect to make some of the screws also.

I placed an order with Cimarron today for a few parts.  The Cimarron is actually an Uberti, so the VTI Uberti parts should be the same as Cimarron parts.  Today I ordered the following:

1 x Part #7 Carrier Block 2500007 (will need some grinding to make fit)
1 x Part # 73 Right Side Plate 2500073(both side plates should fit nicely)
1 x Part # 74 Left Side Plate 2500074
1 x Part # 90 Lifter Arm 2500090  (hoping it will fit ok once I can find a carrier block)
1 x Part # 96 Magazine Spring 2500096
1 x Part # 98 Firing Pin 2500098 $

These parts are in stock and should ship today.
I'm still looking for the breech block w/extractor, lever (finger lever), and the toggle links. 

I've got the 3rd model made in 1883, serial number 40xxx.  A question I have for ya'll, will the Uberti breech block fit the original 1876?  The toggle links?  Will any modification be required?  I've read thru this thread a couple or 3 times with good info: https://www.cascity.com/forumhall/index.php?topic=17987.0

I know this will be a slow process to complete project.  I'll need LOTS of guidance and suggestions from this group over the process of the project and any help will be greatly appreciated.

Ken H>
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: Black River Smith on November 11, 2020, 05:06:48 PM
Sir,
You have a great project and long road ahead.  You have a good start with a good barrel, receiver, trigger, hammer and buttstock.  There is one thing IMO, I would not expect Uberti parts to 'easily work' in an original Winchester.  I would suggest you look for new manufactured parts under Win specs from other sellers - like Winchester Bob  http://winchesterbob.com/ .

I am certain some of the gunsmiths and project builders on the site/forum will give you more and better suggestions but this would be my starting point.

Another idea would be to put your hands on a "problemed" Chapparal 1876, for a good price.  It is stated that their specs matched original 1876 dimensions, just not their quality.  I was lucky to get a good one that only had rim thickness issues at the extractor to bolt face dimensions.  I bought a new extractor from Win Bob's and installed myself.  Works fine now for modern 45/70 brass with modified rim thickness and diameters.

Good luck to you and keep us posted on all your progress.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: Blackpowder Burn on November 11, 2020, 10:59:31 PM
You might also try Homestead Parts (www.homesteadparts.com).  They have both original parts and newly manufactured parts to fit original Winchester rifles.

Good luck with the resurrection.  Let us know how it's progressing.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: ndnchf on November 12, 2020, 06:13:43 AM
Dusty Texian who frequents this site has a lot of experience reviving original M1876s.  I'm sure he'll chime in soon - heed his advice. 
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: Major 2 on November 12, 2020, 06:36:20 AM
+ 1 to what ndnchf said...

also Winchester Bob -  http://winchesterbob.com/
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on November 12, 2020, 08:48:45 AM
Thank ya'll for the comments and info.  I'll be calling WinchesterBob later today for guidance and looking for Dusty Texan's comments.  It sounds like those two folks are who I really wish to talk with.  The lady at www.vtigunparts.com had notes written on some of the parts as to weather they fit or not.  The side plates I ordered she says are a "drop in" fit with no problem.  The carrier block she says will fit with some grinding required to make it fit.

Grizzly Adam's thread shows the toggle links side by side with Uberti and Original, and are not an exact fit.  I'm concerned about finding the breech block (bolt) and confirming if the Uberti will fit or not.  Since WinchesterBob actually makes some custom parts he might know what Uberti part fits, and how much work is required to make parts fit.  I'm not concerned about doing some work, maybe even a little machining.  I plan to be making a good bit of screws and pins required.

Thanks again for comments.

Ken H>
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: King Medallion on November 12, 2020, 09:46:42 AM
You can also find original parts on ebay. I myself would not mix Uberti parts with an original, but it's not my project. Looking forward to your progress. Don't forget pictures! Mandatory here.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on November 12, 2020, 11:19:29 AM
My choice would be to use original parts, but those can be hard to find....  and EXPENSIVE!  I have an original magazine tube coming today that was purchased on ebay.  I'll keep looking for those parts.  As I said, this is going to be an all winter project, and maybe longer.

As I get parts to add I'll keep this thread going by adding posts and photos showing progress.  I'll be looking for a mold and brass for 40-60 before long.  Might not be able to shoot for a long while, but having the brass will be a positive feeling for me.  I'll only need a few to start, but I do love shooting my old guns.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: King Medallion on November 12, 2020, 01:57:02 PM
PMed you.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on November 12, 2020, 02:31:36 PM
Steve, I got PM, ordered brass and a set of dies.  Grafs had RCBS 40-60 3 piece die set on sale for $25!  Now to find (or make) a bullet mold.

Thanks for info - I know I'll not need the dies or brass for a long time, but it helps keep the dream going {g}
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: dusty texian on November 22, 2020, 11:20:41 AM
Hello ya'll.  This is my first post to the board.  Been reading some and learning about the 1876.  These are photos of an old rifle my son-in-law gave me.  His father purchased it at an estate sale up in Minnesota several (many?) years ago and passed it on to my S-I-L as a wall hanger.   A week or so ago my S-I-L gave it to me as an early Christmas present knowing I like fooling with these old guns.  I've got a few Rolling Blocks (all original), a Trapdoor (original), and a reproduction 1874 Sharps.  I enjoy tinkering around with gunsmith work, casting, and reloading.... and of course shooting :)

As you can see in photos there are parts are missing, but it does seem to be repairable. The bore at the muzzle is .401" and best I can tell the base of the chamber next to the rim portion of the cartridge is .490" diameter.  40-60 cal is stamped on barrel next to receiver.  Bore looks good after I cleaned it up some.  Here's a full length image:
(https://i.ibb.co/47kh4qv/Full-Length.jpg)

This is an angle side view of receiver showing trigger & hammer installed.  They work good along with the lever safety pin.  The rear toggle pin is in place.
(https://i.ibb.co/jrGfm9b/Angled.jpg)

I've got the magazine tube ordered from ebay.  I'll make the magazine plug and follower.  I expect to make some of the screws also.

I placed an order with Cimarron today for a few parts.  The Cimarron is actually an Uberti, so the VTI Uberti parts should be the same as Cimarron parts.  Today I ordered the following:

1 x Part #7 Carrier Block 2500007 (will need some grinding to make fit)
1 x Part # 73 Right Side Plate 2500073(both side plates should fit nicely)
1 x Part # 74 Left Side Plate 2500074
1 x Part # 90 Lifter Arm 2500090  (hoping it will fit ok once I can find a carrier block)
1 x Part # 96 Magazine Spring 2500096
1 x Part # 98 Firing Pin 2500098 $

These parts are in stock and should ship today.
I'm still looking for the breech block w/extractor, lever (finger lever), and the toggle links. 

I've got the 3rd model made in 1883, serial number 40xxx.  A question I have for ya'll, will the Uberti breech block fit the original 1876?  The toggle links?  Will any modification be required?  I've read thru this thread a couple or 3 times with good info: https://www.cascity.com/forumhall/index.php?topic=17987.0

I know this will be a slow process to complete project.  I'll need LOTS of guidance and suggestions from this group over the process of the project and any help will be greatly appreciated.

Ken H>
                          Welcome Ken H , Sorry for the delayed response  nice project you have there .  I do not know if the Uberti parts will fit , have never tried . I can say the toggles and bolt from a Chaparral will fit . I have installed a Chaparral Bolt and toggles into an original and it functioned , even had a usable headspace . I have put one Chaparral toggle along with one original toggle in an original and it functioned fine . Made a short video of the Chaparral internals functioning in an original ,  but cant post it here .  I got your info and will try and send the video to you . What barrel length is on your rifle ? Looks shorter than 28 " may be just the angle . If you shop around the parts will turn up sooner or later . I would try and get original parts but fully understand the challenge and feeling of accomplishment by making the parts you are able to.   Wish you the best of luck with your project , and will be glad to assist in any way I can .,,,,,DT
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on November 22, 2020, 11:51:46 AM
Thank you for the response DT - I would LOVE to see the video, please do send a link or the video file to my email.

Yes, it's a neat project and one I never really considered getting involved with.  I've got a few old rifles and a Pedersoli 1874 Sharps.  The old guns are 3 original Rolling Blocks, one of which I "blueprinted" the action and installed a new 45-70 barrel.  Also have an old Trapdoor in 45-70, and had Jes to rebarrel an old Western Auto (Marlin 336) 30-30 I got by trading a BSA motorcycle for back in late 1960s.  I just like the old guns {g}.

I have installed Uberti sideplates - took some filing to get them to "snap in" correctly, but that's not a big deal.  I got a Uberti carrier block and it only took a small amount of "touch up" to get it to fit.  I made the #8-40 screw for sideplate.  The Uberti loading gate should be here tomorrow also.

I've got the breech bolt from VTI to be delivered tomorrow, and the dust cover from Dixie Gun Works coming.  Just couldn't beat DGW's $19 price on the dust cover.

The big item now is the lever (finger lever) - it's on backorder from Italy with both VTI and Cimarron, and not sure when it will be delivered.  The toggle links are also on backorder.  A really nice guy in Oklahoma has promised to loan me a set of toggle links to use for building my own set.  Making the toggle links will be pushing my abilities I'm sure.  Screws 'n pins are pretty easy.  I've got a Grizzly G0602 lathe and a G0619 mill, both is which I'd added a nice DRO.  Boy do I LOVE those DROs.

This is the current image showing the original tubular magazine I purchased, and the forearm I'm working on.  I used a piece of scrap walnut I had laying around.  The end cap should be here tomorrow from VTI also.  The barrel is 22" long.  From what I've  read the carbines were 22" barrel, but ALL carbines were round barrels?  If so I suspect down thru the years the barrel got cut off.

(https://i.ibb.co/PxkDW63/IMG-3614.jpg)

Thank you for any and all suggestions and help,
Ken Holland


Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: King Medallion on November 22, 2020, 12:13:17 PM
How is the bore? You could have it relined if it's bad, or get a  new barrel made to order. I think you should get it working fist, then shoot it before doing anything to the barrel. Sometimes even a sewer pipe bore will shoot good with the right bullets. Also, if it were mine, I'd keep at the 22" length, with the same length tube. Just what I like to see.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on November 22, 2020, 12:16:17 PM
The bore actually looks darn good.  I'll try to get the bore camera out and get a pic of bore before long.  I agree, I like the 22" barrel - never really cared for those long 30" barrels.  Got a couple of long barreled rifles and they're just awkward to handle, for me anyway.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: Major 2 on November 22, 2020, 12:53:05 PM
I'm loving this thread  :D
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: Buck Stinson on November 22, 2020, 06:57:19 PM
I can tell you what is was as shipped from the factory, but I need the complete serial number.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on November 22, 2020, 07:09:46 PM
Thank you so much for the offer to supply info on how rifle was shipped from factory.  I've been wanting that info.  I've sent you a PM with the info.

Thank you again,

Ken H>
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: ndnchf on November 23, 2020, 08:48:37 AM
I'm going to grab some popcorn, sit back and enjoy following this thread  8)
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: Professor Marvel on November 23, 2020, 03:12:27 PM
Love following a sweet project like this!

Yhs
Prof Marvel
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on November 23, 2020, 03:17:14 PM
OK, time for an update:

I got the VTI order today with rear part of firing pin - now have both parts with a spring I've got that seems to work. Next is to make the firing pin stop to fit the Uberti breech bolt to hold firing pin in place.

I got the Uberti breech bolt and without the lever it's really hard to tell how well the breech bolt will function, but it seems to. There is an issue with the tab on bottom of bolt face preventing the bolt from fully closing and extractor grasping the rim of cartridge. From what I can see that tab (tit?) shouldn't extend past the thickness of the cartridge rim because there is not a relieved place in barrel (bottom of chamber) for it to extend into. The barrel face is flat, and I can see where a tab (tit) has pressed against the barrel face in the past. There is a nice extractor slot into the barrel on top for the extractor to fit into. I'm thinking that tit needs to be "touched" with a file to the same thickness as the cartridge rim. Does that make sense?

The right and left lever springs seem to fit and work as they should, again without the lever no way to really tell. The carrier block does hold down as it seems like it should with the right side spring.

The forearm protection cap seems to fit as it should, including the tenon holding the forearm cap. The forearm I made won't work with the end cap. I was concerned about it being thick enough on bottom at the forend. I'd picked up a scrap piece of walnut that was laying around to do a practice forearm. Now to cut a piece of walnut that will fit and do the forearm right.

Thanks to a GREAT board member here I've got a set of toggle links coming to use as a pattern to make a set. Yes, it will push my machining ability, and might have to make a couple sets to get them right. That's the beauty of being retired - plenty of time to work on projects {g} Once the links are made, then the lever will be the big thing. Both VTI and Cimarron have the lever and toggle links on backorder from Italy and no idea when they'll get them. Hopefully this winter sometime?

Thanks to all ya'll nice folks with suggestions and guidance 'cause I NEED all the help I can get {g}
Ken H>
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on November 27, 2020, 01:10:19 PM
Rather than starting a new thread I'll ask a question on this thread - or would it be better to start new thread to ask about ageing metal?

The Uberti parts I got for the 1876 have a new black looking finish.  I'd like to remove the black finish and "age" the parts, make the new parts look more like the old patina on the existing rifle.  I'm thinking just sand off finish using a fine sand paper - perhaps an 800 grit finish?  400 grit?  Then wipe down with vinegar and let sit a while.  OR - perhaps FeCl solution?  I use FeCl for etching Damascus for the pattern so have some on hand.

Comments and guidance please,

Ken H>
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: King Medallion on November 27, 2020, 01:16:58 PM
It's part of this project, so I would keep it here. One the other hand, you may get more traffic on a thread titled for that particular venture.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: Slamfire on November 27, 2020, 02:24:36 PM
  " DITTO " King ,, I just rebuilt a 45-60 and cold blued all made parts,, then lightly " rubbed off the bluing , ( alcohol & water ), to give it that aged look,, your new parts are salt blued ( I could be mistaken ) , use Ace-tone ( finger nail polish remover ),, or you could just shoot it ,, 120 years ??????????? ( lol) When using alcohol & water , leave the pieces wet,, let set for a day or 2 , it will start to rust lightly,, clean  with alcohol ,, then use cold blue on parts to the desired look you want ,, YMMV ,, mine looks very used ( not abused ).

  coffee's ready ,, Hootmix.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on November 27, 2020, 02:26:50 PM
Thanks for the info - it sounds like there was no reason for me to start the new thread I just started on ageing metal.  I had wondered how cold blue, then "cleaning" up would work.  Sounds like it'll do nicely.  Thanks for the info
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: Major 2 on November 27, 2020, 02:27:15 PM
Try white vinegar with out the sandpaper, it will remove bluing.... if that is what the blackish coat is

I've used Navel Jelly too
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on November 27, 2020, 02:55:10 PM
I'll give some vinegar later today and let ya'll know how it worked.  Thanks for the info
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: King Medallion on November 27, 2020, 03:03:20 PM
 Or, or,, you could get the whole rifle up n running, then send it to Turnbull or Taylor's and have the whole thing refinished and CCH,
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on November 27, 2020, 03:06:56 PM
Sending it out for a new finish?  I sorta like the "old" look.  BTW, what's CCH?

Got forearm cap soaking in vinegar now - we'll see how it goes.  Not sure of time so will keep a watch, or will it take an overnight soak?

edit:  Just checked and after 5 minutes most of the finish is removed.  That's gonna work great for removing the new black finish.  Thanks for idea
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: King Medallion on November 27, 2020, 03:59:36 PM
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.turnbullrestoration.com%2Fwp-content%2Fgallery%2Fcolor-case-hardening-examples%2Fcolor-case-hardened-winchester-1876-restoration.jpg&f=1&nofb=1)
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on November 27, 2020, 04:04:39 PM
WOW!!  That is pretty for sure - simply amazing.  I know it's got to be big bucks, what would having a rifle finished like that cost - just in general terms a price range?  $500?  $1,000?

Yea, I know, if you've got to ask you can't afford it {g}
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: King Medallion on November 27, 2020, 04:07:08 PM
Kinda why I bought a Uberti, Can't afford the real thing. And both do the same thing, big boom, big hole.  ;D
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on November 27, 2020, 04:12:17 PM
OK, I think I understand, the photo above is of your Uberti - darn nice looking rifle.  I fully understand why you purchased the Uberti rather than an original, same reason I purchased a Pedersoli 1874 Sharps.  Love to have an original, but the Pedersoli is good enough for me for shooting.  The price of those original 1874 Sharps in shootable condition is outta sight.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: King Medallion on November 27, 2020, 04:16:48 PM
No, that one is not mine, I just googled CCH and grabbed the 1st pic. This one is mine, early Uberti in 45/75.
(https://uniim1.shutterfly.com/ng/services/mediarender/THISLIFE/010046471428/media/53801588065/small/1521899439/enhance)
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on November 27, 2020, 04:25:58 PM
OK, you've still got a good looking 1876 lever action rifle.  I'm sure you've had many fun days shooting it.   I'm looking forward to getting my old rifle in shooting condition.  I guess I'm a little anxious, already got 20 new Jamison 40-60 brass, bullet mold, and RCBS 3 die set of loading dies.  RCBS on sale for $25 - couldn't pass it up.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: King Medallion on November 27, 2020, 04:38:46 PM
only 20??? Oh man, gotta have at least 200 while the gittn's good. once they're gone, they're gone. I know I spent a goodly amount finding and securing Jamison 45/75 brass, and when I found 40/60, and 50/95 Jamison brass, I grabbed them too. Now just finding those 2 rifles in said calibers. 1 at a time. For whatever reason, 45/60 doesn't really interest me. Maybe because I have 2 1886's in 45/70. In time I hope to have all 4.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: Buck Stinson on November 27, 2020, 08:48:33 PM
CCH IS COLOR CASE DARDENDED
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on November 27, 2020, 08:56:09 PM
Thank you Buck - I didn't have a clue what CCH was, did a search and best I found was "Concealed Carry Handgun", which I'd always known as CCW (Concealed Carry Weapon) permit.  Color Case Hardened stuff looks good.  Perhaps more than I'll ever do on this rifle.

Thanks again Buck.  And thanks for looking up how the rifle was shipped from factory "in October of 1884 as a standard 28" octagon full mag in .40-60 caliber.  There were at least a dozen guns all exactly alike in the same caliber shipped the same day to the same order number. "

Looks like my rifle has a replacement barrel since there is no Winchester info stamped on barrel in front of action, except for "Cal 40-60"

While it's not in near "original condition" and will never be of an interest to a serious collector, it's just right for me as an old shooter.

Ken H>
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: dusty texian on November 28, 2020, 10:52:02 AM
Thanks for the info - it sounds like there was no reason for me to start the new thread I just started on ageing metal.  I had wondered how cold blue, then "cleaning" up would work.  Sounds like it'll do nicely.  Thanks for the info
                                  kenH  you can get pretty close to the Old Look using Cold Blue and rubbing back with 0000 steel wool . A tip I have used Birchwood Casey Plum Brow along with the Cold Blue to make the patina look / smooth rust color . Good part of doing this , if you don't like the look just strip and start over .PS . enjoying following along with your project . ,,,DT
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on November 28, 2020, 12:31:04 PM
Thank you Buck - I didn't have a clue what CCH was, did a search and best I found was "Concealed Carry Handgun", which I'd always known as CCW (Concealed Carry Weapon) permit.  Color Case Hardened stuff looks good.  Perhaps more than I'll ever do on this rifle.

Thanks again Buck.  And thanks for looking up how the rifle was shipped from factory "in October of 1884 as a standard 28" octagon full mag in .40-60 caliber.  There were at least a dozen guns all exactly alike in the same caliber shipped the same day to the same order number. "

Looks like my rifle has a replacement barrel since there is no Winchester info stamped on barrel in front of action, except for "Cal 40-60"

While it won't be anywhere near "original condition" and will never be of an interest to a serious collector, it's just right for me as an old shooter.

Ken H>
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on December 28, 2020, 09:00:00 AM
OK, for a short update to the project rifle. Thanks to a board member I've been able to make a couple of toggle links that work. For the needed parts I've either made or purchased Uberti parts for the rifle.  Again a special THANK YOU to a kind member of the board who sent me a set of toggle links to use as a pattern.  I wouldn't have been able to make the links without his kind assistance.

I'll talk about the Uberti firing pin problem. When moving the bolt out of battery to rear ejecting point , about mid way it movement stops. See image:
(https://i.ibb.co/6DHkZcS/Jam-mid.jpg)

By putting finger (or thumb) on bottom of bolt to lift up slightly the movement will continue to full rear position.
(https://i.ibb.co/9qx1gpC/Jam-back.jpg)


Fortunately I found my neighbor has an original 1876 that his great-great-grandpa purchased new and has been handed down to him. He was kind enough to loan me the rifle to remove side plates and lever to see how things work on a toggle link lever action. I'd never even seen one before this project rifle. I fiddled around for a couple days trying to figure out the jam problem - finally I measured the firing pin diameter of the original Winchester, then the Uberti. OK, the Uberti pin is .008" larger in diameter causing the jam. The slight downward movement of the bolt as the toggle links pull bolt rearwards cause the bolt to drop a tiny bit throwing the firing pin out of alignment with the hole in the action.

I made a new firing pin the same diameter as the Winchester pin (remember Winchester is a one piece firing pin while the Uberti is a 2 piece firing pin). That solved the problem. Almost every Uberti part I've purchased has needed some type of modification.

The aluminum finger lever seened in the photo is one I made by using the original as a pattern. I had a piece of 1/2" aluminum plate laying around so used that. Works good, except for the finger lever spring puts a good bit of pressure and would wear the aluminum pretty quick I'm sure so I left spring off for testing.

Here's another image of where the rifle is now.
(https://i.ibb.co/G9pyGNQ/Right-Side.jpg)

I wish to say  THANK YOU to all of ya'll for the help 'n guidance provided with this project. 
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: King Medallion on December 28, 2020, 09:24:00 AM
Great job fixing the issues. I admire those that have the talent. Your side plates look alot better too. Your aluminum lever should keep you going for awhile, can you make one of steel? If you can whittle links, a lever aught be a piece of cake! Range report next? Happy New Year!
Steve
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on December 28, 2020, 09:33:17 AM
Steve, Thank you for the nice words.  Yes, I think I can make a lever from steel, but I do have a Uberti finger lever on back order from VTI.  I talked with Lisa last week and she "thinks" it might be shipped in Jan sometime.  I'm not sure if the Uberti lever will need modification or not, and if so how much modification will be required. 

I've still got a few things to work on, need to make a buckhorn sight and a few other things.  It is coming together and I do plan to load some light loads soon.  The thread on "Uberti 1876 in 45-60 ejector issue or brass" confirmed the problems I was having with the Uberti bolt and Jamison brass.  I've turned down a few rounds of Jamison brass so the rim is .600" range  rather than the .615" diameter rim it comes with.  Since I set my headspace for the Jamison brass (rim .055" thick) Star 45-70 brass is pretty tight with .064" rim thickness so does need to be thinned a tad.

Ken H>
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: dusty texian on December 29, 2020, 08:11:15 AM
Looking good Ken , I do admire you dedication and skill . Not many walking around that can bring back an antique making the parts as you go . Thanks for sharing your progress . ,,,DT
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: King Medallion on December 29, 2020, 08:34:21 AM
HA! You do it all the time!  ;D
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on January 06, 2021, 09:59:24 AM
OK, here's another quick update on the project rifle. Here are a couple of images of the rear sight I mounted on the rifle. The sight is from the Pedersoli 1874 Sharps I've got. I removed the rear sight and mounted a ladder tang sight.  The 3/8" dovetail was right size.  All I had to do was tap the dovetail for screw to hold sight to dovetail.
(https://i.ibb.co/1qH2b9p/Rear-Sight-Down.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/BrN2xkz/Rear-Sight-up.jpg)
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on January 06, 2021, 10:03:04 AM
There are a couple of methods used to lock magazine in place. Either a screw that extends thru the magazine end plug into a shallow hole in bottom of barrel, or a tab on the magazine end plug that rotates up to engage a slot in bottom of barrel.

In the image below the magazine extends out past the forearm 5-1/2". About 1-1/2" from the forearm tip there is a slot in the barrel where I suspect the original magazine ended. The slot looks like it would be where the magazine plug tab would rotate into to prevent the magazine tube from slipping forward during recoil. What do you think about me cutting this old original magazine tube to fit that slot? This magazine tube did NOT come with the rifle, I purchased it off ebay. Comments?

OR, should I leave magazine the length it is using the screw that would extend into a hole I'd have to drill in bottom of barrel?

(https://i.ibb.co/0h0rX24/Left-Side-View.jpg)
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: dusty texian on January 07, 2021, 07:09:21 AM
In the past I have purchased 76 rifles that had the magazine cut back like yours . In those cases I used another piece of cut-down Magazine tube , Tig Welded them together polished the weld in and outside . The added piece cant be seen as the weld is inside the forearm  . Myself I would do this and add a Magazine tube hanger about 3.5 " back from the muzzle and use the End Cap with the slot and tab set-up .  Just a thought .     ,,,DT
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on January 07, 2021, 08:08:36 AM
DT, thank you for your comment, I see you like the idea of a full length magazine tube.  Most 1876s you see do have the long tube, but Winchester did have some short magazines, but they stopped inside the forearm endcap if I remember correctly.  A full length tube would be more "original", but since this rifle has lots of non-original parts and has no collector value a full length tube won't really add any value.  Let's see what other comments we get on the subject.

Ken H>
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: dusty texian on January 07, 2021, 09:24:22 AM
1876 Winchester rifles could be ordered in 1/2  5/8  3/4 and full Magazine  whatever the customer wanted . Personally I like them all about the same . The one I drag around the most hunting is a 24" Half Mag . Very handy feel .  Coming along nicely !!!! ,,,DT
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on January 07, 2021, 09:42:06 AM
Personally I also sorta like the half magazine length - the length it is now.  BUT - to stay that length I've got either cut another slot or drill a shallow hole in barrel to lock magazine tube in place so it doesn't move forward while firing.  The attraction of shortening the magazine is to use existing slot so I don't have to cut an extra slot, and to hide more of the crappy looking magazine tube.  It's in pretty poor condition and I'm not sure how well it's going to clean up.  I guess I'll wait about doing anything until I see how well it does clean up for putting an "old" finish on. 

Right now I'm just bouncing around ideas to help me have enough info to decide.  This whole toggle link lever action stuff I totally new to me.  A month ago I'd never even seen one nor held one in my hands so it's been a steep learning curve for me.  I surely do enjoy these old straight walled BP cartridges.  I had my old 30-30 rebarreled to 38-55 last year.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: dusty texian on January 07, 2021, 11:32:00 AM
I think you will like the 40-60 WCF its real close cousin to the 38-55 . I  shoot Bp. in my 40-60 and its accurate but fouls out faster than the other three 76 cartridges , at least my loads do .  The first two or three shots are almost touching at 50 yd  after that groups open up . Have used IMR 3031 with good results . ,,,,DT
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: greyhawk on January 07, 2021, 05:00:44 PM
Personally I also sorta like the half magazine length - the length it is now.  BUT - to stay that length I've got either cut another slot or drill a shallow hole in barrel to lock magazine tube in place so it doesn't move forward while firing.  The attraction of shortening the magazine is to use existing slot so I don't have to cut an extra slot, and to hide more of the crappy looking magazine tube.  It's in pretty poor condition and I'm not sure how well it's going to clean up.  I guess I'll wait about doing anything until I see how well it does clean up for putting an "old" finish on. 

Right now I'm just bouncing around ideas to help me have enough info to decide.  This whole toggle link lever action stuff I totally new to me.  A month ago I'd never even seen one nor held one in my hands so it's been a steep learning curve for me.  I surely do enjoy these old straight walled BP cartridges.  I had my old 30-30 rebarreled to 38-55 last year.

KenH
heres another way of doing it that saves drilling or cutting the barrel
top picture is reversed, the taper part faces muzzle end - I have done this on a couple of rifles - its more of a fiddle assembling because you cant slide the tube through the forend cap but it holds tight even under heavy recoil (silver solder the little ring bit to the tube, leave the tube a bit long at the action end then carefully fit it by turning the tube end back till its a smick fit between action and the forend cap recess)
another tip - magazine tube for the 76 you buy cheap chinese curtain rod from the haberdashery/ home decor store - its much thinner than original but 18mm rod is exact OD fit for the 76 and 16mm is exact fit for 44/40 size guns (model 73,92 etc) - this stuff comes plastic coated but that will burn off and it blues ok
very impressed with your progress so far!!

Ken  I corrected my pictures
So the end cap has a tapered shoulder inside that fits the taper on the magazine tube collar (I assumed this is common feature ? a couple of 92's I have done and my Uberti 76 had it) the bit of collar you see protruding is about two cigarrette papers thick and not needed I did that because the end cap was old and been messed with before - also had to file the ring off at the top to clear the barrel dovetail. Screws ? there is no screw engagement to the tube in this setup - the end cap screws just engage the barrel dovetail. If you gonna cut the barrel for a tab on the magazine end cap (or a end cap screw that goes into the barrel) you dont need this collar thingy and it is a pain sometimes   
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on January 07, 2021, 05:07:15 PM
Thanks for the idea - I like it.  I think that might just be my plan now, the "collar" that will allow the endcap to hold tube in place.  Is the endcap screw long enough to press against the collar to hold in place?  Looking at my endcap it fits tight around the magazine tube and doesn't have room for the collar to extend thru.  Thanks for the idea.

Ken H>
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on January 14, 2021, 08:59:00 AM
Here's the magazine that's now cut off. I just slid it all back together to check fit.  I made a new end plug for magazine tube from carbon steel so it will take a finish also, and to put the tab that turns into the slot on barrel to hold tube in  place.

I've still got to finish the tube. I planned to finish the end cap, but sorta like the looks of the clean finish that has a pewter look. I know the 1876 didn't have the pewter caps like the old Sharps did, but I still like the looks.  I hope to start work on finish today.

(https://i.ibb.co/K2BLmNG/IMG-3688.jpg)
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: King Medallion on January 14, 2021, 09:40:41 AM
Looks good! your the only one you need to impress.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on January 14, 2021, 04:23:42 PM
OK, here's the result with shorten magazine and treated in FeCl to get the "aged" look on tube and endcap.  Bad reflection on the side plate, and I do have more work to do on the rifle.  Trying to get it shooting condition, then work on details.  The lever is a Uberti finger lever that was loaned to me by an extremely nice forum member who has been good enough to share knowledge with me.

I shot 5 rounds of 18.3 grains Lil'Gun with a 208 grain bullet, seating depth of 2.15" OAL.  The 5 rounds gave 1574 to 1621 fps range with chrono.  Tilted barrel up on two shots gave 1610 & 1621 fps.  Seems like Lil'Gun needs filler over powder since 18.3 grains is only about 40% brass fill.  Since I'm shooting in back yard I've only got 15 yds or so.  Shooting offhand there's no way to tell accuracy.  It does make nice round holes in paper and grouped like I'd expect for me shooting offhand.

(https://i.ibb.co/cwgbdcT/IMG-3691.jpg)
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: Trailrider on January 14, 2021, 07:27:48 PM
I have used a 2-inch square of single-ply toilet tissue, poked LOOSELY into the case and having the bullet to compress or seat it. You should probably reduce the powder charge by 5% because of the reduced volume inside the case, or about 1 gr. DO NOT COMPACT THE TISSUE AGAINST THE POWDER!
Stay well and safe, Pard!
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on January 14, 2021, 08:55:06 PM
Yep, I've used toilet paper in years gone by for filler material.  These days I usually use kapot (that's not the right word, anyway it's that Polyester Fiber White Fiberfill Stuffing for stuffed animals.  Lil'Gun seems to slow enough to need it, while faster burning powders like Unique doesn't seem to benefit from filler. 

I think I'll try 16.0 grains of Lil'Gun which will be <40% case fill - that should be around 1400 fps range which is plenty for punching holes in paper at my short range.  I should mention this is for a 40-60 caliber using Jamison brass.  I had to turn the rim diameter down from .617" to .602" for better chambering and extraction with a Uberti breech bolt.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: dusty texian on January 15, 2021, 06:08:42 AM
Looking good Ken ,   that should be a good shooter .  Where did you find loading data for Lil Gun in the 40-60 wcf ?  ,,DT
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: King Medallion on January 15, 2021, 07:56:55 AM
Wondering that myself. Isn't Lil Gun a magnum pistol powder?
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on January 15, 2021, 09:05:01 AM
Lil'Gun is used by some of the 300 Blackout folks.  That's why I happened to have some on hand, from loading 300BO ammo.  I guess it could be called a "Magnum Pistol Powder".  The burn rate for Lil'Gun (62) is right there around H110 (63), IMR4227 (65) or even SR4759 (67) powders. 

I used QuickLoad program to work up most loading data.  I'll double check with several of the loading manuals I've got to make sure I've not got something way out of line.  I was looking for a load to give something in the 1400 to 1500 fps range, but with low pressure curve and still provide most of the powder burnt.  If I'm loading a load for hunting or long range shooting then I'll load  more toward the max allowed for the rifle I'm shooting. 

I don't like TrailBoss powders - while it's a bulky powder for better case fill it's a really fast powder with a burn rate of 19, between Bullseye (13) and Unique (31).  All those powders are fast giving a high peak pressure for the amount of bullet velocity.

Yea, I know, sometimes I get pretty wordy when asked a simple question.  I've been told I'm a person if you ask "What time is it", you'll have to listen to a history of time and watchmaking before you finally get the time {g}
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: dusty texian on January 15, 2021, 10:11:31 AM
Reading your load results looks like your load is in the Velocity range for the 40-60 wcf . How did the cases look after firing  ? Hope you get to test for accuracy and report back . The 40-60 wcf is a really fun cartridge to shoot . Hope to get out and shoot mine a bit soon . ,,,DT
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on January 15, 2021, 10:24:14 AM
Since they moved city limits to my property line I've only got a max of 30 yds or so for shooting, so it's hard to get real accuracy results.  AND I've got to get a shooting bench setup - off hand my wobble is too much, especially when trying to get low enough to shoot thru the chrono.

Here's a couple of brass.  You can see there are no signs of pressure at all, primers fully rounded.  Calculated pressure is around 12K psi so the brass is sealing not showing any smoke blowby.  Since they is smokeless there wouldn't be the amount of blowby as would be seen with black powder.   How much cleaning is required for a barrel after firing a few rounds of black powder, if followed up with a couple rounds of smokeless?
(https://i.ibb.co/7vcN1xG/IMG-3692.jpg)
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: dusty texian on January 15, 2021, 10:57:22 AM
From what I can see they look A OK !  Not sure have never tried smokeless loads after shooting Bp. without cleaning the Bp. foul first . Can say the Bp. foul is a lot easier to clean than most would believe . The 40-60 fouls out faster than my other 76 cartridges at least in my rifles and loads . I have the idea of trying a few Duplex Loads in my 40-60 and see if that works as good in my 40-60 as it is reported to do for others . ,,,,DT
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on January 15, 2021, 11:06:03 AM
I have read about duplex black powder loads but never had much interest in them.  I've shot a bit of BP in muzzleloaders, and a BP in Rolling Block rifles, 45-70, 50-70, and a few in an old .43 Spanish Reformado.   I've never used BP in my Sharps, nor the Trapdoor.  Just a bit more hassle to clean than a Rolling Block where I can open the barrel up from end to end.

It does look like a couple rounds of smokeless after shooting BP would clean any BP residual from barrel.  My method of clean BP has always been soapy water and a brush.  Muzzle loaders I'd get in shower and go to work with a brush and hot soapy water.



 

Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: dusty texian on January 15, 2021, 11:26:46 AM
If the powder supplies ever catch up and LilGun is on the shelf again I'll get some and give it a try . I have used and still do  IMR 3031 with good accuracy and no pressure problems that I could see at all . Of course I was not trying for top speed just a 210 cast bullet in the 1400 fps. range  . Have shot a couple wild hogs with that load and can say they cant stand the strain .  Lol ,,,DT
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on January 15, 2021, 11:36:09 AM
DT, do you remember how many grains of 3031 you were using with a 210 bullet for the 1400 fps range?
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: dusty texian on January 15, 2021, 12:09:47 PM
 If I remember right  I started at 28 Gr. and went up 1 Gr. at a time to 30 Gr. of IMR 3031 , accuracy was good a few kernels could be seen in the barrel but besides that it was a good load . I tried  9.5 Gr. Unique and same bullet  accuracy was not as good as the 3031 , but could have been me never tried it again . ,,,DT
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on January 15, 2021, 12:32:43 PM
Thanks for the response - Yep, 30 grains of 3031 is what I loaded with 3031 and bullet seated to 2.15" OAL it wa with a good low pressure round, around 10K psi calculated.  Like you I'd have a few grains of unburnt powder in action, seems it was calculated to be only 60% of powder burnt.  I did fire one round at 35 grains of 3031 and it sure did seem heavier.  Still not a "wild" load at 1650 to 1700 fps chrono'd range with no sign of over pressure (flatten primer, etc).  No powder grains left in action with this load {g}.

20 grains of Lil'Gun is a decent stout load around 1700 fps, but still only 15K psi range.

I did load up a couple rounds of Unique with <10 grains but think I like something in the burn rate range of Lil'Gun powder better.  I think I would use a filler with Lil'Gun.  I was getting 100 fps spread on the 18.3 grain chrono, but a couple of rounds I tilted barrel up, then down to shooting position and got only 20 fps spread.  I'm loading some 16.0 loads today (once I get away from computer:) using filler.

Later
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: greyhawk on January 16, 2021, 07:55:44 AM
From what I can see they look A OK !  Not sure have never tried smokeless loads after shooting Bp. without cleaning the Bp. foul first . Can say the Bp. foul is a lot easier to clean than most would believe . The 40-60 fouls out faster than my other 76 cartridges at least in my rifles and loads . I have the idea of trying a few Duplex Loads in my 40-60 and see if that works as good in my 40-60 as it is reported to do for others . ,,,,DT

Dusty
I run a duplex load in my repro 1886 (45/70) 6 grains 4227 under 64 grains of FFFg - HDPE wad + 335 grain Boolit - that gets 1520'ish FPS
Definitely shoots a lot cleaner - could proly cut the smokeless down a bit - 4 grains maybe?
I reckon in these size cases gain about 100fps over a straight black load but I have not set down to test that properly.
Have not and will not run duplex or smokeless in my 45/75. no big deal just not gonna happen -   

In Kens case ---I would not trust a smokeless load after black or a duplex load to clean things well enough to put a gun away not cleaned  - that might work - but not gonna test the theory - I dont see cleaning as a chore anyway - specially not these big lever guns and double specially if it was one I built like Ken is doing .
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on January 16, 2021, 08:47:00 AM
greyhawk: Thanks for the input on duplex loads.  If I may ask without causing offense, why do you run duplex in your 45-70, but would not even consider running duplex or smokeless in the 45-75?  Is it because the 45-70 is a modern reproduction and perhaps the 45-75 is an original and you're concerned about the strength of the old rifle?

I normal use smokeless in my old original rifles in order to keep the chamber pressure down to protect those old guns.  It seems smokeless allows reduced loads better than BP, and my old shoulders can't handle the recoil like they did years ago. 

I've never tried a duplex load, just read about them, but never really saw the need unless a person running max loads and looking to get a tad more fps from a full black powder load.

Thank ya'll for comments and sharing knowledge and experience.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: dusty texian on January 16, 2021, 09:04:43 AM
I'll be interested in Greyhawk answers about the 45-75  and no duplex load my guess is he has a load worked up and it is not needed .  The 40-60 wcf in my longer barrel guns foul hard pretty fast . I think its the powder to bore ratio and magnified by a longer barrel . In my 22" 40-60 I have no problems , can shoot it for many shots with hardly any loss of accuracy . And in the 22" barrel gun I use the same bullet / lube / powder . With the Swiss Bp. in the longer barrel 40 -60 fouling is not as bad but still accuracy goes away after a few shots . I am not wanting to Hot Rod the old rifles , just like shooting Bp. in them and think I'll try just a small amount of smokeless over the primer to try and achieve a clean burn . I have no IMR 4227 powder and not likely to find any soon . I have read IMR 3031 can be used as a Duplex primer powder . I have plenty of it . What do Y'all think about using the IMR 3031 ?
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on January 16, 2021, 09:28:36 AM
DT, Please understand I have NO experience with duplex loads.  The only knowledge I have is from reading and it seems a faster powder in the H110 (63) to 4759 (67) burn rate is used.  3031 (79) is a good bit slower so I'm not sure how well it would work.  Those burn rates are from a chart I've got, but the burn rate numbers seem to vary from place to place, depending on who comes up with them I guess.

Here's a decent thread with some knowledgeable folks about duplex loads:
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?137201-Black-powder-duplex-loads

Greyhawk, does the info above agree with your experience?

Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: dusty texian on January 16, 2021, 09:56:35 AM
I understood that KenH  , was thinking one of the other members may have some input . Thanks for the link you posted . Did you get to try the LilGun with filler yet ? ,,,DT
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on January 16, 2021, 10:08:02 AM
I've not yet shot them thru a chrono yet - I've got 10 rounds or so loaded up at 16 grains of Lil'Gun with 2 grains of polyester filler (out of stuffed animal) to make the 208 grain bullet a total of 210 grain.  2 grains isn't really enough to make any real difference. 

I'll try to fire 3 rounds thru the chrono today just to check velocity and ES.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: Trailrider on January 16, 2021, 12:24:07 PM
I wonder how H4895 or IMR4895 would work? Also ReloadeR7 might be interesting to try.  Or even IMR4198, with or without the TP filler. I've used 27 gr 4198 with the TP in .40-65 WCF with a 250 gr. cast bullet. But don't know how is would compare with .40-60.
Stay well, Pards!
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: hpbear101 on January 16, 2021, 01:02:07 PM
I tried IMR 4895 in the 50-95, it shot o.k. but quite a bit of unburnt powder. I am now shooting mostly RL7 for smokeless loads, RL7 seems to burn much better.

Tom
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on January 16, 2021, 01:12:58 PM
I Shot 3 rounds into the ground and got 1410, 1450, 1426 fps in that order.  This is with a Lee 410-210-SWC mold that drops bullets at 408, add 2 grains of polyester fiber filler to hold powder in place.  16 grains of Lil'Gun, 22" barrel, and 2.20" OAL.  I didn't weight each power drop, just dropped from a small size of a Harrell's Precision powder measure.

4895 powder would be pretty slow unless you wish to shoot 100% case fill and still it only has 60% to 70% power burnt depending on barrel length and caliber. 

I tend to like small flake or spherical ball powders because they drop so much easier (accurate) from power measures than does a large rod grain powder like 4895, or even 3031 can sometimes shear a grain of power.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: greyhawk on January 16, 2021, 07:26:51 PM
greyhawk: Thanks for the input on duplex loads.  If I may ask without causing offense, why do you run duplex in your 45-70, but would not even consider running duplex or smokeless in the 45-75?  Is it because the 45-70 is a modern reproduction and perhaps the 45-75 is an original and you're concerned about the strength of the old rifle?

Ken - when I got the Uberti 76 I intended to figure out a smokeless load - even cut 100 cases to the correct length for the crimp groove on the LEE 340 grain mold I had bought for the purpose - plans changed as time went by (I always tell people its imperative to have a plan so you can change it as you go along!) about the same time as the 76 came I started making my own powder - we dont talk about that here but it went way better than I had hoped - shoots pretty clean - good velocity - consistent - anyways the Uberti has a Pedersoli barrel and they apparently hand lap these in the factory - it is like mirror smooth shiny - helps with fouling and cleaning - I went ahead and developed loads for the 76 that had me completely satisfied and I could shoot 20 - 25 with just a bit of a blow down the barrel every few shots - so long as I took time and didnt get it too hot - very happy camper with that gun and saw no reason at all to change anything - have touched 1500FPS a few times over the chrony with a 335 grain boolit and ES in the single digit range (just) Good enough I reckon!!! So my no smokeless mantra is mostly - cant see the point - the gun is new - I am sure it would take a bit more.

 So then I bought a Chiappa 1886 - had brass and dies molds etc and been loading for a repro sharps for ages - The Chiappa had some issues - I got it second hand - had fired six rounds - would not feed a round from the magazine at all and I seriously considered taking it back for a refund - I made ten blackpowder loads for it - mounted a decent tang sight and put it over the bench (single loaded from the top) WOW - nice shooter - a keeper for sure - so I took the challenge and got it working nice - tried the duplex load in it for fun and a bit more ooompf - yeah the action is plenty strong to do anything - the barrel on this rifle is not quite as well finished as the Uberti and I am a bit more inclined to rip shots off with it - the same boolit gets me about 1530FPS - plenty enough for me. I suppose laziness and the cost of powder will keep me on this track - a case of aint broke dont fix it. I probably take the opposite view to you on the pressure side  I feel quite content loading any blackpowder firearm with blackpowder but seen blokes get into plenty trouble experimenting with smokeless. (wrong burn rates, double charges of fast powder, unburnt grains gunking the works up, boolits disappearing into the case from poor crimping, wadding in the case to make half charges work properly)
     
I normal use smokeless in my old original rifles in order to keep the chamber pressure down to protect those old guns.  It seems smokeless allows reduced loads better than BP, and my old shoulders can't handle the recoil like they did years ago. 

I've never tried a duplex load, just read about them, but never really saw the need unless a person running max loads and looking to get a tad more fps from a full black powder load.

Thank ya'll for comments and sharing knowledge and experience.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: greyhawk on January 16, 2021, 07:40:12 PM
I'll be interested in Greyhawk answers about the 45-75  and no duplex load my guess is he has a load worked up and it is not needed .  The 40-60 wcf in my longer barrel guns foul hard pretty fast . I think its the powder to bore ratio and magnified by a longer barrel . In my 22" 40-60 I have no problems , can shoot it for many shots with hardly any loss of accuracy . And in the 22" barrel gun I use the same bullet / lube / powder . With the Swiss Bp. in the longer barrel 40 -60 fouling is not as bad but still accuracy goes away after a few shots . I am not wanting to Hot Rod the old rifles , just like shooting Bp. in them and think I'll try just a small amount of smokeless over the primer to try and achieve a clean burn . I have no IMR 4227 powder and not likely to find any soon . I have read IMR 3031 can be used as a Duplex primer powder . I have plenty of it . What do Y'all think about using the IMR 3031 ?

Got it in one !!! good load - no need to change -----I tend to shoot the 76 slow and easy, blow tube (or down the spout if I am out and about) about every three or five shots. 

I did use sr 4759 (that the right tag?? - the bulky stuff with holes up the middle of it) for duplex when I was shooting dirty chinese powder - liked the 4227 better - I dont have 3031 - if burn rates are similar should be ok .
I got ridiculously low ES over the chrony with that 45/70 load  (6FPS for ten shots from memory)

Adding a bit here
SR4759 to 3031 would be the range of burn I would choose ---- I would lean to the slower end rather than faster - no way no how would I try stuff like red dot or bullseye and also the Winchester ball powders (maybe) could be problematic. 
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: King Medallion on January 17, 2021, 09:53:14 AM
Figures. SR4759 is now discontinued, and I used up the last of mine loading a couple K of 40sw. Why must the good powders get discontinued.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on January 17, 2021, 09:59:27 AM
I got ridiculously low ES over the chrony with that 45/70 load  (6FPS for ten shots from memory)
That is impressive!  There have been a few times when I've got ES I was happy with, but most of the time a 10 shot string will vary more than I like.  I really NEED to be more careful about weighting bullets (less important) and powder charge (more important), and being sure the OAL and crimp tension are the same (also important).

Greyhawk - my hat's off to you.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: greyhawk on January 17, 2021, 03:30:24 PM
That is impressive!  There have been a few times when I've got ES I was happy with, but most of the time a 10 shot string will vary more than I like.  I really NEED to be more careful about weighting bullets (less important) and powder charge (more important), and being sure the OAL and crimp tension are the same (also important).

Greyhawk - my hat's off to you.

That could have been a fluke -- the load was accurate right out of the gate - only fired the one string for test
I do load pretty darn careful for these big rifles - that string would have been good case prep, close weighed boolits, drop tubed powder etc -trying to be as consistent as possible without being too pernickity. (Good case prep for me just means squeaky clean inside - no burrs and dings - I never uniformed a flash hole and detest trimming cases)

I have not tested a lot but have got much closer ES numbers with careful blackpowder loads than with the couple of smokeless rifles tested (22/250 and 348 win)

 Somebody made a joke a while back (other forum I think) about loading wads right side up (like it was a dumb idea to bother) ??? every wad I ever cut was cut the same direction from the sheet of material - and every one I ever loaded goes in the case same way up ?? why would we not do that ?? does it make a difference ? who knows - but it dont cost anything - dont take any longer - might as well do it ----------- 
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on January 31, 2021, 12:25:58 PM
ime for another update on the project rifle. I'm getting darn close now. I still have to make a new forearm so it fits properly, and another firing pin. The current firing pin has an extra flat milled on top of it. When I made it I got the top milled a little to far and it doesn't cock the hammer as it should. I turned pin over and milled a slot on other side to see it work. It does, now to make a correct pin.

Here's my proudest achievement - toggle links. I've made several of them trying to get headspace correct and fitting properly. A pretty large learning curve on my part.

(https://i.ibb.co/P5GWFtH/Left-Toggle.jpg)

They fit good, just oiled a bit and now they work smooth. The headspace is right about .060" - that is space between bolt face and barrel face. The rims of brass are about .055" to .056" or so giving about .004" or so clearance headspace. Tighter than normal but it works pretty good. Clearance between bolt space and barrel face checked with a .061" pin. Bolt closes and pin is pretty tight, too tight to easily pull out. A .055" rod slides freely between bolt face and barrel face and has a tad of slop. So, I'm thinking the clearance is actually around the .060" mark which is good for my brass with rim thickness of .055" to .057".

The Jamison 40-60 brass I ordered comes with rim thickness of .055" and a rim diameter of .616". I had to turn rim diameter down to .602" diameter so the extractor would slide over easy.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on February 10, 2021, 12:20:56 PM
Another short update on the project rifle.  Last weekend I finished a replacement forearm for the "draft" version I made from scrap wood.  While I'm not totally happy with the wood to metal fit, it's ok for now. 
(https://i.ibb.co/0F1sZpr/Forearm.jpg)

I also made a couple of screws from W1 tool steel, then heat treated so the slots wouldn't bugger so easy.  That turned them a nice blue color also.  One was a filler screw for the tang sight screw, a 3/16-36 screw.  Another I made was the finger lever screw to fit the Uberti finger lever.  The original Winchester lever uses a .190" body diameter screw while the Uberti is about .198" diameter body.  The original Winchester screw allows the Uberti lever to wobble a good bit.

Yesterday I loaded up 3 rounds of black powder.  Filling the case 100% level full with take almost 50 grains of GOEX FFg requiring compression for depth of seated bullet.  40 grains is amount required for minor compression with a lubed felt spacer between powder and bullet.  Since I wasn't sure about how heavy a load this would be, I opted for 40 grains.
(https://i.ibb.co/vLKGYwK/Black-Powder-Chrono.png)
Not sure why #1 shot was a tad higher fps, but perhaps it was due to a harder crimp I put on one round?

I was impressed with the black powder and think I'll load up some more BP.  Cleaning is easier than I'm accustomed to with muzzle loaders.  I used a solvent on brush thru bore a few times, then a dry patch.  Seems to be clean?  Is there a special solvent I should be using?

Ken H>
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: King Medallion on February 10, 2021, 01:19:41 PM
Ken, that forestock looks great from this angle! Best solvent for black powder is hot soapy water, so I've read, and been my experience with my muzzleloaders years ago. Otherwise I followed up with ol Hoppes #9 a few patches, then Hoppes gun oil. Worked fine on my guns.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on February 10, 2021, 01:26:11 PM
Thanks for nice words on the forearm.

Yep, hot soapy water is what I've always used on muzzle loaders, and my Rolling Blocks, but boy that can be messy.  Best done outside in the yard, and the whole gun tends to get wet.  I was hoping for a cleaning method that would be easy 'n not so messy - like running a brush thru the bore a few times with a "magical" solvent? :)
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: King Medallion on February 10, 2021, 01:35:38 PM
Muzzleloaders are easy, took the barrel off, cleaned it in the bathtub. Haven't actually fired a regular rifle with BP yet, just APP, cleaned as normal. Now I have read that clamping a rifle upside down in the Tipton AR rifle vise contraption works well for cleaning BP. fouling and water falls out of the gun rather than into the action,  just hose off the vise when done. I have one so I'll be trying that.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: nohorse on February 10, 2021, 02:00:47 PM
In order to keep gunk from falling into the action due to the requirement to clean from the muzzle, I started to use a pull through once or twice to get the big gunk out at the muzzle before using a rod.  I use half & half Ballistol/water
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on February 10, 2021, 02:38:44 PM
I had forgotten reading about a pull thru string - I like that idea to get the first part out.  That's a good idea.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: nohorse on February 10, 2021, 03:26:38 PM
I use a common pull through for a pistol.  They have the internal brush wrapped inside the cloth body, sold by several companies in many calibers
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: greyhawk on February 10, 2021, 05:02:17 PM
I had forgotten reading about a pull thru string - I like that idea to get the first part out.  That's a good idea.

Water is good   I use a flush bottle on all my lever guns - fitted a caulking gun spout into a coke bottle lid then put a length of clear plastic tubing on the spout - hold the gun upside down, muzzle down at about 45degrees, poke the plastic spout into the chamber. invert bottle and squeeze - then I have a cleaning cradle where she sits lever UP - one pass with a rod and wet patch or a brush -----repeat this flush and patch about three times and it will run clean water - then run a few fresh patches till its squeaky dry then an oil patch = all done in a few minutes.   
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on February 10, 2021, 05:07:19 PM
Thanks ya'll for all the guidance on cleaning with BP.  I'm learning more 'n more on this site thanks to ya'll. :)
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: Grizzly Adams on February 14, 2021, 04:49:59 PM
A very interesting and informative thread.  Thanks for posting your adventure KenH. :)
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on February 14, 2021, 04:58:30 PM
Thanks for the nice words Grizzly - that means a lot coming from you with the threads you've posted.  I used your "Comparing the Original 1876 with the Uberti 1876" thread a good bit in figuring what Uberti parts might work.   As I noted all the Uberti parts (except for the forearm end cap) and to be tweaked, filed, etc to get them to fit.  The rear half of Uberti firing pin I found it easier to make a new firing pin rather than mod the Uberti pin.

This has been a fun project.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: greyhawk on February 15, 2021, 09:35:37 PM
I think we need a proper picture of the finished article - when this tread started I couldnt help but think does this bloke know what is ahead of him. But Ken has just cruised through the entire process - needs a set of toggles? ----yeah no problem I can do that - headspace? - yeah got that right on the button - fit a few Uberti parts? yeah easy peasy --  now I look at this project and I wonder does this bloke realise what he has accomplished here ??? amazing - well done ! 
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on February 15, 2021, 09:47:13 PM
Ooops, sorry I forgot to upload a finished photo.  If a hi-rez photo is desired, just holler.  GreyHawk, I do thank you so much for the nice words.

Folks, I've had LOTS of fun, and I've learned more than I ever expected to learn about these toggle link type lever action rifles.  Ya'll have really been a BIG help - both with encouragement and shared knowledge. The lever is a borrowed Uberti finger lever a fine Cowboy on this site loaned me until my Uberti finger lever that's on backorder is delivered.  Anyway, here's the result.

(https://i.ibb.co/DLvQcVZ/1876-Finished.jpg)
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: Major 2 on February 16, 2021, 02:11:22 AM
 new SUPER Hero  KenH  Fantastic WINCHESTERMAN
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: dusty texian on February 16, 2021, 04:45:26 PM
Ooops, sorry I forgot to upload a finished photo.  If a hi-rez photo is desired, just holler.  GreyHawk, I do thank you so much for the nice words.

Folks, I've had LOTS of fun, and I've learned more than I ever expected to learn about these toggle link type lever action rifles.  Ya'll have really been a BIG help - both with encouragement and shared knowledge. The lever is a borrowed Uberti finger lever a fine Cowboy on this site loaned me until my Uberti finger lever that's on backorder is delivered.  Anyway, here's the result.

(https://i.ibb.co/DLvQcVZ/1876-Finished.jpg)
Ken I agree with the others , you have done a great job bringing that old Winchester back . Send some more post about shooting the old rifle when you can .,,,DT
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on February 16, 2021, 06:04:41 PM
I'll be sure to post some on shooting once it warms up some - it's COLD down here these days.  Heck, we got below freezing last night.  At least it warmed up to low 40's today, but that's still too cold for shooting.  I had to bring some potted plants in.  I did NOT move South of I-10 to be cold - I like warm weather!
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: Black River Smith on February 16, 2021, 07:21:07 PM
KenH,

Looks like you did a great job compared to your very first picture.  Nice job bring back a wonderful old rifle.  Something to be proud of and it was free, if I remember correctly.

Now, enjoy loading and shooting it.  Find correct, old reloading tools and mold, then you have a real display / talking piece.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: dusty texian on February 17, 2021, 02:54:57 PM
I'll be sure to post some on shooting once it warms up some - it's COLD down here these days.  Heck, we got below freezing last night.  At least it warmed up to low 40's today, but that's still too cold for shooting.  I had to bring some potted plants in.  I did NOT move South of I-10 to be cold - I like warm weather!
Not much shooting here either due to weather conditions . May try and do some casting in a day or so plenty cool enough for that . ,,,,,DT
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on February 26, 2021, 12:49:07 PM
I wasn't sure if this should be posted in the 40-60 loading data thread, or here with the project rifle.  Since it's more what "this" rifle is doing and certainly not loads to use I decided to post here.  It's pretty long, and I would like any comments to my questions at the end.

First a photo of 10"X10" sq target shot at 25 yds with a "prop" rather than an actual "shooting rest".  All bullets are cast from the Lee 410-210-SWC mold and are powder coated and sized to .408" and the bore has been slugged to .4065" diameter.  Since this is an original barrel and best I can tell it's a 40:1 twist rate:
(https://i.ibb.co/g6jGkb7/IMG-3719.jpg)

The two holes labeled "1" are with 50 grains of GOEX Fg black powder.  There was a 3rd shot but it was off the paper, didn't find it anyway. Below is the chrono info.

(https://i.ibb.co/0VjBXk7/50-gn-Fg.png)

The holes labeled "2" are with 40 grains of FFFg, and the chrono info for them.  Note the #2 in upper left corner and the #2 at the extreme right of paper.  Both of those bullets have a yaw shown by the mark on one side of hole and hole not perfectly round.  This tells me the bullets were not stabilized.

(https://i.ibb.co/wr21rBC/40-Gn-FFFg.png)

Next are 3 shots with 16.0 grains of Lil'Gun.  No chrono info for these 3 shots today, but they normally are in the 1425 fps range.  The 3 shot group is 1" horizontal and 1.5" vertical.  That is not good at all for 25 yds.   BUT - it seems to be about what I can do these days with this prop I'm using.  I shot 10 shots with a 10X scope from pellet gun that with good rest 10 shots at 50 yds covered with a quarter (<1" group).  The same rifle shooting same conditions as 1876 rifle gives me over a 1" group at 25 yds.  Boy can I see my wobble thru the 10X scope.  Based on this I feel the 1876 with 16.0 grains of Lil'Gun is shooting ok, it's me that's terrible.

Based on the above tests I'm thinking the Lee 410-210-TL SWC bullet I'm using requires >1400 fps for good stabilization.  Perhaps if I could get the black powder up to 1400 fps it would shoot better?   Maybe see if I can get 50 grains of FFFg in the case with compression.   I'll also be trying 17.0 grains of Lil'Gun that should give almost 1550 fps and see what that does?

Anyway, this did get long and I'd be very interested in your comments on the bullet stabilization idea.  With a 40:1 twist what fps does it require to stabilize a 210 grain bullet?
 
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: greyhawk on February 26, 2021, 04:02:56 PM
I wasn't sure if this should be posted in the 40-60 loading data thread, or here with the project rifle.  Since it's more what "this" rifle is doing and certainly not loads to use I decided to post here.  It's pretty long, and I would like any comments to my questions at the end.

First a photo of 10"X10" sq target shot at 25 yds with a "prop" rather than an actual "shooting rest".  All bullets are cast from the Lee 410-210-SWC mold and are powder coated and sized to .408" and the bore has been slugged to .4065" diameter.  Since this is an original barrel and best I can tell it's a 40:1 twist rate:
(https://i.ibb.co/g6jGkb7/IMG-3719.jpg)

The two holes labeled "1" are with 50 grains of GOEX Fg black powder.  There was a 3rd shot but it was off the paper, didn't find it anyway. Below is the chrono info.

(https://i.ibb.co/0VjBXk7/50-gn-Fg.png)

The holes labeled "2" are with 40 grains of FFFg, and the chrono info for them.  Note the #2 in upper left corner and the #2 at the extreme right of paper.  Both of those bullets have a yaw shown by the mark on one side of hole and hole not perfectly round.  This tells me the bullets were not stabilized.

(https://i.ibb.co/wr21rBC/40-Gn-FFFg.png)

Next are 3 shots with 16.0 grains of Lil'Gun.  No chrono info for these 3 shots today, but they normally are in the 1425 fps range.  The 3 shot group is 1" horizontal and 1.5" vertical.  That is not good at all for 25 yds.   BUT - it seems to be about what I can do these days with this prop I'm using.  I shot 10 shots with a 10X scope from pellet gun that with good rest 10 shots at 50 yds covered with a quarter (<1" group).  The same rifle shooting same conditions as 1876 rifle gives me over a 1" group at 25 yds.  Boy can I see my wobble thru the 10X scope.  Based on this I feel the 1876 with 16.0 grains of Lil'Gun is shooting ok, it's me that's terrible.

Based on the above tests I'm thinking the Lee 410-210-TL SWC bullet I'm using requires >1400 fps for good stabilization.  Perhaps if I could get the black powder up to 1400 fps it would shoot better?   Maybe see if I can get 50 grains of FFFg in the case with compression.   I'll also be trying 17.0 grains of Lil'Gun that should give almost 1550 fps and see what that does?

Anyway, this did get long and I'd be very interested in your comments on the bullet stabilization idea.  With a 40:1 twist what fps does it require to stabilize a 210 grain bullet?

Ken
I think you might be right about lack of velocity but a couple other suggestions here too (I have ran into stability problems a couple times and more velocity or less boolit weight is the best first step to sort it - not always but most times works) 

for your Black loads get rid of the powder coat - make some lube 50/50 beeswax and neatsfoot oil or olive oil or jojoba or ----- some kind of natural oil . 

if you are using a lube cookie ? leave that out - it takes up powder space. 

try a plastic overpowder wad, tight to the bore, I use HDPE that I cut from 10 litre water jugs (all the xpurts recommend LDPE I couldnt find it and the other stuff is everywhere and works for me - gun is a new uberti 45/75 - groups improved quite a bit using it). 

Blow tube every shot - maybe helps - (can do too much of that too) wont help with stability but if that old barrel is fouling up will help that -try it. 
Dusty will give you a better lead on this than me and he will be along soon I bet. 
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on February 26, 2021, 04:43:27 PM
Thanks for comments and suggestions. The lubed felt wad I used was soaked in a heated beeswax lube I made a couple yr ago - don't remember exact, but pretty sure it's a 50/50 mix of beeswax and lanolin (or olive oil).  Heated to a liquid and soaked felt cookie to make the lubed wad.  Not sure what the deal is, but I really need to tighten up the spread on the velocity.  That's about the worse I've had with black powder.  In the past BP always gave me a much smaller spread than I normally got with smokeless powder.

The problem with the Lee 410-210-SWC is it's a tumble lube type bullet with those tiny lube grooves rather than the nice big lube grooves to hold lots of BP lube.

On the LDPE cookie, how thick is the plastic on a 10 liter water jug?  About all I've got around here is 1/2 gallon milk jugs. I've got a set of those cheap harbor freight punches that work good on the felt.

Wife's calling - gotta run.  (I guess that shows who's boss around here:)

Thanks again,

Ken H>

Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: Black River Smith on February 26, 2021, 10:39:48 PM
I will try and give you a few suggestions that I see from your load and loading technique.

1st thing noticed - The Lee bullet you are using, while correct in 'diameter and weight' is a 'pistol bullet' design and too large a diameter, IMO.  The correct bullet would be the Lyman #403168(editted - it is the old Ideal standard bullet for the 40/60 cartridge).  The 0.403 bullet with BP will expand to the 0.406 bore.  It will have larger grease grooves and will most likely be longer in length to stabilize in the rifle.  Tap on the link, then scroll down to 403168 bullet - http://ps-2.kev009.com/ohland/Cast_Bullet/Ideal-Lyman_Molds/Ideal-Lyman_Mold_Descriptions.html#40_caliber_403     This bullet design is still offered by Lyman today.

2nd thing - As Greyhawk stated No powder coating with BP.  No smokeless types of lubing with BP.

3rd thing - No felt wads in a BP cartridge.  It is not a true grease cookie.  Grease cookies are normally like a 3/16" thick semi-hard lube plug.  Not the same approach as in a percussion pistol.

4th thing - IMO GOEX does not have to be compressed to 1/4" (0.25).  My loadings are only 1/16" (to tops 1/8 rarely) compression.

5th thing - The 40/60 was a 60 grain cartridge and still should be close, not only 40 - 50 grains.  I do not own a 40/60 but a 45/60.  In a modified 45/70 case cut to 45/60 dimensions, I measured 61 grains of RS Pyrodex.  GOEX 1F is less.  That is Powder and Bullet with a 1/16 compression.  I would only use 1F or 2F in the cartridges.  (I use a different smokeless powder in mine).  I will have to recheck the GOEX 1F measurements.

6th thing - These older firearms where designed around a different lead alloy than what we most often use.  Much Softer.  The Lyman 39th Ed suggests a 16/1 (Lead to Tin) alloy be used for the Winchester 210 grain - 40/60 bullet.

While I shot BP strictly in all my calibers for 20yrs, I now have to shoot indoors using only smokeless.  NO outdoor ranges close by.

Hopefully Dusty and others with true 40/60 rifles will come in, to give you their loading techniques and suggestions.

Hope this helps, plus there are several books about BP reloading techniques.  Also, Lyman's 49th Ed has a specific 1876 section, for us.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: greyhawk on February 26, 2021, 11:28:53 PM
Thanks for comments and suggestions. The lubed felt wad I used was soaked in a heated beeswax lube I made a couple yr ago - don't remember exact, but pretty sure it's a 50/50 mix of beeswax and lanolin (or olive oil).  Heated to a liquid and soaked felt cookie to make the lubed wad.  Not sure what the deal is, but I really need to tighten up the spread on the velocity.  That's about the worse I've had with black powder.  In the past BP always gave me a much smaller spread than I normally got with smokeless powder.

The problem with the Lee 410-210-SWC is it's a tumble lube type bullet with those tiny lube grooves rather than the nice big lube grooves to hold lots of BP lube.

On the LDPE cookie, how thick is the plastic on a 10 liter water jug?  About all I've got around here is 1/2 gallon milk jugs. I've got a set of those cheap harbor freight punches that work good on the felt.

The water jug will give you about 45 thou but note they are Hdpe not Ldpe -------the HDPE seems to work fine, I was a bit bothered about using it when everybody was using the L stuff - but a recent note from one of the more experienced shooters who was using it in one rifle with better result put my mind at rest . 

Lee makes a 410-195 with two decent lube grooves and a big crimp groove but they out of stock at the moment - better lube carrying and also shorter by 15 grains - might do the trick if you can get hold of one - If you pan lube those boolits you have and cookie cutter them with an oversize tube (say 415 - 420) you might get enough lube in there to do something ? I just reckon the modern lubes are antagonistic to black powder - not just they dont work - it seems they work against us .
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: dusty texian on February 27, 2021, 10:47:10 AM
The 40-60 WCF load that works good in all of my 40-60's is a  .406 Dia. bullet as cast from Winchester mold marked as such , this bullet weigh's @ 210 Gr. is .710 in length with Two Lube Grooves  with a  50-50 mix of wheel weights and soft lead . Lube is 50-50 Deer tallow and Bees wax , lubed by hand . A charge of 55 Gr. by weight  Swiss ffg Powder  poured from a few inch's above the funnel  into a Jamison  case . This charge fills the case to about 1/8 " below case neck top . The cartridge is lit by a Winchester or CCI STD . LGR primer . No wad .  This load is a compression load of about .250 " , I have used the compression die and also just seated the bullet and let the bullet compress the powder . I know that supposed to be a No No but I cant see much difference at the range I shoot in accuracy .  Most times I seat all this together in a Winchester Tong Tool . This old Tong Tool will compress the bullet and charge plus roll crimp all in one stroke .  Some times I use the compression die then use a 40-60wcf Lee Die set to assemble the cartridge but have found very little difference doing this and find the Winchester Tong Toll more to my liking . From what I see in your loading Bp. I would change to a bullet closer to bore size ( it will bump up )   with lube grooves and also increase  the charge of Bp.  The 40-60 is an Express Cartridge that's why the slow ROT of 1 turn in 40 " . It relies on a burst of speed to work as designed . More powder is your friend in this case Pun Intended .,,,DT
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on February 27, 2021, 04:17:49 PM
Thanks for the comments - ya'll have given me plenty to think about.  I  just did some checking and I get the following from a level full Jamison 40-60 brass:
GOEX Fg = 54.5 grains
GOEX FFg = 49.6 grains
GOEX FFFg = 53.3 grains

Those are weighted on a digital scale.  Tapping case on bench lowers the powder to the point a bullet is easy seated, but still will give about 1/4" compression (depending on bullet seating depth) to the powder.  Perhaps tapping on case as it's being filled, then tapping some more might allow a full 55 grains of FFg.  I could easy get 55 grains of FFFg, and that would get close to the desired 1400+ fps velocity.

Yes, I do tend to forget about the "bump up" effect of BP due to the higher pressure peak with BP than a typical smokeless power might be.  It seems like a hollow base bullet would be ideal for BP use as it seems the hollow base would assist in the bullet bumping up to fill the bore 'n riflings.  I keep forgetting BP is a whole different ball game than the smokeless I'm so accustomed to shooting.

Thank ya'll again for all the help, and DT - thanks for posting photos of your reloading tools.  That would be so nice to have original tools for reloading.

Ken H>
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: dusty texian on February 28, 2021, 08:02:28 AM
KenH I would guess that ffg Swiss   and  fffg Goex  are closer in density . Not to start a powder brand war , but the Swiss has worked better in my  cartridge rifles than Goex , Schuetzen , and Graft & Son. Goex is all I use in my muzzleloaders with excellent results .  My next purchase of Bp. will include some Old E Goex  have heard nothing but good about it . I mention using a High Quality Bp. because what I have seen is that  the 40-60 wcf fouls out faster than the other 76 cartridges . I think it goes back to the 40-60 wcf being a high powder to bullet ratio coupled with the very shallow rifling . If you think about it the 40-60 wcf is about the same as a 38-40 wcf with almost double the powder .  ,,,,DT
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on February 28, 2021, 10:11:18 AM
I just realized something - bet I should do a quick wipe down the barrel between shots if I want best accuracy with BP shooting?  As I've mentioned before I've never really shot much cartridge BP, some in muzzle loaders many years ago - thinking back I guess it was 50 yrs ago.  It was when I was in my 20s, and here I am in my 70s, that's close to 50 yrs.  WOW - how time flies when you're having fun :)

I guess I use GOEX powder - not much choice around here that I've found.  With that I suspect the FFFg should be ok, and get most velocity which it seems is needed in this 40-60 rifle, is this due to the slow twist?

Thanks again for all the comments and suggestions.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: Black River Smith on February 28, 2021, 05:06:50 PM
 Deleted.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on February 28, 2021, 05:28:28 PM
You are very correct in that method of measuring BP is by volume.  That's how I've always measured BP was by a volume measuring device.  BUT - it was my thinking that by measuring by weight, each 50 grain load would be exactly the same. 

If measuring by volume, the weight will vary by a few tenths of a grain (perhaps more?).  When I say "50 grain of FFFg", I'm not at all saying it would be the same as your 50 grain volume measure of FFFg. 

Would your scale weight of 50 grains of GOEX FFFg BP not be close to my 50 grains? 

As I've said so many times, I am NOT an expert at all in BP shooting, especially with cartridges and am looking to learn.

Ken H>

Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: Black River Smith on February 28, 2021, 06:17:29 PM
Made a fatal error in posting my last post.  I have deleted the contents.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: greyhawk on February 28, 2021, 09:26:58 PM
You are very correct in that method of measuring BP is by volume.  That's how I've always measured BP was by a volume measuring device.  BUT - it was my thinking that by measuring by weight, each 50 grain load would be exactly the same. 

If measuring by volume, the weight will vary by a few tenths of a grain (perhaps more?).  When I say "50 grain of FFFg", I'm not at all saying it would be the same as your 50 grain volume measure of FFFg. 

Would your scale weight of 50 grains of GOEX FFFg BP not be close to my 50 grains? 

As I've said so many times, I am NOT an expert at all in BP shooting, especially with cartridges and am looking to learn.

Ken H>

Even loading smokeless most of us end up doing it by volume (powder throwers) - BUT - anytime I quote a load it is scale weight - grains is weight - marks on a volume measure is just that, a mark on a container - might or might not equal the weight that the number represents . There is some wiggle room Swiss is denser than Wano, Wano is denser than Goex, Goex is denser than homemade corned is denser than screened .........................50 grains is 50 grains is 50 grains - on a scale !! ---none of which matters so long as we are clear what we are talking about - you were. I would suggest you calibrate your measure using a scale if you can, including how many taps on the bench you use or whatever else you do to to settle the charge evenly. Not nit picking here  - waaaal dont mean to be...........
This has been a fun project for a lot of us - it wont be long and you will be blowin bean cans off a post at 100yards with that old girl! 
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: dusty texian on March 01, 2021, 05:28:18 AM
The Hawk rang a bell for me this morning , He's right Consistency ! Once I find an amount of powder ( However you do it ) that fill's the case to a level that leaves the right amount of room after compression for bullet seating depth with the OAL that I want . Or to be more correct ( That the rifle wants ) . I feel how the powder goes into the case is important . Consistency comes into play again . Most times I pour the powder a few inch's above the funnel directly from the weighing pan into the funnel on case neck with the same amount of wiggles in my wrist while I watch the powder swirl around in the funnel on its way home . I don't count the wiggles just can tell that's the same as always , then the filled case gets two taps on the bench before being set in the loading block .  The point is , when I find a load that works  well  , I try and duplicate the load and the process of how it was assembled . We may all do some things a bit different to get to the same place , but one thing we must all do for good results is Be Consistent in how we get there .                                                                     Sorry Strong Coffee this morning ,,,DT
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on March 01, 2021, 03:28:40 PM
DT 'n GreyHawk both - thank ya'll for comments.  I do agree being consistent is the real key to accurate and reproducible loads for sure.  I have used Lee powder scoops in the past and it's amazing how accurate they will throw a powder charge, but it does take being VERY consistent with exactly how to dip, etc to get close to the same.  Now I do have a question here, and please don't take I'm trying to argue with ya'll.  I KNOW I don't know enough to argue {g}

Let's take a case that holds 50cc of volume by water measurement.   If I fill that case level full using GOEX FFFg BP  thru a funnel and trying to be very careful so it's as close as possible to the same all the time.  That should give me a good consistent load.  Now, just for grins let's weight that and find it holds 50 grains by weight on a good scale.  Yea, I know it might not be 50 grains, but that keeps it simple.

Let's say I get a different batch of GOEX FFFg BP and I fill that same case level full using exactly the same method.  It's still got the same 50cc by volume as the first batch, but when I weight on same scale I find it's is more dense giving a weight of 52 grains. 

Will that loaded bullet with 50 cc by volume (but 52 grains by weight) shoot the same fps and pressure as the first batch of of GOEX FFFg BP with 50 grains - remember, they're still the same volume.

As I said, I don't claim to be an expert by any means on BP - or smokeless for that matter.  I'm just looking for guidance, and sometimes I can be slow on the uptake/understanding part so please bear with me.

Ken >
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: greyhawk on March 01, 2021, 08:09:43 PM
DT 'n GreyHawk both - thank ya'll for comments.  I do agree being consistent is the real key to accurate and reproducible loads for sure.  I have used Lee powder scoops in the past and it's amazing how accurate they will throw a powder charge, but it does take being VERY consistent with exactly how to dip, etc to get close to the same.  Now I do have a question here, and please don't take I'm trying to argue with ya'll.  I KNOW I don't know enough to argue {g}

Let's take a case that holds 50cc of volume by water measurement.   If I fill that case level full using GOEX FFFg BP  thru a funnel and trying to be very careful so it's as close as possible to the same all the time.  That should give me a good consistent load.  Now, just for grins let's weight that and find it holds 50 grains by weight on a good scale.  Yea, I know it might not be 50 grains, but that keeps it simple.

Let's say I get a different batch of GOEX FFFg BP and I fill that same case level full using exactly the same method.  It's still got the same 50cc by volume as the first batch, but when I weight on same scale I find it's is more dense giving a weight of 52 grains. 

Will that loaded bullet with 50 cc by volume (but 52 grains by weight) shoot the same fps and pressure as the first batch of of GOEX FFFg BP with 50 grains - remember, they're still the same volume.

As I said, I don't claim to be an expert by any means on BP - or smokeless for that matter.  I'm just looking for guidance, and sometimes I can be slow on the uptake/understanding part so please bear with me.

Ken >
the

I'm gonna say likely no but we are guessing - only way to really know is test it - the longrange blokes are picky on batch to batch variations in powder - how much it matters at hunting ranges ?
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on March 01, 2021, 08:16:15 PM
I'm gonna say likely no but we are guessing - only way to really know is test it - the longrange blokes are picky on batch to batch variations in powder - how much it matters at hunting ranges ?
I don't think it matters at all at the hunting ranges normally considered for lever actions.

Thanks for commenting.

Ken H>
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: dusty texian on March 02, 2021, 06:24:16 AM
Greyhawk answered that exactly how I would have .  I think part of the fun in loading Bp. is trying different  variables  like compression ,charge size , lube choice , bullet type , crimp / no crimp  ect . The record keeping during testing is as important as anything else . Good luck and have fun .,,,,,DT
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: Black River Smith on March 02, 2021, 03:42:55 PM
I will try to do this again to help you with your BP Loading.  I am only responsible for what I can say and offer,  not for what you understand of that information.

Just to clarify my fatal error was not in what I present to you about my approach to loading but in how you were approaching to get consistancy.

So, now I am attaching a complete BP Cartridge Rifle Reloading Guide from Black Powder Cartridge Rifle forum/website.  Please see attached link.  https://www.bpcr.net/site_docs-results_schedules/documents/bp_cartridge_reloading_dick_trenk.htm

Now for some noticeable statement to take note of:

1.  "Load the same amount of Pyrodex powder height into your case as you would for black powder. DO NOT load Pyrodex using equal scale weight of black powder. Use ONLY the RS or Ctg. grade not the P grade of Pyrodex in BP rifle cases."   THIS corresponds to my comments about different brands not have the same specific gravity and therefore equal weights of different powders will occupy different volumes.
(YES - you can use a scale when your 'final' volume load has been determine but not until.')

(Using only 'volume measurements of different powders", will be the only way to maintain consistent case and bullet loading.)


2. "WHAT POWDER GRAIN SIZE TO USE

Powder grain size     Caliber of rifle cartridge
       Fg                             45 and 50 cal.(best with case lengths 2. 6" and longer)
       FFg                           38 to 45 cal. (all case lengths)
       FFFg                         Under 38 cal. (all case lengths)
       FFFFg                       Flintlock primer"


Recommendation is to use only FFg in your 40 caliber.

3. "With a few exceptions, the original black powder era cartridge cases were designed to be fully filled with the appropriate black powder and partial filling was rarely permitted! If BP is fired in a partially filled case having a large amount of air space there may be a danger of producing a dangerous pressure spike which can "ring" the chamber or bulge the barrel. A small amount of air space not exceeding about 1/16 inch seems to be harmless but there is no good reason to have any air space at all and in fact a slight amount of powder compression is always recommended to hold the powder column in a rigid manner and promote consistent ignition pressures."

This is my concern over your indication of a 40grain and 50grain loading.  That I do not understand how you achieved in a 55 to 57grain casing.  I did go back and checked my 45/60 casing will hold 57 grains by volume of tapped FFg Geox.  That 57gr volume measurement weighs and average of 51.5grains.

4.  "There are at least three methods of load development which can bring you to a point where you have the most accurate loading for your rifle with a particular bullet.

The first method (along with general assembly steps and suggestions) will be described next.

Many black powder shooters weigh every charge but what appears to be more important is to have the same powder "height" or "volume" of SETTLED POWDER in the case prior powder compression and bullet seating. This is more critical with Fg grain size than with FFg and FFFg grain sizes.


Because your bullet may have many seating positions possible, the actual powder height cannot be specified but the following will explain what is required and for these reasons it is usually a waste of time asking other shooters for their "pet" loads. Their bullet, seating depth, powder lot, compression, wad type, lubricants and many other factors will NOT be the same which your gun will be using. Therefore trying to obtain the good results someone else obtained with a certain powder charge and bullet generally does not work too well."

What I was trying to relate to you 'before' was 'talking about weighed charges' before you even have every correct component (bullet).  In my experience a true 'rifle bullet' will have a larger base to crimp length compared to a pistol bullet.  No load you produce with the incorrect bullet will be the usable when you get the correct rifle bullet.

5.  "NOTE: once you have determined the best powder "volume" you can then use a powder measure such as the Lyman #55 or other hopper type dispenser to duplicate that charge volume and speed up your reloading operations. Remember that even with a drop tube attached to this type of powder dispenser, your charge in the case is considered to be not compressed."
Yes then and only then will using a scale be acceptable for you.  But the relating of the measurement to people like us - is as I said before is USELESS.

My biggest problem with trying to help you - with what you have presented - is how you can get a 1/4" compression on both a 50 grain and 40 grain load in the same casing, because the volume filled are totally different.  That was where I was trying to get you to provide more info to fully understand your overall approach.  Did you use a filler? a wad? something to get the space filled between powder and bullet base?

Anyway enjoy the full read and maybe this will help you understand loading blackpowder.  And why I emphasize the - Volume Volume Volume to correct bullet measurements.

PS:  I do cartridge pistol; cartridge lever rifle; cartridge single shot - Grease and Paper Patch; shotgun casing; and percussion pistol and rifle.  I seen and done enough to understand right from wrong and what is the normal acceptable approach by others.  'Fatal error' was not a content mistake.....
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on March 02, 2021, 05:30:49 PM
Thank you for your detailed response.  As said before I KNOW ya'll have MUCH more experience than I do with BP shooting. 
This is my concern over your indication of a 40grain and 50grain loading.  That I do not understand how you achieved in a 55 to 57grain casing.  I did go back and checked my 45/60 casing will hold 57 grains by volume of tapped FFg Geox.  That 57gr volume measurement weighs and average of 51.5grains.
If you remember on last page I made a post
showing I did some checking and I get the following from a level full Jamison 40-60 brass:
GOEX Fg = 54.5 grains
GOEX FFg = 49.6 grains
GOEX FFFg = 53.3 grains

Those are weighted on a digital scale.  Tapping case on bench lowers the powder to the point a bullet is easy seated, but still will give about 1/4" compression

Please do note I did write "about", not exactly 1/4".  I weighted each at least 3 times in the same brass checking to be sure the weight of each powder was in the range given.  Perhaps I should have written "average" for each weight since that's more what it is.

Remember, your 45-60 brass is a straight wall case while my 40-60 is a bottleneck which reduces the volume of the case.  Did you use a drop tube for filling the case?  I poured thru a funnel so there was almost no drop which also would decrease the case.  The 40-60 brass I have is Jamison with 53.1 grains water, while the Starline 45-70 brass I converted to 40-60 holds 56.3 grains of water.  This would indicate the volume of the two brands were different.

Yes, I'm very aware that changing anything in a load, even seating depth of bullet changes the load.  No place shows seating depth more critical than 9mm loads, or other small case loads.

That is a very good link you gave and I've read all the way thru it, and will read it again.  Lots of good info there.

Thanks again for taking the time to write good responses, and please do believe me when I say I'm learning from you, and the rest of folks here like DT.

Ken H>


Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: greyhawk on March 02, 2021, 08:08:45 PM
Thank you for your detailed response.  As said before I KNOW ya'll have MUCH more experience than I do with BP shooting.  If you remember on last page I made a post
Please do note I did write "about", not exactly 1/4".  I weighted each at least 3 times in the same brass checking to be sure the weight of each powder was in the range given.  Perhaps I should have written "average" for each weight since that's more what it is.

Remember, your 45-60 brass is a straight wall case while my 40-60 is a bottleneck which reduces the volume of the case.  Did you use a drop tube for filling the case?  I poured thru a funnel so there was almost no drop which also would decrease the case.  The 40-60 brass I have is Jamison with 53.1 grains water, while the Starline 45-70 brass I converted to 40-60 holds 56.3 grains of water.  This would indicate the volume of the two brands were different.

Yes, I'm very aware that changing anything in a load, even seating depth of bullet changes the load.  No place shows seating depth more critical than 9mm loads, or other small case loads.

Ken
 that number on the Goex FFg has me scratching my head a bit - I reckon I would double check that (maybe you already did but it looks a bit skewed)

Also I reckon we double up on part of DT's post ---- first you figure out the powder required in the case to give you good fill, and appropriate compression (whats appropriate ? simple what works best) some powders "take" more compression, some perform better with more - or less - so thats a volume measurement --ideally would be expressed in cc's like the LEE people do on their scoop measures - but the blackpowder community has fallen into this foolish idea of marking the volume measure and then telling us how many grains weight that is - (thats fine until we encounter a change in density) - dunno why they do this but seems like most everybody does .....anyway ..... once you have established the ideal volume -- then -- if you want ultra consistency weigh it, because everytime you fill that volume measure its likely there is a bit of variation - not much - but some - its all relative

I load 44/40 shells with homemade powder (its a bit less dense) by eyeball measure  - fill em to point of overflowing with my flintlock powder horn, make a row of them along my loading bench - compression die to correct level - insert boolit - its done - good enough for the kind of shooting I do with it and consistent within about one grain   

my 45/75 that I am trying to make teensy little groups with, same powder, I weigh every powder charge to within a tenth of a grain and use a drop tube to fill the case. Carefully assembled loads for that rifle have given me Extreme Spread velocities in the single digit range (just but we made it) That amount of work is unwarranted for  most of my 44/40 shooting under 100 yards. 

Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on March 02, 2021, 08:21:00 PM
that number on the Goex FFg has me scratching my head a bit - I reckon I would double check that (maybe you already did but it looks a bit skewed)
********************************************

the blackpowder community has fallen into this foolish idea of marking the volume measure and then telling us how many grains weight that is - (thats fine until we encounter a change in density) - dunno why they do this but seems like most everybody does .....anyway ..... once you have established the ideal volume -- then -- if you want ultra consistency weigh it, because everytime you fill that volume measure its likely there is a bit of variation - not much - but some - its all relative
It seems you and I are on the same page there.  I agree 100% with your comments.

I will double check the weight of the FFg in the Jamison cases.  I would well have mixed something up.  I am prone to doing that sometimes.  Seems worse in my "older" years {g}

Yes, I've read your posts in the "homemade black powder" thread on another forum - all 170 or so pages of the thread.  I'm actually planning to fool around a bit with making a bit - just because I like to learn new things.  That's what's so nice about retirement - having time to play around with all the different things that are interesting.

Ken H>
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: Black River Smith on March 03, 2021, 03:04:54 PM
...Remember, your 45-60 brass is a straight wall case while my 40-60 is a bottleneck which reduces the volume of the case.
...

Sir, I am sorry but you are wrong about that.  All the 1876 cartridges are bottlenecked.  I have a photo from theChaparral manufacturer of all 4 cartridges.  I just cannot get to where I am at now.  Also, my Lee & RCBS dies both put a nice shoulder in the modified/cut 45/70 brass.  Unless you are calling the manufactures of dies wrong, I think you need to more research.

In the old days a designation of 40/60 and a 45/60 meant a 40 caliber and a 45 caliber respectively, but both casings still held 60 grains of powder by volume.  That was for balloon head cases but not modern solid base brass.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: Black River Smith on March 03, 2021, 03:13:15 PM
Attached picture.  Shoulder is there but smaller than the 40/60.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on March 03, 2021, 03:24:01 PM
Thanks for that drawing showing the two cases.  I was looking for info and found conflicting info on the case.  Wikipedia says "Case type   Rimmed, tapered" and the photo "looks" like a straight tapered case.  I even checked the 8th edition of "Cartridges of the World" on page 136 and it shows a straight case, with the 45-75 right below it as clearly a bottleneck and text says bottleneck.  Also on page 353 of "The Handloader's Manual of Cartridge Conversions" it clearly shows the 45-60 Winchester as a straight case.

BUT - with that said, You have the actual cartridges and are the final authority.  The drawing you posted clearly shows a bottleneck.  I will acknowledge the 45-60 Winchester is a bottleneck.  I think you can see where I was confused with the sources I had showing straight case.

Thank you for your input.

edit to add:  https://www.cascity.com/forumhall/index.php?topic=65001.0
That's the link to your post with the photo of all 4 cartridges.  The left most cartridge is the 40-60 and the bottleneck barely shows, but we know it's there.  The next cartridge is the 45-60 and I just didn't see the bottleneck.  From your drawing it's there, but I sure did miss it in the photo.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: Black River Smith on March 03, 2021, 04:20:15 PM
...but the blackpowder community has fallen into this foolish idea of marking the volume measure and then telling us how many grains weight that is - (thats fine until we encounter a change in density) - dunno why they do this but seems like most everybody does .....anyway ..... once you have established the ideal volume -- then -- if you want ultra consistency weigh it, because everytime you fill that volume measure its likely there is a bit of variation - not much - but some - its all relative...

First off comment No One I know has never converted a Blackpowder Measurement to a Weight relation until You have in these postings.

Ok guys, lets put all the discussion about volume grain and weight into real historical perspective.  Won't argue that the term grain by definition is a weight base.

But now you are back in the 1770, 1830, 1860, 1870.  Just how many people living their life style could own; afford and protect a very sensitive scale/balance that could weigh to the grain weight?

NO ONE.

So to make it simple, for the common man, the gun manufactures/and people, used dedicated measuring tubes, hollowed out dear antlers; copper powder flask with pre-sized tubes attached; copper scoops in reloading tool kits.   That way people got what they needed to simply do what we do today to reload and shoot.

I started my smokeless reloading with the LEE Powder scoops.  LEE put scoops in all their LOAD-ALL kits.  All the modern Drop dispensers work off of VOLUME dispensing.  We just accept this without issues(I do check my drops against a balance).

I now own several digital scale for small medium and large smokeless charges, because I can.  That way, I do not need to record what scoops are needed to get to a desired charge.  It makes it simpler.  But back then simplicity was one charge; one bullet; a repeatable loading technique.   That was/is the only why Winchester, Marlin, and Ideal reloading tong tools worked.  But then bullet variety came into play and different smokeless powders became available - requiring changes.

I have read books on Schuetzen rifles; Creedmore shooting; and general target shooting.  Do you really think all these groups and people weighed their loads?  Truly, I do not.

Give this argument about 'grain blackpowder volume' and 'grain smokeless loading' a REST and just follow the normal convention, like the rest if us.  Once 'you' are comfortable with blackpowder cartridge loading and have developed your load, you can do whatever/however you feel like doing it in your environment.  Just understand that most all of us look at cartridge designation like 44/40; 45/70; 45/75; 38/40; 32/20; 44/77; 50/70.. etc and say OH! that last number is the amount of powder measured by a tube dispenser filling a casing(old not modern).  Period End, because that is what the original manufacturers have told us in their brochures and reloading kit accessories/instructions.

Besides you're loading these cases for a Levergun not a Creedmore, Sharps or Remington Target Rifle.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on March 03, 2021, 04:48:08 PM
@Black River Smith:  The quote you show above is NOT from me, but Greyhawk.  His post looks like it's me quoting, but when he quoted my post, he started typing before the [/Quote] that would indicate the end of my quote.

A question for you, we all know the 45-70 and the 70 indicates the grains of BP using in the original case.  I was thinking (scary thought) the manufacturer actually weighted the BP it took to completely fill the case, not just a volume measurement.  Remember, the old original 45-70 (and others I suspect) were a balloon head type case giving the case more volume than our modern cases have.  This allowed them to actually get 70 weighted grains of BP in the case.

There was a question if I had made a mistake in weighting GOEX FFg in the 40-60 case.
 It was felt the brass case should have held more power.  So, just for the record, just now I weighted again and got 49.7 grains of GOEX FFg in a Jamison 40-60 case (no reason to think it was the same case, but was Jamison).  In a Starline 45-70 case that has been trimmed, sized, and fired in the 40-60 rifle it held 53.0 grains of GOEX FFg powder.  I used the same Jamison brass case when I weighted the Fg, FFg, and FFFg powders.  I didn't wish to take a chance that different cases might hold different amount of powder.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: Black River Smith on March 03, 2021, 05:45:51 PM
KenH,

I know the quote was not yours but that is the error of the quoting button on the forum.  Sorry about that.

"I was thinking (scary thought) the manufacturer actually weighted the BP it took to completely fill the case, not just a volume measurement."  Reread my posting that is what I am saying also, only a manufacture could afford a grain sensitive scale/balance back then.  I am certain that they did weight a charge to first develop the cartridge being offered.  But then they had to change that measurement into something useable by the common man.  Plus a lot of manufactures tried to just sell their preloaded cartridges, more profits.  Then there was the whole flint and percussion period individual gun builds gave a dispenser that through a charge the gun would handle.  Sight were adjust to that and only that.  Also, powder was just quickly measured and thrown down the barrel/cylinder on some occasions.  No real time to weigh or measure. except for (preloaded paper loads think Civil War).  In the 70's - 90's there where the loading tools, there still where 'no real accurate weighing' devises for anyone.  So manufactures made scoops to replicate the correct charge.

The main thing during all of this time is that there were only a few Powder Manufacturer in America.  They were not high quality producers.  That is why during the Mountain man times they relished getting their hands on English powders.


"It was felt the brass case should have held more power."  Short answer - NOT all manufactured cases for a particular caliber have the same internal Volumes.  Winchester -Remington- Starline - Federal will all have different volumes mainly because of wall thickness.  This is another reason for talking just about volume filled to get to final completed load.  One 44/40 case will take 2 more grains volume over another.

Here read this posting from this site in the  The Winchester Model '73 section.  https://www.cascity.com/forumhall/index.php?topic=54292.0
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: King Medallion on March 03, 2021, 10:08:12 PM
Certainly have gotten off topic here  :-\
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on March 03, 2021, 10:14:01 PM
Yes, you're right, it did get off topic of "project rifle" a good bit, but it sorta "snuck up on us" - you know that dreaded "slippery slope"? :)  Still a good conversation and nobody got upset.  All in all, a good exchange of information.  I learned a good bit from it.  Actually I should have started a totally new thread on "how to load" ammo for my old rifle.

Ken H>
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: Black River Smith on March 04, 2021, 11:48:53 AM
King Medallion,

This was the Original Poster KenH comment in Reply 102,

"I wasn't sure if this should be posted in the 40-60 loading data thread, or here with the project rifle.  Since it's more what "this" rifle is doing and certainly not loads to use I decided to post here.  It's pretty long, and I would like any comments to my questions at the end."

It has become a terminology; reloading; & BP history dump.  Just helping a new BP shooter who has brought back to life a nice old rifle by has own skills.  I would now hate to see him put a ring the chamber by his initial loading techniques.
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: King Medallion on March 04, 2021, 02:04:31 PM
 :) My comment only was in observation about the thread being about a man bringing a cool rifle back to life and how he did it, to pretty much 2-3 men taking, what, 2 page on how to reload for it. Nothing more. Not arguing, just observing. All good here. I'm learning too, someday hope to have a 40/60 76 too.  ;D
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: greyhawk on March 04, 2021, 03:43:14 PM
Mr Smith

in my reply to Ken
I said.....
Even loading smokeless most of us end up doing it by volume (powder throwers) - BUT - anytime I quote a load it is scale weight - grains is weight - marks on a volume measure is just that, a mark on a container - might or might not equal the weight that the number represents . There is some wiggle room Swiss is denser than Wano, Wano is denser than Goex, Goex is denser than homemade corned is denser than screened .........................50 grains is 50 grains is 50 grains - on a scale !!


Seems like you missed this next bit

 ---none of which matters so long as we are clear what we are talking about - you were.

 I would suggest you calibrate your measure using a scale if you can, including how many taps on the bench you use or whatever else you do to to settle the charge evenly. Not nit picking here  - waaaal dont mean to be...........
This has been a fun project for a lot of us - it wont be long and you will be blowin bean cans off a post at 100yards with that old girl!


So If you tell me grains weight along with the brand and grade of powder  I can weigh out a charge and go cut a volume measure from anything thats handy

OR the number from a LEE volume measure

OR even something as simple as "fill a new starline 45/70 case and tap it three time on the bench"

you have given me good information that I can easily duplicate from ten thousand miles away.

 OTOH if you tell me 55 grains volume - to me that is a rough guide at best  - I have no clue how your measure is calibrated, what brand it is, what the actual measured VOLUME of it is 

I was not intending to be obstreperous at the time - if thats the way you took it - my bad I guess - I always thought of this forum as the friendly place .
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: King Medallion on April 14, 2021, 01:54:13 PM
So is this project complete? Sending to Turnbull for CCH and reblue? Or stuffed in a scabbord for calf branding season?
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: greyhawk on April 14, 2021, 05:27:13 PM
So is this project complete? Sending to Turnbull for CCH and reblue? Or stuffed in a scabbord for calf branding season?

I vote for stuffed in a scabbard for calf branding season  :)
Title: Re: 1876 Winchester Project Rifle
Post by: KenH on April 17, 2021, 07:41:39 PM
From my post on page 5, Feb 15th I mentioned the result is pretty well complete.  I've even traded for the borrowed Uberti finger lever.  I thank all ya'll for the help.  Here's the post:
Folks, I've had LOTS of fun, and I've learned more than I ever expected to learn about these toggle link type lever action rifles.  Ya'll have really been a BIG help - both with encouragement and shared knowledge. The lever is a borrowed Uberti finger lever a fine Cowboy on this site loaned me until my Uberti finger lever that's on backorder is delivered.  Anyway, here's the result.

(https://i.ibb.co/DLvQcVZ/1876-Finished.jpg)