Lever gun guidance

[98s1lightning]

You can't beat the quality of the Browning/Miroku rifles for the price. I like the 92 action. I am not aware of the Browning/Miroku line ever producing a 45LC rifle though, they did produce a B92 in 44 mag.

 

[LRDGCO]

The original rifles were never chambered for .45Colt because in the 1870s the way the cartridge was made, the design of the rim -- very small, as it only had to hold the cartridge in place, not withstand extraction in a dirty chamber -- precluded use in weapons with mechanical extraction like rifles.
It had nothing to do with the power of the round.

Not withstanding the logic of your argument, the actual reason it was not chambered in a rifle, or the US Army's other pistol the S&W Schofield, was because it was a proprietary cartridge to Colt, protected under patent. When patent protections expired, there were some 1875 Remingtons allegedly chambered in 45LC but given the bad blood between Colt and Winchester, there was never going to be a Winchester rifle chambered in 45 LC...

 

[Tommygunn]

Not withstanding the logic of your argument, the actual reason it was not chambered in a rifle, or the US Army's other pistol the S&W Schofield, was because it was a proprietary cartridge to Colt, protected under patent. When patent protections expired, there were some 1875 Remingtons allegedly chambered in 45LC but given the bad blood between Colt and Winchester, there was never going to be a Winchester rifle chambered in 45 LC...

Patents may have played a role, but I know of no repeater rifle of that era chambered in .45 colt.
It was not terribly uncommon for manufacturers to make cartridges for a competitors weapons, which was legal if they were licensed in agreement with that manufacturer. If they wanted to capture a larger share of the market it was a good practice to do so; Marlin made ammo that fitted Winchester Rifles because they wanted a larger share of the market. Despite Marlin making stronger lever actions earlier than Winchester, Winchester's terrific marketing and salesmanship expertise (it's real strength) kept Marlin playing catch-up for years, and also frustrated John Marlin greatly.

 

[LRDGCO]

Patents may have played a role, but I know of no repeater rifle of that era chambered in .45 colt.
It was not terribly uncommon for manufacturers to make cartridges for a competitors weapons, which was legal if they were licensed in agreement with that manufacturer. If they wanted to capture a larger share of the market it was a good practice to do so; Marlin made ammo that fitted Winchester Rifles because they wanted a larger share of the market. Despite Marlin making stronger lever actions earlier than Winchester, Winchester's terrific marketing and salesmanship expertise (it's real strength) kept Marlin playing catch-up for years, and also frustrated John Marlin greatly.

Again, without challenging the validity of your logical argument, 19th Century rim size is irrelevant to the 1873-1894 period. Colt refused to license use of its proprietary cartridge to other manufacturers and Colt was a litigious company. In fact, the rim issue may help explain why 45 LC was not chambered in a rifle between 1895 and 1985. It would seem to make more sense than "there was no profit in it given the powerful rifle rounds available in the 1890s".

"But the research I did back in 1984/85 for my first book on leverguns shows that the 45 Colt handgun round was a proprietary round developed and patented by Colt for the Army. And Colt never gave permission to other companies to chamber any guns for it. That included S&W, Winchester, and later Marlin....so the 44-40 became the revolver/rifle classic. Colt did sell 45 caliber handguns to the public early on when U.S. Army orders slowed...but wouldn’t let other manufacturers chamber for it. That’s not being critical of Colt, it’s a fact of history....so by the time the patents and design copyrights fell into public domain two decades plus later....the 44-40 and 38-40 class of rounds dominated. And then rather large cased calibers followed to make the leveraction rifles very potent long arms. So these big rounds created no profitable reason to go to the 45 Colt handgun rounds in rifles, after the 45 Colt patents were expired. Rounds like Winchester’s 45-65...and Marlin’s 1881 leveraction in 45-70 eclipsed the need for the 45 Colt in rifles."

http://www.leverguns.com/articles/paco/45coltlevergun.htm

 

[Tommygunn]

Ok, then; every source I have read has stated the rim of the .45Colt as the round was made at the time was the issue. I dimly recall an experimental rifle being made in .45 that demonstrated it was a real issue, but I don't recall the source, or details about the company that made it or exactly when it was done.
This is the first I've heard about Colt maintaining a proprietary monopoly on the .45Colt via patent, but then little of my reading has mentioned patent issues so ..... I will have to do more research ....

Edit: very interesting article at your link. I don't care for the author's style but he had some interesting comparisons between .30-30 and .44 mag from longarm (I have both). Thanks for that link!

 

[SunnySlopes]

I don't know much about the Henry's... the deal killer is the magazine loading

Loading thusly is the original loading procedure for the lever. I have a 44 mag Henry and like it. I've owned both Marlin and Winchester and those loading gates got on my nerves sometimes. Especially in cold weather with cold fingers. That said, I'm currently in the market for a Winchester 1873. There was a guy with a new one locally for $400 under retail. I was waiting for him to go $500 under retail. He hasn't posted it for a while.

 

[Scrapiron45]

I have really enjoyed my 1866 uberti in 44 40. Was originally looking for a Henry or uberti in 45 but ended up with the 44 with no regrets. There was a learning curve involved with reloading the cartridge but it was enjoyable. I was told that the uberti action was more similar to the original Henry than the modern Henry's are which if true, is a plus for me. The gun is plenty accurate for me and after stripping off the dark red finish I found some beautiful wood underneath. I enjoy the other brands but for plain fun I grab the uberti.

 

[Jack B.]

Henry. Brass receiver and octagon barrel.

 

[Charlie98]

Loading thusly is the original loading procedure for the lever.

I am aware of that.... but it isn't my favorite setup, and this is 2019, not 1860.

 

[Gridley]

Related to the OP topic: what do you check when examining a used lever action?

For any rifle I'll try shouldering it, check the bore with a light (or scope if available, usually not), work the action once, and if permitted and appropriate to type do a dry fire.

Is there anything else you do? Or specific points to look at for a lever?

 

[Llama Bob]

I would stay away from souped up .45 rounds

Which is just another way of saying it's a weak action that's not really suitable for the cartridge

 

[Charlie98]

Related to the OP topic: what do you check when examining a used lever action?

For any rifle I'll try shouldering it, check the bore with a light (or scope if available, usually not), work the action once, and if permitted and appropriate to type do a dry fire.

Is there anything else you do? Or specific points to look at for a lever?

The action in particular... is it rough or does it cycle well with no grittiness. Does it lock up easily or do you have to squeeze the lever (force, not necessarily a snug bolt) into place. In actions that don't come apart often (like a Winchester) you should look for rust or crud in the action. Are the screws buggered up. Is the stock inletted well. Is the barrel band or forearm cap (if originally fitted) present? Are the sights complete? If you want to fit an optic or a peep sight... is it drilled and tapped for that already? Look for rust in the tiny places... barrel band, around the front and rear sight, at the receiver joint.

 

[LRDGCO]

Which is just another way of saying it's a weak action that's not really suitable for the cartridge

Obstinacy is not a demonstration of authority. Your flawed argument is that if a rifle that is safe to shoot the cartridge it is designated for as specified by SAAMI may not hold up to cartridge specifications that it is not designed for, it is substandard. The argument is therefore absurd. "Don't get a rifle designed to shoot 45 Colt because it can't necessarily shoot non 45 Colt spec loads". Absurd. By your flawed logic, only Old Style Vaqueros, SRH, and BHs should be purchased. Absurd.

 

[Crunchy Frog]

Whichever model you choose, a pistol caliber lever action rifle is a lot of fun. If you are going to use it for any type of competition (like the silhouette game) I would take a look at what folks are using in matches.

I have two “toggle link” Ubertis, an 1873 and an 1866. These rifles really shine with a little gunsmithing. If I wanted a rifle that would stand up to a steady diet of Magnum loads I would probably choose a Marlin or an 1892.

 

[98s1lightning]

I have a related question:

Which company is making the nicest 1892 clones in 45LC for under $1000

 

[16in50calNavalRifle]

Well I've decided to go ahead and get the Uberti 1866/45 Colt repro I came across. Seller says 100 rounds through it, perfect condition, functions well. It's a pretty attractive price - 40% below current retail in my neck of the woods. That meets my very demanding "buy" price level for a used gun, and ranks second on my all-time list for good buys.

The questions/answers above about what to check in a lever gun are timely and useful. I assume everything will be fine with this one, as it's basically new. But I'll check it and see.

I'm comfortable staying within standard pressure limits for 45 Colt on loads for this rifle. As stated at the outset, mostly for fun, and some silhouette matches. I do matches for fun and to do something other than static, lane-bound paper-punching, and don't worry too much about my score. As long as I shoot OK for the platform, and for me and the conditions, mission accomplished. When I want to load something spicier in this caliber, I expect some day to get a revolver, and it will be able to handle above-standard pressures.

I expect I'll have some questions for Uberti 1866 owners here - who seem happy with theirs - as I take it to the range and get acquainted. Thanks to all for the input. And I find the debates over historical matters interesting and educational.

 

[ThomasT]

You don't have to magnumize the 45 Colt for it to be effective. A 250gr bullet going 900-1000fps will kill about anything you are likely to run across as long as you respect the range at which you use it.

 

[Old Stumpy]

My experience has been that the Uberti guns are beautiful repros and well made for what they are, but they do have their faults.
The 60,66,73 actions are weak, but perfectly sound for .44-40, .45Colt, and .44 Special. Some specimens can be fussy and need tuning to work well. Accuracy is equal to the more modern guns. Stocks have more drop than the modern rifles and feel funny at first. If you were planning to shoot your rifle a lot, then one of these probably should not be your first choice. Wear will be greater than with the modern made guns.

The Marlin 1894 with Ballard (not microgroove) rifling shoots very well with lead bullets or jacketed. Of all of the rifles mentioned, one of these with the shorter barrels always fit me and handled the best, with a checkered plastic butt plate. (Hate the rubber butt pad) I found that the 1894C in .357 Magnum, with its shorter and lighter barrel was the slickest and fastest and most fun to shoot. The action loves that smaller cartridge. The rifle was designed around the .44-40 and the bolt face encloses it and the .44 Magnum/Special rim properly such that ejection is brisk. The .45 Colt Rim is larger in diameter and the bolt face does not support it against extractor pressure during extraction and ejection. The rim drags against the inside of the receiver, which is polished to compensate. It works, but not as well IMHO. These are very strong rifles and you can load the .45 Colt up to .44 magnum velocities with no problems. While some may disagree, I still would not buy any Remington-made Marlin, and would search for an earlier JM stamped rifle. I owned JM Marlin 20" Cowboys in .44 and .45. I also owned a Stainless Steel JM Marlin with Ballard rifling and checkered stocks and really liked it. These are rifles made for a lifetime of shooting.

The Rossi 1892 rifle is a mixed bag IMHO. The original Winchesters were hand fitted at the factory and always worked very slick, as you would demand back then. The Rossi varies, depending on when it was made and the individual gun. Some of the old ones with a Puma medallion in the receiver were so tight that they were very stiff to use. The .44 Magnum one that I bought new about 20 years ago had a number of problems. It didn't feed properly. Cartridges hung up on the loading gate. But it wasn't stiff. After disassembly, tuning and polishing, it worked well enough, but not as well as a Marlin. The stock was very bland colored walnut, almost painted in appearance, but sound. Unfortunately, the rifling in it was so shallow that it would only stabilize jacketed bullets. It keyholed with lead bullets, even 200 grain ones. I can't speak for the newer production guns, or for all specimens of the older guns. Your mileage may vary. Certainly the 1892 action is very strong, but I will pass on the Rossi.

The Henry Big Boy in .45 Colt will be my next lever gun. They are very well made and plenty strong, despite the brass or bronze receiver.
Brass Henrys are also made in .44 magnum, .30-30, and .45-70, so I foresee no problems. The action is a time proven copy of the Marlin 336, so they have the same reliability in design. They do look slightly funky with the receiver shape and with the tube loading, but that is very much offset by the quality of manufacture and the fit and finish. They have a hidden transfer bar safety in the hammer, so no external safety. .45 Colt accuracy with lead factory loads has been reviewed as excellent. One downside is that the octagon barrel makes this rifle over a pound heavier than the 336 or the 1894 Marlin, though the barrel length is 20". Presumably, the bolt face was engineered around .45 Colt, and not adapted for the 45 Colt, so ejection will be as brisk as for .44 magnum.

No original lever or pump rifles were chambered for .45 Colt, possibly because the original rolled cartridge rim was too small for a claw extractor. The modern solid head .45 Colt, with the fouling groove common to all modern rimmed cartridges solves that nicely. It functions like a semi-rimless cartridge in lever guns, with plenty of purchase for the typical sharp beak extractor.

 

[Old Stumpy]

You can't beat the quality of the Browning/Miroku rifles for the price. I like the 92 action. I am not aware of the Browning/Miroku line ever producing a 45LC rifle though, they did produce a B92 in 44 mag.

I owned a B92 back in the late1970s. With that steel carbine butt plate and Norma factory loads, it was lethal at both ends.
These are beautiful rifles. Highly polished inside and out, with a glossy blued finish and glossy finished and figured walnut stocks.
Very smooth and reliable.
One thing that I did not like was the Japanese fondness for very finely threaded machine screws. The muzzle barrel band on mine stripped out.
I recall that reviewers mentioned that you needed to be careful not to damage these screws.

 

[mustanger98]

The original rifles were never chambered for .45Colt because in the 1870s the way the cartridge was made, the design of the rim -- very small, as it only had to hold the cartridge in place, not withstand extraction in a dirty chamber -- precluded use in weapons with mechanical extraction like rifles.
It had nothing to do with the power of the round.

The .45 Colt was originally a revolver cartridge... the Colt's Model P, aka the model of 1873 or "Peacemaker", used a barrel-mounted rod ejector that had nothing to do with the rim.

Somebody here said there was little or no difference in power between .45 Colt and .44-40, which IIRC was developed for the Winchester '73 and applied to the Peacemaker.

 

[mustanger98]

Which is just another way of saying it's a weak action that's not really suitable for the cartridge

Well, not really. In many cases, the rifle's good for it, but why not enjoy shooting a load that offers less recoil.

 

[Old Stumpy]

You don't have to magnumize the 45 Colt for it to be effective. A 250gr bullet going 900-1000fps will kill about anything you are likely to run across as long as you respect the range at which you use it.

Certainly anything deer-sized or less that you would shoot with a standard velocity 200 grain .44-40 round.

 

[mustanger98]

You don't have to magnumize the 45 Colt for it to be effective. A 250gr bullet going 900-1000fps will kill about anything you are likely to run across as long as you respect the range at which you use it.

The .45 Colt, as a revolver round, IIRC was adopted because the U.S. Army specified that their new sidearm should be capable of stopping a horse... incoming cavalry charge among other situations.

From a 16-20" rifle, the round will gain another 300-400fps.

As with any other rifle, you have to get to know it... zeros- near and far, and trajectory.

Anybody who might be reading this and thinking of hunting needs to know their state game regulations regarding ammo.

 

[Tommygunn]

Which is just another way of saying it's a weak action that's not really suitable for the cartridge

Absurd. .45 Colt works in both revolvers and rifles just fine. I have a Rossi 92R in .45 Colt and it works fine. Personnally, I don't "soup up" any round in any of my guns. Were I to start, I'd learn everything I could about reloading, what was safe for each load I had, start out using known, published safe loads, and work up conservatively. I'd also make myself aware of danger signs like primer problems and other symptoms. There are safe ways of developing + power loads .... and certain types of guns that can use them ....and others that CAN NOT USE THEM.

If you go to a store and buy factory loads, they will be safe in the Colt SAA and Winchester 92 style rifles, as well as toggle-link repros like Uberti's Henry, their 1866 and 1873 repros, and Miroku's (if they chamber them in .45, and I'm insufficiently familiar with their product lineup to know).
For those with doubts, "cowboy loads" are available and useful in older guns, but they work in new ones too.

By "souped up"rounds, I mean home brewed rounds. It is possible to double load while handloading if you're not paying attention. Also, there's always some nimrod who'll stuff a case with some inappropriate powder, stick a wrong type primer in, go out and shoot it, then get really surprised when his gun blows up and a metal shard goes through his right eyeball.

We live in a litigious society. Gun makers and ammo makers both go to lengths to try to NOT GET SUED. That means not making things blow up.
If you have a modern Rossi, Uberti, Winchester, Pedersoli, Miroku firearm that is chambered in .45 Colt, it will use a factory round safely.

 

[Rudolph31]

As I understand it, when the .44-40 cartridge was introduced Winchester named it the .44 WCF for Winchester Center Fire. It was so popular that Remington and Colt has offered guns chambered for it, but changed the name so as not to mention the competition. History repeated with the .30 WCF, which we know as the .30-30; the only smokeless powder round to use the black powder naming system.