1866 lever action w/24 inch barrel

F

FoghornLeghorn

New member
That model is the old toggle action and I already have to shoot reduced power loads (45 long Colt) in my Winchester 1873. (Reduced power, say, in comparison to what I might load for my Ruger Redhawk.)

Is a 24 inch barrel with lower 45LC loads practical? Just choose a slow burning powder?
 
Why? I thought the point of a "pistol caliber carbine", old or new, was to shoot the same ammo in handgun and rifle. Yet so many shooters treat them entirely differently.
 
Why different load in the 1866, 1873 Winchester vs the revolver?
The modern repro revolvers are good quality steel and will handle some pretty stout loads.
The '66 & '73 Winchesters, original or repro use a weak toggle link lockup that only handle low pressure loads.
The Winchester 1892, original or clone is a much stronger design so that would be the rifle of choice
for a rifle/revolver combo of the same caliber using heavy loads.
 
Reduced Loads = lower than normal loads
Hot Loads = higher than normal loads

Yes, the 66" is considered a Group I "weak action" rifle by Lyman's 49th reloading manual. Only normal or reduced loads should be used.
 
I thought the point of a "pistol caliber carbine", old or new, was to shoot the same ammo in handgun and rifle. Yet so many shooters treat them entirely differently.
Click to expand...

150ish years ago it was the point. Rifle and handgun used the same ammo. There was normally only one, sometimes two ammo loads and everything used black powder. And the solid frame revolvers (Colt, Remington) were the ruling class and concerns about "Strength" in terms of withstanding pressure virtually didn't exist.

In our modern era there are widely differing ranges of steels, designs and powders and people have taken advantage of that to maximize performance of different guns.

IN the old days, if your pistol and your carbine shot differently (had different accuracy) it was pretty much a "learn to live with it" thing.

Today, the industry has expanded enough to offer a much wider range of options, and using them gives the ability to fine tune the ammo for a specific gun, if desired.
 
Technically the 44 W.C.F. (Winchester)/44-40 (Marlin) was loaded for both rifle and revolvers up until about 1950.

Originally loaded with black powder, newly offered with smokeless powder in 1895. The new smokeless powder was Dupont No. 2 and loaded in "bulk", taking up the same space as black powder, but not compressed.

Aside from the 44 W.H.V. load (loaded with Sharpshooter from 1903), Dupont No. 2 was replaced by Sharpshooter powder by 1925. Although not a "bulk" powder, it was still a rifle powder that could be used in both rifle and revolver and maintain original ballistics in both. By 1950, manufactures switched to ball powders.

The ball powders began reducing rifle performance, and by 1960...factory performance was reduced in both with the use of flake/disc powders.

1,325fps originally obtained in a rifle with black powder...then settleing down to 1,310fps with ball powder. For revolvers, 9xxfps (I forget exactly) with black powder and early smokeless powder.

Velocity was reduced in order to keep pressures down with the new pistol powders. Dupont No. 2 actually created less pressures than black powder. The pressures begain to rise with the more dense powders.

By 1975, all was lost, and the 44-40 now thought to have always been a dud.

Powder samples removed from 44 cal. and 45 cal. cartridges
 
40 grains and duality

When introduced, the concept of handgun and carbine chambered the same made some sense. Living on the frontier, remote, perhaps from a saddle bag, with a limited distribution network dual chamberings made life a bit simpler. I suppose most all of us know that. I suspect that the .44 WCF popularity back in the day was that very reason.

Just today watched an interesting video, a 'Tuber shot 44-40 and .45 Colt from a 4-5/8" revolver, both loaded with 40 grains of black powder. The .44/205 had higher velocity over the .45/255, foot pound numbers were a near match. the .45 only 10 lbs higher. Regrettably he used 2F, but such is the case.:D .

A bit of Winchester lore I only recently learned is that the '66 Winchester was chambered in the .44 Henry or .44 rimfire. Apparently there was a centerfire version of the stubby .44 available at the end of production. Before you flame me, that is from a single internet search and I sure could be mistaken. But.....I never realized the '66 fired the same cartridge as the Henry. Always thought they were .44-40/.44WCF. So surprise, .....the '66 was relatively mild ballistically speaking, not anymore gun than the Henry rifle. Didn't know that 'till just a few days ago.

A bit off-track, but I no longer match my (.357) carbine and revolver loads. What I observed was that for one thing, I rarely carried both at the same time. My DA defense loads were factory 125 JHP. My SA utility load was a 158 LSWC at a modest 1000 fps. The carbine load was an all up 158 JHP for whitetails. None of the guns shot their respective loads to a common POA/POI well enough to suit interchangeability. (oddly, mag 125 JHP and .38/148 wadcutter DID from N-frame 'Smith...go figure) If I made a sight adjustment to gain duality, eventually, I would find myself wanting to plink with light loads, or hunt with heavy loads, and one of the guns would not be appropriately zeroed. Pain in the neck. Historically,with one bullet style and weight offered, the old timers didn't face such issues.
 
A bit more trivia.
Early S&W American Models were also offered in 44 Henry/ 44 rimfire. I've got to assume for ammo interchangeably with the Henry, and 1866 Rifles.
The 44WCF was introduced in the 1873 Winchester.
 
Always thought they were .44-40/.44WCF.
Click to expand...

The reproductions are .44-40 so you can buy or load ammo. For some strange reason, nobody makes .44 Henry*. I guess an enthusiastic handloader could find something to trim and resize to put a centerfire variant in action.

*I knew a guy who had a .56-.52 Spencer. The landowner where he hunted sold it to him for $10 when he could no longer buy ammo. This back in the 1950s before collectors got fired up at the Civil War Centennial.
 
In fact, you can buy a drop-in centerfire module for the Spencer. I have an original 56-56. It actually does OK with Buffalo Arms 0.520 cast bullets. However, I bought a mold for "heeled" 0.550 bullets, which are more consistent. Over 32 gr FFg, the 374 gr slug runs 885 fps. Not too accurate, but then the Spencer never was know for its accuracy.
 
Do be aware that part of the govt's definition of "curio & relic" includes the availability of ammunition. Modern reproductions chambered for currently commercially available cartridges, even if 100% accurate to the original otherwise, generally don't qualify and the regulations for modern firearms apply.

Not that is a big deal or would matter to most of us, just something to be aware of.

The .44-40 and the .45 Colt were introduced in 1873 with the Winchester rifle and Colt revolver of that year. The .38-40 arrived in 1874 in the Winchester 73 rifle but didn't get into a Colt pistol until several years later.
 
Jim Watson; ( Why? I thought the point of a "pistol caliber carbine", old or new, was to shoot the same ammo in handgun and rifle. Yet so many shooters treat them entirely differently. )

i for one don't have a pistol in 38-40 so when reloading i want to take advantage of slower burn rate for less stress on the action of the old rifle. can't answer for anyone else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top