357 mag Uberti 1873 rifle myth busting

S

stubbicatt

New member
Just called the telephone number from the Uberti website, which connected me with Beretta, who seems to be involved in importing the A. Uberti 1873 rifles. I asked them if continuous use of standard 357 magnum ammo would cause premature wear or breakage of their 1873 Winchester clone rifle. The man on the phone told me that the rifle is designed to handle these cartridges, and that the toggle link is adequate for the task.

This has been bugging me for some time now, as here and elsewhere on the internet, I have seen comments to the effect that the action is not designed to handle the 357 magnum loading. Straight from the Beretta person then, there is this jewel of information.

So. Blast away and have fun.

Personally, I rarely hand load full power 357's as I find a middling load is accurate and my brass lasts longer. But it is nice to know.
 
This has been bugging me for some time now, as here and elsewhere on the internet, I have seen comments to the effect that the action is not designed to handle the 357 magnum loading. Straight from the Beretta person then, there is this jewel of information.
Click to expand...

As my Lovely has told me, many times, get a name?
 
Howdy

Beretta is not 'involved in importing the A. Uberti 1873 rifles.'

Beretta owns Uberti.

Anyhoo, ask them to explain the Uberti 357 Mag rifle a friend of mine bought used that he discovered had a cracked frame when he got it home.

Yes, ALL Italian made firearms are proofed in government run proof houses. That means one proof round will be fired, a round that develops somewhere around 30% more pressure than a standard MAX pressure round. If the gun is not damaged by the proof round, it will be considered in proof.

That's one round, not hundreds. One hot round usually will not damage a well built firearm. But the repeated pounding of many hundreds of rounds may cause stress cracks to appear that one proof round did not.

No, there is no way of knowing what cracked the frame in the used rifle my friend bought, but we have always suspected it was too many high pressure rounds.

'Designed' to handle these cartridges? Hardly. There is no difference between the specs of a 44-40 or 45 Colt Uberti '73 vs a 357 Mag Uberti '73. Just the barrel and the carrier. All the other parts are interchangeable. So we are not talking about the strength of the toggle links when at battery, we are talking about the strength of the frame itself.

No, I don't own a '73 chambered for 357 Mag, I own one chambered for 44-40. But you can be sure if I owned one chambered for 357 Mag I would not be firing many Factory 357 Mag loads through it.

I do own a Marlin 1894 chambered for 357 Mag. Much stronger design than a toggle link rifle. I have no problem firing full power factory 357 Mag loads through the Marlin.
 
I figure that my 357Mag Uberti`73 loaded to run at 38Special+P
(~20ksi) pressures is about all I need anyway. ;)
 
SAAMI list the standard pressure for 357 magnum at 35,000PSI.

CIP list the standard pressure for 357 magnum at 44,000 PSI.
CIP does have a requirement that all guns manufactured by countries that are members of CIP to proof test all their guns with proof loads 30% stronger then standard pressure loads, so the proof loads would be operating at 57,200 PSI for the 357 magnum.

stubbicat you might contact some of the importers, distributors and dealers and ask them if they know of any 1873 model Uberti rifles in 357 magnum that's been returned, if so for what reason.

I have a couple of Uberti revolvers in 45 Colt that I've been shooting Tier II loads in, it was stated here on this forum they could not take it, so far they have done very well, they are still tighter in lock up then my Rugers out of the box and are just as accurate.
 
Driftwood Johnson said:
Yes, ALL Italian made firearms are proofed in government run proof houses. That means one proof round will be fired
Click to expand...

So they claim. I purchased a brand new Uberti Cattlemen. 22lr revolver that would not accept any cartridges of several brands tried. The service center had to ream all six charge holes.
So, even though this revolver bore proof marks it had obviously never been proof fired.
 
Amazing, so a well known company builds a rifle in 357 magnum that you can't shoot standard, factory 357 magnum ammo in? Really? Certainly there would be huge liability for Uberti/Beretta to make such false claims...world-wide :eek:
 
Any machine will wear with time, but I would be shocked if a gun company that's been around as long as Uberti would sell guns that break down quickly.
 
As DJ notes- Beretta owns Uberti & is not involved in importation of Uberti products.
Stoeger is actually the import arm.

The .357 Mag '73 CAN handle .357 Mag pressures, or it would not be sold in the caliber.

The issue is how much & how hot, and to be on the safe side (longevity-wise, not blow-up-wise) it'd be advisable to not push the envelope too hard in either direction.

Modern steels leave the toggle design better able to hold up than the original's, but it still ain't no '92 in terms of strength & never will be. :)
Denis
 
I am sure modern steels will stand up longer than the original iron or steel parts in iron or brass frames, but then the original cartridges ran only about 13-14K CUP, vs. the 35K of the .357 Magnum. IMHO, that is an old design that is deservedly obsolete. To reproduce ancient designs for fun shooting with old time loads is one thing, but to make them for modern high pressure cartridges is, again IMHO, asking for trouble.

Jim
 
I'm not advocating buying a 73 in that caliber, I personally would not.
Much as I like the 73, I have a Marlin 1894 that handles the .357 Mag, light or heavy, all day long without any worry whatever.

If I were going to go with a more "classic" levergun in the caliber, it'd be a Rossi 92.

Both are much stronger actions. :)

I'm just saying the .357 Mag 73 will not blow up & will not wear itself out in two boxes of ammo.
It won't hold up like either of the two models above for as long using hotter loads, but you CAN shoot one.
Denis
 
Another revelation is the bore diameter, .355"

I reckon there will be good grip on my cast bullets by the rifling, squeezing plenty of lube out! I'm really excited to shoot this beautiful rifle. If only I can find some 357 brass now.

Waiting on a few tools, and to search for my bullet mold. I was fortunate yesterday to find a couple of 1 pound bottles of 2400, my favorite propellant in this cartridge.

The trigger is unduly heavy, although it breaks clean. I'll probably buy a spring kit for it sometime later this summer. Very excited about my new acquisition. Perhaps one of the Uberti SAA clones is calling for me now. :cool:
 
For the Uberti`73 in 357Mag, I'm using this:

SAECO #398-TruncatedCone (very close clone to BlackHills* 357 Cowboy Ld)
Cast #2 (could go 1:30 softer)
Sized 0.358"/Lyman 50-50 classic lube
POWER PISTOL/6.0gr**
OAL: 1.595" (No longer)




*
The BlackHills ammunition was a 158gr truncated cone/BHN_21 (hard) and phenomenally accurate ~1,110fps/20" barrel. Appeared to have 4.5g/W231 in it (primer unknown). I was able to ~duplicate the ballistics w/ the Saeco#398/CastLyman#2 /Federal Primer, W231/5.3gr

**
Tried Unique/W231/BlueDot/Herco/2400/Viht_N110, etc
PowerPstl gave me the fast pressure rise at low pressure req'd to quickly seal the bore.
Performed better(accuracy) than the rest, thoW231 statistical dead heat/just as good.
1¼" @ 75yd using a Lyman#2 Tang Sight
 
Last edited:
Mehavy, I'm eyeballing the Marbles tang sight due to its windage adjustability. I have a deuce of a time seeing the front sight using the standard dovetailed "buckhorn" sight which came on the rifle.

Should be fun!

Does your trigger have a pretty hefty pull on it? If it did, did you do anything to lighten that pull? What did you do?

Thanks.

Regards,
Stubb

ETA: P.S. I have always been amazed that in a stronger action, loading full 357 magnum 158's the velocities aren't that far from 30-30 but with a lot less powder. Neat cartridge in a rifle. :)
 
Stubbi...

My two `73s were "Commanchero'd" by Taylors and are slicker than water. Trigger is about 3lbs.

I chose the Lyman#2 tang sight (I have Marbles on two other rifles) for both of the`73s since
the #2 is slimmer and just an absolute rock for a stable sight. Shim it left/right with one
or two aluminum slivers cut from a soda can and minor adjust the front sight. After that you never
change anything.
 
Further comment:

I actually masking taped the Lyman#2 sights onto the tang/stock and used the aperture to get
good definition of the stock front/back sights at the start. This also allowed me to sight in/adjust
the rear sight for windage and ensure reasonable alignment before actually drill/tapping the tang
for permanent fixture. Then I shimmed the Lyman#2 until the stock front/rear sights lined
up again and went ahead to remove the rear sight.

The masking tape gave me a remarkably stable -- and immediate -- sight mounting fixture.
Far better than I would have ever anticipated
 
remove all doubt and throw caution to the wind

Trade in that '73 for a '92 and don't look back.

Seriously though, the '73 action was designed around low pressure BP loads. Unless you really beef up that action(which may bring a whole new raft of issues) I figure the higher pressure range of the .357 magnum will accelerate wear and tear on what is viewed as, a somewhat, fragile action
 
Apples and Artichokes.... :D

`73 is to`92 as XKE is to XJ







**
Keep it at 38+P pressures (which is what normal (BHN:10-15)cast bullets
would want anyway), and your grandchildren will still be shooting it. :rolleyes:
 
I'm satisfied the 73 will do what I want it to do.

Mehavey I appreciate your input on the Lyman. I had started out intending a Lyman until I saw that the Marbles is adjustable for windage. As it is, the sights, both front and rear *appear* to be pretty much centered up in their dovetails. I would not wish to end up with a front sight slid one way or other to correct any windage issues I might have.

You also indicated you have Marbles sights on other rifles, and that the Lyman has a narrower base on it than the Marbles. I have noticed that the sight base on the Marbles does look a bit wider than the tang of the rifle. I also don't really like the bluing on that sight base, and have been pondering "antiquing" it a bit. So I got to thinking, why not mill some of the edges off the Marbles thus making it a bit narrower in the process, and then "antiquing" it a bit.

You reckon the Marbles sight will still remain stable if it has had its base narrowed a bit?

I have a really mellow 13 to 13.5 grain loading of 2400 which seems to be accurate in anything in which I have shot it so far. I do not know the pressure of the cartridge combination. I have no leading with this combination, and attribute that to the really big, fat, grease groove and my home made bullet lube.

If I find any power pistol powder, I'll snag a pound and see if it performs as well for me as it has for you. I might even try that 231 load, as I have a bunch of 231 on hand.

I'll also call Taylors here in a bit to find out how much $ it would take to "Comanchero" it.

Thanks again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top