I got my rifle in today. Winchester M71 in 450 Alaskan
Forum rules
Welcome to the Leverguns.Com General Discussions Forum. This is a high-class place so act respectable. We discuss most anything here other than politics... politely.
Please post political post in the new Politics forum.
Welcome to the Leverguns.Com General Discussions Forum. This is a high-class place so act respectable. We discuss most anything here other than politics... politely.
Please post political post in the new Politics forum.
-
- Senior Levergunner
- Posts: 1970
- Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 1:42 pm
- Location: Arkansas
I got my rifle in today. Winchester M71 in 450 Alaskan
I got my rifle today. I had a busy evening, but I did find time to fire a few shots. The gun arived in good shape. It has a very good recoil pad that really soaks up the recoil. Since I had never fired a 450 Alaskan or a 458 winchester, I was a little concerned as to what I should expect in the way of recoil from this fairly light carbine.
I loaded a round in the mag and jacked the lever, to see if it would feed Ok, and was rewarded with a slick and smooth transfer to the chamber, with not even a hint of the slightest possibility of a failure to feed. So, because the rifle is a little on the light side for a heavy recoiling gun, I decided to go ahead and fill the tubular magazzene full, so that I would have all of the weight possible on the rifle.
Since I was pressured for time, I set up a coke can in front of a flat sandstone rock a little taller then the coke can and about 12 inch long. My first shot was impressive, it blew the coke can in half and completely exploded the rock behind it, from about thirty yards. The fired case ejected with not a hint of hard extraction, and I fed another one it the chamber. I kept setting up targets, using sandstones for targets on an old log and proceeded to shoot the remaining rounds in the magazzene. The sights are on pretty good and I kept backing up farther on each shot with the last one being about a 60 yard shot. I was firing pretty slow, setting up targets in between shots, the light barrel was getting pretty hot, but I was having too much fun to quite before I shot up all of the shells in the Mag tube.
Recoil was stout, but not painful, probably due to the thick and soft recoil pad. I was happily surprised that it didn't kick harder then it did for such a light rifle. The only thing that I noticed on the first shot or two was the lever sliding in my hand, with the slightest sting, but I shot it six time and really didn't notice it after the first couple of shots. Maybe I was holding it too tight, anticipating the recoil. When I relized that the gun wasn't going to bite me, I probably relaxed some.
I loaded a round in the mag and jacked the lever, to see if it would feed Ok, and was rewarded with a slick and smooth transfer to the chamber, with not even a hint of the slightest possibility of a failure to feed. So, because the rifle is a little on the light side for a heavy recoiling gun, I decided to go ahead and fill the tubular magazzene full, so that I would have all of the weight possible on the rifle.
Since I was pressured for time, I set up a coke can in front of a flat sandstone rock a little taller then the coke can and about 12 inch long. My first shot was impressive, it blew the coke can in half and completely exploded the rock behind it, from about thirty yards. The fired case ejected with not a hint of hard extraction, and I fed another one it the chamber. I kept setting up targets, using sandstones for targets on an old log and proceeded to shoot the remaining rounds in the magazzene. The sights are on pretty good and I kept backing up farther on each shot with the last one being about a 60 yard shot. I was firing pretty slow, setting up targets in between shots, the light barrel was getting pretty hot, but I was having too much fun to quite before I shot up all of the shells in the Mag tube.
Recoil was stout, but not painful, probably due to the thick and soft recoil pad. I was happily surprised that it didn't kick harder then it did for such a light rifle. The only thing that I noticed on the first shot or two was the lever sliding in my hand, with the slightest sting, but I shot it six time and really didn't notice it after the first couple of shots. Maybe I was holding it too tight, anticipating the recoil. When I relized that the gun wasn't going to bite me, I probably relaxed some.
-
- Senior Levergunner
- Posts: 1970
- Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 1:42 pm
- Location: Arkansas
This gun has a very good set of open sights on it with a good clean sight picture that doesn't cover up the target.
Does the Model 71 normally have any writing on the tang? This one does not. So the lower tang very well might have been replaced with a left over 1886 tang. I can't hardly see how the top tang could have been replaced, unless it was cut and welded to the action frame. The only concern I really have is that there is a little tiny chip of wood missing on the left side at the rear of the tang, and maybe a very slight crack in the wood, either that or a scratch, and I am not sure which. But it seems solid. And there are a few screws such as the barrel band and the forearm cap that are sorta mangled just a little. Not bad, and could probably be fixed pretty easy.
Over all, this gun is a pretty slick piece of machinery for a 1938 model. It's not been abused or probably even hunted with that much. The action is slick but tight. Just the way I like it. So, I think it's a lifetime keeper for me. I can load it down a little if I want milder 45/70 class loads or shoot something simular to the reloads I have now.
I can't hardly wait to work up some of my own loads. I guess I am going to have to get some loading componets purchased for this gun.
Does the Model 71 normally have any writing on the tang? This one does not. So the lower tang very well might have been replaced with a left over 1886 tang. I can't hardly see how the top tang could have been replaced, unless it was cut and welded to the action frame. The only concern I really have is that there is a little tiny chip of wood missing on the left side at the rear of the tang, and maybe a very slight crack in the wood, either that or a scratch, and I am not sure which. But it seems solid. And there are a few screws such as the barrel band and the forearm cap that are sorta mangled just a little. Not bad, and could probably be fixed pretty easy.
Over all, this gun is a pretty slick piece of machinery for a 1938 model. It's not been abused or probably even hunted with that much. The action is slick but tight. Just the way I like it. So, I think it's a lifetime keeper for me. I can load it down a little if I want milder 45/70 class loads or shoot something simular to the reloads I have now.
I can't hardly wait to work up some of my own loads. I guess I am going to have to get some loading componets purchased for this gun.
-
- Senior Levergunner
- Posts: 1970
- Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 1:42 pm
- Location: Arkansas
KEWL!
Kind regards,
Tycer
----------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.saf.org - https://peakprosperity.com/ - http://www.guntalk.com
Tycer
----------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.saf.org - https://peakprosperity.com/ - http://www.guntalk.com
- Ysabel Kid
- Moderator
- Posts: 27790
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 7:10 pm
- Location: South Carolina, USA
- Contact:
Agreed. I thought the '71 didn't come in a straight grip configuration. That sure does look nice!!!copen wrote:That certainly is a fine looking rifle. And I just learned something new.
Haven't seen too many 71s, but that's the first I've seen with a staight grip. Maybe the reason for the tang. Stock change? Congratulations.
-
- Senior Levergunner
- Posts: 1000
- Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2007 4:02 pm
- Location: WY
Somebody sure spent a lot of time making a 71 look like an 86. They must have preferred the 86 style. Even Harold Johnson preferred the 86 action in a lot of cases, especially with the 50AK. I presume that you have double checked the action serial number as being in the 71 range. Whatever the case, that is one beautiful rifle. Just enough use to be ooozing with "character". You did good
-
- Senior Levergunner
- Posts: 1970
- Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 1:42 pm
- Location: Arkansas
-
- Senior Levergunner
- Posts: 1970
- Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 1:42 pm
- Location: Arkansas
Yes, I like that too, it gives me at least one extra round in the mag. I stuck 5 rounds in the mag, last night, I didn't try for six, but it might go, and it allows for a little more weight out front. The gun balances good with one round in the chamber and 5 in the mag.C. Cash wrote:Oofffh. That is really nice lastmohecken. I especially like the full length mag tube underneath.
-
- Senior Levergunner
- Posts: 1970
- Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 1:42 pm
- Location: Arkansas
I am a little curious about the rifling in the barrel. I know the original 348 barrel was rebored and rifled, but the rifling looks to be very shallow. I wonder exactly how they did that back then. It looks sorta like a micro-groove marlin rilfling. It seems to shoot accurately. I have not put it on paper, yet. I only fired 6 rounds at some reactionary targets from the offhand position, last night.
My first impression is that it is probably plenty accurate enough for short range hunting, and the sights are dead on for me. I would have plenty of confidence in being able to place quick killing shots on a close range Brown bear, which I guess is what this gun was actually designed for.
I am curious as to how it will group farther out. And I am also curious as to the average barrel life on one if these rebored big bores. Does anyone want to hazzard a guess?
My first impression is that it is probably plenty accurate enough for short range hunting, and the sights are dead on for me. I would have plenty of confidence in being able to place quick killing shots on a close range Brown bear, which I guess is what this gun was actually designed for.
I am curious as to how it will group farther out. And I am also curious as to the average barrel life on one if these rebored big bores. Does anyone want to hazzard a guess?
-
- Senior Levergunner
- Posts: 1970
- Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 1:42 pm
- Location: Arkansas
I am also debating on brass. I can get 348 brass, but I will have to fire form it, as in the old days. However, I actually have found some loaded ammo in 450 for sale, and also new reformed brass for the 450, at least they call it reformed. Reformed from what? 348 brass or 50 Alaskan?
I can also buy Starline 50 Alaskan brass and it's nearly $30 dollars cheaper per hundred then the 450 brass. I recently read where Dave Scovill wrote in the latest Rifle Sporting Firearms journal, that the 50 Alaskan brass can be run through the 450 dies, and eaisly turned into 450 Alaskan brass. So my next question is how good is the Starline Brass? I am wondering if it might be the best choice, not to metion $30.00 cheaper per hundred. If all it takes is a pass through the resizing die, I can certainally resize 100 rounds for $30.00 savings, and it might be better brass to boot.
I guess the only way to know for sure is to try both. Unless someone here has already tried it.
I can also buy Starline 50 Alaskan brass and it's nearly $30 dollars cheaper per hundred then the 450 brass. I recently read where Dave Scovill wrote in the latest Rifle Sporting Firearms journal, that the 50 Alaskan brass can be run through the 450 dies, and eaisly turned into 450 Alaskan brass. So my next question is how good is the Starline Brass? I am wondering if it might be the best choice, not to metion $30.00 cheaper per hundred. If all it takes is a pass through the resizing die, I can certainally resize 100 rounds for $30.00 savings, and it might be better brass to boot.
I guess the only way to know for sure is to try both. Unless someone here has already tried it.
Starline is absolutely the best quality brass available. I'm to the point where I will not use anything else. It is tougher than any other brass, but will reform easily if you don't try to do the entire operation in one pull of the handle. I other words, you to "finesse" it. I have made plenty of 45-70 cases into .33 WCF and .45-90s into .40-82 without any problems.
Lastmohecken,Lastmohecken wrote:I am a little curious about the rifling in the barrel. I know the original 348 barrel was rebored and rifled, but the rifling looks to be very shallow. I wonder exactly how they did that back then. It looks sorta like a micro-groove marlin rilfling. It seems to shoot accurately. I have not put it on paper, yet. I only fired 6 rounds at some reactionary targets from the offhand position, last night.
My first impression is that it is probably plenty accurate enough for short range hunting, and the sights are dead on for me. I would have plenty of confidence in being able to place quick killing shots on a close range Brown bear, which I guess is what this gun was actually designed for.
I am curious as to how it will group farther out. And I am also curious as to the average barrel life on one if these rebored big bores. Does anyone want to hazzard a guess?
As I understand it, Pope used a rifling method similar to the smaller and more numerous grooves used in the Marlins. His barrels were highly prized for their accuracy. So, just because it has something akin to the micro groove style doesn't mean it wont shoot like the dickens, once you get it dialed in.
-
- Senior Levergunner
- Posts: 1970
- Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 1:42 pm
- Location: Arkansas
That is interesting information. Who is Pope?C. Cash wrote:Lastmohecken,Lastmohecken wrote:I am a little curious about the rifling in the barrel. I know the original 348 barrel was rebored and rifled, but the rifling looks to be very shallow. I wonder exactly how they did that back then. It looks sorta like a micro-groove marlin rilfling. It seems to shoot accurately. I have not put it on paper, yet. I only fired 6 rounds at some reactionary targets from the offhand position, last night.
My first impression is that it is probably plenty accurate enough for short range hunting, and the sights are dead on for me. I would have plenty of confidence in being able to place quick killing shots on a close range Brown bear, which I guess is what this gun was actually designed for.
I am curious as to how it will group farther out. And I am also curious as to the average barrel life on one if these rebored big bores. Does anyone want to hazzard a guess?
As I understand it, Pope used a rifling method similar to the smaller and more numerous grooves used in the Marlins. His barrels were highly prized for their accuracy. So, just because it has something akin to the micro groove style doesn't mean it wont shoot like the dickens, once you get it dialed in.
-
- Senior Levergunner
- Posts: 1970
- Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 1:42 pm
- Location: Arkansas
I decided to play it safe and I ordered 100 rounds of 450 brass so I would have it, in case it got harder to get. But I also ordered 5 pieces of 50 Alaskan to play with, just to see it resizes ok for the 450 for future use if needed.Mike D. wrote:Starline is absolutely the best quality brass available. I'm to the point where I will not use anything else. It is tougher than any other brass, but will reform easily if you don't try to do the entire operation in one pull of the handle. I other words, you to "finesse" it. I have made plenty of 45-70 cases into .33 WCF and .45-90s into .40-82 without any problems.
From what you say, it sounds like Starline 50 Alaskan ought to be a breeze to resize to 450. I guess I will give it a shot when it comes in.
[Who is Pope?]
Harry M. Pope was one of the most famous, and acknowledged best barrelmaker of the early cartridge rifle era (although he also was involved in a lot of BP too) in & around the turn of the 20th Century (1900).
He had a proprietary-type rifling that he developed, as noted above, that was so good it was named Pope rifling - similar to the rifling used in Ballard rifles becoming "Ballard rifling".
Pope sometimes even full-length choke-bored (tapered internally) & rifled his barrels ! He also developed other target-shooting accessories, and was very ederly (1861-1950) when he passed away.
Savage Arms hired him to supervise their target barrel-making - making the Stevens-Pope tatget rifles the gold standard of the 1920's & 30's. Those rifles still bring top dollar - when they can be found for sale.
Harry M. Pope was one of the most famous, and acknowledged best barrelmaker of the early cartridge rifle era (although he also was involved in a lot of BP too) in & around the turn of the 20th Century (1900).
He had a proprietary-type rifling that he developed, as noted above, that was so good it was named Pope rifling - similar to the rifling used in Ballard rifles becoming "Ballard rifling".
Pope sometimes even full-length choke-bored (tapered internally) & rifled his barrels ! He also developed other target-shooting accessories, and was very ederly (1861-1950) when he passed away.
Savage Arms hired him to supervise their target barrel-making - making the Stevens-Pope tatget rifles the gold standard of the 1920's & 30's. Those rifles still bring top dollar - when they can be found for sale.