New Member and New Winchester 1895... plus a few questions

[lever- believer]

Hello All,

I have been one of those guys who has got a lot of information from this website and just finally joined up. To go with this new found member I just purchased an almost NIB Winchester 1895 in the hated .270 caliber. It has some stock scratches but appears to have never really been fired. Good news is I got for a little more than 5 Franklins and it had the original box and manual. I have yet to shot it because I just bought a new house and am moving yet again (too old for this stuff).

I am including some Pics below. I plan to shot it some to see how I like the .270 chambering (never had a .270 before. I was big into old .303 British and 7.62x54 in the past). I have read on several sites including this one about changing the caliber (rebore the barrel. I know the .270 is based off the .30-06 (some say .30-03 originally) but I have read of guys going 9.3x62, back to .30-.06. Anyone who did that and has a comment post the change? I am guessing if I stick with those two calibers Nothing else would change. What about .303 British? could it be done and would anything change. I know the SAAMI pressure specs are lower for .303 but 9.3 is higher? I read of a horror story where one WIN 95 user did the 9.3 and had issues with rounds getting stuck and not wanting to eject.

Plan to put a Pattern 21 (Lyman repo) on it. Anyone got any reviews on that?

Lastly (I know a thousand questions), If anyone knows a good rifle range in Virginia on the I-81 corridor let me know. I live about 30 minutes north of Harrisburg, VA and only thing close is an indoor pistol range.

Sorry almost forgot the pics:

NC WIN95_mine.jpg

NC WIN95_2.jpg

[rjohns94]

Welcome to the fire. Your answers should be along shortly. Blessings.

[mod71alaska]

Welcome! Very nice 1895. The .270 Win is a great cartridge, too. If your '95 shoots it well, I'd consider leaving it original. Not many .270s were made and many were sent back to Miroku in Japan to be rechambered because the .270 in the 1895 wasn't accepted well. So, you actually have a rare 1895!

We look forward to your future posts and pictures!

[Paladin]

Welcome, try it you might like it.

[Chuck 100 yd]

Lucky you!! Congrats! If I were wanting a 95, the .270 would be my second choice of caliber but not far behind the .30-40. Enjoy

[lever- believer]

Thanks All,

The Winchester 1895 has always been something of an enigma to me. I cannot think of many rifles that both represent the Twilight of the Old West in toughness but have the strong lines and custom look of an early twentieth century African Plains Safari rifle.

Outside of Beautiful antique Double rifles (which I always drool over but cannot afford) the Winchester 1895 says Class and Power like few can.

Being a .303 fan (a wonderful caliber for those early safari hunts) I turned away from buying an original 1895 Winchester in that caliber about 5 years ago with a price of about 7 bills. I still kick myself thinking about it.

With an African Plains adventure on this old dudes 'Bucket List' If I chose to make a change I would like to have one gun that can do it all (multiple continents) and using the Winchester 1895 action. Whether I realize that goal or not is anyones guess.

[AJMD429]

Nothing wrong with the 270 chambering (just ask a man named Jack O'Connor ). I'd leave it as-is.

I never had an 1895 (one IS on my things-I'd-like-to-get list), though. I've not even really handled one, even.

1895 Lever detail.jpg

I never noticed that the lever has what appears to be a separate bottom-half - do all 1895's have that...???

[ollogger]

Hi & Welcome, Glad you joined us
Nice looking gun,The Lyman on it would be sweet
try it you may like the 270, will it be used for hunting?
maybe a 35 whelen would work out good also

sounds like you got a great buy!!!!


ollogger

[BenT]

Shoot it first of course. If you like medium bores. I would look at boring it to 35 Whelen. Jesse offers that service.Not sure if there is enough meat in the barrel to bore it that far. I do know the internal magazine is cartridge specific. So you would want to stick with 30-06 based cartridges for feeding purposes.(270,280,338-06,35 whelen) I have one in 30-06 and it's a great rifle. I've thought about rebarreling it to 35 Whelen but it shoots too good. I would think the other cartridges you mention would give you feeding problems without a magazine change.

[lever- believer]

Doc,

Yes, the bottom piece of the handle drops just a little which then releases the lever. Does not come far enough apart to pinch your hand or anything or even really be noticeable.

See if you can see what I mean with this diagram:




Olloger,

Yes, it will be used for Hunting and I knew I forgot to mention another caliber. Yes the .35 Whelen I have heard great things. one last thing, I will be reloading for it regardless of caliber. With the new house finally comes a nice dry place for a reloading bench and such. In fact the bench sits right below the window that overlooks the mountains. The house sits on a hill.

[lever- believer]

Shoot it first of course. If you like medium bores. I would look at boring it to 35 Whelen. Jesse offers that service.Not sure if there is enough meat in the barrel to bore it that far. I do know the internal magazine is cartridge specific. So you would want to stick with 30-06 based cartridges for feeding purposes.(270,280,338-06,35 whelen) I have one in 30-06 and it's a great rifle. I've thought about rebarreling it to 35 Whelen but it shoots too good. I would think the other cartridges you mention would give you feeding problems without a magazine change.

Thanks Ben,

I believe the 9.3mmx62 is just a necked up .30-06 case just like the 35 wheel but a little bigger. I would suspect for saving money in manufacturing costs that Winchester (in these repo models that is) wouldnt have multiple external contours on their barrels for these similar calibers (.270/.30-40/.30-06) some I am assuming the .270 and .30-06 have the same dimensions on the Outside diameter of the barrel and such?? I am guessing so .. if anyone knows for sure let me know.

[pwl44m]

Welcome LB, that 95 looks really nice. 270 holds a certain appeal to Me. I have only owned one and that was for only about 2 hours. Haven't really had a desire for one since. I know it comes in other actions but it just seems like a BOLT caliber to Me and that aint My bag.
Perry

[Don McDowell]

I have the 38 type sight on my 95. If I had it to do all over again, I would of went with the Lyman or Williams receiver sight, unless you are going to try some serious long range shooting those will work fine.
The climbin lyman got it's knickname aptly.
There's an outfit making copies of the Peabody rifle and the Lyman 21 sight, but their name has slipped me at the moment.
The 95 is a fine rifle and contrary to a lot of the babble you hear about how miserable they are to carry in the field , I find mine a joy to carry on a hunt.I'm not sure about the 270 in one as that cartridge to me just says a nice model 70 with a redfield scope in balvar mounts.

[lever- believer]

Thanks for the Info Don,

I clicked on your link to the Historic Forums and read a post by a guy who resleeved his 30-40 krag 1895 and put one of those repo Lyman 21's (Made by providence tool) and it looked like he shot pretty well.

I also read your comments on that forum about the Model 38. When you stated a redfield or lyman if you had it to do over again are you referring to the Lyman 21 repo like mentioned above?
Thanks again all.

[Don McDowell]

Dan Cash is the fella that had the 30-40 rejuvenated. He's a really decent fella, puts on a shoot up near Medora ND every July, and one day is dedicated to mostly leverguns.. He's healing up from a broken neck at the moment, so maybe he'll leave some prizes for the rest of us that shoot with him.
Anyway if doing it over again, I'ld probably go with the Lyman 56 receiver. Your rifle will need drilled and tapped for which ever sight you choose.
Incidently some of the best groups I ever fired with my 95 was when I took the one ragged hole sight I had on a 94 Winchester and put on the 95. Thing layed 4 rounds touching at 100 yds.
Another option you might consider is the Marbles tang sight that is made to fit the tang safety'ld Winchesters. I have a friend who put one on his 405, and the first two Cabela's 50th anniversary 38-55's I saw were mounted up with that marbles sight and kickin butt at a levergun shoot.

[MrMurphy]

As a .303 fan, realistically the .270 will kill almost anything in North America (and significant parts of Africa and almost all of Europe).......i'd leave it as is.

[AJMD429]

Thanks, lever- believer, Every time a thread comes up about 1895's, I get more fascinated by them.

...you guys are a bunch of enablers...

[Hobie]

30 minutes north of Harrisonburg, VA? Well, welcome! I'm 30 minutes south. There's a range on the National Forest off US 33 but I think it is on the WV side. There's one indoor range on the south side of the Friendly City, Top Gun.

[Griff]

and Welcome to THE Forum. Excellent first post. The Win' 1895 is probably the only Winchester I'm not enamored of. It's probably that magazine that hangs down below the recevier, right where I like to carry my rifles. Other'n that... it's chambered in some of the most wonderful cartridges... well... one at least .30 Gov't-06! You've exceeded my knowledge of the rifle.

Well... that and you stole that rifle!!!!

[lever- believer]

30 minutes north of Harrisonburg, VA? Well, welcome! I'm 30 minutes south. There's a range on the National Forest off US 33 but I think it is on the WV side. There's one indoor range on the south side of the Friendly City, Top Gun.

Hey Hobie,

Yeah I know about Top Gun which is a handgun only (or .22 rimfire rifles only) range. I used to go plug holes in paper with my 1911a1 and various comblock pieces.

I am familiar with the one across the mountain on 33 but I also know there are a few 'private' ranges /clubs around. I still haven't been to the skeet range in H-burg with my Ithaca 37 (but that's another story (grin)).

When I want to pop my rifles off I have to travel all the way to Hedgesville, WVA which is a long round trip.

Thanks for the response sir, much appreciated and keep me in the loop if you hear about anything else.

[lever- believer]

30 minutes north of Harrisonburg, VA? Well, welcome! I'm 30 minutes south. There's a range on the National Forest off US 33 but I think it is on the WV side. There's one indoor range on the south side of the Friendly City, Top Gun.

Actually to correct myself I am only 15 minutes north of Harrisburg in Timberville which is west of New Market. Either way I don't mind driving but the rifle range is only 100 yards. I would like to find a 200 yard range which is all the farther I can probably do right now with Peeps.

[Hobie]

I am going to point out that it is "Harrisonburg" not "Harrisburg". Harrisburg is in PA. Gotta watch that spell check!

[Shasta]

Greetings lever-believer, and welcome to THE forum.

You got a great deal on your Winchester 1895. I would love to find one of those at that price! The .270 is an excellent cartridge, and although it fell flat when presented as a levergun caliber, it remains very popular as a bolt gun cartridge. I expect this is because such a cartridge would ordinarily be used with telescopic sights, which the 1895 Winchester is not designed for. At one of the Reno Gun Shows last year I saw an 1895 in .270 on which someone had tried to mount a scout style scope forward of the action. It was a botched job and the gun looked totally out of balance.

The reproduction Lyman 21 receiver sight mentioned is made by the Providence Tool Company. Here is a link to the sight as offered by Buffalo Arms Company:

http://www.buffaloarms.com/Lyman_21_Sig ... x?CAT=4096

I have a Browning made copy of the 1895 in .30-40 caliber that has this sight mounted on it. I did have to install a slightly taller front sight blade to achieve a 100 yard sight setting. The Lyman 21 looks perfect on this rifle and is easily adjustable. I have not had a problem with the sight lever loosening as some have claimed it to do. This rifle is most used as a deer gun, for which the barrel sights would be adequate, but my poor vision does better with a peep sight. I have even taken up the sport of High Power Hunting Silhouette Rifle competition with it, shooting offhand at chickens set at 200 meters, pigs at 300 meters, turkeys at 385 meters, and rams at an eye-straining 500 meters! The Lyman 21 sight comes in real handy at those long distances, and the scope rifle boys have found that they do not necessarily have the edge!

As for your .270, I think it is a fairly rare rifle and should be left in that caliber. A Lyman 21 receiver sight would be an excellent way to take advantage of its long-range capabilities.

Finally, here is a picture of my Browning 1895 with the Providence Tool sight and a Blacktail buck taken a couple years back:





SHASTA

[lever- believer]

http://www.buffaloarms.com/Lyman_21_Sig ... x?CAT=4096

I have a Browning made copy of the 1895 in .30-40 caliber that has this sight mounted on it. I did have to install a slightly taller front sight blade to achieve a 100 yard sight setting. The Lyman 21 looks perfect on this rifle and is easily adjustable. I have not had a problem with the sight lever loosening as some have claimed it to do. This rifle is most used as a deer gun, for which the barrel sights would be adequate, but my poor vision does better with a peep sight. I have even taken up the sport of High Power Hunting Silhouette Rifle competition with it, shooting offhand at chickens set at 200 meters, pigs at 300 meters, turkeys at 385 meters, and rams at an eye-straining 500 meters! The Lyman 21 sight comes in real handy at those long distances, and the scope rifle boys have found that they do not necessarily have the edge!

Thanks for the info Shasta, Its interesting that I have read reviews on the sight (the repo you mentioned) being used on the same rifle and some need a taller front sight and others don't mention it. I suppose since it only uses the original front screw hole and the other has to be drilled and taped perhaps its a matter of where you put it that makes that difference?? Regardless, did you purchase the replacement front sight (the taller one you needed) or did you fabricate. If you did purchase, who made the replacement and does it have the brass bead on top like the original (perhaps the Browning is different)?

Thanks again and that is a nice looking Browning and rack for that matter. I will be using mine to hunt as well.

[Don McDowell]

[lever- believer]

Very Nice Sir, The 95 keeps getting it done. Suppose that helped to stock the freezer very nicely.

[Shasta]

Thanks for the info Shasta, Its interesting that I have read reviews on the sight (the repo you mentioned) being used on the same rifle and some need a taller front sight and others don't mention it. I suppose since it only uses the original front screw hole and the other has to be drilled and taped perhaps its a matter of where you put it that makes that difference?? Regardless, did you purchase the replacement front sight (the taller one you needed) or did you fabricate. If you did purchase, who made the replacement and does it have the brass bead on top like the original (perhaps the Browning is different)?

You are correct regarding the drilling & tapping of the rear screw hole for the Providence sight affecting the front sight height. The Providence sight comes complete with the unique drill and tap needed for the rear hole. When I installed the sight, I had to disassemble the rifle and remove the bolt so as not to drill into it. I put in the receiver sight's front screw, which uses the same location as a screw already in the rifle, so location there is not a problem. If I recall correctly, I then lined up the top reference line on the sight with the sight's little brass pointer, then located, drilled, and tapped the new hole. The sight was .035" off the bolt in its lowest position, which was a little high, but I wanted to be able to use the reference marks on the sight. Mounting the sight lower would put the reference marks below the pointer where they would be unusable. It was a bit difficult to get the rifle back together, but I got it figured out and took it out to sight in. It shot high even with the rear sight all the way down, so now I needed a taller front sight. Thankfully I had at one time purchased some unused old sights from a gun show vendor, and lo and behold one of them was a flat blade with a brass bead! It required a little shortening and then re-drilling the pin hole, but that was easy, and it worked.
Just to give an idea of how much adjustment there is in this sight, using a Remington 180 grain pointed soft point bullet at 2,450 fps velocity, my rear sight has .090" elevation at 200 meters, .145" elevation at 350 meters, and .225" elevation at 500 meters. The maximum elevation available is .950", so you see I could probably shoot clear out to 1,000 meters or so, I would guess, far more than I am capable of shooting!

SHASTA

[3t-]

I had that rifle for several years. I put the Williams FP on mine and it shot great. I had several loads for it some full house and one that used the Hornady 150grn round nose bullet and was loaded to somewhere around 2000 fps. Basically a 30/30 loading and it shot great with very mild recoil compared to the sharp smack of a full house 270. Sold mine because it was not getting much shootin time once I got my 30/40 and 30/06 Browning 1895's. Enjoy your rifle.

[stew71]

Nice gun! But then I'm biased towards the Win1895/Browning 95....





Chambered in 30-40 Krag with the Providence Lyman repro sight. Now that you've mentioned it, mine DOES need the taller front sight. But it's dead on at 150 with this setup.

[Pete44ru]

.

Welcome to our little corner of the internet, l-b !

You might just want to rethink reworking that .270 Winchester/Miroku Model 1895................

The reason being is that, although many/many were originally made, they are now scarce !

The .270's are scarce, because when they proved unpopular (leaving Winchester with a warehouse full of them), Winchester shipped every one they still had in the warehouse back to Miroku (in 2002 IIRC) to be rebarreled (etc) into the (then) newly re-introduced .405 Winchester Model 1895.


If it were mine, I'd use a "no-gunsmithing" mount to scope it (given the chambering's potential), or install the Providence Tool repro of the Climbin' Lyman receiver peep sight.

I had a .30-06, and a .405 Miroku, and just installed an XS peep sight on the .405 as a bolt peep (on the rear flat of the bolt top), along with a taller front sight.

I don't particularly miss the .405, but DO wish I hadn't sold the .30-06.




.

[lever- believer]

Final Decision Made,

Will stick with .270 and for now go with the Climbin Lyman Replica sight.

Thanks for all the opinions and Help. Once the sight is purchased and install I will send in some pics and hopefully some paper with some closely grouped holes in it to show how it shoots.