Winchester 71 .45-70 Conversion: Cycling Issues

[cal30_sniper]

Howdy all,

Long time lurker and lever gun fanatic, first time post. Some time ago, I purchased a very beautifully modified original Winchester Model 71. The rifle has been rebarreled to .45-70, converted to a full tube magazine with barrel bands, and had the forend slimmed back to an 1886 style profile.

Unfortunately, it needs a few tweaks to be up to my performance standards. When the conversion was done, they did not modify the .348 carrier at all. Due to its narrower body diameter, the .45-70 case isn't held very securely by the carrier lips, and wallows around quite a bit. With sharp actuation of the lever, it will occasionally throw a round completely out of the action when the carrier rises at the end of the stroke.

The way I see it, I have three options to correct this:

1. Modify the carrier to more securely hold the cartridge. I don't know what the best way to go about this would be, perhaps buying an original 1886 carrier and cannibalizing it to cut apart, reweld the Model 71 carrier. Sounds expensive and labor intensive.

2. Convert to an 1886 style lever/carrier/carrier hook. From what I can gather, the whole purpose of the carrier hook was to prevent what is happening in my rifle. It was designed to hold the rim and prevent the heavy nose .45 caliber bullets from somersaulting out of the action when the carrier rises sharply. Winchester specifically designed the .348 for a lighter weight bullet and tapered case to avoid this problem and eliminate the carrier hook.
a) Can I use an original Winchester 1886 curved lever, carrier, and carrier hook in my original 71 action?
b) Can I use a reproduction Winchester/Browning curved lever, carrier, and carrier hook in my 71 action? If not, is there any combo of parts that would work? The original curved 1886 levers are very hard to find. I suppose I could also get around this by cutting the curved lever portion off of my 71 lever and welding it to an original 1886 straight lever that was cut in the same location. My welding skills are there, but it would be a lot of precision cutting to make it right.
c) Can any of the reproduction Japanese internal parts be made to fit an original Winchester action without significant work, or are the differences simply too great?

3. Convert to .450 Alaskan. I don't really want to do this. For one, the full tube magazine would have to be rethought. For another, I already have a .348 which is hard enough to feed. I don't need an even more difficult cartridge to deal with. For thirds, I have no use for a cartridge that powerful, and wouldn't relish the recoil.

I'm really interested in #2. If there is a combination of internal parts that I could use that would mimic an 1886 carrier assembly, I think that would completely eliminate my problems. I'm sure simply having the correct dimensions on the carrier lips would help, but I don't know that it would eliminate the issue completely without a carrier hook design. If 1886 action parts simply won't work, maybe I should get a spare 71 and 86 carrier and attempt to cut off and reweld the feed lips of the 86 carrier onto the 71? Sounds like a lot of precision work.

I welcome any and all input from those familiar with these big actions. Photos of the rifle attached.

IMG_4788.jpg

IMG_4790.jpg

IMG_4791.jpg

IMG_4794.jpg

[GunnyMack]

Having not done this conversion I would start by taking the easiest route. That being modifying the carrier. The carrier should be plenty soft enough to cut with a file. I'd even reccomend you purchase a 45-70 carrier so you can see where and how much material needs removing. It's not rocket science, you can do it!

[AJMD429]

Not being familiar with the conversion, nor having a 71, nor fully understanding your goals, I should probably just 'lurk' and see some other far better informed levergunners submit intelligent and practical answers, but........what fun would THAT be...???

First, I would ask what your fundamental goal is. If it is to have a smooth-cycling 45-70 levergun, I'd be tempted to say seek out an 1886 already chambered for 45-70, or a JapChester/Miroku, or for that matter, a Marlin or Henry lever action. Then sell the 'project gun' to someone who wants to further the project or use it for parts.

Some of us (me) like 45-70 leverguns just for range fun, or perhaps for hunting non-dangerous, non-expensive-to-tag game like whitetail deer, and for us, the performance doesn't have to be 100% in terms of reliable cycling. If you would be contemplating using this gun for dangerous game like bear, or expensive-to-tag game like bighorn sheep, or if you would be wanting to use it for home-protection, 99% cycling isn't good enough, and I'd probably scrap the project and get something more reliable.

My 'go-to' levergun for BIG power was a Marlin Guide Gun, but I think the 1886 action is stronger, and when Big Horn Armory came out with their 500 S&W levergun based on the 1886 action done with modern materials, I went for that, although I don't hunt dangerous or expensive game, and for home protection my levergun is in 45 Colt.

Anyway, all that aside, hopefully some more experienced folks here will give you some useful answers as to the specific issue of fixing up the 71 to run 45-70 reliably. Good luck with your project...!

[crs]

Thanks for the pix; that is a nice looking rifle!
I shoot 1886 actions in 45-70 and 45-90, but am not a gunsmith, BUT, Gunny Mack made a suggestion that makes a lot of sense to me.

Keep it simple and cheap and make it a success or an inexpensive and valuable learning experience.

With all the 1886 and M71 experience on this web site, you will surely receive some more advice from learned folk.

Best of luck and BTW, how does the rifle shoot?

[vancelw]

Convert it back to .348 as God intended!

[cal30_sniper]

Thanks for all the great feedback so far. I've always enjoyed the community feel of this forum, and your replies certainly reinforce that feeling.

Having not done this conversion I would start by taking the easiest route. That being modifying the carrier. The carrier should be plenty soft enough to cut with a file. I'd even reccomend you purchase a 45-70 carrier so you can see where and how much material needs removing. It's not rocket science, you can do it!

Perhaps that is the problem. My day job is actually what most people would refer to as rocket science, and the level of perfection and attention to detail required at work tends to blend over into my evening auto and gun hobbies. Either way, those were my thoughts on the carrier as well. If it were simply removing material like a .45-70 to .50-110 conversion on an 1886, I'd already be at it. Unfortunately, to go the other way (.348 to .45-70) requires adding material to the carrier. A bit trickier. Same with purchasing a .45-70 carrier for a 71. I'd happily purchase an 1886 carrier if it seems it will work, I just don't know anything more than the carriers for the two models are significantly different.

Not being familiar with the conversion, nor having a 71, nor fully understanding your goals, I should probably just 'lurk' and see some other far better informed levergunners submit intelligent and practical answers, but........what fun would THAT be...???

First, I would ask what your fundamental goal is. If it is to have a smooth-cycling 45-70 levergun, I'd be tempted to say seek out an 1886 already chambered for 45-70, or a JapChester/Miroku, or for that matter, a Marlin or Henry lever action. Then sell the 'project gun' to someone who wants to further the project or use it for parts.

Whats the point of lurking when we're really all here for the conversation! Like many of the other guns in my collection, this 71 doesn't have a well defined purpose beyond being something that appealed to me. It sits in the safe directly between a Japchester 1886 Extra Light in .45-70 and a Browning Model 71 in .348. If something big needed reliable killing, I'd probably grab for the .348. If I was doing normal deer hunting, I'd grab for the original 1895 Takedown in .30-40 that sits a few spots down. It's been my go to deer rifle for several years now. I have more accurate, more portable, and better sighted weapons, but that old .30-40 just has a certain feel to it. I can't get past the rebounding hammer and tang safety on the Miroku '86. Someday I'll fix that too, but that's a question for another day. I just liked the feel of the original 71. It's a beautiful rifle, eeks class and craftsmanship, the action is glass smooth, and it's a lot easier to find a box of .45-70 in a pinch than .348. If I can get it feeding reliably, it might just become my go-to big bore. I won't knock Marlin/Henry, because they're great guns and a lot of people I have a lot of respect for use them, but I'm a Winchester guy. The only "other" I've got in the lever gun section is a Marlin 1894 .32-20 made in 1905. It was my grandfather's rifle, and it will stay. So that's it. I love the feel of this 71, and looking at it knowing it occasionally throws a round straight from the magazine to the ground bothers me. Reference perfectionist issues above.

Thanks for the pix; that is a nice looking rifle!

With all the 1886 and M71 experience on this web site, you will surely receive some more advice from learned folk.

Best of luck and BTW, how does the rifle shoot?

Thank you! It's even prettier in person. Just enough wear to not feel bad shooting, but you can tell that whoever did the conversion spent a lot of time on fitment and finish (if not 100% function).

It shoots very well. It groups 325grn Hornady LEVERevolution ammo into about a 2MOA circle. I haven't fooled with handloads for it yet, but will at some point. The .30-40 and .348 have been taking up most of my loading bench time for a while.

Convert it back to .348 as God intended!

The thought has crossed my mind! I think I'd rather do a .450 Alaskan if I chose that route though. By all inspection, it already appears to wear a very fine .45 caliber barrel, and .458 bullets are a lot easier to come by than .348. Of course, I'm biased, since I already have a .348 and it would be a hard pair of weapons to double fist.

Thanks again for the replies. I'm really hoping someone has experience with an 1886 lever/carrier/hook in a 71 action and can confirm whether or not it will work.

[DocRock]

So, Gunny's suggestion still holds but it's a matter of adding to rather than filing away at the carrier. The carrier does not require strength, so modifying the carrier to narrow it and better cradle the 45-70 round is what's required. Since I don't have a 71 or an 1886, I am of course offering entirely hypothetical advice. And it's free, so likely worth about that. But, my route for going at this would be 1) try to find another 71 carrier; 2) you say you have an auto hobby, so you know machinists and welders. See if one of them can add material to the carrier lips to better hold the 45-70. If that doesn't work or can't be done, I would want to get hold of an '86 carrier and compare it to the 71 carrier to see whether it could be modified to fit. In the meantime, someone will come along and tell you the easy way to do it, usually right after you have finished doing it the hard way. But I have to believe that brazing a bronze alloy onto a spare carrier and shaping that to better cradle the 45 -70 is a productive avenue of exploration.

Fab rifle. Best of luck.

[AJMD429]

Like many of the other guns in my collection, this 71 doesn't have a well defined purpose beyond being something that appealed to me.

I can't believe anyone would actually have a gun that they don't have a specific NEED for.....!

I'd never do such a thing....the only firearms I would allow in my home would have to have a very specific and extremely important function to fill, that no other firearm I have could possibly be used for. I try to keep at most three rifles on hand - all leverguns:

1. a 500 S&W in case the tracks I saw back by the pond are a Cape Buffalo
2. a 32-20 of my great grandfather's for small critter hunting and target shooting
3. a 44 Mag levergun for everything in between, including deer hunting.

SO that's it......all the guns I really need. You should follow my example, clearly...

Now of course I do have a spare 44 Mag Marlin, just in case a part breaks or something.
....and a Rossi 44 Mag, just so I can shoot it once in awhile and be sure I like the Marlin better.
....and since the balance is so different, I do have the Rossi's in 16", 20" and 26" barrel lengths.

But that's really all I need.

.

.

Other than I do have a couple/few 357 Mag leverguns, just because....well, er....the cartridge is closer to the 32-20, and I might have a guest who can't shoot the heavy-recoiling 44 Magnums. Yep, that's it.

.....and since the Marlin 357's are so handy, I have both Marlin and Rossi ones just like with the 44.

But that's really about it.

Now I do have a couple/few 45 Colt ones, of course.....because, well, er....if I shoot them enough, I might trade in all the 44's on 45's someday. Yep, someday. That's the plan. Someday.

.....and of course a 454 Casull (or two) is really needed, in case something needs the power of the 500 S&W but in a smaller caliber...

But that's pretty much the only leverguns a person needs, really.

.

.

In terms of the short-actions.

Now some would say the 454 Casull and 500 S&W cover all the big stuff, but I think there are CLEAR niches where the 45-70 does things that neither the 454 or 500 cover very well. I can't think of any offhand right now, but I do know there must be some.

.

.

Then I forgot - EVERYONE has to have a 30-30 levergun - I think it's State Law in Indiana.

And that really covers everything.

.

.

But I guess I do firmly believe that anyone with 44 Mag leverguns SHOULD have at least one (or three) 444 Marlins - obviously there could be a shortage of 45 caliber bullets, yet somehow tons of 44 caliber bullets still around, and the 444 Marlin could literally be a LIFESAVER in such circumstances, so I think it really boils down to a Civic Duty to own at least one 444 Marlin.

The only other firearm I really 'need' is my 375 Winchester, because it is my only Winchester levergun , and is surely one of my most beautiful leverguns. There are also TONS of game species that won't fall to the 44 Mag, or 45 Colt, yet the 454 Casull or 45-70 or 444 Marlin or 500 S&W would be horrific overkill and leave nothing left edible. The 375 fills that vital niche.

.....and for the game that the 375 would be overkill for, yet the 357 Mag not enough for, and you need a smaller entrance wound, I guess I do have to admit that a 35 Remington is perhaps not absolutely vital, but is pretty much necessary if one is to have even the most basic levergun battery.

But that about covers it, with really just those three guns, plus maybe another one or two/dozen.

.

.

.

.......other than RIMFIRES, of course.............

[vancelw]

Convert it back to .348 as God intended!

The thought has crossed my mind! I think I'd rather do a .450 Alaskan if I chose that route though. By all inspection, it already appears to wear a very fine .45 caliber barrel, and .458 bullets are a lot easier to come by than .348. Of course, I'm biased, since I already have a .348 and it would be a hard pair of weapons to double fist.

Thanks again for the replies. I'm really hoping someone has experience with an 1886 lever/carrier/hook in a 71 action and can confirm whether or not it will work.

.348 Bullets are not that hard to come by. I have a few thousand. Have even sold some because I realized I would never shoot them all in my lifetime, even with multiple M71s. The bullets choices are limited, but face it, with open sights we're not going to be shooting more than 300 yards at game and a high BC bullet is not needed for that.

Well, If I was going to convert it, .450 Alaskan would be a fine choice. It's a traditional conversion for the rifle and, since it's already been altered, there would be no loss of value.
I had M71 in the past that I should have converted but someone wanted it a whole lot more than I did in it's original caliber. I had only bought it to rob the bolt peep off of it.

[JFE]

I think you will need a shell lifter from an original Win 1886 and the “S” hook. I’d try the lifter first without fitting the “S” hook. To fit the hook the M71 lever will need to milled to accept the part. Your smith will need to use a 1886 lever to work out the slot he needs to mill into the M71 lever for the hook to fit and operate.

I’m not sure how close the repro 1886 rifles are for internal parts. You could ask Turnbull as they are experts at this stuff.

If you are going to rechamber I’d suggest a 46 Winchester, a cartridge that Winchester never released - it’s a 458, but on a full length 50/110 case.