Question about the 1876 vs 1886

[Gary7]

I've read several times in various sources that the "big" advantage of the 1886 over the 1876 was that the Browning design could handle much more powerful cartridges than the toggle-link 76 action. The specific cartridge mentioned is the 45-70, which the 76 was never chambered in. But the 76 was chambered in 45-75 and 50-95. Are these not just as "powerful" as the 45-70? I mean, if the 76 can handle the stress of 95 grs of black powder launching a 50 caliber slug, why couldn't it handle the 45-70?

[J Miller]

Gary,
Power and pressure wise it could. Cartridge length wise the 76 didn't have the capability to handle the longer 45-70 round.
The 45-75 is a shorter, maybe not by much, bottle necked round. The 45-70 uses a basically straight case.

Joe

[Gary7]

Gary,
Power and pressure wise it could. Cartridge length wise the 76 didn't have the capability to handle the longer 45-70 round.
The 45-75 is a shorter, maybe not by much, bottle necked round. The 45-70 uses a basically straight case.

Joe

So, while the 86 clearly has a stronger action from a fundamental design standpoint, the real issue when it came to the 45-70 wasn't the strength of the 76 action, but its size. Interesting. A lot of what has been written about the 86 is sure misleading on this point.

[J Miller]

From what I've read, the 1876 wasn't all that week considering it was a toggle link action. But when comparing the two, John Browning's 1886 was and is much stronger.
I think what it comes down to was they were two completely different design concepts. The 1876 was a larger rifle based on the smaller 1873 design made to use the bigger cartridges then in use.
Later on Winchester wanted another gun that could use the longer 45-70 types and by then John Browning was on the job and did a real doozy of a design job.

Joe

[RIHMFIRE]

From what I've read, the 1876 wasn't all that week considering it was a toggle link action. But when comparing the two, John Browning's 1886 was and is much stronger.
I think what it comes down to was they were two completely different design concepts. The 1876 was a larger rifle based on the smaller 1873 design made to use the bigger cartridges then in use.
Later on Winchester wanted another gun that could use the longer 45-70 types and by then John Browning was on the job and did a real doozy of a design job.

Joe

Exactly.....

[Martini450]

As Joe pointed out, the 1876 action was perfectly capable of handling the power and pressure of the army's black powder 45-70 load, but couldn't digest the length of the government cartridge. It's worth pointing out that the 45-75 was loaded with a 350 grain bullet, as compared to the 45-70's 405 grain or 500 grain loadings; what was lost in bullet weight was in theory gained back in velocity.

I've seen it written that Winchester used the 350 grain bullet because the '76 action couldn't handle the stress of a heavier slug, but according to the book "The Winchester Model 1876 Centennial Rifle" Winchester actually offered a long range factory 45-75 round that was loaded with a paper patched 450 grain bullet backed with 90 grains of powder which was intended specifically for the 1876 rifle. The rifle had to be loaded like a single shot when using this round, as the overall length was far too long to operate through the repeating mechanism. This shows that the limiting factor with the Winchester toggle design was not it's strength, but it's length. This is of course based on the black powder cartridges of the day; all bets were off as soon as smokeless powder entered the picture.

Another interesting thing the book points out is that the '76 was not based on the '73, but was based on a model 1867/1868 that Winchester had developed in those years, in hopes of foreign military contracts. This model had the side plates, was chambered for a centre fire round, and predated the '73 by a few years, so the '73 actually borrowed ideas from the '76's lineage.

[KWK]

I doubt we'd have seen a .33 WCF or a .348 if Winchester had stuck with their old toggle link designs. The 1886 was far stronger and more compact as well.

The 76 is fine for what it is, and I've seen more than a few comments that isolating the elevator from the breech locking was a good idea with black powder and its residues.

[Old Time Hunter]

Another interesting thing the book points out is that the '76 was not based on the '73, but was based on a model 1867/1868 that Winchester had developed in those years, in hopes of foreign military contracts. This model had the side plates, was chambered for a centre fire round, and predated the '73 by a few years, so the '73 actually borrowed ideas from the '76's lineage.

Dang nabit! I thought that I was the only one that ever read that!

[Cimarron]

I've seen it written that Winchester used the 350 grain bullet because the '76 action couldn't handle the stress of a heavier slug, but according to the book "The Winchester Model 1876 Centennial Rifle" Winchester actually offered a long range factory 45-75 round that was loaded with a paper patched 450 grain bullet backed with 90 grains of powder which was intended specifically for the 1876 rifle. The rifle had to be loaded like a single shot when using this round, as the overall length was far too long to operate through the repeating mechanism. This shows that the limiting factor with the Winchester toggle design was not it's strength, but it's length. This is of course based on the black powder cartridges of the day; all bets were off as soon as smokeless powder entered the picture.

Another interesting thing the book points out is that the '76 was not based on the '73, but was based on a model 1867/1868 that Winchester had developed in those years, in hopes of foreign military contracts. This model had the side plates, was chambered for a centre fire round, and predated the '73 by a few years, so the '73 actually borrowed ideas from the '76's lineage.

I just got a copy of "The Winchester Model 1876 "Centennial" Rifle" by Herbert G. Houze and I would recomend it to anyone interested in the 1876 Winchester! I own a Cimarron/Uberti "Centennial" in .45-75 WCF and a Browning 1886 in .45-70 Govt. I can't say which I like best but I love shooting either one. I've had the Browning for about 25 years but the '76 only about 6 months.

[Poohgyrr]

I can't help but think of Crossfire Trail whenever I read about a '76.

[hfcable]

Another interesting thing the book points out is that the '76 was not based on the '73, but was based on a model 1867/1868 that Winchester had developed in those years, in hopes of foreign military contracts. This model had the side plates, was chambered for a centre fire round, and predated the '73 by a few years, so the '73 actually borrowed ideas from the '76's lineage.

Dang nabit! I thought that I was the only one that ever read that!

i have that book too. great book. once saw a picture of one of the truly rare 1868s sold to switzerland that was coming up on auction in europe......wonder how much$$$ that thing brought?

[KirkD]

I wrote an article which you can download as a pdf ( http://www.leverguns.com/articles/1876.pdf ) that recounts some of the history of the '76 as mentioned above. As far as action strength goes, the action of the '76 is perfectly fine for the cartridges it is chambered in, judging from the two original '76's I have owned. Neither showed any headspace problems despite the fact that they were well over 100 years old and had earned their keep. I never hot rod these old '76 cartridges (both of mine were/are 45-60).