Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

regpark · Post by **regpark** » Fri Nov 22, 2013 5:59 pm

I recently picked up a Miroku 92 in 45 Colt, does anyone if these Japanese rifles can handle +P ammo? I am working up some new loads and would love to try some heavier loads if it could handle it. If they use the same receiver as they do for 44 mag, I'd imagine it'd be no problem but wasn't sure if that's the case. Thanks guys!

Post by **Old Savage** » Fri Nov 22, 2013 6:10 pm

Yes, they can.

Tycer · Post by **Tycer** » Fri Nov 22, 2013 6:28 pm

No problem.

Post by **Hobie** » Fri Nov 22, 2013 6:55 pm

I had a sudden desire to channel Terry, better leave.

jeepnik · Post by **jeepnik** » Fri Nov 22, 2013 7:57 pm

I really hate to say this, but the japchester's steel is better than Winchester's. And, they are exceedingly well made. So +p, as others have stated is no problem.

regpark · Post by **regpark** » Fri Nov 22, 2013 8:19 pm

Ya'll seem pretty confident about it, glad to hear it!

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Fri Nov 22, 2013 10:09 pm

There are a few old threads about the general topic of "+P" loads, as well, that you might find interesting...

If the forum's "search" function won't find them, you can try a 'URL' search using "levergunscommunity.com" and "+P loads" or other similar searches, and perhaps find them as well.

JerryB · Post by **JerryB** » Fri Nov 22, 2013 10:46 pm

You are right Hobie, WHERE IS TERRY WHEN WE NEED HIM????????

Buck Elliott · Post by **Buck Elliott** » Sat Nov 23, 2013 12:13 am

AFAIK, SAAMI does not recognize, list, or sanction any .45 Colt "+P" load data.. That leaves the term wide-open to broad, vague, and subjective interpretation.. That said, great hordes of Experimenters have juiced up the old cartridge, for use in any number of 'modern' firearms.. Including Yours Truly.. Many of us have managed to survive these excursions into forbidden territory with impunity, but not All.. It is NOT recommended practice for the novice or intermediate handloader.

The various Modern iterations of the venerable Model 92 seem to be tough, strong, fairly well made firearms, and since most makers chamber their various 92s for the relatively-potent .44 Magnum, it would seem to stand to reason that the same gun, chambered to 45 Colt might well stand pressures in the same general vicinity as generated by the slimmer .44.. Certainly, the 92 is more than amply "strong" for standard .45 loads..

There are powders and loading combinations that will give significant increases in velocity, and many such have been published in these very forums over the
e years.. I would hope that only "successful" data had been presented for public perusal..

Answer: maybe yes; maybe no..

Larkbill · Post by **Larkbill** » Sat Nov 23, 2013 8:00 am

This is the article that originally lead me to this forum:

http://www.leverguns.com/articles/paco/ ... vergun.htm

regpark · Post by **regpark** » Sat Nov 23, 2013 11:21 am

Larkbill wrote:This is the article that originally lead me to this forum:
http://www.leverguns.com/articles/paco/ ... vergun.htm

Yeah, those loads are serious... not sure I want to mess with those magnum powders.

earlmck · Post by **earlmck** » Sat Nov 23, 2013 12:00 pm

regpark wrote:Yeah, those loads are serious... not sure I want to mess with those magnum powders.

I'm worried that your thinking may be getting skewed here, regpark. If you want a considerable increase in performance for your 45 Colt rifle over that available with original factory pressure loads you will be much better served with the powders that are considered "slow pistol powders" such as H4227, H110, Lil' gun, etc. that I am assuming you are calling "magnum powders". These powders will give you much increased velocity levels while remaining at modest pressure levels, and if you accidentally try to drop a double charge, you'll have powder spilling all over heck.

It's much easier to get into trouble with fast pistol powders, which you may consider to be "target load powder". Drop a charge of bullseye in the big old Colt case. Look down in there -- lots of room left. Now drop a second charge in the same case -- still lots of room left. That's a much more likely way for you to get into pressure trouble than the use of "magnum powders".

If you want to get some real impressive performance and stay safe, pick up some H110 (I like to use a magnum pistol primer with the ball powders) and just stay with Paco's M94/Marlin336 level of loads and you'll be in "hog heaven".

regpark · Post by **regpark** » Sat Nov 23, 2013 2:15 pm

I've been using Trail Boss, and HS-6 for 45 COLT so far, haven't experimented with any other powders for this caliber yet.

But I'll reconsider the 'big boy' powders for the heavy loads.

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Sat Nov 23, 2013 4:34 pm

earlmck wrote:
regpark wrote:Yeah, those loads are serious... not sure I want to mess with those magnum powders.
...stay with Paco's M94/Marlin336 level of loads and you'll be in "hog heaven".

However, just like when developing any load, drop down the charge and work up to that maximum slowly, in small increments. While I believe the mdl 1892 is stronger than ither the mdl 94 pr mdl 336, I wouldn't recommend jumping in at the max!

JerryB · Post by **JerryB** » Sat Nov 23, 2013 5:23 pm

You could always trade your .45 Colt for a .44 mag or appreciate the .45 for what it is. I have a 1957 Colt SAA 5 1/2 inch .45 and a Hartford 92 in .45 Colt and have been loading for the handgun sine 1960. Eight or nine grains of Unique will take care of anything I hunt here in Arkansas. You may need more where you live.

Buck Elliott · Post by **Buck Elliott** » Sun Nov 24, 2013 1:47 am

I always have to chuckle at the notion that we should learn to "appreciate the .45 for what it is.." Believe me, we DO.. But we also appreciate even more, what it Can Be, when loaded to its potential.. For me: I don't want to settle for a .44 Mag., if I can have a .45 "Magnum" for the same price or effort.. For those of you who may have been living under various rocks for the past 60 years or so, it may come as a shock to learn that the "stodgy" old .45 has been successfully 'magnumized' by various guncranks for at least that long..

While the rather untutored and unsophisticated Elmer Keith was busy blowing up perfectly good sixguns, using heavy bullets and heavy charges in old 'balloon-head' .45 Colt cases, another, more-astute group of students of gunology was working in Salt Lake City - eventually under the expert tutelage of Keith's old nemesis P.O. Aclley - attempting to build .45-caliber revolvers that would top anything then available.. Jack Fullmer, Sherm Eskelsen, and one Richard (Dick) Casull, were the enterprising trio who finally brought a Magnum .45 to life..

In their quest, they were hampered by old-school metallurgy; lack of appropriate bullets & powders, and rampant skepticism among their supposed peers.. Along their way, they learned every carburizing trick in the book, and added a few of their own.. They learned the extreme importance of fits and tolerances, and devised loading methods and recipes that scared lesser souls out of several years of their lives, I'm sure...

One of Casull's stated goals was to drive a 230-grain, .45-caliber bullet out of a 7 1/2" revolver barrel at over 2,000 fps.. To accomplish that, with then-available powders, at containable pressures, it was necessary to load THREE different powders, sequentially into the case, one on top of the other, to be held in place by compression, when the bullet was seated.. First, a small 'initiating' charge of BULLSEYE was dropped in and settled.. Then, the Main Charge of 2400 was carefully added, being careful not to mix the two powders in the case.. Finally, a 'kicker' charge of UNIQUE was added, to give the bullet one last boost out of the barrel.. It was not recommended that casual reloaders should attempt the precision required to make sure everything came together correctly..

As I have heard the stories, over the years, there was mention of several '92 Winchesters having been barreled and tightly-chambered for this new level of .45 Colt performance.. Magnum Style..!

As commercial introduction of Casull's .45 Magnum loomed ahead, it was decided that the cartridge case should be lengthened enough to prevent chamberin.g in conventional .45 Colt firearms, and a nominal case lenght of 1.385" was standardized..

When Freedom Arms finally brought the .454 Casull to the marketplace, many gun-scribes were aghast at the heretofore prohibited pressures.. 65,000 psi in a hand-held revolver, scared the living excrement out of several of them.. The late Bob Milek vowed that he would never even pick up a FA Casull revolver, until he saw first-hand, what He considered to be reliable pressure data.. Never mind that a new, "miracle" powder had come on the scene, taking the place of the scary-sounding Tri-Plex loads, and that both Hodgdon's and H.P. White Laboratories had tested the loads, and that the new H-110/W-296 had proved to be the Holy Grail of powders for that application..

You have to envision Pressure as relative.. Relative to the mechanism(s) used to contain it.. If it does not exceed the strength of the container (chamber/cylinder/barrel/&c..) it can be deemed"safe" in that application..

All this brings us to our present discussion of the 92 Winchester, and high-end .45 Colt loads - specifically, to loads generating less than 50,000 psi..

For a few years, before I finished my .454 rifle, I had a Browning B-92, which had been born a .44, but was destined to become a .45 Colt, utilizing the very barrel with which we destroyed several Winchester 94s and one 336 Marlin.. I cut off the breech end, rethreaaded it for the Browning, and cut a .480"-diameter chamber.. It was a light, well-balanced, easy carrying, 24" rifle, that took its share of game, large and small.. I sold it for a relatively handsome price, to be able to continue work on the .454 rifle project..

After several thousand rounds of high-pressure .45s, the little Browning remained tight and smooth.. But I knew that the angled locking bolts and their mortises would not stand up to the pounding of 65,000 psi, over the long haul.. I had always known that I would rely on the perpendicular geometry of the lock-up found in the big 1886, and it proved to be the way to go..

To make a long story just a bit shorter... SAAMI specs are not the absolute measure of a gun's or cartridge's potential.. In the case of the old .45, SAAMI standards are set low, taking into consideration all the old , decrepit Colts that MAY be out tbere.. I understand that, and respect the fact, as far as it goes.. But I also realize that in modern guns, made of modern materials, to closer tolerances and fits, the extremely-conservative numbers for our old warhorse can be relegated to the history books.. That BIG, cavernous case begs to be used, to its fullest potential.. The .45 Colt will still do EVERYTHING anyone could demand of the upstart .44 Mag., AND THEN SOME, and with less pressure.. Fact!

Newly-made 92s are the perfect platforms for the Modern .45 Colt, along with the full-size Blackhawks and Vaqueros from Ruger, and several others of their class..

Frankly, the little B-92 devoured a few thousand rounds in the 55,000+ psi class as well, and while the rifle held up well, those loads were becoming decidedly unpleasant to shoot.. I had cut the cartridge stop on the carrier back, to allow for longer 300 - 325 grain bullets to be loaded.. There was no more "extra" room inside that action for anything longer except by lengthening the lever stroke, which I did not want to do..

There.. That's my 2-cents worth...

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Sun Nov 24, 2013 7:46 am

Buck,

Good readin'! And well done by the way!

I still get a chuckle out of cowboy action shooters whose only experience with the 45Colt... seems to with the under-charged, light .452 bullets in the 600-650fps area so prevalent in that game. So... when I get a wild one and load a few rounds of 45Colt just shy of 38 grains of 3F compressed under a 250 grain round nose in the 45Colt... they squeal like little girls!

Post by **Hobie** » Sun Nov 24, 2013 11:09 am

That was a dollar's worth for certain there Buck! Thanks.

earlmck · Post by **earlmck** » Sun Nov 24, 2013 11:19 am

Hobie wrote:That was a dollar's worth for certain there Buck! Thanks.

I'll third that! Thanks, Buck.

getitdone1 · Post by **getitdone1** » Sun Nov 24, 2013 11:53 am

Buck Elliott,

Outstanding article. If you do not write for some gun publication, you should. Be something to do on cold winter days. Help you buy more guns, too!

Don

Tycer · Post by **Tycer** » Sun Nov 24, 2013 3:01 pm

Nice Buck. Thanks!

Buck Elliott · Post by **Buck Elliott** » Sun Nov 24, 2013 3:18 pm

Thanks Gents..!
I appreciate the kind words..!

JerryB · Post by **JerryB** » Sun Nov 24, 2013 10:49 pm

Very interesting article Buck, good for those that want or need heavy loads. Since I don't live where I need anything like that I'll stick with my 8 or 9 grains of Unique under a little 255 grain swc and go back under my rock for another 60 years so you can still have your chuckle.

Malamute · Post by **Malamute** » Sun Nov 24, 2013 11:27 pm

Buck Elliott wrote:... I had cut the cartridge stop on the carrier back, to allow for longer 300 - 325 grain bullets to be loaded....

Did it still feed shorter rounds alright? I've been wanting to do just that to my 92 to use the 44 Lyman Keith bullets. I've heard some say their various makes of 92's don't feed shorter rounds, I didn't know how common that was, or if I'd likely have trouble with shorter rounds in the Browning if I cut the stop on the carrier back.

Buck Elliott · Post by **Buck Elliott** » Mon Nov 25, 2013 12:21 am

Yes... The B-92 still fed 'standard length' cartridges just fine..

Malamute · Post by **Malamute** » Mon Nov 25, 2013 12:28 am

Thanks!

piller · Post by **piller** » Mon Nov 25, 2013 12:42 pm

I also appreciate it when Buck steps in and sets things straight. He gave me a tip on powder to use in my .480 that is not published in anything that I can find, but is working very well for me. I worked up the load using a lot of guesswork based on load density and powder speed comparison with known published data, and still have my guns and all body parts. I am not going to give any data out on what I am using just because it is not published and I am afraid of the lawyers. So far it is giving good velocity and accuracy from the pistol, and great accuracy and velocity out of the carbine. I don't have the equipment to test pressure, but I have looked at the fired cases and compared them to factory loads fired in the same firearm by looking at them with a 10x magnifying glass, and cannot see any difference in the cases. My chronograph says that the pistol is within 25fps of the factory ammo with a standard deviation of 10 fps per 50 rounds, and the carbine is gaining 200 fps with the same deviation. Thanks Buck.

regpark · Post by **regpark** » Mon Nov 25, 2013 1:22 pm

Thanks guys, defiantly got my money's worth!

I'll try to find some 4227, H110, LIL`GUN, etc and start experimenting. I have some 255gr Keith SWC and 300gr projectiles heading my way, should be interesting.

Buck Elliott · Post by **Buck Elliott** » Mon Nov 25, 2013 3:57 pm

No matter what else you do, you should also consullt published loading manuals.. My latest Speer and Hornady manuals - and the Hodgdon's Annual Manual - all have sections reserved for Ruger & Contender loads, which push pressures and velocities way beyond the SAAMI-mandated 14,000 psi limit.. Author Brian Pearce and gunsmith John Linebaugh have also worked up some serious .45 Colt loads that would be useful..

Using top-end loads of the slower powders in the list should work best in a rifle or carbine..

Be careful with your procedures, and yo'll have a lot of fun with this..

Arkansas doesn't have Yukon wolves or grizzly bears, but Wyoming does..

regpark · Post by **regpark** » Fri Nov 29, 2013 4:05 pm

I managed to find some 2400, H110, TiteGroup and IMR4227, score!!

Lets see what kind of damage I can do....

regpark · Post by **regpark** » Sat Nov 30, 2013 10:46 am

This shall be interesting, loaded up some 300gr lead over 18.6grs(+/-) of 2400, and 20grs(+/-) of IMR4227, bullet is from missouribullet.
They measure around 1.565-75" and cycle through the lever beautifully! muahahahaha.....have a feeling they are going to kick a bit!

earlmck · Post by **earlmck** » Sat Nov 30, 2013 11:40 am

I ran your loads through my ballistics software program, regpark. I don't have that exact bullet to plug in, but substituted another 300 grain cast bullet. QuickLoad is predicting you'll get about 1350 fps at 24K psi with the 4227 load and about 1550 fps and 36K psi with the 2400. That'll up the power level quite a lot from "factory".

regpark · Post by **regpark** » Sat Nov 30, 2013 12:19 pm

Oh that is cool Earl, maybe I should consider this program.... quickload you say?

If it makes any difference, the bullet are .452 dia, and .775 long, crimped at the highest crimp groove.

I wasn't expecting the 2400 load to be that high of pressure...

earlmck · Post by **earlmck** » Sat Nov 30, 2013 6:08 pm

regpark wrote: I wasn't expecting the 2400 load to be that high of pressure...

Ballistics software is just something else to look at and can occasionally give results that differ considerably from the real world. So if you have load manual data for the 2400 showing lower pressure, that's probably more reliable. But if you chronograph your loads and get velocities in the vicinity of what QuickLoad predicts, I'd bet the pressure prediction isn't far off either.

Several of us on the Leverguns forum have this program and although I don't know of anyone who'd bet the ranch (and their health) on the program, I doubt any of us would be in any rush to bet against the program, either.

regpark · Post by **regpark** » Sat Nov 30, 2013 9:25 pm

I got to shoot the hot loads today, and my right shoulder hates me right now! Even though I only shot 25 rds ea. of the 4227 and 2400 loads, that was enough. The 2400 loads defiantly felt a little hotter... so your software predictions may of been pretty close to reality. I'm going to see if I can come up with a load for the 300 grainers that meets around 1000FPS, that should be plenty of power (for what, I don't know) and hopefully significant reduce in recoil. The 20gr of 4227 under 300gr bullet felt plenty powerful but didn't kick quite as hard as the 2400 load. Also, I have 255gr SWC bullets to throw in the mix. There was one thing I noticed about the 2400 load, when I was shooting close (like 3-7 yds), it seemed like it was key holing. The 4227 load was nice clean holes in comparison.... weird.

Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo

Re: Miroku Winchester 1892 +P ammo