Older Gun With Newer Ammo: A Centerfire Winchester 1866
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 сен 2024
- utreon.com/c/f...
/ forgottenweapons
www.floatplane....
Cool Forgotten Weapons merch! shop.forgottenw...
The Winchester 1866 was chambered for the .44 Henry rimfire cartridge, like the Henry rifle before it. Before too long, however, centerfire ammunition began to take over as the best and most common type of cartridge. The Model 1866 continued to sell for decades, but some buyers wanted to use centerfire ammunition in them. A centerfire version of the .44 Henry was developed, and conversions of the 1866 were done by both the Winchester factory and professional gunsmiths. Mechanically, the change was quite simple; just replacing the two rimfire firing pins with a single central one, and replacing the bolt face with an insert with a hole for that new firing pin.
Winchester factory example are typically found in the 140,000 serial number range and later. The best-documented batch was a sale of 1,020 centerfire 1866 rifles to Brazil in 1891, with numbers in the 167,000-169,000 range.
Contact:
Forgotten Weapons
6281 N. Oracle 36270
Tucson, AZ 85740
When Ian says "Henry exploded" there is a second I am thinking "it looks rather good for a gun that exploded..."
Well, to get technical, an explosion occurs every time a round is touched off lol But yeah, if the action maintains and there is no 'catastrophic failure,' the firearm is not regarded as having 'exploded.' Thus, a round going off with the firearm functioning correctly and containing that explosion is a 'controlled explosion.'
The word 'exploded' did stand out to me too though, like for a moment I thought he was referring to ACTUAL explosions, so I think it's understandable to have misinterpreted him as having said that that specific lever-action rifle had exploded.
I wonder when/where that rifle was purchased. What was the first meal hunted with it? Was it eaten out in the woods or in a home/shack somewhere? Surely that rifle can't have gone over a century and yet having never been used hunting... that just seems improbable. And, for that matter, had it ever been used in self-defense against someone... or if not self-defense then how?
If that rifle could talk, it would have some incredible stories to tell...
@@normanmccollum6082 Are you Ian's older, more sensible brother?
Yeah, the "exploded" portion of that sentence got me too for a second. Tho he finished the sentence before I could think much of that.
I instantly thought he was gonna talk about chain fire on the original Henry magazine. There's a chance you might detonate a cartridge in the Henry 1860 magazine if you drop the cartridges straight down or at too sharp an angle.
@@AshleyPomeroy
You perceive Ian to not be sensible? Also, pretty sure Ian is older than me, and I can guarantee he has A LOT more trigger time than me and is likely generally a better shot than me unless it turned out he struggles to hit targets out to 200-300m, which I doubt.
For the glory of the algorithm
I have nothing to say, but I am going to anyway.
yuck footube
Someone knowledgeable of Nier, I see
I wonder if this counts the same as a c○M €NT?
ALL HAIL OUR AI OVERLORDS!!
Great to learn something new about conversions. As an owner of many Uberti Henry, 1866, and 1873 rifles in .44-40 centerfire, I can tell you the ever so slightly necked .44-40 is a very accurate cartridge and the expansion of the neck upon firing seals the breech to keep powder blowback to a minimum unlike straight cased cartridges. I have fired BP and smokeless in my Uberti rifles and the clean up is so much easier because it is a necked cartridge.
Indeed. Shooting BP in 44-40 requires no more cleaning of the ACTION area then smokeless.. (and many, including myself, would argue that cleaning BP residue from the barrel is EASIER then cleaning smokeless residue) My Uberti 45 Colt OTOH gets very dirty, very quickly..even with smokeless. Not enough pressure is generated to cause proper expansion of that very heavy duty case...
You guys think like that because you can get new ammo and new cases easily, plus reloading (handloading ammo) is an option, not the only reasonable (either financial wise or because people are limited in the amount of ammo they are able to buy) way to shoot enough.
Straight cartridges last longer and are easier to reload. While this may be totally irrelevant for you, it's still something to take into account.
Good to know..Thank's 😐
@@trooperdgb9722 Than brother "than" not then.
Thanks for looking at another old Winchester variant! I remember, in the mid 80s reading about an archeological study of the Little Bighorn battlefield where they found spent 44 RF Henry cartridges with multiple firing pin hits. The archeologist, apparently along with me, didn't know about the Henry's twin firing pins, speculated that the Indians must have found a way to reload those cartridges in order to for there to be more than one firing pin strike. Even later after I initially learned of the dual firing pins, I had assumed that the second pin was to accommodate both the rimfire and centerfire ammunition as it became available. It has only been much more recently, through both Ian's and Karl's efforts that I have learned the true arrangement of the Henry's firing pins and the error of that Custer battlefield historian. Thanks to Ian once again for expanding my firearms knowledge!
Old Henry rifles that have scuffs and age showing are nearly always pretty to me for some reason. Thanks again Ian for consistently posting new videos lately. 👍
Yes, that natural patina always looks great on an old firearm. You know this gun was loved and well used as intended.
@@Steve.Cutler Exactly, it's an earned life showing it's journey.
It's kinda funny. One little knick on a gun looks awful. Fifteen makes it looks like it would barely function. 10,000 makes it look trusty and venerable.
@@bobhill3941 and at least a few probably used it to put food on the table for his family, nothing more American than that!
@@Steve.Cutler I like to think they were Steve, tools loved and used. That's very Canadian too.
I was just been called "stupid" for a comment in a cooking channel about how to reheat meat for sandwiches, and I want to say that the comment section of your channel is a great reflection of your person, Ian. Funny, friendly, inteligent, always bringing something good to the subject and above all, respectful. It's pretty much the only channel that I enjoy the comments nearly as much as the contenet, and I believe that's all on you.
A big hug from Argentina and keep on making great content.
@@michaelmurdock4607 There's really passionate people out there.
Unlike the Sandwich People, who can be downright rude, everyone in this comment section is armed.
An armed comment section is a polite comment section.
Now go back there and tell them that you reheat the meat by wrapping it around the barrel of an M-2 before running off a belt of .50's.
That'll put some spicy mustard on their sammiches.
@@kj3n569 HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Good one.
*obligatory comment saying bad things about you* jk man
The internet is filled with all kinds of crazy people.
I use Cowboy Action loads for my pre-1900 firearms… Winchester 1873 38-40, Springfield Trapdoor 45-70 Gov, and Springfield 30-40 Krag.
I want to see you do a shooting match with a cowboy themed arsenal the way you have with other periods/countries. A lever rifle and a Schofield revolver, or something like that...
Shooting black powder ammo at one of those matches would definitely stand out, but maybe not in the way you'd want :D.
You should look up SASS or cowboy action shooting, if you haven't heard of them already. Its a lot of fun.
As Jason has already mentioned. Look up Cowboy Action Shooting. A pair of SA revolvers . a pistol cal lever rifle, and a shotgun. ( I use a pair of Ruger Vaqueros, a Uberti 73 and an SKB) "1880's 3 Gun" lol I'm an Aussie.. but Ive been shooting that since 1994! It seems to have a foothold everywhere Western movies are popular. US, Canada, Europe, NZ, Australia.....
1886 winchester + Colt peacemaker action match = 1 million views EZ
without knowing it I would think someone painted that gun due to the very dull nickel plating
I've seen only one Winchester 1866 at a local shop and it was also a .44-40 center fire conversion!
5:15 I don't think there ever was an extractor on the bottom of the bolt. Both my reproduction Henry and Winchester rifles just have the same little knub at the bottom as a simple cartridge guide.
You are right, the bottom tab was not an extractor. As you said, it's just a guide. Since Ian already made a very good series or lever action evolution videos, I wonder why he made that mistake. I'm sure he actually knows better.
The Winchester is my favorite gun. I just love the mechanism from a mechanical design perspective.
I have heard of people reloading rim fire ammo by using the old style strike anywhere matches grind them up add a tiny amount of water make into thick paste drop a bit into cleaned cartridge case push into groove with little stick let dry and then load powder and bullet into case.
You can also spin the case in a drill to distribute the paste around the rim. Only really works with black powder rimfire cartridges that only need a spark. To make it work properly with smokeless you'd need something _faster_ than match-head soup and I would be wary of that: in a centrefire cartridge you are replacing the only part whose strength has been seriously compromised by deformation each time you reload, in a rimfire cartridge you are not. I did once try reloading 9mm rimfire shotgun cartridges: I am much older and wiser now. Also bear in mind that by the time you've filled the rim of a 9mm or .44" case, you've used an awful lot more compound than you'd fit into any normal priming cap, so you don't want anything too energetic and that probably brings you back to only using black powder loads.
You made me very interrested in old weapon mechanics a long time ago. The Henry's and first Winchester are the end of the aera, I'm interessted in the most. Thx a lot!
I always wondered why rimfires only hit one spot on the rim. Now I know the smart ones didn't.
@Bacteriophagebs The new Winchester Wildcats also have a double striker.
@@BruceLortzHI I would say it's probably because modern rimfire is much more reliable than in the 1800s, but really, it's almost certainly just because the designers didn't even think of it.
And the AM-180 isn't unreliable because of duds, it's unreliable because of feed and ejection issues.
@@BruceLortzHI it is with cheap .22 bulk packs of ammo.
There is only a certain amount of energy available from the hammer. Spreading it over two firing pins isn’t a problem for a lever gun since there is no problem designing in sufficient hammer force.
Blowback semi auto loading systems have limited energy available to re-cock the hammer or striker.
@@davidchristensen2970 That's a very good point, but I disagree that blowback systems lack the energy to cock a heavier spring. All you have to do is lighten the bolt to get more reciprocating energy. In fact, a heavier spring would be a good thing in that regard, since people like their .22s as light as possible.
Idk if it was the lighting, but that dull nickeled finish tricked me into thinking it'd been given an old timey ceramic wash finish like some cookware of the period. It would make no sense, of course, but that yellowish/cream hue is the spitting image of old coated pans.
Like an old-tyme version of that artist who did the blue-and-white porcelain AK? Nice.
@@trioptimum9027 yeah, like enamel ware (which is the term I was trying to think of at the time of my OP)
'Just exploded' may not be the best choice of words!
thank you for sparking a fascination of firearms! its amazing how such mechanically simple devices can have such complex development processes.
I'm always interested in firearms from 1830 to 1895. When one considers a young boy say of 14, learning to shoot a single shot flintlock rifle or pistol in 1830 and should he have lived a long life, by 1875, he now has a center fired muti shot rifle or a 6 shot pistol.
That same young boy would most likely have been second generation from the revolutionary war, and been able to talk to veterans of the truly greatest generation
Love this channel, always fascinating to hear about the mechanics and history behind firearms. Especially the super obscure ones.
Honestly a great video Ian, these lever action rifles like the 1860 Henry rifle were huge stepping stones in firearm innovation and hopefully some day i'll become the owner of one despite them being hard to get in Canada.
the 1866 has always been my favorite Winchester
Indeed!
Hi Ian, that style of guns reminded me of my 2 missing beauties. 2 1873 Winchesters, one very old, give to great grandfather by Bill Cody (yes that buffalo bill), I bought the second one in the 1970 directly by Winchester, but I was living in Milan, Italy and we got robbed when we were on a weekend holiday. Never saw them again, my heart still cries for them...
This is something that I've wondered about for a long time. I knew that the 1866 continued in production until 1899 but I had a hard time trying to find out if it had been offered in any caliber other than .44 rimfire.
I think i have seen one in .22 rimfire. I'm not sure if that was original or reproduction though. I have seen a new one (obviously) that's a reproduction, so I would imagine there was the occasional original one made.
That worn nickel plating almost looks like old pastel furniture.
neatly and accurately answered all my questions on the subject thank you kindly
I love videos like this, showing the internal mechanism of old old guns!
Brazil bought three batches of Winchesters 66, to suplement Spencers carbines in use, as these were not available anymore after the Civil War. Brazilian Army Models 1872 and 1874 (there is minor differences between the two models) were converted to centerfire in 1876, as was also done with the American and Belgian Spencers. The last batch of Winchester 66 was bought in 1891, but these already in centerfire configuration.
Heh, I guess you can teach an old dog new tricks.
ruclips.net/video/iEaPdqduRg0/видео.html
Thank you , Ian .
🐺
Not to get off the subject, I feel like watching "The Rifleman" any of you remember that show? Great forgotten weapons video👍
I've read articles and books that assert the centrefire '66s are only a modern thing. Even though it seemed to me a practical and sensible modification to make.
I'm glad to see that, and have explained it why, they were wrong.
Dual strikers for rimfire ammunition? Huh. I wonder if that is a feature on modern .22 semi-autos today. If not, maybe they should, if it would reduce duds. But I'm not expert, so I'm just thinking outloud.
Very nice rifle 😊 looks like it still works.
Why double firing pins are not standard on rimfires to this day is baffling. That looks a lot easier than the conversion I did on a Remington Rolling Block 32RF.
Those models 1866 and a number of 1873 imported to Brazil were known as the "Winchester papo amarelo" (Winchester yellow goiter), due the yellowed carrier block.
Excellent work on your review of the Winchester Centerfire 1866 Repeater, Ian. I really appreciate your work, partner. Take care now. 🤠🤘🏼
would love an og 66 carbine. even a basket case one.
I wonder why we have gone away from firing pins that strike in 2 locations in rimfire applications, like .22’s. Seems like a simple way to increase reliability of inherently unreliable ammo!
I still see it on some modern firearms. It is not uncommon to see a hammer/striker impact that runs the full width of the case head.
Simplicity of manufacturing, mostly.
And nobody's life is on the line with a .22
@@ScottKenny1978 One would hope not. But the reality is, often people do rely on ol' .22lr. A ruger 10/22 is an easy gun to learn with low recoil. You run the right rounds in it. I'm not saying it's a good idea, but it can work.
Really good for recoil adverse people, or people concerned about indoor concussive force. Some people don't live in a state where you can get NFA items, so suppressors are not an option.
@@SlavicCelery true. There are people who have to rely on a .22lr for whatever reason.
But I'll be honest, I'd sooner trust a cap and ball revolver than a .22lr!
Ian I really enjoy your videos. As a machinist I've always had an interest in the innovation of firearms the industrial revolution etc. The volcanic, henry, 73 and 76 winchesters, luger, and Pederson where toggle lock actions. I remember reading something years ago that an innovative individual tried a flap on the muzzle and spring system on a winchester to attempt an semi auto conversions. Did any innovative machinists ever try a recoil operated spring system on a toggle. Lock winchester to convert to a semi auto rifle
In the camera world we have a term for that wear on the nickel plate. It’s called brassing
Some ,22 Savage 1919 NRA Match rifles had double firing pins. I had a gunsmith convert my .41 Swiss to centerfire.
Very good job Ian
Thanks again for some very interesting insightful information, I’ve always wondered about how these unique updates were performed, so thanks again I once again have learned something new that I wanted to know.
omg we're back at Morphy's!
One of the most iconic rifles out there.
So, there seems originally have been a fork-like firing pin to hit the rim to detonate the rim-fire cartridge. As the only change seems to have been replacing the firing pin and drill a hole, why not simple replace the "two-prong" fork with a three-prong fork capable of both hitting center-fire as well as rim-fire ammo? You could then simply mix-and-match whatever you've got available. ( I'm probably overlooking a major issue)
It'd mangle the brass.
We beseech the great algorithm!! Bring us more forgotten weapons!! Please
God ian i love your videos, its always so cool to learn a little tidbit of history around a gun
Simple conversion really when you look at it. Minimal number of steps and new parts to convert.
I had a chance, long ago, to buy a more difficult conversion. A Winchester lever (model 94, I believe) action that had been converted to .45 ACP. I thought it would make a great companion to my 1911, but returned with money the following week to find it gone. This was in the 1970s. I’d still love to know the story behind the .45 ACP conversion. I’d have thought it could be quite popular.
That would be a neat gun. Imagine it Could hold quite a bit of rounds too. I've got a 94 chambered in .357. Definitely great guns. Timeless like a 1911 I think.
Anvil Gunsmithing had a video on one that came out of Argentina, as a standard arsenal conversion. Needed a bit of TLC to get working again, which is why there was an Anvil video.
Their border patrol (iirc) was armed with 1911 pistols and Winchester 1892 carbines.
@@ScottKenny1978 thanks!
@@5ringsmaster no problem!
Watching that video made me want a 92 in .45acp something fierce, though!
A 94 would be a poor choice to covert to such a short cartridge... the modern 94s in pistol calibres are ...not very good. (At least from a competition perspective) Maybe it was a 92? There are one or two gunsmiths in the US who have converted 45 Colt Uberti 73's to 45 ACP for the Cowboy Action Shooting spin off called "Wild Bunch Action Shooting" (Match is shot with a 45 ACP 1911, a 40 cal + lever rifle and a Model 97 or Model 12 pump shotgun) Handy of course having the same ammo for rifle and pistol...just like the "old days"..lol
You need to do a catapult or blunderbuss
What a wonderful day, thanks for the video of the wonderful firearm!
Interesting conversion. The dual firing pin for the rimfire cartridge is a solution that would be nice to have in modern rimfire guns. It might be hard to do with how small the head of all the modern rimfire cartridges are.
Some of the good modern rimfires do have dual firing pins.
Thanks for the awesome content and great video!
Thank you Much!
Great video once again. Love the history of the firearms out of the 1800's
God bless all here.
The 1866 Winchester is a gun of its time, most firearms up to about 1885 were using Black powder, not smokeless, and even those rated for smokeless of that early era were of a lower pressure than modern powders. It is always best to research the gun, have it inspected by a trusted gunsmith who can determine what the guns level of fitness for use it is, and then develop a low-pressure load using the correct components for that firearm.
As to what you referred to as the "second extractor" on the lower face of the bolt. Even though it does have a slight jaw that appears to be a short extractor, it is in fact a cartridge guide/alignment pawl. What it does is align and help hold the case rim against the bolt face preventing it from falling down into the receiver, and aid in holding said rim against the top Extractor jaw. As the bolt retracts rewards, the fixed ejector will push forwards against the lower-case rim pushing the case off the pawl and camming it upwards on the extractor jaw to clear the receiver.
"The 1866 fixed a couple of the flaws with the Henry and just exploded"
ya know I always forget what is the advantage between rim fire and center fire that enabled the centerfire cartridge to be the de facto standard?
Centerfire is able to be used at higher pressures. Rimfire needs to have primer distributed over a larger area and it must be evenly distributed, which makes large calibers difficult to produce and potentially unreliable and dangerous. If you think about it, putting a small amount of primer in a specific spot (the center) means you can use less of it while achieving maximum reliability.
He mentions that centerfire ammo was user reloadable.
I would also guess it also has to do with reliability. Remember where he says that they were putting two rimfire strikers(?) per bullet because the powder charge could be thin on one side?
Centerfire wouldn't have that problem because the primer is in the center.
Ian broke the extractor! Kidding!
It's interesting that Ian says that centre-fire could be reloaded, whereas the Henry rim-fire could not. Of course, there's a lot of truth in that. But actually, in some circumstances, American Indians especially found it easier to reload Henry rim-fire. They had lead and black powder, but they didn't have ready access to the primers needed to reload centre-fire. But they managed to reload rim-fire, apparently by using material from match-heads in the rim. Not the safest process, of course... but needs must when the devil drives. And the nice thing about a lever gun is that if you have a round that fails to fire, you can just lever it out and chamber another one.
If history went another way and guns would be developed now, they probably would never transition from rimfire to centerfire BECAUSE you can/could reload the cartridges. 😐
what? im confused! i dont have guns. you can reload rimfire cartridges? how does it work since they have a dent?
@@joranvandersluis No, as far as I know, you can't reload rimfire cartridges - a nice opportnity to sell expensive ammunition - like ink cartridges for printers.
@@JohnADoe-pg1qk thanks. there is a youtube video from some one whoe uses matches as primer. check it out.
My friend owned an 1866 rifle in .41 Long Colt. He did not claim it was factory done and said he thought the barrel was from a .40 caliber Winchester lever gun. Probably an 1886 .40-65 or .40-82. but I don’t know if they could be adapted to the gun.
I realize that this gun is a field conversion from RF to CF, but why would Winchester do factory conversions?
It seems like the only difference was in the firing pin and the bolt. Why not simply make those parts in the CF and RF varieties and put in the version the customer wanted? Or were other changes needed as well?
Perhaps because existing owners requested it? Just a guess...
Cool info - learned much from the FW videos!
I have a new .22 Henry rimfire...and with certain ammo, the double rim hits would be helpful, such as with a batch of Remington golden bullet that often needs a second strike to fire.
Lol whoever buys this, I can make the set screw big lever from rifleman if you desire one.
Winchester Model 1866 reproductions be like:
Could You make a video about why lever-action guns passed away in favour of bolt-action?
Wasn't it a simple thing like spitzer bullets and magazine design?
@@cyrilhudak4568 And action strength. This toggle lock design is a weak action, and worked fine for low pressure black powder cartridges. There are other designs that allowed full power smokeless rifle cartridges to be used, but they were way less slick to operate. There might be other reasons, like ease of manufacturing and costs, too.
Action strength. Most lever actions before the M1894 weren't strong enough to handle a full power rifle load like .30-40, .303, or x54R.
@@loquat44-40 the 86 was loaded with black powder cartridges, which don't have a lot of pressure. 18kpsi, if I remember correctly.
Modern smokeless powder runs at 55kpsi, which means that whatever locking surfaces are being used need to be 3x bigger.
@@loquat44-40 yes, the 55k is an average. 5.56 is 62k, iirc, while .50bmg is right at 55k and is proofed at 65k instead of the full 69k.
Doesn't matter how much black powder you have, it's always 18-21k absolute max due to the burn rate.
Thanks again
Why not have the firing pin strike in both place? If it can handle both ammo pressure wise, why not just make it compatible with both? Hit a rimfire on the edge and in the center, it still goes off. Hit a center fire in the middle and on the edge, it still goes off. They both get a dent that didn't do anything, but still fired.
Ian. the double firing pin on rim fire do you know why no manufacturer has not tried to employ that on a .22Lr or any other .22 caliber for that matter and if there is cases of this do any come to mind. I feel like it would help with modern .22 reliability
To make it cheaper to produce
Thanks for another "good lesson"!
Double firing pin's was a good Idea, kinda like double spark plugs on plane's.
Centerfire: One shot fires all the bullets in the magazine...
Oh hey, I was just telling Karl from Inrange about my recent affiliations on old school lever action designs. Perfect video for me haha
Foaming at the mouth to get an 1860 henry for my channel. It will happen for sure.
Ian, this leads me to a question. You spoke of the duel firing pins at 3 and 9 o'clock. Are there any modern manufacturers that do a duel firing pin rim fire to increase reliability?
I'm a bit curious about the marlin 1894 I wonder why Ian has never covered it?
As always a great video
Question why are there still subtitles on, when I have turned them off ?
Just to clarify -- was this centerfire conversion the actual .44 WCF round, aka .44-40, or was it a shorter round? I'd had the impression that the .44 Henry rimfire was a pretty short round (20-25 grains powder load), a little less powerful than a maximum load in a Remington or Colt cap and ball revolver, while the .44-40 (with its canonical original load of 38 grains) was quite a bit hotter...
You are correct, .44 Henry was a lower power round than .44-40. (Wikipedia lists the Henry's powder charge as 26 to 28 gr, .44-40 used a 40 gr powder charge.)
According to Barnes COTW, there was a .44 Henry centerfire round made just for these rifles.
I really love old school leaver action rifles. 🤠👍
Now I’m wondering why all (or at least some) modern .22 rimfires don’t have double firing pins.
Oh Lord! Where is thine MSBS Grot video?
Neat old Winchester 👍
Why was Winchester still making 1866s in the 1890s? The 1873 was such a runaway success, and is so similar to the 1866, I would have thought the 1866 would have been long discontinued.
Because they were selling. Similarly, Winchester had JMB design the 1892 rifle to be the successor to the 1873 rifle, but continued to sell the '73 for some time.
Shoutout Sean Ranklin
I want cowboy gun. It’s not the best gun but its a sexy gun.
glory to the algorithm gods!
I was wondering what was the final year that any of the US ammunition manuf.s produced .44 rimfire for sale to the public? Did this go on into the 1920's lets say?
I always thought the articulating mechanism of the lever to actuate the bolt transfers some recoil into the receiver just enough that a 44-40 or other CF round is a tad too much recoil going into the soft brass frame, therefore either bad idea for a brass frame lever to be the more powerful chamberings, or at the very least not a good choice for long term durability? That apparently is wrong.
Knee joint and break don't go together
Hmmm...double firing-pin rimfire. Why do we not see that in .22 rimfire today to make them more reliable? I've seen open-bolt .22's, (Gevarm), with fixed bar firing pins. Not sure if they're more reliable but they're easily made full auto with reliable fun.
I knew the Vetterli took the tube magazine design from the Winchester but I did realize they use the bolt face as well. Too cool. Also how we convert to center fire these days is what they did back then!
The gun didn't need any changes for the tube?
Why don't 22s have double firing pins now?
Cheaper to make them with one firing pin.
The video doesn’t address this, but I’m assuming it must have been cost prohibitive for Winchester to simply discontinue the 1866 entirely, and offer .44 Henry rimfire and centerfire as custom options for the 1873? Perhaps they wouldn’t have been able to use the forgings for the carrier, and therefore would have had to create a new one for the 1873? I would think with different extractors the same bolt could be used, but maybe not?
I’m only curious because the 1873 was both lighter, and cheaper to manufacture, so on the face of it it wouldn’t be obvious to me whether continuing to produce the 1866 and offering a conversion service to centerfire, or offering the 1873 in those chamberings, would be the absolute best way to go.
The nickel finish kinda looked like aluminum at first glance
Ok so centerfire 44 Henry Nagant revolvers ended up in Brazil. That’s quite a sentence.
Were the 73's offered in Henry RF?? (Edit: Apparently not. Interesting given they were being produced for many years concurrently with 1866's..which WERE)
this type of lever cation seems to me like it’s superior to the systems used by the militaries of the time. In terms of rate of rate of fire I would guess that it’s even superior to guns like the Kar.98 k. or the LeeEnfield or the Mosin Nagant. I mean you can stay on target and cycle the action, it just surprises me that nobody tried to adopt this. Are there any drawbacks to it that I’m missing?
there are concerns over the strength of that system when using full power rifle cartridges, particularily in long term durability.
The Russian actually used lever guns in 762 54r in ww1 and 2 made by Winchester Ian has video on it
@@Dumbo8234 nah thats not it when militaries were getting into the multiple rounds guns they wanted magazine cut offs and stuff for logistical reasons that's y the US army's rifle after the war was a single shot trap door Springfield. Many militaries used really shitty guns compared to what civilians had. Hell that's why the US army had such a hard time with the Indian campaigns after that civil war is because the Indians were generally better equipped then the US army
The issue most militaries had was ammunition consumption. They were afraid that their barely-trained troops would empty the magazine and then be out of ammunition for weeks. Weeks because a request for more ammunition moved at the speed of a horse, and the resupply moved at the speed of a man walking.
As for how long that idea/attitude lasted, well the M16A2 had a burst mechanism to make it so that poorly trained troops couldn't just dump the magazine downrange with one pull of the trigger.
Toggle link actions of that type simply don't have the strength to handle full power rifle cartridges...(definitely not of the 303/7.62x54R/8mm Mauser class!!! Not even for ONE shot safely let alone long term) Even the scaled up "Rifle calibre" version of the 1873 (the 1876) was chambered in more "gentle" cartridges..notably EXCLUDING the 45-70 Government! The Model 1886 might have been a contender, but was not of the Toggle Link design... ... and as already pointed out militaries were reluctant to adopt repeaters... and of course they were much more expensive. Other possible reasons? Lever actions are somewhat awkward to use when shooting prone ....The Model 1895 (Which has a much longer and slower "lever throw" than the Toggle link designs anyway) was only adopted militarily by Russia..and THAT was at a time they were desperately buying whatever they could get during WW1.
Oh man nickel plating that nice brass....Day one, Firearms are invented. Day two, Bubba was invented.
Nickel plating actually serves a purpose though. It's much more corrosion resistant than brass as well as being less porous. So it's a smoother finish that won't tarnish as easily.
Also, it certainly wasn't some Bubba who figured out how to electroplate metals.
TL;DR that was a bad take and you should feel bad
When it was new, nickle plating was the durable, heavy duty field finish. Kinda like Cerakote. Functional first, flashy later