PDA

View Full Version : Browning Mdl 53 Delux 32WCF



omgb
07-08-2005, 07:58 PM
I just recently got the idea that I needed a 32-20. Most of the Italian knock-offs were model 73 or 86 Winchester copies; designs I don't feel are very strong. Some original 92s were out there but they cost a whole lot more than what I wanted to pay for a plain jane gun. I saw two very interesting pumps, one a Remington and the other a Marlin but with guns that old, barrels become suspect and besides, if I wanted a pump, I'd go with a Colt Lightning. So, back to the search. Then I discovered the short run (5K) of Win knock offs done by Browning in 1990. This seemed to be perfect. I've never actually had one in my hands though. Do any of you have any direct experience?

StarMetal
07-08-2005, 08:20 PM
The 1873's aren't a strong action, but I don't know where you get the notion that an 1886 is. That baby is brute strong and is right up there with the Marlin 1895. Off the top of my head I can't recall an Italian copy of the 1886, but have seen the Italian copies of the 1876 and 1892. Browning made a run of Winchester 1886's and like the current Winchester 92's and 86's are made in Japan.

Joe

9.3X62AL
07-08-2005, 08:41 PM
OMGB--

I saw only one example of the Browning (Miroku) Model 53 repro, about 3 years ago--a high-grade example. The wood was spectacular, fit of wood to metal was about flawless. Its fine condition and skyward price caused me to not buy it--this during my search for a lever 32-20 rifle for field and hunting usage.

I will be turning my attention to the 32-20 rifle shortly--I just got some of the Starline brass in this caliber, and it is stronger (thicker) at the case mouth than the W-W and R-P stuff I've used for years in wheelguns and a former lever rifle. Like you, I developed a "need" for a rifle in this small hyphenated WCF chambering. I've recently run across a plethora of molds to service this caliber, so the work will commence soon.

KCSO
07-08-2005, 08:52 PM
A friend of mine has a Browning M53 and I have had the pleasure to shoot it quite a bit. It does very well with Lee soupcans up to 150 yards. We only shoot the gun with the original sights as he won't take a chance of scratching the gun. The bad news is that when he bought it 10 years ago? it ran him $700 bucks. I have a Rossi 357 that I am thinking of lining to 32-20. I know I will have to change the cartridge guides, but I may do this to get a 32-20 that I want for a price I can afford. My only 32-20 now is an old Savage bolt that a guy walked in with under his arm one day. I gave 150 for the gun and it is a splendid shooter. I am currently working on relining an original M94 Marlin in 25-20 for another friend and I can't wait to shoot it. Years ago I relined a trapdoor carbine with a sewer pipe bore to 32-20 and that was a nice little gun also, but it was strickly a low pressure gun.

9.3X62AL
07-08-2005, 09:08 PM
I almost leaped at a Italian copy of the 1873 Winchester in 32-20, this to match the original '73 I have in 44-40 WCF. The price was about the same as the high-order M-53, close to 1200 bones. I didn't object to the repro '73's ballistic limitations--115 grainers at 1200 FPS. The M-53 or the Marlin 94 can be a lot more useful in some situations, owing to their ability to safely process higher pressure loads that have no place in either a '73 or most revolvers. I will need to pay CLOSE attention to my 32-20 loads for this reason--any that get creative ballistically could harm a couple irreplacable revolvers I have in that same chambering.

omgb
07-08-2005, 09:21 PM
While the 1886 is strong, it's also kind of big. I really wanted something more compact. I finally located a Browning from a dealer in PA. he also had a Ruger Gold Label that I wanted so we worked out a package deal. I had to pay about $750 for the Browning but it's new and in the box unfired. So, I don't think I got skinned.

Sky C.
07-08-2005, 09:51 PM
I have one of these and the Browning repro of the 53 is an outstanding piece of quality workmanship in my opinion. As I'm sure you're aware - the 53 uses the same actioin design as the M-92 and it is a smooth and strong design. My small gripe about the gun is that Browning used the high gloss finish on the wood (mine is a grade 1 rifle). Wood and metal finish are 1st rate as is wood to metal fit. Browning did Winchester proud in the copy they turned out and with no extraneous "saftey" devices.

As for accuracy - I wish I could tell you but honestly I haven't had the chance to do load development yet. Hoping to wring it out before the end of the year but my schedule has not been cooperating so far. Last time to the range was back in Feb!

Best regards-

Sky C.

Stray Round
07-09-2005, 01:09 PM
Like others here, I've found that I'm in great need of a 32-20.

The Win 53s that I've seen have been perfect, except for the price.

Another idea is that supposedly Marlin has their 1894 CL's with half magazine listed in their catalog for 2005. I'm keeping an eye out for one and don't think they've produced them yet. I picked up one in 218 Bee the last run and have been kicking myself for not getting a 32-20 too.

Their catalog lists it to have as "micro-groove (six groove)". I don't know how six groove is micro-groove, it looks like Marlin doesn't know yet what they will make. Guess we'll have to look down the bore before we can know for sure.

9.3X62AL
07-09-2005, 02:15 PM
I saw this Marlin information about the 32-20/1894CL re-introduction about a month after I leaped on the 1894CCL now residing in the safe. I've heard both renditions of the rifling profile, too. Mine is 6-groove. So far, it did all right with some old lead-boolit factory loads, not so great with Lee Soup Cans, and REAL GOOD with Speer 100 grain .312" HP's. I'm hoping this rifle is more friendly to castings than the 1894CL in 25-20 has been to date. This class of calibers is just purpose-built for cast boolits--so the 25-20's recalcitrance with the castings is a little annoying.

Buckshot
07-10-2005, 12:51 AM
Al, of course you already have your 32-20, but remember there was that Savage bolt action 32-20 on the board at the range?

You know, re; Your M94 25-20, I seriously think you should take a look at the forend, mag tube, bbl and action fitting. Even though it does well with jacketed bullets, there still might be a bit of "Levergunitis" going on.

...............Buckshot

DOUBLEJK
07-10-2005, 06:59 AM
About 2 month's ago I aguired one a these beauties from another poster here...not sure what grade it is but it's a real nice lookin' piece a werkmanship fer sure...

It is pushin' real hard on my Rossi .44 as my go to gun for repelling duties around our place...

http://www.geocities.com/doublejk2/Coon32201.JPG

It has accounted for 7 of em now....like Deputy Al's it really likes the Speer 100gr. H.P.'s but does purty good werk with the Saeco 118gr. cast also...we had a real downpour the other night so my bench at the pond is a bit deep ta wade to....so yesterday I sat a 2gal empty oil jug at the end of the road against the dirt bank n walked back bout 110 steps... happened to be a semi dry spot n squated down on my heels n shot 5 as fast as I could settle the sights on the jug....could cover all 5 holes in the jug with the palm of my hand....the load was the Saeco 118 over a light startin' load of AA#7....gonna havta try it from the bench when the water resides a bit....:)

Denver
07-10-2005, 10:08 AM
I seem to recall that Cimmarron or maybe Navy Arms offered a version of the 92 Win, in 32-20 at one time. I think there may also have been a run of the Winchester 92 (made in Japan), rifles in 32-20, possibly a Davidson's special.
I have a Mdl. 25 Rem. in 32-20 that my Dad bought new in 1936 for $19.95. It shoots cast pretty well. Never did really try to develop a "best" load for it though. I have molds for both a plain base and GC 115gr bullets.

Shoulda' mention EMF Co. also.

9.3X62AL
07-10-2005, 04:10 PM
Buckshot--

Yeah, I saw that ad for the Savage on the bulletin board. Right tempting.

I don't understand how a rifle that shoots j-words so well and so consistently would do such evil things with cast boolits. Now, it doesn't shoot them BADLY--just not as well as the Speer 75's, 1-1/2X to 2X the group sizes at a given distance. Maybe I'm expecting too much from the platform--dunno. I'm going to keep working with it a while longer, safe in the knowledge that the J-words WILL WORK. That alone discourages any mods to the mag hanger or fore end, at least until we see how the 32-20 operates.

Rrusse11
07-10-2005, 08:27 PM
Gents,
Got a 32-20 barrel from GPC and a Marlin 1894 in 357Mag should be on the way shortly as the result of some trolling on Gunbroker. My buddy's original Win 1873 with set single trigger and 28" octagon barrel has been shooting the the Lee C312-113 'soupcan' superbly without a check with a shot of liquid Alox and unsized. With 5.5gr of Blue Dot I believe we're at the strength limitations of the action, and no point in risking a lovely old firearm. I also sold him my Marlin 1889 when I informed I was gonna start d&t it for a scope. Lol, he felt it his duty to save the old girl from the alterations of an alley cat like myself.
Hence the acquisition of the above modern build 1894,,,,, and here's what I'm planning for it.
http://www.marlinowners.com/gallery/albums/userpics/30-360Mauser1.JPG

In a modern gun, should give a substantive performance increase over the 32-20.

Cheers,
R*2

9.3X62AL
07-10-2005, 09:25 PM
R2--

Now, THAT is an interesting cartridge design for the modified 1894C in 357 Magnum. I suspect the lifter and feed rails will require no alterations. The only question I have is the cartridge's overall length--will the platform support a OAL 1.730"? The Marlins 357's start to get fussy much past the stock 1.590", I thought. Maybe that's lifter or cartridge stop issues, though.

Since you got a 32-20 barrel with nominal .310"-.311" groove......what kind of ballistics can this caliber develop with the 85-115 grainers available in this diameter?

Rrusse11
07-10-2005, 10:08 PM
R2--

Now, THAT is an interesting cartridge design for the modified 1894C in 357 Magnum. I suspect the lifter and feed rails will require no alterations. The only question I have is the cartridge's overall length--will the platform support a OAL 1.730"? The Marlins 357's start to get fussy much past the stock 1.590", I thought. Maybe that's lifter or cartridge stop issues, though.

Since you got a 32-20 barrel with nominal .310"-.311" groove......what kind of ballistics can this caliber develop with the 85-115 grainers available in this diameter?

Al,
I've been fiddling with COAL on my Marlin 336's and 1894's a fair bit now. With little more than work on the cartridge stop on the lifter, fairly ez to get + .050"-.070". The modern 1894's in 44Mag are already out of the factory set for 1.710", and I got to the full Casull spec of 1.765" COAL on my 452LoooongColt in one of the 45LC Cowboy models. Haven't played with one in 357Mag yet, but with the interchangeability of parts in the Marlins, I'm sure I can come up with something that'll allow a .300" nosed boolit.
Ballistics???? You tell me, {:o). I'd hope to get close to 2000fps with the Lee C312-113. Dunno if looking for 1000#'s of ME is asking too much of the caliber/case/pressure limits. Be interesting finding out.

What IS in the gunsmith's shop this week is the following, a Marlin 1894CL in 218 Bee, getting re-chambered with a 221Fireball reamer Allen had on the shelf. I've got the Fireball dies and with a step of 30Mauser>256WinMag>221Fireball, managed to neck down the same 360DW case as above to 22cal. I will have to trim the rim size on the brass from .440" > .408", but nothing much else needs to be done to the rifle. We agreed that the 'new' chamber is really a 221FireballR(immed),,,,,,, but that 218FireBee is a lot sexier name for it.
And that I'll have to back off the 52,000cup top pressure loads on the Fireball data.
He's got a coupla' cases, but I'll have to get a proper production set-up, anneal the necks, and figger out a jig for a drill press to trim the rims consistently, the mark one case was the battery drill and a file, lol, with frequent checks with the calipers, and the bolt face.
http://www.marlinowners.com/gallery/albums/userpics/218FireBee.JPG

Cheers,
R*2
Ps. With the FireBee, I'd like to crack 3000fps with a 45grainer. Not bad in a lever action, {;o). And, heaven help me, I even got some 22cal GC moulds now,,,,,. Haven't been game to try 'em yet, but here's the platform to test the speed limit of cast.

9.3X62AL
07-10-2005, 10:31 PM
I have no experience with the Bee, but that would be a rat-strafing caliber for sure. Hard to say how fast you could get the 32 going.....the stock 32-20 gets 1800 FPS with 100 grain j-words in the Marlin with complete safety. Should be interesting.

Rrusse11
07-11-2005, 06:59 AM
.the stock 32-20 gets 1800 FPS with 100 grain j-words in the Marlin with complete safety.

Al,
Thanks for the info! The 'new & improved' 30/360 is ~ 25% more case capacity than the 32-20, if I get that much more velocity it'd put a 100gr into the 2200-2300fps category. This cartridge will require a purpose built reamer, now that I've finally got my friend Allen willing to try some of my mad schemes, and I've got enuff experience with the Marlin actions to do some of the 'fiddly' bits of action mods, with existing dies it keeps wildcatting costs almost reasonable.
Eg., the Lee Factory Collet Crimp Die for the 218Bee, will, with a spacer on the shellholder, crimp my 218FireBee case. Same same with the 32-20 FCD on the 30/360Mauser.
The other evolution is the same approach to the 25-20, I've got a Model 62 in 256WinMag. With the magazine, and it's clip fed action, it's not really suitable for the wildcatting approach, plus prolly to valuable a rifle to mess with. But it sure could finance another 1894 in 357Mag and a 25cal barrel.
Cheers,
R*2

http://www.marlinowners.com/gallery/albums/userpics/256DWMag.JPG

9.3X62AL
07-11-2005, 02:34 PM
2R--

I think you already have the 25-20 solution in hand with the 256 x Marlin 62.

Funny you should mention that.....I have a M-62 in 30 Carbine, and it can get to 2150 FPS using 110 grain j-words due to its 22" barrel--this with a "stock" load of 14.5 grains of WW-296. Your estimate of 2300 FPS for the 30/360 is likely quite close, maybe a little conservative.

omgb
07-12-2005, 01:40 AM
j-words? Someone please fill me in.

Rrusse11
07-12-2005, 02:27 AM
2R--

I think you already have the 25-20 solution in hand with the 256 x Marlin 62.

Funny you should mention that.....I have a M-62 in 30 Carbine, and it can get to 2150 FPS using 110 grain j-words due to its 22" barrel--this with a "stock" load of 14.5 grains of WW-296. Your estimate of 2300 FPS for the 30/360 is likely quite close, maybe a little conservative.

Al,
The problem with the Model 62 is that I just don't like it much compared to the 1894 action. Shoots good, and there's a lot to be said for that short throw lever,,,, but I'm shying away more and more from clips. Something else to lose, lol. Thanx for the evaluation of the 30/360, I'm trying to be conservative, and the 32-20 Marlin barrel I got from GPC is one of the 22" 6groove CL's.
Turned a tidy profit on a Marlin 31-20 pump shotgun today,, mebbe I'll just buy one of the 25-20 CL's if/when one pops up.

omgb,
Jacketed, (almost universally copper), or condom, bullets, most commonly available from the various major bullet makers. They have their uses, but without some expensive swaging equipment, difficult to produce at home. The boolit caster has a LOT more options,,,,,, more trials and tribulations as well,,,. But your barrel will last a LOT longer, {:o).
Cheers,
R*2

Four Fingers of Death
07-12-2005, 07:37 AM
j-words? Someone please fill me in.

Really comitted casters are reluctant to utter the word for those strange boolits which have a copper or cupro nickel 'condom.' (jacketed, oops! I said it!).

Most of us use them when no ones looking, but our first love is cast.
Mick.

9.3X62AL
07-12-2005, 01:34 PM
I must be a little thick lately.......it just dawned on me that the Marlin 62's in 256 and 30 Carbine are little more than updated 25-20 and 32-20. I should wake up fully before posting, I guess.

Rrusse11
07-12-2005, 10:08 PM
I must be a little thick lately.......it just dawned on me that the Marlin 62's in 256 and 30 Carbine are little more than updated 25-20 and 32-20. I should wake up fully before posting, I guess.

Al,
And the 62 action is really a 22 rimfire, and IMO, not as suitable for cranking up as the 1894,,,,, which is where, rightly or wrongly, I'm headed these days. A LOT easier to work on to, at least for me.
I agree that the 256WinMag is an updated 25-20,,,, but not so sure about the 30 Carbine having the 32-20 as its parentage....... I'm hoping my 30/360Mauser is a 'better' offspring. I do have a Ruger Blackhawk in the 30,,, oncet I've got a reamer, it'd be interesting to do the cartridge in a sixgun.
Cheers,
R*2

NVcurmudgeon
07-13-2005, 12:40 AM
IIRC, I read somewhere that the .30 Carbine cartridge was developed from the .32 Winchester Self Loading.

StarMetal
07-13-2005, 12:31 PM
bill...I do believe you are correct sir.

.30 US Carbine - In 1940, the US Army's Ordnance Department approached Winchester with a light rifle concept. This was to bridge the difference between the .45 ACP and the .30-06. For the cartridge, Winchester recommended a rimless version of their .32 Winchester Self-Loading sized down for .308" projectiles. The resulting cartridge tossed a 110gr projectile at nearly 2000fps from a carbine-length barrel. While derided for lacking stopping power in contrast to the .30-06, the .30 Carbine is more powerful than many common handgun cartridges of similiar size such as the .357 Magnum.


Joe

omgb
07-14-2005, 10:20 PM
I've taken deer with both the 30 carbine and the .357 mag. In each case it was at close range (under 75 yards and the shots were all squarly in the hear/lung area. Even so, I still had to track the deer 100 or so yards. In contrast, I've hit deer in the chest with a 30-40 krag and with the '06 and have seen them drop like a limp sack. In one case, it was right after a light rain and the bullet hit the deer so hard the water on his hide vaporized and he dissapeared in a cloud for a few moments. Of course, I've seen a few run quite a ways too. So I guess what I'm saying is that under the right conditions, the 30 carbine and the 357 mag are capable killers. I would imagine that given the suceptability to shock that humans have and the relatively light construction of the human chest, either would be potent killers on people given expanding bullets or cast bullets with a wide meplat. However, I still wouldn't push it too much on deer sized animals.

Now while we're on the subject here's an interesting little example. Back in '83 I was hunting pheasent outside of Lewistown Mt down in a river bottom. A forked buck sprang up out of a Chokecherry bush and waved his flag at me. I had a 30" barreled Fox 12 GA (M/F) with an ounce and a quarter of number 5 shot in each tube. I hit him in the rump with one shot (maybe 25 feet at most) and all it did was chunk a divot about the size of a tennis ball in his right hip. The second shot (after I got some lead) went smack into the chest at about 30 yards. Post mortum showed that the pellets went through both shoulder bones, broke ribs and lodged under the skin on the far side. His lungs were mush and his heart had several tiny holes in it. The total spred of the shot was maybe 24" in diameter.

Now before I get the ** about shooting deer with bird shot I've got to tell you, in those days I had a wife, two small kids and a $2.50 an hour job while going through college. I needed the meat. i would have dressed out road kill if it would have fed my family. But back to the point, I've always figured that the first shot failed to penetrate because the shot cup hadn't opened and the mud on the deer's hide acted like a balistic vest. The second shot hit him in a softer area and after the shot had time to open a little. Any way, it was an interesting kill to say the least. We had three cocks that day and the deer. On the way back to the house, I stopped in at the flooded medow below the house and shot two mallards as well. Geez, I miss those days.