Correct mounts for 1885 Hi Wall?

[Nick Adams]

Hi all:

Was looking for a little help on the correct 2-pc mounts (bases) that would correctly fit a Winchester 1885 High Wall "Trapper" that I just picked up. I'd like to get the right pair of bases to start with, so I don't have to pay a gunsmith later to "shim" them up to the correct height.

My Trapper is new in the box, one of the Japanese-made Winchesters. It's the 16.5" Trapper in 30-40 Krag.

I'll shoot it with irons for a while, but still want the option of mounting a small-ish, low-powered scope for hunting and load development, like a 1x-3x 20mm.

I just haven't been able to find bases for it. I'd want either Weaver or Leupold, but the Weaver 1885 mount is for the Browning 1885 and it says "octagon barrel." The short tube on my Trapper is round.

Anybody already have these newer Winchester 1885s - a Trapper or otherwise - set up with a scope?

Thanks for any help ...

Nick

....

[blackpowder man]

I purchased the leopold mounts for the browning 1885 high wall because the midway info said they would fit and they definitely do not. hole spacing in rear mount not close. My win 1885 is octagon and I saw yours is round, but I ordered some weaver bases that I read on another post here that may fit. Will try to recheck this post when they come in and let you know.

[Doc Highwall]

For my 1885's in 30-30 Win and 38-55 Win I used Weaver #11 and #29 to mount a scope for load development. This is my Browning Traditional Hunter in 30-30 Win.

[Nick Adams]

I purchased the leopold mounts for the browning 1885 high wall because the midway info said they would fit and they definitely do not. hole spacing in rear mount not close. My win 1885 is octagon and I saw yours is round, but I ordered some weaver bases that I read on another post here that may fit. Will try to recheck this post when they come in and let you know.

Thanks, blackpowder man.

Leupold's sku# for the 2-pc mount set I'm looking at is #50012.

Is that the one you tried that wouldn't fit?

Yeah, my barrel is round, and the Midway info said they will fit the 1885 Hunter model, but not the BPCR.

[Nick Adams]

For my 1885's in 30-30 Win and 38-55 Win I used Weaver #11 and #29 to mount a scope for load development. This is my Browning Traditional Hunter in 30-30 Win.

Thanks for your reply too, Doc.

Did you need to "shim" either of the Weaver mounts to get the scope in correct relation to the barrel, ... or were the mounts good to go out of the box?

[Doc Highwall]

I was able to shoot it as is with the mount but for some of the slow velocities I milled a little off the front mount to do some testing with the scope. With higher velocities you should be OK.

[Mk42gunner]

Nick,

I would call customer service at Leupold. You definately want the mounts to match the barrel on these rifles. I had a round barreled Browning B-78 in .243 Winchester, that came (used)with bases for an octagon barrel. The screw holes matched, but the front base was way too low. The rifle shot something like three inches high at 25 yards with the scope adjusted all the way down.

Robert

[Nick Adams]

Doc: thanks for the additional info.

Mk42gunner: thanks for the suggestion.

I couldn't get through to Leupold techs, so I just went ahead and ordered the Leup #50012 bases from Brownells. I've done a lot of business w/ Brownell's over the years and if it doesn't work out I know they'll take them back.

Plus, Brownells also carries the #11 & #29 Weaver mounts that Doc mentioned earlier. If the Leups don't fit or if I have off-set problems, Plan B will be the Weavers.

[Nick Adams]

Update:

The Leupold 50012 mounts for my 1885 Miroku/Winchester Trapper arrived today Brownell's. They'll be going back tomorrow.

The rear mount fit fine and the holes aligned correctly.

However, the underside geometry of the front mount is formed at angles, which doesn't fit the round barrel on mine. It's cut for an 1885 with an octagonal barrel. When I placed the front mount on the barrel for a "look-see," and lightly tightened the screws down just to hold it there, it sat crookedly.

Thus, the Leupold # 50012 is a no-go for people with ROUND tubes on their M/Win 1885s.

I'll switch to Plan B and order from Brownells the Weaver mounts Doc referred to in his post. Should have listened to the Doc from the git-go. Hope they work out with the 16.5" barrel.

Just wanted to update the group with my experience in case anyone is pondering the same scope-mounting issues for their M/Win 1885s.

[Mumblypeg]

I have a Winchester traditional hunter with an octogon tube. If either of you fellows have a set of bases that fit it I'll buy them if you don't want to send them back. It's a 38-55 not that that matters. Thanks

[Doc Highwall]

Nick Adams, does your gun have a round barrel? My 1885's all have octagon barrels.

[Nick Adams]

Nick Adams, does your gun have a round barrel? My 1885's all have octagon barrels.

I take it from the "smilie" that you're kidding ...

... yes, again, my 1885 Trapper's barrel is ROUND.

[45r]

I got burris base and sig rings for my octogon barrelled win 1885 and they worked.Weaver bases didn't.Might have to get custom bases for a round barrel.

[Nick Adams]

I got burris base and sig rings for my octogon barrelled win 1885 and they worked.Weaver bases didn't.Might have to get custom bases for a round barrel.

45r:

Can you explain that a bit more, ... about why the Weaver bases "didn't work" on your octogon barrel? Was it that the fit to the barrel was off, space not right between the mounting holes, etc?

Would they have worked if your barrel had been round? And what were the #s of the Weaver bases you tried?

Thanks!

[45r]

They were not level,I guess some people shim them to make them level but that doesn't appeal to me so I got the burris bases and they mounted level and I got their signature rings to make sure the scope didn't get torqued by any remaining slightly off issues.I got a +20 minus 20 insert to get plenty of adjustment also and make a little more room for pulling the hammer back.Mine is a sporter 45-70 with the pac pad and shoots 1 to 2 inch groups at a 100 with a half dozen boolit molds,rcbs 300 and 405,saeco350 and 480,brp 420, and Mtn mold 400.I mainly shoot the 420 and 400 with 5744.The pac pad helps alot when shooting the 2000 fps loads with H-322 and Vit-133.The rifle shoots everything very well.If it was me I'd leave the round barrel for iron sights and get a octagon barreled rifle for a scope,the win 1885's are selling for a couple hundred less now than when I got mine.I think the quality is pretty good for the money,most falling block good quality rifles are way expensive.I'd like to get a wickcliffe 76 next,there is a place in Ohio I think making them again,very strong and simple design.Read an article about a 500 mag one being made up.

[Nick Adams]

They were not level,I guess some people shim them to make them level but that doesn't appeal to me so I got the burris bases and they mounted level and I got their signature rings to make sure the scope didn't get torqued by any remaining slightly off issues.I got a +20 minus 20 insert to get plenty of adjustment also and make a little more room for pulling the hammer back.Mine is a sporter 45-70 with the pac pad and shoots 1 to 2 inch groups at a 100 with a half dozen boolit molds,rcbs 300 and 405,saeco350 and 480,brp 420, and Mtn mold 400.I mainly shoot the 420 and 400 with 5744.The pac pad helps alot when shooting the 2000 fps loads with H-322 and Vit-133.The rifle shoots everything very well.If it was me I'd leave the round barrel for iron sights and get a octagon barreled rifle for a scope,the win 1885's are selling for a couple hundred less now than when I got mine.I think the quality is pretty good for the money,most falling block good quality rifles are way expensive.I'd like to get a wickcliffe 76 next,there is a place in Ohio I think making them again,very strong and simple design.Read an article about a 500 mag one being made up.

Okay, thanks!

[blackpowder man]

Sorry I didn't respond i've been out of town. I did call leupold a couple of weeks back and they only make the one set for 1885 highwalls and they don't fit either of my traditional hunters with octagon barrels. They said winchester must have been changing the hole spacing again. I ordered weavers and they just came in and I haven't had time to pick them up yet. I looked at the burris stuff online and I may have to go that route. I wanted leupolds for their quick disconnect so I could use irons also. So shimming the weavers won't work with that idea. We'll see.

[Nick Adams]

Sorry I didn't respond i've been out of town. I did call leupold a couple of weeks back and they only make the one set for 1885 highwalls and they don't fit either of my traditional hunters with octagon barrels. They said winchester must have been changing the hole spacing again. I ordered weavers and they just came in and I haven't had time to pick them up yet. I looked at the burris stuff online and I may have to go that route. I wanted leupolds for their quick disconnect so I could use irons also. So shimming the weavers won't work with that idea. We'll see.

Actually, the front mount of Leupold's#50012 1885 set IS for an octogon barrel, not a round one I have. Can't say about hole-spacing on earlier Winchester 1885s (or Brownings), but the hole-spacing on my barrel for both mounts was correct. If the bottom geometry of that front mount had been for use on a round barrel, they would have been great mounts. Looked real nice, and the rear mount went on without problems.

I've now got the Weaver set on order.

I'd like to hear from someone who has the Weavers if the front mount (assuming correct hole-spacing) will otherwise fit a round barrel.

Thanks!

[Nick Adams]

2nd Update:

Received the Weavers #11 & #29.

Both front & rear mounts lined up perfectly with the spacing of the holes in the barrel. The screws fit the drilled holes correctly.

The underside of the rear mount was contoured correctly for the curvature of the Miraku/Win receiver and the fit was solid.

However, the bottom of the front mount is flat, intended for the flat top of an octogon barrel. Laying against the curvature of my Trapper's barrel the fit is dicey at best, as if you were standing on a balance beam. When the screws are tighten down the front mount feels snug, but if they came loose there probably would be some rocking effect.

Locktite might hold the front mount solid for a while. As for shimming the rear mount, the only way to know is for me to get it scoped up and range test it.

Just in case ... does anyone know if the front mount of the Burris 2-pc set will fit a round barrel 1885? I believe the sku# is TU-85 (or #410281).

[Yjacket]

I have installed the Leupold 50012 mounts on my 1885 Trapper. They were meant for an octogon barrel but have contact on top and both sides. It seems to work ok but its just a bit of an uneasy feeling knowing that the mounts were not designed for a round barrel. Has anyone came across a front mount yet for the Trapper model with the round barrel contour?