Win 94, how big can you go?

[lar45]

Hi all. I picked up a neglected Win 94 30-30 in a pawn shop a little while back just because it was there and needed a new home. Maybe that's why we have 6 dogs? No I guess it's not the dogs, but more why I need a new much bigger safe;)
Anyway, I browsed Numerich and they have some 356 and 375 barrels for cheap, so I ordered a couple and thought I'd put the 356 barrel on and just load to around 40k.
So I have the rifle torn most of the way down and sitting on the shelf. I was reading in the Rifle mag about Turnbulls 50 cal leverguns, and I have a 50 cal blank sitting on the shelf. I cut a RUM case off at 2.1" and seated a bullet for my 500 S&W. The case just fits inside the action and fits in the mag tube. Case capacity is 93 gns H2O, about the same as the 50 Alaskan. I'm thinking that it should handle pressures around 37k easily.

So, how big of a cartridge has anyone put into the Win 94 action? I know Winchester made the 94 in 444 and 450 Marlin.
It would probably be just a big waste of time, but I still have to wonder.

[45nut]

Glenn I have no doubt you would want such a beast,but the 375's,444, and 450 Marlin 94's were all built on the Big Bore 94 actions.
If the 50 cal is in your future I would think an 1886 or similar would be the Winchester to go for. But then,,I am the nut here with the 458 and 50 ak pistols.
More powder,bigger bullets, I love that tagline. :)

[omgb]

The .348 or 444 case is about as big as the 94 action will take. You will have to keep pressure down to around 30-35K. If you go above that with a standard action you risk running into trouble with increasing head space and attendant separations. Starmetal and I argued about this very issue, he taking a much more liberal approach. Too many have tried to hot rod the 94 action with uneven results.

[Four Fingers of Death]

Use the 375 Bbl and make it a 38/55, that would work wouldn't it and rechamber the 356 to a 35/30/30 AI or similar. 35Lever Power is nice, but a pita to make brass.

[Trailblazer]

I say try it! The 50 caliber would have a lot bigger casehead and a lot more bolt thrust so I doubt you would want to load it to 37,000. 30,000 PSI might be more realistic. The barrel shank is small and you wouldn't have much meat left around the chamber. Marlins have been barreled to 50 calibers and what little objective evidence I have seen indicates the 94 is just as strong as the Marlin. I probably wouldn't go there with a 94 that has the cast receiver.

If you want to feed from the magazine the 94 needs a rimmed case to function as it is designed. With a rimless case you would have a two shot. One in the chamber and one in the magazine.

[LET-CA]

According to the article written by Paco on his Leverguns website, when Winchester made the 444 Marlin version of their 94, they spec'd the pressure out to 55,000. I have no personal knowledge, but I highly recommend reading his article on the Win 444.

[mtngunr]

As others have pointed out, the .375 and other high-pressure rounds were built on the BB frame which is beefed up considerable like in the rear area where the locking bolt engages in order to prevent bolt springing, brass stretching, case head seperation, loss of headspace, kabooms, etc etc etc......I rather like the idea of using the .375 barrel as a .38-55, which is what I use my .375 for....as for folks hotrodding the standard 94 action, I would weigh in with the observation that the folks at Winchester certainly didn't think it was up to it, which is the why of the beefed up BB frame and which couldn't have been a cheap research project nor production decision....

[lar45]

The 356 case is a rimmed 358 win, which is bigger than the 30-30 case. So no 35/30-30 AI. You would need to sleeve the chamber to make it smaller.
I have a BB 375.
I thought the 444 was on a standard action. I'll have to go check out the article.

[Trailblazer]

The 444 was built on the Big Bore Action but I wouldn't read anything into that. It may have been done for production or marketing reasons. I have a 444 in the Black Shadow configuration that is the testbed for a couple wildcats I am playing with. SAAMI max for the 444 is 44,000 CUP. Paco's point was that the Big Bore is rated at 52,000 CUP so you can load it hotter in the Winchester than in the Marlin. Strengthwise the standard 94 and the Marlin 336 are two peas in a pod with the possible exception of the cast receiver 94's.

Winchester put the 450 Marlin into what looks like a standard receiver. I doubt that it is the standard receiver though. The Big Bore was made from higher carbon steel than the standard and has bigger barrel threads. I would not be surprised if the 94's in 450 Marlin have the better steel and the larger threads even though they don't have the bulged sides of the Big Bore.

[PatMarlin]

What 94 years were made with cast receivers?

[Trailblazer]

All the standard caliber post 64 top eject rifles are cast steel. I think they were made with the MIM (metal injection mold) process. Winchester went back to forged receivers with the Angle Eject model that was introduced in 1983. The cast receivers may be fine too, but I read something about them that makes me a little suspicious of them. Can't remember what it was though. They are certainly adequate for the 30-30 class cartridges.

From what I have found, all the Big Bore receivers are forged steel since their introduction in 1978.

[PatMarlin]

Thanks.

Boy Winchester really screwed up after 64 didn't they?.. :roll: :mrgreen:

[lar45]

Trailblazer, have you pulled barrels on the regular and BB win 94's? I thought that I'd read somewhere that the shank threads were the same, but did some digging around and came up with the below. The 356 and 375 win barrels I have, have a .870" OD shank.

Win 94 .809x20
Win 94 BB .875x28?

Marlin 336 .775x12 square .85”

So to use a 375 barrel on the regular action with 38-55 loads, you would have to turn down and rethread the shank to get it into the regular action??

I read an article on the Marlins
http://www.levergun.com/Marlin/index.html
and it looks like one of the biggest problems is the barrel shank size. So even the regular Win 94 has a larger OD.
It looks like I'll have to do some more digging and reading before I start cutting.

[PatMarlin]

Hey thanks for the lube samples by the way Glen.. :drinks:

[Trailblazer]

LAR, yes, I have both standard and BB barrels loose here. The dimensions you have on the Winchesters are correct. Your Marlin dimensions sound correct but I don't have my notes handy. And yes even the standard Winchester has a stronger barrel thread than the Marlin. A friend of mine has rethreaded the BB barrels from Numrich to fit a standard 94 so it can definitely be done.

I edited my above post because I forgot the Big Bores. From what I can tell all BB receivers have been forged steel.

[lar45]

I started compiling a list awhile back about different guns barrel threads to see what could be used where or be modified to fit.
So here it is if anyone is interested. It still has some holes to fill in.
The tabs and spaceing don't line up here.

Rifle action dimensions

Action threads length Reciver OD? other
Mauser lrg. Ring 1.1x12 1.41”

Mauser sm. Ring .98x12

CZ 550 1.1x12.7

BBK-02 1.1x12

Rem 700 1 1/16”x16 .885
1.0625x16
Win 70 1x16

Ruger 77 1x16 1.41”

Sako

Weatherby mk V 1.06x16 .7
1 1/16x16
Browning A-bolt

Ruger no. 1 1x16”

Rem Rolling block
No. 1 smokeless 1.055x12 square 1.43”

Win 1885 High wall

Sharps 1874

Savage 110 < 2001 1.05x20
Short magnum>2001 1.125x20 G series, noticeable step after threads
CRF 1 1/16x20
1.0625x20
Bolt Shotgun 1.1x20?

MRC 1999 1x16 UNF 2B .75

Enfield M-17 x10 square

Enfield SMLE

Mosin Nagant .97”x16 or 1x16”

Steyr M-95

Win 94 .809x20
Win 94 BB .875x28?

Rossi 92

Marlin 336 .775x12 square .85”

Marlin 1895 45-70 same as 336, 450 may have been changed to a v thread.





Savage 99

[mtngunr]

Sorry for helping to continually try to hijack this thread, but just wanted to thank those responsible for furthering my education as to 94 receiver composition from post-64 until present....I would have guessed they went cast and stayed cast, but that apparently is not the case....there's not much out there that I can find on the subject, and when I went to google and typed in "winchester 94 receivers cast forged", the number one response in their listing was....tah dah.....this very thread........any further pointers to sources on this subject on the internet would be greatfully perused.....

[Trailblazer]

mtngunr,

There is a thread on leverguns.com that lists the different variations of the 94. I can't find it but I did find that the forged steel AE model was introduced in 1983. The search function is not to good there but you can google search the site. There is a "The One Sticky" thread at the top that tells how to google search the site. A lot of info there. A fellow posting as "OD" is one of the most knowledgeable members there on Winchesters.

[Boomer Mikey]

If you order the Big Bore Barrel you will need to turn down the shank to fit the smaller 94's action.

I've been using my 30-30/375 conversion for 5 years without any problems but I consider the conversion to be a "cast bullet only" gun.

It chambers 38-55 and 375 brass fine. I use 38-55 class loads in 375 Winchester brass but I wouldn't be afraid to load them a little more toward 375 Winchester power levels occasionally. I proof tested the gun with 375 Winchester factory ammo and headspace didn't change at all.

Mine is a top eject, cast receiver of 1985 vintage.

Definitely one of my favorite lever guns!

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?t=8549


Boomer :Fire:

[mtngunr]

mtngunr,

There is a thread on leverguns.com that lists the different variations of the 94. I can't find it but I did find that the forged steel AE model was introduced in 1983. The search function is not to good there but you can google search the site. There is a "The One Sticky" thread at the top that tells how to google search the site. A lot of info there. A fellow posting as "OD" is one of the most knowledgeable members there on Winchesters.

I appreciate the input of the google search of leverguns......I can never get their built-in search to function, period, so you can bet I'll be using the tip. Pretty funny is the fact that right after I read this thread and made the above query, I emailed OD to ask for his input.....he's a heck of a nice guy, and very sharp on quite a few things, including Winchesters and Colt 1911's and SAA's (among others), and we've been in touch for years....might even get him to admit I've helped him out a time or two (wink), but I'll definitely admit he's talked me into more expensive toys I was unfamiliar with that I've been able to con him into....oh, and his reply was, "Yes sir, Winchester started the cast receivers at or around 2,700,000 and return to forged in 1983 with the introduction a the AE receivers. I have never gotten a definitive answer as to whether or not any of the Big Bores were cast." (copyright OD Enterprises, LLC, all rights reserved, prosecutors will be violated)

[lar45]

Boomer, just read your 375 conversion. Very nice.
Did you run into any problems pulling the 30-30 barrel? How about indexing the new 375 barrel?

The barrels I have are for the AE and my gun is top eject. I'm sure it won't be any problem to cut a new extractor slot.

Ruger guns are cast, and very strong.
Connecting rods for the small block chevy are cast and hold up to mondo HP and RPM.

Forged recievers sound better, but is there any real difference in strength?
Anybody know what grade of steel was used in the 94's? 4140?

[Boomer Mikey]

[QUOTE=lar45;135659]Boomer, just read your 375 conversion. Very nice.
Did you run into any problems pulling the 30-30 barrel? How about indexing the new 375 barrel? QUOTE]

Hi Lar45,

I didn't have any problems pulling the original barrel. I used a barrel vise and a HUGE crescent wrench on the receiver (as close to the barrel as possible) after wrapping the receiver with fiberglass packing tape to protect it.

I purchased the top eject barrel, measured the original barrel, mounted the new barrel between centers and cut the shank to the same dimensions as the original. Then I mounted the original barrel between centers using the sight ramp flat as the lathe dog purchase and chased the original barrel threads. Then I cut the new barrel's threads using the sight ramp flat for the lathe dog purchase. The ejector slot alignment and the headspace were perfect after a test fitting and small adjustment to the barrel shoulder (I left myself .010" extra material).

I would be concerned about the thickness of the chamber walls with any cartridge case larger than the 375 Winchester in the 30-30 action as the 30-30 barrel and action use a smaller diameter shank around the chamber than the Big Bore XTR.

Boomer :Fire:

[Trailblazer]

I have come to believe that if it is a leveraction Winchester spec and OD doesn't know it nobody knows it.

The 1996 Winchester catalog says that the standard receiver is forged from 1119 steel and the Big Bore uses 1141 steel. 1119 is nothing special. IIRC the 11** indicates it is a re-sulpherized steel to improve machining qualities. Otherwise it isn't much different from cold rolled 1018. 1141 at least has enough carbon to respond to heat treat.

Boomer, clever way to index the barrel! I think you can go larger than the 375 case diameter. Marlin chambered the 356 and went all the way to 45-70 with a smaller shank. It's all about pressure!

[lar45]

Was there a different thread pitch? My notes show
Win 94 .809x20
Win 94 BB .875x28?

I have home made barrel vise and action wrench. Actually the barrel vise is mounted at the end of my Lathe bed. The bench wasn't sturdy enough while breaking a Mauser barrel free.

I just needed to think about it for abit. Did you start the new threads at the same point the old thread started and that would match up with the lead in thread on the reciever?

[Boomer Mikey]

Was there a different thread pitch? My notes show
Win 94 .809x20
Win 94 BB .875x28?

I have home made barrel vise and action wrench. Actually the barrel vise is mounted at the end of my Lathe bed. The bench wasn't sturdy enough while breaking a Mauser barrel free.

I just needed to think about it for abit. Did you start the new threads at the same point the old thread started and that would match up with the lead in thread on the reciever?

Win 94 .809x20 V thread sounds right but use the measurements from the barrel you remove. If the original barrel is sloppy or tight on the receiver you may want to adjust the diameter accordingly.

If you chase the threads of the original barrel turning it between centers and index the barrel by placing a small piece of brass or aluminum on top of the front sight ramp (after removing the sight insert) and securing your lathe dog to that flat you will be able to cut an identically indexed set of threads on the new barrel if secured the same way and you use the same number on the threading dial.
Cut the threads using cross slide feed only with real light (.0005") final cuts.

Leave yourself .010" - .025" extra material on the barrel shoulder to make final indexing adjustments. I left .010" and ended up taking .008" or so off to get the crush fit I wanted where the ejector slots lined up.

Old Mausers are tough to take apart. I cut the barrel off and bored out the barrel stub on the last 3 Mausers I worked on, a K98 and two M48A's. It’s easy to crack or tweak the receiver when you use too much torque to take of the barrel. My Win 94 came apart easily in comparison but it wasn’t on there 50 years. The split aluminum ring style is superior the wood block barrel vise. The little B-Square barrel vise is my favorite. You have a lathe - make your own split rings that fit perfectly.


Boomer :Fire:

[mtngunr]

Just a quick second to say I also enjoyed the conversion write-up.....great stuff....I still consider myself a conservative person when playing with explosives inches from my face....I also doubt Winchester went the BB route without feeling they HAD to....sales were certainly hurt by the "fat hips" (as many writers complained), and if they'd been comfy with the standard '94 action taking the pressure after the press was done raking the BB action , they could have easily announced a hogwash "new-improved steel/heat treat" to have dropped the BB, saved some money, saved some face, and maybe revived flagging sales....but they didn't...keep in mind, they had to build a gun which would pass with .375 Winchester PROOF loads, and I imagine the standard '94 action might have a bit of trouble digesting those....or maybe even hotter loads on a hot day....and with a heavily fouled barrel....and....and....well, you get the point.......but I think that's a GREAT conversion, and a beatiful job, too, with clever shortcuts on rethreading to top it off......I will, however, chime in with those who advise remarking the gun to perhaps .38-55...just a simple stamped line-out of the .375 on the barrel with .38-55 restamped above it....just to protect the heirs against a suit if the gun failed.....it could fail from a muzzleload of mud, and the heirs would still loose, as it sits now......

[Boomer Mikey]

I don't want to hijack this thread but one of these days I might surprise everyone with a picture of my conversion showing a new 38-55 stamp on the barrel.

Boomer :Fire:

[mtngunr]

Boomer, I wouldn't think you've hijacked nothin', as you've probably answered more of the topic question that any of us theorists in the peanut gallery....and, again, that's a great write up of a great project....

[Trailblazer]

mtngunr, I am currently working with my second wildcat project on a Winchester 94 although it is a Big Bore. You might say my theory is based on practice. See here:
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?t=1282&highlight=7mm
and here:
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?t=1868&highlight=7mm

That one didn't perform to my liking so I developed my theory and tried again based on that theory:
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/showthread.php?t=12060

So far this second attempt confirms my theory. I have more testing to do with it. If you are interested I can explain my theory. It is more than a simple question of strength. And it depends on what you mean by "bigger".

[mtngunr]

Trailblazer, I didn't mean to leave you out in the kudo dept., as I'd read the wild kitty thread, and was mighty impressed with that one, too.....and thanks for the link to the first thread, as I hadn't seen that one, yet......sure, I'll bite....why do you think the first was giving trouble, whereas the second seems to be working as hoped? Anything to do with case head thrust? Shoulder angle? Brass thickness? Rosie O'Donnel?

[Trailblazer]

I was afraid you would ask. I am under the weather today so I will give the short version.

Yes, it has to do with those things but primarily because it has a shoulder. These actions are stretchy and when the case expands it compresses the bolt and stretches the frame. Then the pressure drops and the action relaxes around the outside of an overexpanded case. Then it is hard to unlock the action. A straight wall case will just slide forward in the chamber when the action relaxes so it doesn't keep pressure on the locking bolt and it will unlock normally. On a bottleneck case the shoulder stops it from sliding forward in the chamber.

That is why the 450 Marlin can operate at 43,500 PSI. My 7mm case has basically the same head diameter as the 450 but the action was sticky to open at what I believe was the same pressures that the 450 uses.

[lar45]

Were there any problems like this with the 307 and 356?
Maybe it starts to show up when bolt thrust gets to the point where the action starts to spring but the pressures are still safe as far as no ruptured barrel or setback??
What big bore are you contemplating? A 475x45-70 with rim turned down? A very long 475 Linebaugh.

[Trailblazer]

Yes, that is the limiting factor with the 307 and 356. More so with the 307 because it has a smaller bore and more shoulder.

I do believe the Big Bore receivers are "stronger" than the standard receiver. I see no reason Winchester would lie about what alloy was used. Furthermore the BB has the larger barrel thread and it has a larger receiver ring. I just don't know about the bulges on the sides of the receiver. Anyway what "stronger" means is that it takes more pressure to blow up the action. It does not mean the action is stiffer.

The Big Bore will stretch just as much as a standard receiver because the thickness of the critical parts is the same. The BB receiver and bolt both have the same cross sectional area as the standard receiver and bolt. All steels have pretty much the same modulus of elasticity which is how stretchiness is measured. Furthermore heat treating has little effect on elasticity. So it doesn't much matter what steel the rifle is made out of or how it is heat treated for our purposes with sane loads.

An example of this is Myron Rockett's 444/308. He had an article in Gun Digest in the 70's about his wildcat. He rechambered a 30-30 Win 94 to 308 and formed brass from 444 brass so his cartridge was what became the 307 Winchester. He used a standard action 30-30, there were no Big Bores when he did this. His max loads before he got sticky extraction are right in the middle of max 307 Winchester loads. From what I can tell the max pressures for the 307 and 356 to function normally are in the mid 40,000 PSI range. I do not believe the BB is a 52,000 CUP action with the .470" case head. It may well be with the 375 Win as the 375 has a much smaller casehead and thick brass. I do not believe it is coincidence that Marlin and Hornady are loading the 308 ME to 47,000 PSI.

After the failure of my 7mm cartridge it took me about 6 months to figure out what the problem is. The answer for a bottlenecked cartridge is to reduce the cartridge base diameter, use strong brass and go to a larger bore. The smaller base diameter reduces the total pressure on the case head. Stronger brass reduces the case stretch and thus the pressure on the bolt face. A larger bore takes less pressure to produce higher velocities. Basically the cartridge case has to carry the load. If the case stretches much at all the action gets hard to open. So I went from a .510" casehead to a .468" casehead and from 7mm to 30 caliber. It worked in the same rifle that the 7mm didn't work in. I went from sticky extraction with a 120 grain 7mm at 2700 FPS to zero case stretch at 2700 FPS with a 150 grain 30 caliber bullet.

Straight wall cases and near straight wall cases are different in that you won't necessarily get the sticky extraction when pressures get to high. If you are stretching cases though it is time to back off. To be safe there I would load according to the factory loads. For example measure the ID of the 444 Marlin case head, calculate the area and using the area of your proposed case, load to pressures that will give about the same bolt thrust as the 444 will at 44,000 CUP which is SAAMI max. Ditto with the 450 Marlin. SAAMI max for it is 40,000 CUP/43,500 PSI.

[mtngunr]

Meanwhile, at the other end of the extreme, you have the original chamberings for leveractions, slightly tapered bottlenecked cartridges that seal the chamber upon firing and prevent fouling of the action, the thin brass rapidly expanding and grabbing the chamber walls with no slippage, and the original chamberings have yet to be beat in slick and reliable feeding.....it's funny how things that work ideally at one pressure level need something 180deg's out to operate at another pressure level.....such an old fashioned approach at higher pressure is a guarantee of case-head seperation sooner rather than later, especially where reloads are concerned....as for the wide stern/big hips of the BB action, I honestly would have thought that beefed up area would reduce the actual spring of the receiver sidewalls where the locking bolt hammers the receiver during firing.....and, Trailblazer, I hope you are feeling a bit better by the time you read this....

[lar45]

That makes perfect sence to me. Maybe you should write up an article and see if you can get it published in the Rifle mag?
I measured the thickness of the reciver over the barrel shank and they were the same on my 375 BB and regular 30-30. Both are Winchester top eject. I don't know if the USRAC and angle eject are different.
Yes the modulus of elasticity is essentially the same. So the reciver flat sides will spring the same the same on the BB and regular. Except for the fat part that adds thickness to the thinest part of the reciever where the locking bolt slides vertically. The difference in the steels is what pressure it will take to permanently stretch or compress a part, and what pressure it will take to let go(blow up).
I looked up some Steel properties. I couldn't find 1119, but did find 1018 which should be about the same. Espescially if you look at the carbon content (18) or (44) tolerances which can go up or down several points. The 1144 carbon content range is .40 - .44 %. The 11 is resulferized version of 10.
The 1144 has a yield(where it will permantly stretch) point of 100,000 psi and tensile strength of 115,000 psi.
The 1018 yield is 53,700 and tensile is 63,800psi.
I'll have to see if I can find some specs for 1119 and see how close it is to 1018.

[Boomer Mikey]

Trailblazer, mtngunr, Lar45

Great posts! This information is priceless!

These observations and discussions add so much to the overall understanding of the dynamics of pressure on these actions.

Varmint Al's experiments on coefficents of friction for chamber finishes may be of interest as it relates to this issue of case head thrust too. http://www.varmintal.com/afric.htm

Varmint Al's article about case stretching and bolt face loading is very interesting and appropriate as well.
http://www.varmintal.com/a243z.htm

All of this indicates that headspace in lever actions is merely a reference point.

So much to learn, and so little time.

Boomer :Fire:

[mtngunr]

For the record, I have contributed almost zero to this discussion, my gunsmithing experience being limited to dis/reassembly, parts fitting, sights, etc of long and handguns, the rare rebarrel of Mausers using issue NOS barrels, blah blah blah.....I very much liked the animation in the second link showing what happens to the case under pressure, and particularly was interested in the comparisons between 1/2 hard, full hard, and annealed brass....knowing and seeing are two different things, and the animation is just great....I once had an Old Model Blackhawk .357 with very rough chambers...in between the cylinder springing at max pressure and the brass spring out but not springing in, combined with the neccessary headspace a revolver requires for the cylinder to turn, my Keith loads would get about 5 reloads before the ejector rod pushed out only the case head....the chamber and brass would expand, the brass would grip the chamber wall ridges, the rear of the case would continue aft while leaving the rest of the case glued to the chamber walls, the inevitable thinning of the web occurred, and the case heads seperated shortly thereafter.....

[lar45]

That was some very interesting reading. I had seen the one about case head expansion many years ago and had forgotten about it.
About 10 years ago there was some writing about bolt thrust with straight or near straight walled cartridges in the TC Contender. I think it was centered around the JDJ rounds made from the 444 case. The point was that there would be less bolt thrust from a straight walled body vs a tapered body and both made from the same parent case.

It would seem that if the loaded round had a small amount of room that it could get knocked forwards during fireing, that a chamber with a rougher finish might produce a head seperation quicker than a chamber with a smoother finish.
If the chamber pressure held the case body against the wall, then as the pressure rose, the case head would get pushed back against the bolt face and you would start to get a thin ring near the base.
If it was fired in a chamber with a smoother finish, then maybe the whole case body would stretch some until the case head came in contact with the bolt face.
?? Maybe not though, it could be that the friction on even a smooth chamber would be enough to keep the body in place while the base of the case was pushed back?

So back to the other topic of action springyness, what we need is a lever gun with front locking lugs. I think the BLR is this way. They don't show up on the used rack for $250 though.

[lar45]

Isn't that funny, I was writeing the same thing and just clicked the submit button later.
I've never had any cases go bad in a revolver. I've loaded win 45 colt cases in my Blackhawk to places I should never have gone.
The bases were expanded to fit the oversize Ruger chambers and would not chamber in my Seville even after a full length resize.
I annealed the case head on a few and sized them down in a 44 Automag die, then expanded the mouth and loaded. This was the only way I could get them to fit. After reading the comparison to full hard, half hard and annealed, I think I need to find that box of brass and toss them.
I keep my Ruger and Seville ammo seperated now so I don't mix the fired cases.

[Trailblazer]

Went to the gunshow yesterday. My biggest purchase was a RCBS 30-180-FN mold for $35 and my second biggest purchase was an October 1998 issue of Precision Shooting magazine for $0.25. I had been looking for the magazine because it has an article by Mic McPherson titled "Maximizing Marlin's New Model-1895 Rifle". Mic is a gunsmith and writer who likes to work on Marlin leverguns. His website is levergun.com and it has several of his articles posted. The article is mainly about how he modified a Marlin 1895 to cycle 45-70 cartridges up to 2.665" in length. However he also talks about how he determines maximum loads in a levergun. In Mic's words:

"When both the case and chamber are clean and dry, case stretching is a useful measure of action stress. I load and fire the same case three times with the test load. When total case stretch after three firings is less than or equal to the rifle's headspace, total receiver stress is below the threshold of making any difference. (None of the loads I use show this degree of case stretching.)"

So Mic, who has shot and worked on far more leverguns than I will ever handle, reached the same conclusion I did: In a rear locking levergun the case has to carry the load. I was a little hazy about whether this rule applies to straight wall cases as I have never pushed the limits with a straight wall case but apparently it does.

Mic estimated his max load for the lengthened 1895 develops 40,000 CUP. I don't think he had Quickload in 1998 so that is a seat of the pants estimate. His load is R-P nickel plated brass, Remington 2-1/2 pistol primers, 60 grains RL-7 and a Speer 350 grain FP seated to a max overall length of 2.664". He chronographed the load at 15' and got 2256 FPS.

Mic also stated the Marlin 1895 receiver is made from 4140 steel. I looked through one of my reference books for steel specs. It had a comparison of 4140 and 1141 where they tested the two steels to failure. The two steels are very similar in strength. 4140 is far more durable though as it withstood far more test cycles than the 1141 did. And I was confused about my steels. 1119 and 1141 are not leaded steels but are indeed resulpherized free machining steels. Thanks Lar!

I have seen Varmint Al's articles on case stretching and bolt loading but I have to confess I haven't made the effort to plow through it. That stuff is heavy reading!

Lar45, I think you are referring to David White's test on Contender barrels. He compared tapered cases and improved cases with an open breech. He rigged up a flapper device to ignite the primers. Improved cases stayed in the chamber and tapered cases backed out. The 45-70 shot out of the chamber. He never said but I assume he used 10" to 14" pistol barrels and I am not sure his tests directly apply to longer rifle barrels. I had links to that write up but at least one of them died. It still might be out there somewhere though.

[lar45]

I wonder if this applies to bottle neck cartridges in revolvers?
With max loads in revolvers, does the frame spring a little?
http://www.singleactions.com/
This guy has made some big bottle neck wildcats for revolvers.

[mtngunr]

I wonder if this applies to bottle neck cartridges in revolvers?
With max loads in revolvers, does the frame spring a little?
http://www.singleactions.com/
This guy has made some big bottle neck wildcats for revolvers.

Bottlenecked cartridges in revolvers have caused problems at times (the Jet is a good example), but those problems were related as much to case shape as anything else....Gary Reeder has some humdinger wildcats that give really suprising power in a revolver (ie .30-30/.35Rem. power in a handgun with the .357GNR).....depending on the load, of course, revolvers get pretty active...the cylinder tries to slam back into the recoil shield on the frame when the case walls get a grip on the chamber, the case head slams back against the recoil shield, the cylinder tries to rock on the base pin, the cylinder itself experiences expansion and contraction of the chamber, and the frame itself can spring.....the weak point in revolvers would be the cylinder locking notch or wherever the cylinder wall is thinnest...that thin point is where they generally let go when over-stressed, and then that can lead to the top strap going.....