40-65 winchester lever

[bigted]

ive had this thing running around inside my noggin for a few years now and thought id post the question here again.

i have a marlin 444 in the short barrel guise which has been fun to a point. i have always wanted to figure out how to have it re-done into a 40-65 but the same thing is the problem....i also want to shoot the longer 400ish boolits and they require the action to be able to withstand an coal of 2.800 inch so they will work thru the action.

recently i took my guide gun to parade rest to make sure the black powder was all cleaned out and as i had it scattered on my bench i re-hashed the 40-65 thought.

what can i do to lengthen the action capability from the 2.550 inch to the needed 2.800 inch? this will require an additional 1/4 inch or .250 inch of capability inside the action.

i know ive read about grinding some off here n there to accommodate a longer length but cant remember where to find the article.

anybody know where i could find this article or ones like it to study for my feeble mind to mull over?

maybe somebody now has done this with a marlin and has some helpful hints....other then the obvious...lol:bigsmyl2:

thanks all and yes im gonna post this on the gunsmith area as well for thoughts.

[NickSS]

It would be easier to buy a Winchester 95 in 405 Winchester or to rebarrel one in either 40-65 or 40-72 winchester.

[onceabull]

my 40/65 lever rifle is a late Marlin 1895 that started as a 45/70 , liner installed by some worthy who lost interest before putting much wear on anything.. I've not gone heavier that the Rcbs 300 Gr. CSA boolit, as that as met all the expectations I had at the time of acq. Had a great uncles Win 1895 in 40/72 not passed into one of his grandson's' hands, I would have been set up right in 1953, someone wiser //(luckier ??)got it away before any of us realized what those things would eventually be worth... Onceabull

[Irascible]

I read an article a year or so ago about a fellow who re-barreled a Marlin 1895 to 40-65 for the Quigly competition, so I guess it would have been for heavy bullets. Anyway, he reported no problems.

[Buckshot]

.............Irascible, if you say you read an article about someone who'd actually accomplished the fact, then I don't doubt it. But going from 2.550 to 2.800 is a distance of .250". To do that the lifter would have to accept that additional 1/4" (plus a little bit for 'play') and also the bolt face would have to retract the same 1/4"+ to push the round into the chamber. I'm not familiar enough with the innards of the 336 action to visualize the part's relationship, but 1/4" is a considerable amount in tight confines. I for one would be interested to hear how it would be accomplished, again not saying it couldn't be!

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

[doubs43]

I read an article a year or so ago about a fellow who re-barreled an 1895 to 40-65 for the Quigly competition, so I guess it would have been for heavy bullets. Anyway, he reported no problems.

Was that 1895 a Marlin or a Winchester? It could make a difference I would think.

[JFE]

I think the article you are thinking of is one by Mic McPherson that appeared in Precision Shooting (Oct 1998). In that article he discusses how he increased COAL to 2.665" in a 1895 Marlin. Since then he has figured out how to increase COAL further, but I've never seen in writing how he does that. I believe Dave Clay has made at least one 336 that was chambered in 50/110, but it needed a lot of work. Bottom line is it seems doable if you want to throw a bucketful of cash at the project, but whether its worthwhile is another matter.

As mentioned earlier, it would be far easier & cheaper to simply buy a new Win 1895 in 405 Win. These rifles have a 1 in 14" twist and can stabilse 400 gr pills. All you would need to do is source a mould to suit.

If you still want a 40/65 then you'd be better off with a Browning 71 and convert one of these - they already feed 2.80" COAL, so mods would be minimal, and they are a stronger action too. If you want something with more herbs, something like the 450/400 BPE (2 3/8" case), or something similar but using Starline 50/110 brass to form the case, would be an interesting option for a 71/86.

[Irascible]

It might have been that article, and yes it was an 1895 Marlin. Since I make 40-65 brass from 45-70 for my High Wall, I guess I never gave the OAL a thought. But the OAL would all depend on the bullet length/weight that one would be able to live with. Since the fellow in my article was going to the Quigley match, I would guess he was going for long heavy bullets. Darn, now I'm going to have to spend time looking for that article. Gee, I thought it was in the Black Powder News.

[doubs43]

As mentioned earlier, it would be far easier & cheaper to simply buy a new Win 1895 in 405 Win. These rifles have a 1 in 14" twist and can stabilse 400 gr pills. All you would need to do is source a mould to suit.

After trying the 288 grain Lyman and a 335 grain boolit from a Mountain Mould in my 405 1895 Winchester, I bought the RCBS BULLET MOULD .416-350-FN and .416" Hornady gas checks. It has proven to be the most accurate boolit - so far. It must, of course, be sized down to a diameter that your chamber will accept.

[Jon K]

I read an article a year or so ago about a fellow who re-barreled a Marlin 1895 to 40-65 for the Quigly competition, so I guess it would have been for heavy bullets. Anyway, he reported no problems.

Was that an "Original 1895" or "new model 1895...aka 336"?.... different actions.
Original was also chambered in 40-65.

Jon

[ammohead]

A friend of mine has an original Marlin in 40-65. It won't shoot long boolits worth a hill of beans. The originals were twisted for 265 gr or so boolits. The best luck we have had so far was with the lyman 288 gr intended for 405 win. It is not the exact dia. for a 40-65 but full diameter .410"+ boolits don't chamber well in it at all. I guess Marlin expected the soft lead bullets of the day to set-up with the black powder originally loaded in this round. Boolits sized .406 - .408 feed and chamber well and when cast soft enough provide good accuracy.

ammohead

[bigted]

all purdy interesting. i didnt want to throw a ton of money at this project...just kinda wanted to fiddle with something myself...sounds like the 95 winny in 405 would probably be my best bet tho.

[Irascible]

"Was that an "Original 1895" or "new model 1895...aka 336"?.... different actions.
Original was also chambered in 40-65."

I don't know. I guess I'll really have to go look for that article.

[6pt-sika]

I read an article a year or so ago about a fellow who re-barreled a Marlin 1895 to 40-65 for the Quigly competition, so I guess it would have been for heavy bullets. Anyway, he reported no problems.

This fellow wrote two articles in "The Fouling Shot" about this !

He took an 1895/336 action and used a octagon barrel he'd removed from his Sharps I believe . Anyway his first article was about him wacking a Pronghorn or two and then the second was about how it did at the Quigley .

I had one my self in an original square bolt Marlin 1895 of 1896 vintage that shot nicely when I did my part .

Before I got the original I got a NIB Marlin 1895CB and was gonna send it and have the barrel bored and relined for 40-65 but I never could bring myself to tear apart a brand new gun . I finally found the original 40-65 and sold the 1895CB still NIB !

I actually had thoughts of three relining jobs on 1895CB's in 40-65 , 38-56 and 33 WCF . But I eventually got originals in all three cartridges . After I shot them awhile I lost intrest and sold them as well !

[smithywess]

A friend of mine has an original Marlin in 40-65. It won't shoot long boolits worth a hill of beans. The originals were twisted for 265 gr or so boolits. The best luck we have had so far was with the lyman 288 gr intended for 405 win. It is not the exact dia. for a 40-65 but full diameter .410"+ boolits don't chamber well in it at all. I guess Marlin expected the soft lead bullets of the day to set-up with the black powder originally loaded in this round. Boolits sized .406 - .408 feed and chamber well and when cast soft enough provide good accuracy.

ammohead


ammohead


I've just been playing around with two original Marlin 1895's in .40-65. One slugs to .408" and the other to .409" and I wanted to fire a .410" bullet cast in a homemade Lyman #2 alloy. I had the choice of the .41 Cal handgun bullet at 261 grains, I think it was, or the heavier 300 grain R.C.B.S. bullet #82070 which falls from the mould at between .411" and .412". I decided on the 300 grain bullet sized to .410" and it wouldn't chamber in either Starline cases, or Remington cases which are two thousandths of an inch thicker. I was able to solve the problem by hand reaming the throat with a chamber reamer made by Pacific Tool. It only needed a hair off. Maybe one and a half turns. These rifles are now custom made to fire smokeless loads with bullets two and three thousandths of an inch overbore and I must say the rifling twist stabilizes these heavy bullets extrememely well. To shoot a 261 grain bullet out of these big rifles struck me as being too much similar to shooting a .38-55. One thing I've come to believe now is that I don't think smokeless powders have very much effect at all in bumping up a bullet's diameter even when the bullet is cast soft and a relatively fast powder like Unique is used. Better to custom ream the throat to accept the larger diameter bullet. I've had to give two .44-40's, also Marlins, one a model of 1889 and the other a vintage model '94, the same treatment with throating reamers for the same problem.

[SgtDog0311]

Sorry about the duplicate... system locked up.

[SgtDog0311]

Interesting thread and worth revival. Been working on a heavier bullet for an 1895 in 40-65. I wonder if bigted ever scratched that itch.

I’ve shot some black powder in this one with a 300gr bullet loaded single shot fashion. 20;1 twist seemed to stabilize pretty fair judging from some groups at 50 and 100yds. Didn’t check any paper strikes at longer distances for signs of instability. I’ll likely save the longer profile bullet slinging for genuine single-shots.

Still, I’ve got a 317gr drawn out that manages a BC of 2600 and a Stability Factor of 2.9 according Tom’s TNT software. I think the lube capacity is sufficient for smokeless since that was probably it for me and BP in the lever. I think it would be a good dinger ringer out to 650 yds. Certainly out to 400yds unless the twist just won’t support that weight. I hope it will or I’m out a hundred bucks sent to Tom at Accurate.

This summer I was shooting a 350gr out of a Ballard Pacific that had nearly the same nose profile and the same twist and that was connecting on 960yds with some regularity. Four in a row is regular for me.

That wasn’t bad considering I was sizing the RCBS BULLET MOULD .416-350-FN mentioned in post #9 down to .410. The gas check looked like it took considerable abuse from the force required in sizing and who knows how much other distortion was going on with that kind of size reduction. But it shot as well as anything else present that week.

In the levergun, for now I’m gonna settle for the 2.250 COAL and rework an RCBS 40-300-CSA bullet to give me the nose length needed to cycle in an unaltered action. Think I’ll turn some cases down to allow a .410 bullet diameter rather than address it the way Sandy did. I'm not as brave with the reamer - or as familiar. But I think I’ll start looking for that McPherson article.

In the Ballard I’ve now reworked the .416-350-FN on paper (screen actually) to a BC of 3166 but could only get a stability factor of 2.21. Weight is 365gr. Again, hopefully with enough lube capacity to satisfy BP requirements. Another $100 sent to Accurate will tell the tale.

If anyone every chased that article down and has the details, let me know. If I find it I’ll do the same.