Nothing Like A Great Article On A Great Gun

[shrapnel]

I never thought much of the Winchester 1895, as it is kind of bastard child. Lever guns were a thing of the past, but it was still developed for a dying market. Find a nice one in 40-72 and the rules are changed.


I found this one and Mike already had the 405, just right for a comparative article and here it is...


http://www.hunt101.com/data/500/medium/image3531.jpg

[Patrick56]

I really regret that I sold my 1895 converted to 45-70. A Winchester 70 in 458 replaced it as I wanted to mount a low power scope.

[osteodoc08]

I never really liked the asthetics of the 1895. I'm not well versed on levergun history pertaining to the 1895. Can someone tell me why it was designed and commisioned when the 1886 and 1894 were already around. I realize it has a box style magazine which helped with the use of spitzer style bullets, but what are the other attributes that are unique to this model?

[Patrick56]

A longer and stronger action capable of handling jacketed pointed bullets as in the .30 Krag and other. The 7,62x54R version could be loaded using a 5 round clip and took a bayonet, not to mention military type sights, wooden handguard etc.

[lbaize3]

I have one of the replicas in 30-06 and do enjoy mine.

[snowwolfe]

I shot a bison in SD in Feb with my .405 1895. It is the smoothest lever action I ever had the honor of using.

[Dan Cash]

My 95 in .30-40 is my go to rifle for all but prairie dogs and it has killed a few of them. Mine has no bluing left but I did install a replica of the Lyman 21 light. Works great.

[Wayne Smith]

Mine is a Jap in 405 with the replica Lyman 21 from Buff Arms. Is the article in the current Handloader or Rifle?

[Maven]

Saw, read, and enjoyed that article very much, shrapnel. Give Mike my regards, as I like his writing very much.

[TXGunNut]

Good to see him writing about leverguns now and then, milsurps pretty much leave me cold for some reason. Just as well, the leverguns keep me broke (but happy) anyway.
The 1895 is a big, heavy rifle....everything a levergun shouldn't be, in my humble opinion. I still want one someday, biggest stumbling block is the chambering choices...and the cash. As a TR fan I'd probably go for the .405 but it would be a totally new reloading and casting experience for me, getting set up to make ammo could be an expensive proposition in itself.

[Le Loup Solitaire]

I've had a 95 in 405 for many years now and have always loaded for it. I got it in a trade and it has always been in god shape, over 90%;fortunately it came with a shotgun butt so I never had to deal with putting a crescent shaped butt-plate in the wrong spot.With a full house load it can kick like a blue mule, developing around a ton and a half of ME. It is indeed a hard kicking old smokewagon. The action is strong and smooth and Barnes in his book states that is the most powerful lever ever commercially designed. I would not doubt that it could be considered as adequate for any North American game. T.R. favored it for use against lion in Africa, but some big game hunters of the day did not agree with him. It is fun to work with, but even with moderate loads it can get to the point of being tiring after a while.It is not a target rifle or a plinker and would not shoot as tight a group as a model in 30/40 Krag or 7.62x 54. But it is one of my showpiece rifles and I take good care of it. LLS

[Idaho Mule]

I think the 95 is kinda like a moose-calf, so ugly they are pretty. When I was a teen I hunted with a friend who had one in 30-40, I was using an SMLE in 303 Brit. Ever since I discovered that the 95 was chambered for both 30-40 and 303 I have wanted one of each. Still wanting. Thanks for the reminder shrapnel, I just read that article yesterday. JW

[John Allen]

The 95 has a special spot in my heart. I have my great grandfathers 1921 30 army (30-40) krag takedown version. It is a great gun and will be one of my kids guns at some point.

[starmac]

I am a certified lever gun nut, but just never caught the 95 fever. To me they are just heavy and bulky compared to most.

[OverMax]

I suspect its design and purposely built was to replace those outdated Springfield Trapdoor single shots. But the US Army had something else in mind. Something Spanish Mauser like after confronting such weapon in the Spanish-American War.

[StrawHat]

I have an original 1895. It started life as a 30-40 but has since been worked over to handle the 405 WCF. As has been said, it can be punishing. I load mine with the Lyman 412263 and 5744. I duplicate the old 40-72 ballistics and am happy. I do have some factory loads in case large critters come back to Ohio but do not need to shoot many before I realize how the 405 WCF got it's reputation. Put the crescent butt plate in the wrong spot and it makes you take notice, right quick!

The more I use the 405 WCF, the less I use the 45-70. Flatter trajectory and hits like a freight train. Decent penetration also, with the correct alloy.

When originally introduced the cartridge was thought to be too much for North American game but the poor bullets of the day hampered it for use on big game. Several professional hunters used it and a couple of them died for relying on it. Today, with a properly poured boolit or one of the better bullets available, it makes a good round.

Kevin

[StrawHat]

...Is the article in the current Handloader or Rifle?...

Wayne,

It is in Handloader.

Kevin

[dragon813gt]

Yuck, that's the best way I can describe how I feel about that model. There isn't anything appealing about it IMO. I know guys love them. But that is one big heavy eyesore.

[snowwolfe]

My interest in the .405 began because I wanted a large bore Take Down that was not a 45-70 plus the "good deal" found online. Last year a gent was selling one like new (Jap repro)with only 20 rounds down the tube in the factory box as well as a box of new brass and bullets and a set of William receiver sights still in the package. Cost me 10 Ben Franklins.

Once at the range I loaded the magazine and run 5 through the rifle pretty quick and I was hooked. The action is the smoothest lever I ever used. Even with these tired eyes managed to shoot 3 shot groups at 100 yards that averaged between 1.5 and 1.75 inches.

She does kick, so when practicing I add one of those small slip on pads (size small) which takes all the sting out. When hunting the pad comes off as we all know recoil is never noticed when we are hunting.

If you get the chance run a full magazine through one, you just might find yourself adding another rifle to your safe. If not, well, you gave it a try.

[Clark]

136629

I bought a 1902 1895 30 Gov [30-40 Krag] two years ago for $500 in a pawn shop.
The barrel has been shortened.
I bought a 250 Krag Ackley reamer and dies.
I have a few cubic feet of 303 Brit brass.

I took it apart and got MORE than a pound of dirt out of it.
At the same time I took apart an 1892, removed dirt, and made it exactly one pound lighter.

The 1892 is easy to put back together and there are books and videos to help.
The 1895 is hard to put back together, and there is little help. When I rebarrel, I should make a vid to help others.

[wrench man]

My brother has one in 30 GOVERNMENT, yep the good ol' 30-03, yep '03!, good thing '06 shells work, took us a while to get it shooting?, Sierra 220gr rn go less than 2" with full buckhorn sights.

[starmac]

30/03???

[missionary5155]

Greetings Starmac
The 30-03 was the first cartridge up grade in the 03 Springfield. Was still with the 220 rn bullet of the Krag but the larger case capacity allowed about 5 more grains of the same powder. Lasted just those few years before the 30-06 with the lighter bullet and more powder was standardized. Most of the original 03 Springfields that were made for the 30-03 were rebarreled.
Mike in Peru

[starmac]

Learn something everyday. lol

[StrawHat]

I believe the 30-03 was a slightly longer cartridge than the later 30-06. It was shortened and loaded with a lighter bullet in 1906.

Kevin

[Artful]

http://m1903.com/odd1903/

"In the Beginning..."
http://m1903.com/odd1903/03recvr.jpg

Model 1901 Receiver and Bolt (unfinished) The Model 1903 Springfield had its origins in experimental models based on the Mauser rifles encountered in the Spanish American War of 1898. Trials in 1901 seemed very successful, and Springfield believed that the Model 1901 rifle would be approved for manufacture. They unofficially begin production of some parts. Unfortunately, the Ordnance Department decided changes were needed, and the parts being made had to be scrapped. Occasionally these will be encountered assembled into complete M1903 style rifles, but as they were never heat-treated, they would be very dangerous to fire. Here are an unfinished receiver and bolt from the Model 1901 rifle, which closely resemble the Model 1903. Note that the "safety lug" on the bolt is a bit lower, and that the rear "bridge" of the receiver lacks the raised step found on the 1903 rifles. The left wall of the receiver has a deep cut for thumb clearance when loading with stripper clips, and a longer reinforcement on the side. The 1901 parts turn up from time to time, but were unfinished scrap, and rifles built using them are not safe to fire.
http://m1903.com/odd1903/03ctgs.jpgThe Original .30 caliber cartridge, Model of 1903 (top) with heavy round nose bullet and case about 0.10 inch longer than the .30 caliber cartridge Model of 1906 (.30-06) shown below. About the same time that the rod bayonet rifles were being converted for the knife bayonet, they were also being altered for the much better .30-06 cartridge.
http://m1903.com/odd1903/03rod.jpg

[MtGun44]

I am pretty sure that "30 Government" is what they originally called what is today called .30-40 Krag,
not .30-03.

Bill

[bob208]

.30 gov is the .30-03 .30 army is the .30-40. I have one of the 03's converted from 03 to 06. it was done by cutting one thread off the breach end of the barrel and chambering.

the reasons for the 95 are . to have a leaver to handle the new high power smokeless cartages with pointed bullets, also as allways Winchester was chasing government contracts. they had been doing that since the henery.

I read that T.R. carried a 95 carbine in .35 Winchester to cubia.

I have 2 95's one a .30-40 rifle it is a nice handling rifle. the other is a .35 takedown. it is a little more weight then the .30

[Clark]

Per the SAAMI drawing with toleranced chamber dimensions:
The 30-06 chamber is 0.4708 + 0.0020" at 0.2 in from the rear
The 30-40 chamber is 0.4590 + 0.0020" at 0.2 in from the rear

If I put pin gauges in the chamber of this 30 U.S. 1895 Winchester made in 1902:
0.460" no go
0.459" goes in ~ 0.2"
0.458" goes in ~ 0.2"
0.457" goes in ~ 0.2"
0.456" goes in ~ 0.3"

What does it all mean?
30 U.S. = 30-40

[wrench man]

On the vintage Winchester 1895's,as far as I'm aware, "30 GOVERNMENT" is the 30-03, "30 GOVERNMENT 06" is the 30-06, "30 ARMY" is the 30-40 Krag.

Clark, get a 30-40 round and see if it chambers, if it does it's a 30-40, if you need a hammer to beat it in the chamber it's an '06, probably the Krag?, the '03/'06 didn't come to be until 1903, my brothers rifle was built in 1905, a year before the 30-06.

[Clark]

I fired a 303 Brit round in the 30 U.S. and the case did not change much. It seemed to work.
Not like shooting a 270 in a 7mmRemMag:(


I bought a 250 Krag Ackley reamer, dies, and Benchmark barrel blank for the old 1895.

[Bob Busetti]

Once you get used to carrying the 95 it doesn't feel awkward to carry. I always liked them + the action cycles very fast. Rifle too heavy, try a carbine.

[W.R.Buchanan]

The case dimensions between the .30-04 and .303 Brit are very similar. The .30-40 has a longer neck but the rest of the case is almost the same. You could easily make .303 cases out of .30-40 cases.

You're about .100 short to go the other way.

Randy

[starmac]

Once you get used to carrying the 95 it doesn't feel awkward to carry. I always liked them + the action cycles very fast. Rifle too heavy, try a carbine.

Not to say I would never own one if the right deal came up, but I would just grab a 99 and not worry about trying to get use to the awkwardness or weight. lol

[shrapnel]

I was slow to warm up to a 95, but this gun is a beauty. It has lots of original blue, bright bore and the 40-72 Chambering makes it one of the most desirable 95's ever made. It is accurate and will kill something this fall. Meanwhile it has been killing rabbits...


http://i235.photobucket.com/albums/ee202/bridgershooters/Varmints/DSCN1087.jpg

[jrmartin1964]

There always seems to be a certain amount of confusion in some quarters when a .30 caliber Winchester Model 1895 is involved. Sorting out the various .30 caliber chamberings of the Model 1895 is actually quite simple:

.30 U.S. or .30 ARMY = .30-40 Krag. A very few Model 1895s so chambered were simply marked 30;

.30 U.S. MOD. 1903 ​or .30 GOV'T. 1903 or .30 GOV'T '03 = .30-03;

.30 U.S. MOD. 1906 or .30 GOV'T. 1906 or .30 GOV'T '06 = .30-06.

[W.R.Buchanan]

Schrapnel: good to see you're using enough gun for the task at hand. :mrgreen: I know that a charging Cottontail can be pretty intimidating. Knock down power is essential when dealing with these types of threats.

I plan on using my Enfield converted to .35-303 for similar purposes. 250 gr boolits should be enough for chickens pigs turkeys and rams on the Short Range. One of the guys I shoot with has a Browning High Wall in .40-72 and it is just enough for that game. Those animals are pretty tough.:mrgreen:

Randy

[MT Chambers]

My orig. '95 is in .303 Br. as most Canadian '95s were, action is butter smooth and because of it's unique look it is in demand, my fav. levergun.