40-65 or 405W in 1885 highwall?

[andym79]

Hi guys I am hoping that someone on here has experience with these cartridges using cast bullets. I have always fancied the unusual cartridges, for a while now I have wanted an 1885, but not in standard chambering.

Does anyone have one of the Uberti (Cimarron) 1885 highwalls? Are they well made?

I am now faced with a dilema, if I am to get one should it be in 40-65 or 405!

Secondly in a single shot rifle which cartridge do you think has more potential accuracy, the 40-65 or 405W?

I have seen load data for 280-415 grainers in the 405 and 300 and 400 in the 40-65.

I am not too wise on the ballistics of either. I know the 40-65 was a successful black powder cartridge and the 405W was the famous lion medicine gun!

I assume reloading the 40-65 would be easier as if 40-65 brass isn't available then you can just resize 45-70 brass.

Any help on if the Uberti is a reasonable be any the pros and con of each cartridge would be greatly appreciated.


Thanks

Andy

[Ballistics in Scotland]

I doubt if there is any real edge for one over the other in accuracy or, if you do your own loading, power. In a single shot rifle I would avoid the lighter bullets. Probably the key factor is that for the .40-65 it is indeed easy to form cases from .45-70, so really strong and relatively inexpensive cases are going to be available everywhere, ten or twenty years from now. With the .405 you never know.

[Don McDowell]

If Uberti built those rifles with the correct rifling twist , the 40-65 will be the better of the cast bullet guns. The 405 if built properly will have a 14 twist in the barrel, that's is for the specific purpose of sending a 300 gr bullet in excess of 2000 fps.
I own rifles in both cartridges, the 405 can be made to shoot cast with decent accuracy, but where it really shines is making 300 gr jacketed bullets go fast. The 40-65 in a single shot has a proven track record for accuracy with cast bullets in the 400 gr range trotting along at a leisurely 1200 fps.. and it's easier on the shoulder, easier on powder whether white or black, and cases are a good deal less expensive.
Plus the 40-65 also holds the advantage when/if you ever decide to jump off into bpcr sillouette shooting as that cartridge is approved, the 405 is not as it was never a blackpowder cartridge.

[John Taylor]

Several years back I made a two barrel set for an 1895 Winchester, one in 40-72 and the other in 405. Both use the same size brass but the 405 has a bullet that is .005" bigger. The big difference is the 405 is a smokeless cartridge and loaded to much higher pressures. I shot the 40-72 first and thought it was a fun rifle to shoot. Then I tried the 405 and that thing hurts.

[Don McDowell]

The 405 brass is supposed to be thicker in the rim than the 40-72 so as to supposedly keep the 405 from chambering in the 72 chamber, but it doesn't really sound like that is always true in some of those older rifles.

[Clay M]

For a hunting rifle I like the .405 win. For black powder competition, the .40/65 is great.
The .405 win with a crescent buttplate has some nasty recoil, unless you use a good pad between it and you shoulder .

I am a big fan of the .405 win ,and have owned and shot them for many years..

[EDG]

If you are going to hunt with jacketed bullets the .405 is the best choice. It is a high pressure and high powered round. The 405 is not permitted for BPCR competition all though you could probably load it with BP and call it a 40-72. It would have ballistics a little better than the 40-65 but the twist is all wrong for BPCR use.

The 40-65 in its modern incarnation uses a twist that is about right for 400 grain bullets. The BP ballistics are about 1100 to 1300 fps and are probably far more suited for BPCR target competetion.

[Kraschenbirn]

Currently, I have two Uberti falling blocks: a HighWall in .38-55 and a LowWall in .32-20 and, with proper loads, either shoots as well as I can hold...like sub-2" 10-shot groups @ 100M with iron sights.

Were I doing the picking, I'd go with a .40-65 and never look back...but, then, I'm in the process of finishing up a .40-65 RB that someone had rebarreled but never completed. Unless you're going to hunt dangerous game or really BIG animals at longer ranges, within the limitations of its BP ballistics, the .40-65 will kill just as effectively as the .405 and, if you're just going to punch paper or shoot steel, it's a more 'traditional' chambering for a HighWall.

Bill

[rfd]

yer cartridge choice should probably be swayed first by usage/task, then availability and mechanics.

hand's down, the .40-65 for me, i have another coming next week in yet another rolling block format.

[andym79]

Well I have decided to go with the 40-65, easier to get brass, designed for black should I want to.

I now need to decide which version to get. A straight stock to minimise felt recoil, but I really do want the octagonal barrel. The standard sporting or the deluxe?
The deluxe has a pistol grip and is checkered. Checkering is nice, but the pistol grip doesn't look traditional. All my levers have straight stocks, I have heard that the pistol grip is however better for slower deliberate shots and is helps with reduce felt recoil.

Are either of those statements about pistol grips true?

[rfd]

to each their own and my own likes the .40-65, a pistol grip (checkered or not, don't care, don't matter) is mandatory for better tactile contact and trigger control (nothing to do with recoil), and large shotgun stock (with an added kick killer acton pad). as to the action, i prefer rollers - few moving parts, easy to take apart and clean, and i can make my own firing pins. second choice would be falling blocks, starting with the sharps. last choice would be a high wall as from what i've heard & seen (not owned) they're not friendly when it comes to action stripping. anyhoo, interestingly apropos to this thread i have a new .40-65 roller arriving this week. guns r good, life is good - enjoy the journey of guns. :)

http://www.dixiegunworks.com/images/CR3250.JPG