Which 38-40 should i look for?

[learjet]

Hi everyone, i recently purchased a 1920s Colt SAA in 38-40, and im looking for information on which carbine/rifle in 38-40 i should puchase to go along with it. Im using both the lyman 175g and an older lee custom group buy mold that weighs appx 190g and has a cannalure ring with unique and 5744. the lee when loaded has an oal of 1.655 and functions fine in the SAA. My friend who owns the mold has a marlin 1894 and he cant get the lee boolit loads to function thru the mag. I have read that the win 1873s shouldnt be shot w smokeless, and the actions are short for some loads as well. Are the win 1892s more forgiving to OAL? No plans to shoot BP, and no interest in non C&R guns

any advice apppreciated!

Lear

[cwtebay]

I would definitely look for an 1892 Winnie to go with that Colt. Preferably from the same appropriate period. I'm not a huge Marlin guy, but there wouldn't be much wrong with that either.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

[eastbank]

my 38-40,s, a 92 winchester and colt bisley.

[learjet]

thx guys, eastbank you have ny issues w the 1892 cycling, esp related to OAL?

[farmbif]

I think if you find for yourself a nice clean unmolested marlin 1893 you probably won't regret it

[learjet]

my buddies 1893 wont cycle the lee boolit w cannalure, and the lyman 401043 wants to set back in the tube mag. he has tried lee factory crimps and roll crimp wo groove in the lyman. im hopin the 1892s are a bit more forgiving to OAL, i dont want to buy another mold unless absolutely necessary

[relics6165]

Another vote for a '92. Look for a factory style mold, that should cut out the feeding problems. Lee Factory Crimp Dies are your friend!

[Kai]

I don't cast the Lee bullet but do cast Lyman 401043 which works nicely in the Win. 1892. What is the length from the top of the crimp groove to the tip of the bullet for the Lee Bullet?

[learjet]

length from crimp groove about .375, oal 1.655. my 401043s oal 1.610…bettin the lee will be too long for any of the rifles after more reading

thx!

[Rick B]

Look at the Accurate Molds 40-190C flat base. The crimp groove is in the proper location for 1873's and 1892's. Personally I prefer the 1873's. As far as smokeless powder loads. They work well in the older rifles, as long as you stay at or below the pressures generated by original black powder loadings.

The 40-190C shoots well at 100 yards with powders in the Unique - W231 range. A 1873 will produce 2.5" - 4" five shot groups at 100 yards with a reasonably good bore. Don't overlook an original 1873 thats mechanically sound and has a bad bore. Smiths like John Taylor who frequents this site, will reline one.
Rick
PS 1873's work best, with a OAL of 1.592

[eastbank]

i make sure they fit in both and lock my seating die for that OAL.

[mack2]

I have a 73 made in 1885 myself. I really like the added velocity I get with the 38wcf BP loads, 1425 to 1450 with a 24" barrel. If you find one with a sewer pipe barrel ic could have a liner installed. I prefer the 44wcf in the revolver and the 38wcf in the rifle. This is ok I have both combo. The barrel being Nickel Steel was the change for smokeless, with a modern liner and good toggle links I wouldn't hesitate to shoot smokeless. I don't think back thrust is the issue, there have been firing pins blown out the back but this is because of out of battery firing (firing pin not retracted). This is all only my observations there may be others with different opinions. I think 1.630 wound be the longest that will fit in my 73.

[Jeff Michel]

Unless your stuck on an original, Cimarron imports an 1873 made by Uberti. I've had one for a number of years and it's amazingly accurate. Not picky as to bullets, just be sure to crimp firmly.

[BoBSavage]

I have read that the win 1873s shouldnt be shot w smokeless
any advice apppreciated!

Lear

Hogwash

[learjet]

thx all, reading between the lines it sounds like the lee boolit is out, will just be too long in any older rifle. not surprised really. ill stick w the 92 or a marlin, whichever i find firstin the condition i want. might consider a colt lightning also. place i travel too over the summer has one in 38-40. be fun to mess with

[BoBSavage]

The barrel being Nickel Steel was the change for smokeless,

Nickel Steel was not necessary for the 38-40 and 44-40 when using smokeless powder. Winchester used Dupont No. 2 Smokeless Rifle powder for the 38-40 smokeless loads. This powder produced less pressure than black powder.

It would appear that during the early smokeless powder transition years, there was some real fuss and confusion between the "low-powered" rifle shooters and the "high-powered" rifle shooters....very much the same as today. There was certainly talk about the powders, velocities and pressures to be used, as well as the use of the Special Steel Barrels.

During this time there was grandpa's black powder cartridges, the son's new smokeless powder replacements and the grandkids new fangled high-powered Winchester 30-30 and the Savage 303! In between the fuss of those two, were the "middle of the roaders"...black powder cartridges that were now offered with smokeless... and the confusion began!

Much talk about all of this in the old 1899 through 1920's magazines, books, articles...especially about burning out the bores...you know the spill! From what can be found, the two most popular mentioned cartridges for this argument were the 32-40 and 38-55 cartridges...and for good reason. Not only was the 38-55 loaded with black powder, it was also loaded with low-pressure smokeless and high-pressure smokeless powders....thus the confusion was real...even back then.

The 38-55 loaded with black powder could be used in any barrel. The Low-Pressure, "bulk for bulk" smokeless powder 38-55 loads could also be used in the black powder barrels. The reason was the "bulk for bulk" low-pressure powders burned cooler and the velocities slower than the high-pressured powders, thus safe (or at least "Safer") for the soft steel barrels. The problem began when folks tried to use the high-pressure "dense" powders (30 cal smokeless powders like WA30 or Dupont 30 cal). The heat generated would certainly burn the riffling over time.....or could blow the chamber or barrel of the softer steel types.. Some say 3,000 rounds is what it took to burn out the bore, but even then, diminishing only mere inches per groups. Nevertheless, eventually the hotter burning powders would certainly cause the rifling to wear away and even powders like Sharpshooter were still corrosive on the bores of the softer steel over time.


1899
Recreation Magazine, Vol 11
page 298 - Questions & Answers
page 458 - More About Smokeless Powder

One of the first examples of readers/shooters asking smokeless powder questions comes from this magazine.

Will the rifling of a Winchester .38-55 (common barrel) be injured by the use of a smokeless powder cartridge, with soft point jacketed bullet?

I referred this inquiry to the Winchester Repeating Arms Co, and they reply:

Our 38-55 rifle will not be injured when 38-55 smokeless cartridges of our make are used. The bullet will not harm the rifling. Smokeless powder is more difficult to clean than black. Where smokeless powder cartridges are made to take the place of black powder cartridges in guns which were intended for black powder, such smokeless powder is used as will give the same pressures and same velocities as were obtained with black powder in the black powder cartridges intended for the gun originally. We do the best we can to have the combination give the same velocity as before, which it would be difficult to get same accuracy.

The Winchester manufacturing company reassures the shooter that all is fine with shooting such appropriate low-pressure loads in black powder arms.

Moving on up into the year 1900, more questions and answers can be seen in articles. This next full-page “A Batch of Suggestions” article by H. A. Stillwell is a must read…



1900
Recreation Magazine, Vol 13
A BATCH OF SUGGESTIONS
Page 138

In this article, Stillwell speaks of the 30-30, 45-70, and the 38-55 on using such new smokeless powders. He also speaks of using high-pressure and splitting the barrels, rather than using the low-pressure smokeless powders.

He then states that “Everything considered, a black powder gun with low-pressure smokeless is good enough for me.”

It would appear that by 1902, the start of new terms and trying to understand the definitions for what they mean. If you recall, black powder was called gunpowder, but now with smokeless, the two were to be divide into black powder and smokeless powder.


To continue, this new smokeless powder is now getting separated, sliced and divided up for a better understanding of what is being used in what arms and why. By now the low-pressure, low-velocity shooters are becoming the new “peasants'', much the same today. If you shoot less than 2,000fps, you are the dirt of the earth.

1902
Western Field
The Sportsman’s Magazine of the West · Volume 1
This two-page article reveals more information about moving on up from the slow cartridges to the more high-powered cartridges.

“Anything in the way of a bullet moving less than 2,000 feet per second of time, must now, according to the dictum of these cal-low authorities, be considered not only obsolete but offensively objectionable.”

Then the author continues to explain.

“And yet, with high assurance notwithstanding, right here enters an element of danger to which I desire to call especially attention.” Shortly afterwards, he discusses the 32-40 and 38-55 high-pressure vs low-pressure smokeless loads and different arms manufactured for them, which covers a full-page explanation.

Not only was this nearly ten years after the introduction of smokeless powder, it was also the beginning of the new “High Velocity” fad that, as well as smokeless powder itself, many misunderstand even today.

The "Bulk for Bulk" powders, Dupont No. 2 in the photo...whiteish in color, was a low-pressure powder and could be used in the softer steel barrels, even when used in the 38-55. While all 94' 30-30's had smokeless barrels, not all 38-55's had the special steel barrels,. No 44-40 ever used special steel barrels, even the High Velocity loads due to their velocity being less than 1,700fps and pressures being less than at least 30,000 lbs.

Here are examples of misunderstanding what is safe, and what is not safe for your particular black powder firearm.

By 1905, Smokeless Powders were divided in two classes, low and high pressure. The first named being mostly used in old black powder cartridges, the latter for cartridges of the military and "high power" hunting types. Aside from black powder, most folks just getting over the fact that the new smokeless powder was also divided into two classes, “bulk for bulk” (Dupont No.2 types) and “dense” (Laflin & Rand .30-cal. types), both equaling the strength of a black powder charge but one being "bulk for bulk", and one being much less than bulk…. but yet both are safe for black powder firearms. Although both were safe for the soft steel barrels, the dense powders like Sharpshooter and Lightning were a bit corrosive.

Generally, for rifles, anything larger than .32 cal. was basically a bulk for bulk while anything smaller than a .32 cal. was a less bulk for bulk, or what was called “dense”. Aside from shooting jacketed bullets and large quantities of smokeless shots fired in the soft steel barrels, smokeless powder was plenty safe for use in black powder arms. The concerns below involve high pressure vs low pressure and the confusion thereof. Thus, by early 1900’s definitions, we must divide these pressures into at least two groups.


The division of smokeless powder could be divided into the following two classes.

Low Pressure – anything below, say…30,000cup
High Pressure – anything above, say…30,000cup

Just because a particular load may say “low pressure” doesn’t mean it is safe for the weaker barrels, weaker manufactured arms…but at the same time, smokeless powder itself is not unsafe to use in soft steel black powder barrels either.

Further down the pages we find this High Velocity/Low Pressure data while speaking about special sights…

“These cartridges are especially designed for use in rifles originally built to use black powder only.”

With that said, right there is why we need to understand what is meant between High-Pressure vs Low-Pressure, regardless of high velocity or low velocity….as well as…the reason for the switch from soft steel to special steel.


Also, keep in mind that even though the above 1902 information is nearly ten years into using smokeless powder era, the High-Velocity/Low-Pressure is another new Nomenclature!



1903
Western Field
The Sportsman's Magazine of the West · Volume 2

This 1903 article introduces the new High Velocity cartridges by Winchester for the Model 92’ and Model 86’. Noted is the part about…” A feature of all the high velocity cartridges is that they can be used by persons who dislike the high-power small caliber cartridges on account of their great range.”


1904
Western Field
The Sportsman’s Magazine of the West · Volume 4

“SOME NEW MARLIN DEPARTURES.

Interesting announcement comes from The Marlin Fire Arms Co., New Haven, Conn. concerning a new line of goods the company is marketing this season, which will attract wide attention among a large class of sportsmen and lovers of the rifle.

The company is now arranging a line of their famous repeating rifles, Model 1893, to be known among the trade Grade “B”. These rifles will be in every respect the same as the regular Model 1893 with the exception that the barrels will be made of the highest obtainable grade of soft gun barrel steel instead of their “Special Smokeless Steel”. The intention is to meet the large demand for a high-class, carefully made arm on the part of many shooters who are not sufficiently interested in the smokeless steel barrels to pay for the extra cost. The new line is, of course, not intended for high power smokeless ammunition and its use in this grade is not advised by the makers: only black powder ammunition and equivalent loads such as low power smokeless should be used. The 32-40 and 38-55 sizes only will be made in this grade.

The line will consist of the carbine with 15-inch round barrel weighing 6 1/4 pounds and carrying five shots, or with 20-inch round barrel weighing 6 3/4 pounds and carrying seven shots. With the regular round barrels in 26-inch to 32-inch lengths the rifle may be had weighing 7 to 7 3/4 pounds. Octagon barrels are furnished 26-inches to 32-inches long the rifles weighing 7 1/2 pounds to 8 1/2 pounds. These rifles can be furnished in short half or full magazine. They accommodate a wide range of cartridges and all the popular ammunition with the exception noted above regarding high power smokeless powder.”


By 1905, Smokeless Powders were divided in two classes, low and high pressure. The first named being mostly used in old black powder cartridges the latter for cartridges of the military type.

Black Powder - Low Pressure

Smokeless Powder - Low and High Pressures

a. Low Pressure - maybe less than 30,000 lbs. "Bulk for Bulk" powders and some "Bulky" dense powders
b. High Pressure - greater than at least 30,000 lbs. slower burning rifle powders, WA-30, Lightning, .30-Cal smokeless

Sporting Smokeless Powders were also divided into two general classes ~ "Nitrocellulose Industry" by Edward Chauncey Worden, 1911

Bulk - "Sharpshooter" (not bulk for bulk, and loaded by weight not volume) The Nitrocellulose has been produced in sufficiently light and porous loose granulars by mechanical means so that in equal volumes they possess about the same ballistics as black powder.

Condensed - Represents the maximum of propulsive force in the minimum of space...prepared in the same manor as the military flake powder. Condensed smokeless powders designed for the more modern rifles. [1911]



By 1918, Townsand Whelen noted some nomenclatures.

Small Bore - .35 cal. and smaller
Large Bore - larger than .35 cal.
Low Power - up to 1,750fps
High Power - greater than 1,750fps - Although not always stamped on the barrel, special steel barrels needed (bore wear issues, not strength issues), 30-30, .303 Savage and the high power loaded 32-40 and 38-55 loads.
High Intensity - Velocity greater than 2,400fps, - 30-40 Krag (30 Army), .30 cal. 1903, .30 cal. 1906, etc.

[indian joe]

Hi everyone, i recently purchased a 1920s Colt SAA in 38-40, and im looking for information on which carbine/rifle in 38-40 i should puchase to go along with it. Im using both the lyman 175g and an older lee custom group buy mold that weighs appx 190g and has a cannalure ring with unique and 5744. the lee when loaded has an oal of 1.655 and functions fine in the SAA. My friend who owns the mold has a marlin 1894 and he cant get the lee boolit loads to function thru the mag. I have read that the win 1873s shouldnt be shot w smokeless, and the actions are short for some loads as well. Are the win 1892s more forgiving to OAL? No plans to shoot BP, and no interest in non C&R guns

any advice apppreciated!

Lear

a 1892 will be way more forgiving on OAL than most other levers - the 73 actions are very perticular on length - not saying you will get away with your combo in a '92 but its the best chance

[Jeff Michel]

I've always stuck with the suggested OAL in the Lyman handbooks, they feed and fit in both my 1873 clone and 1873 "P" model Colt.

[John Taylor]

There was a lot of variation in chambers for the 38-40 and 44-40 way back when. You might want to keep your brass separated so you don't over work the brass and neck size only. modern factory ammo has the shoulder back quite a bit so it will fit all chambers. My own 38-40 is an 1889 Marlin.

[indian joe]

Hi everyone, i recently purchased a 1920s Colt SAA in 38-40, and im looking for information on which carbine/rifle in 38-40 i should puchase to go along with it. Im using both the lyman 175g and an older lee custom group buy mold that weighs appx 190g and has a cannalure ring with unique and 5744. the lee when loaded has an oal of 1.655 and functions fine in the SAA. My friend who owns the mold has a marlin 1894 and he cant get the lee boolit loads to function thru the mag. I have read that the win 1873s shouldnt be shot w smokeless, and the actions are short for some loads as well. Are the win 1892s more forgiving to OAL? No plans to shoot BP, and no interest in non C&R guns

any advice apppreciated!

Lear

stuff I have loaded for my almost 50 yr old Uberti 66 (44/40) is oal 1.55 -1.56" --
1.655 I dont believe is gonna work in a toggle gun

we have the RCBS Cowboy mold in 38/40, loaded in the crimp groove of starline brass = 1.578 works fine in my '92