1876 proof testing 203 grains powder, 1750 grain bullet !

[preventec47]

QUOTE
The Model 1876 is the only repeating rifle that had successful, documented use in the northern plains buffalo slaughter. The strength of the Model 1876 rifle and the .45-75 W.C.F. cartridge was tested by Winchester in the late 1870s. The factory conducted tests on the strength and reliability of the action to answer concerns by customers. These tests will astound collectors and shooters who have stated the Model 1876's toggle link action is "weak." In response to a letter sent to the company by Charles Hallock, Esquire, of Forest & Stream magazine, Oliver Winchester responded by telling about the tests the factory accomplished on the 1876 rifle.

He indicated that engineers first started the tests by removing one of the toggle links and fired 20 rounds (this was with .45-75 W.C.F. cartridge with 350 grain bullet) with no effect. They restored the missing link then went through 6 more trials starting with a charge of 105 grains of black powder, behind a 700 grain bullet! The comment "worked well" is noted. They then increased the charge of powder to 165 grains behind 3 bullets (1,150 grains) and that "worked well." From there, they increased the powder charge to 203 grains and added more bullets until they reached 1,750 grains of lead (five 350 grain bullets). This also "worked well."

Finally, they added one more bullet, bringing the total weight to 2,100 grains, and things began to happen. The comment was, "Breech pin slightly bent. Arm working stiff." The seventh and final test was again 203 grains of powder but this time six Martini bullets weighing 480 grains each (2,880 grains) were used. "The charge bent the breech pin, blew out the side plates, split the frame and otherwise disabled the arm," was the comment. Oliver Winchester noted that in this seventh trial, the shell had burst into fragments and the escape of gas at the breech did the damage.
QUOTE

http://www.bar-w.com/1876v04.html

[Nath]

Now that is some test
Nath.

[TedH]

Holy Cow!

[3855]

Sounds fishy to me. I can't imagine any way you can get 203 grs of blackpowder in a 45-75 case...

Even if they were merely filling the chamber with powder without the case somehow, the dynamics of the normal pressure curve are drastically altered proving little.

In addition, even if the action held for a few of any kind of overcharges, you can bet the links were stretched, headspace was now excessive and the gun effectively ruined.

Despite the aforementioned test, the 1876 action is a weak one. That is evidenced by the most of the remaining 76's around today that exhibit loose and damaged links.... and these are just from the effects of normal pressure bp loads.

[preventec47]

QUOTE "PROVING LITTLE" ! !

Are you kidding me ?

am surprised you didnt notice how difficult it might be to insert
six 480 gr bullets into the case :- )


Assuming the reports were truthful I am darn impressed
that the thing didnt grenade much earlier. That has to mean
something !

[Terry Murbach]

YEAH RIGHT !!! IF YOU BOYS BELIEVE THIS YOU ALSO BELIEVE IN THE EASTER BUNNY, AND FREE SEX TOO.
AND '92 WINCHESTERS WON THE CIVIL WAR. I SAW 'EM WITH MY OWN EYES IN THE MOVIE SO IT MUST BE TRUE.

[w30wcf]

preventec47,
Thank you for posting. That very interesting test was published in the 1878 Winchester catalog under the heading "Trial Of The Winchester Repeating Sporting Rifle.".

3855, Terry Murbach,
As mentioned, the test was documented in an 1878 Winchester catalog.
It was done in response to a letter from Charles Hallock, Esq. questioning the safety of the 1876 Winchester Rifle using a 350 gr. bullet and 75 gr. of b.p. (as compared to the 1873's 200 gr. bullet / 40 gr. of b.p. with a similar breech fastening system).

The 1st test would have been sufficient to prove the rifle capable but I believe Winchester wanted to see how much it would take until failure.

The powder and bullets would have been loaded from the muzzle.

w30wcf

[Grizzly Adams]

Despite the aforementioned test, the 1876 action is a weak one. That is evidenced by the most of the remaining 76's around today that exhibit loose and damaged links.... and these are just from the effects of normal pressure bp loads.

Uh, not to mention 125-130 years of use as a tool on the frontiers of this continent!

Heck, I'm not half that age and have a few loose links!

[Buffboy]

Sounds fishy to me. I can't imagine any way you can get 203 grs of blackpowder in a 45-75 case...

Even if they were merely filling the chamber with powder without the case somehow, the dynamics of the normal pressure curve are drastically altered proving little.

In addition, even if the action held for a few of any kind of overcharges, you can bet the links were stretched, headspace was now excessive and the gun effectively ruined.

Despite the aforementioned test, the 1876 action is a weak one. That is evidenced by the most of the remaining 76's around today that exhibit loose and damaged links.... and these are just from the effects of normal pressure bp loads.

This was a test, to failure, of the 1876, they were going to keep adding pressure till it failed, they succeeded. It was printed in response to a magazine article of the time saying the action was "weak". They used black powder because that's what they had. IMO, the test showed the naysayers that the rifle was stronger by far than the detractors thought.

Yes, they muzzle loaded the rifle to get those numbers. They would put a primed case in the rifle, pour powder, then seat the larger/ multiple bullets to get those numbers. You notice the failure of the rifle was the breach pin/bolt(Winchester thought the damage was from case failure). The links on the 73/76 rifles don't stretch as any pressure to them is in compression. They can fail by bending or breaking but they don't stretch in firing. They can stretch only in extraction or hitting the back of the lever travel with force.

IMHO the reason there are loose/damaged links in those old rifles is a combination of poor cleaning of black powder residue over time, metallurgy of 1876 era steel(a similar test of a modern steel replica would be interesting, but I'm not donating mine), likely use of smokeless powder(that can generate far more pressure per unit than black), and ,considering the number of moving joints/wear points, lack of proper lubrication over the 125+ year age of the rifles.

[w30wcf]

Despite the aforementioned test, the 1876 action is a weak one. That is evidenced by the most of the remaining 76's around today that exhibit loose and damaged links

The few originals I have examined did not have any loose or damaged links. I fired one of them and there was no primer protrusion, indicating that the headspace was still tight.

As Buffboy mentioned, the improper use of the wrong smokeless powder will tend to loosen things up.

w30wcf

[Leverdude]

I'm not doubting it was in a catalog advertisment. But it must be Remembered that Winchester, the man, was a salesman first & foremost.
People have fired 30/30's from guns lacking breech blocks too. Interesting but not a strength indicator.

I'm not knocking the 76 but if it & the 73 were not relatively weak designs we wouldn't have 92's & 86's.
Another thing that begs asking if it was so strong an action is why it was never chambered for 45/70.

[w30wcf]

11/1/04 posted by colt 1849
"Had the opportunity to look at a Winchester 1876 that had a serious over charge of smokeless shot through it, causing a complete separation of the case and head. Barrel right at the chamber area was blown out at the bottom, about 3 inches of the bottom half of the barrel was in pieces. This caused a secondary detonation of the cartridge in the mag tube. Mag tube had a “banana peelâ€

[w30wcf]

Another thing that begs asking if it was so strong an action is why it was never chambered for 45/70.

Leverdude,
The action is not long enough for the dimensions of the .45-70 cartridge.

w30wcf

[Ysabel Kid]

I think I'll pass on testing my reproduction that way!!!

[Nath]

What we have to remember and imagine is how the case grips the chamber on firing. Mr luger knew this too and he also developed a rifle of his design too.
It is hard sometimes to realise what the actual pressure does, yeah we all know the figures but we tend to take the actual amount for granted. Time is also important, a case and barrel even may not want to hold that pressure for say a couple of seconds but they cope with a couple of milli seconds.
Any way it does not matter to me how the breech is closed as it is not wholly what is required to contain the pressure, to me it is merely the means to facilitate easier loading than the M loader.
Nath.

[505stevec]

I want one!!! in .45-60 probably

[Mike D.]

Considering the toggle link design of the Models 1873 and 1876, they are comparitively speaking a fairly strong design. The '76 was the most powerful repeater of it's time and if it's frame was slightly longer it would have handled the .45-70 cartridge.

My original .45-60 was shot for many years using smokeless loads only. 36 grains of IMR 3031 was the maximum, but most loads were of 30-32 grains. All bullets were 300 grain, both lead and jacketed. As far as I know the old gun is still going strong to this day.

Do not sell the 1876 short. Everyone thinks that the design is inherently puny, but it is far from that. Of course, an overcharge of smokeless can wreck one, but using reasonable caution in loading modern smokeless powders in the originals, as well as reproductions, will lead to a lot of shooting fun and no black powder mess to clean up. Personally, I will not use black in any of my original Winchesters, regardless of the model and year of manufacture.

[hfcable]

[quote="3855"]Sounds fishy to me. I can't imagine any way you can get 203 grs of blackpowder in a 45-75 case...

Even if they were merely filling the chamber with powder without the case somehow, the dynamics of the normal pressure ccase in the chamber, add powder down the muzzle and bullets down the barrel for the extremem tests;
this was a know method in the late 19th century for extreme load testing, since they had no other powders.
i will dig out the book and try to scan it and post it.

it is a weak action and of course would not hold up pto a steady diet of any kind of stiff loads;
my books say winchester modifed 18-20 1876's to take the standard 45/70 cartridge for military trials and the guns could not handle those stressed and failed too rapidly for successful military or commercial use.

[Ben_Rumson]

Why would you need a stronger action (92 still in the BP era) for calibers that the “weakâ€

[Leverdude]

Another thing that begs asking if it was so strong an action is why it was never chambered for 45/70.

Leverdude,
The action is not long enough for the dimensions of the .45-70 cartridge.

w30wcf

Thank you, learn something every day.
I wonder why not make it long enough at the onset tho. Given the widespread use of the 45/70 at the time.

At any rate I'm not arguing just thinking on the keyboard.

[Nath]

Ben R, you'll have to explain that one to me. What cam lobes?
I allways understood the Luger stayed shut via pressure sticking the case to the chamber walls and then when it drops the case pushes back on the toggle which has a cross pin above the bore axis causing it to fold abit like if you push on your heel with a relaxed leg. Have I got it wrong?
Nath.

[Buffboy]

Nath, to take the topic completely off topic , here's an explanation of the operation of the Luger

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luger_pistol

[Don McDowell]

Thank you, learn something every day.
I wonder why not make it long enough at the onset tho. Given the widespread use of the 45/70 at the time.

At any rate I'm not arguing just thinking on the keyboard.

The 45-70 really wasn't that widely used at the time, mostly just by the military, and a few of the buffalo hunters. Many of the buff hunters had 45-70 chambers opened up to 45-110's.
The 45-70 probably has a greater following now than it ever did during the time of its inception to the time it became obsolete in the 1930's.

[KirkD]

If that test was published in the Winchester Catalogue, I've no doubt it was performed. True, the powder would way over fill the case and continue up the barrel, but don't forget the weight of all the bulllets, which would have caused a very impressive pressure spike. I've read the results of that test a few times over the past few years. I owned an original '76 and was intimately acquainted with its internals. The action is stronger than many people suspect. When the bolt is closed, the links form almost a straight line and are very strong. The pins bear little if any pressure when the bolt is closed. Mine was made in 1882 and the headspace was still factory spec. If a '76 is going to blow up, it won't be the 'weak' toggle link action that lets go, it will be the chamber, as usually for most rifles. The '86 and '92 do have stronger actions, but the real payoff for them is that they are lighter, and the '86 could chamber longer cartridges.

There was a case involving a modern repro '73 where a firing pin came out the back and into the person's eye. In my knowledge of the action, I can see how that could happen if the pin with the firing pin retainer lug is sheared off from other stresses. By the way, if anyone does come across an original '76 with loose toggles, it is probably because someone reformed modern 45-70 brass and didn't thin the rims and forced the action closed, way overstressing the pins. My action would not close over modern 45-70 rim thickness. I had to thin the rims to original 45-60 specs. Then the action locked up nice and tight, but not too tight. I have an article somewhere about this that I wrote and posted on the old leverguns articles section.

[Ben_Rumson]

To me it would make no sense to have the pins bear any of the load..A little clearance/slop in the links and on the pins may be mistaken for wear..But what counts is when that slop is compressed when the bolt is home on a shell ..then the links should be bearing fully in their nests in the frame and bolt..

[KirkD]

To me it would make no sense to have the pins bear any of the load..A little clearance/slop in the links and on the pins may be mistaken for wear..But what counts is when that slop is compressed when the bolt is home on a shell ..then the links should be bearing fully in their nests in the frame and bolt..

That is it, exactly.

[Grizzly Adams]

There was a case involving a modern repro '73 where a firing pin came out the back and into the person's eye. In my knowledge of the action, I can see how that could happen if the pin with the firing pin retainer lug is sheared off from other stresses.

The Uberti replica of the 1873 differs from the original 1873 in terms of the firing pin.

The original Winnie 73 had a one piece firing pin that was retained in the bolt by the firing pin retractor link. The Uberti has a two piece firing pin assembly. The firing pin is spring loaded to provide retraction, and the striker is captured in the bolt by a thin cross pin. Should that pin shear it may be possible for the striker to come out the back of the bolt.

The latest versions of the Uberti 73, and the new 1876 Uberti have been equipped with a firing pin retainer link/lug that is much like the original. Believe me, before you shear this baby, your going to have a lot more trouble on your plate than a firing pin!

[Ben_Rumson]

Since we're talking links & what not, I'll put this in here for a bit of a giggle..I ordered a "matched pair" of replacement links for my 73, for just in case..When I opened the package out fell a pair of link alright..Two left links!!

[KirkD]

The Uberti has a two piece firing pin assembly. The firing pin is spring loaded to provide retraction, and the striker is captured in the bolt by a thin cross pin. Should that pin shear it may be possible for the striker to come out the back of the bolt.

The latest versions of the Uberti 73, and the new 1876 Uberti have been equipped with a firing pin retainer link/lug that is much like the original. Believe me, before you shear this baby, your going to have a lot more trouble on your plate than a firing pin!

That makes sense. I've always wondered about what series of bizarre events could send a normal '73 one piece firing pin out the back, but the thin cross pin of the older Uberti sounds less strong than their newere design, or the original Winchester design.

[junkbug]

Here is a recent 1876 failure (vintage rifle). The owner said it was a double charge, obviously of smokeless powder.

http://www.shilohrifle.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=11153


Sean

[KirkD]

That photo illustrates what I mentioned earlier ..... if you do blow up your '76, it's not likely the action that will go, but the chamber area. Of course, I still believe that a fellow should stick to original black powder ballistics and pressures.

[Nath]

Thanks Buffboy, I did not realise the barrel moved back
Nath. ( Sorry Ben R).

[Driftwood Johnson]

That makes sense. I've always wondered about what series of bizarre events could send a normal '73 one piece firing pin out the back, but the thin cross pin of the older Uberti sounds less strong than their newere design, or the original Winchester design.

Howdy

It's not really all that bizarre, or rare. Part of it is because all toggle link rifles, Henry, '66, '73, and '76 never truly lock the breech closed like a modern rifle will. The toggle links derive all their strength from being locked rigidly in line, just as our legs derive all their strength from our knees being locked in place. But if the links are not lined up straight, they have no strength at all. Imagine you are standing up straight and somebody sneaks up behind you and shoves your knees forward from behind. You will go down like a ton of bricks. That is exactly what will happen with a toggle link rifle if the links are not lined up perfectly straight, but are ever so slightly folded. In this case, the bolt is out of battery, but if the links are close enough to being straight, an inattentive finger can brush the trigger, dropping the hammer. If the bolt is almost closed, the hammer will strike the firing pin, and the pin will be close enough to fire the cartridge. But since the links are not lined up quite straight, they have no strength at all and will fold up just like your legs did. In this case, recoil will drive the bolt straight back. The lever will be yanked forward, often right out of the grasp of the shooter. The bolt continues driving straight back, and in the worst case scenario, when the links fold as much as they phsycially can, stopping the rearward motion of the bolt, the firing pin extension may have built up enough momentum that it shears the tiny pin holding it to the bolt, and continues straight back at the shooter's eye. The hammer will usually deflect the firing pin extension enough that it does not strike the eye, strikes the cheek instead. This has happened with Uberti toggle link guns, I have read numerous accounts of it on the Cowboy forums. I know one shooter who had an out of battery discharge with an Uberti '73. He was lucky, he had a firm enough grasp on the finger loop that when it flew forward the loop broke right off in his hands. His fingers were sore, but it slowed down the bolt enough that the firing pin extension stayed with the bolt.

This is one reason why Winchester wisely included a lever activated trigger interlock with the Model 1873. The interlock is no modern lawyer driven safety device, Winchester realized that with the introduction of the more powerful 44-40 cartridge there was more potential for injury than with the less pwerful 44 Rimfire cartridge chambered gy the Henry and 1866 Winchester. Indeed, many modern shooters foolishly disengage the trigger interlock on modern 1873 replicas. My friend did. If he had not, he probably would not have had an out of battery discharge in the first place. I do not know for a fact if the more powerful '76 had an interlock, but seeing as it was a later, and more modern design I'll bet it did.

This out of battery discharge problem was not a problem with the 1886 and 1892 designs. Unlike the toggle link designs, these Browning designed rifles had solid locking lugs, not toggles, to lock the bolt in battery. The design was such that the lugs were at least partially engaged before the bolt was completely in battery. So even if an out of battery discharge occured, the lugs were partially blocking the bolt from going anyplace serious. Another difference is all the toggle link designs present the new cartridge in line to the chamber, so it is already grasped by the extractor and the primer is lined up with the firing pin long before the bolt is closed. Another possible path to dissaster. The Browning guns feed the new cartridge up an inclined carrier, and the primer is nowhere near the firing pin until the last moment, when the lugs are already almost completely in place. For these reasons, the '86 and '92 designs did not have a lever activated trigger interlock like the '73 did. It was not needed. Any more recent safety devices on these models are lawyer driven.

Lastly, in any discussion of the relative strength of the '76, it must be remembered that the frame of all the toggle link rifles are basically skeletonized frames. They all have side plates of some type or another, some are dovetailed in place, some are screwed on from the outside. But the side plates of the toggle link rifles inpart no strength in tension to the frame. The '86 and '92 on the other hand have no side plates, the frame is milled from one solid block of steel. Even though the frame of the '86 is lighter than the frame of the '76, and the frame of the '92 is lighter than the frame of the '73, the Browning designs have solid sides to the frames, the toggle link guns are skeletonized.

While it is true the links derived their strength in compression, not in tension, the skeletonized frame was in tension under the impulse of recoil. Properly fitted links were fitted to the mortices in the frame, and the compressed links would transmit the pounding of recoil directly to the sleletonized frame.

*****

One reason the '76 was never chambered for the longer 45-70 round has to do with the carrier design. With all the toggle link rifles, the cartridge is lifted straight up from the magazine by a lifter that sits directly behind the magazine. So the frame needs to be long enough to accomodate the toggle action, and the lifter in front. Browning's use of the tiliting carrier enabled the cartridge on the carrier to sit below the bolt, not in front. When the bolt retracted, the carrier merely tilted so the round would ride up the tilted carrier. This meant the frame did not need to be as long. The frame of an '86 is considerably shorter than a '76, dispite the fact that it could handle the 45-70 and the 45-90 round.

[Naphtali]

For anyone interested, maximum pressure burning of black powder in a sealed pressure vessel is approximately 96K psi.
***
[From the British Proof Act of 1868] Bullets were used exclusively in proof: these were to be "spherical, conical or cylindrical in form, except those for rifled arms. These latter were to be flat-ended cylinders, 135% of service weight. Powder was to be "of equal quality and strength with that which is now used by Her Majesty's War Department." Proof charges for rifles were to be 300% of service charge for provisional proof and 200% for definitive proof. Wads were of solid felt or cork for rifles, of felt, cork or paper for other arms. Wads were not to be thicker than bore diameter; one to be loaded on the powder and another of the projectile. . .
***
One, last thing. The word "proof" as used here means test. To refer to a proof test is equivalent to saying test test.