Can't have enough .45-70s. (new tang sight)

[2ndovc]

I picked up this custom Browning '85 a couple of weeks ago and even though it was all of 17 degrees out I couldn't stand it and had to go shooting.
Ran out to my friend's farm, set up at 50yds and tried a couple different loads.
Center target was 405 gr LHPs and 50 grains of Varget. That one is a thumper. I had a partial box of Remington 405 JSPs that have been sitting around for some time. These shot well and with the weight of this rifle, quite pleasant to shoot. The 29" barrel is 1 1/8" at the muzzle.
Wasn't out looking for tight groups in this weather, but I'm pleased so far. The tang sight was missing so I'll have to order a new one. The dealer I bought it from took it in as part of an estate, but had no info on who did the work. He had a Rolling Block as well, but it went higher than I wanted to pay for it.

The boss lady gave me a gift card for Christmas for my favorite shop and I picked up an IWI 941, 9mm. Should have started with the pistol, Not bad at @ 20 yds or so, but I was freezing by this time and the crummy "WinClean" ammo didn't help. I'd bought a case cheap, a couple of years ago. Now I know why it was so cheap. Not terribly reliable and you can hear a difference in the report every few rounds.
I like the IWI though, it's all steel, heavy and fits my hand perfectly. Looking forward to better weather and spending time with these two.




jb

[.45colt]

Good Stuff there Jason!! One thing for sure , that rifle would make a great piece of gym equipment.. .. . does it weight around 10 lb.? should be an easy shooter in T-shirt weather. Enjoy.

[2ndovc]

Good Stuff there Jason!! One thing for sure , that rifle would make a great piece of gym equipment.. .. . does it weight around 10 lb.? should be an easy shooter in T-shirt weather. Enjoy.

According to the bathroom scale, it weighs in at 11.6 pounds.
It's a beast for sure. Should be just right for lobbing some big, heavy bullets a couple hundred yards down range.

jb

[CowboyTutt]

I have quietly said for well over a decade that the 1885 Winchester action is far superior to the earlier Sharps design. Interesting stock on that one Jason! Looks very usable with the slope of the comb correct and just the right amount of curve to the butt plate. And at 11.6 lbs it can double as gym equipment! -Tutt

[Bill in Oregon]

Jason, I am admiring that perch-belly butt stock. That's some good shooting for the first time out and fiendish weather conditions!

[Oldncrusty]

Love it. Congrats.

[AJMD429]

.

I've never handled one of those but it seems kind of like a Ruger number one, and those are certainly nice.

[kaschi]

Always wanted to own one but have not (as of yet anyway). How does the 1885 action operate with regards to the cocking of the hammer? In other words: when you lower the lever, insert a cartridge and raise the lever, does doing so cock the hammer or does it have to be manually pulled back to fire the rifle? Along the same lines with regards to the hammer: is there a "half cock" position?

[2ndovc]

Always wanted to own one but have not (as of yet anyway). How does the 1885 action operate with regards to the cocking of the hammer? In other words: when you lower the lever, insert a cartridge and raise the lever, does doing so cock the hammer or does it have to be manually pulled back to fire the rifle? Along the same lines with regards to the hammer: is there a "half cock" position?

Depends on who made it. The Browning hammer cocks as you raise the lever to close the action. My 1885 Uberti I have has to be manually cocked after closing the action. Some people find having to manually cock the hammer upsetting, but I don't see it as a real issue.
Both rifles have a half cock position.

Tutt,
! agree with you, as much as I kike my Sharps, I prefer the '85 action. No real reason honestly, mostly aesthetics and a personal preference.

jb

[marlinman93]

Nice additions to your collection! The 1885 is a time proven strong design, and I like the look of yours too. Should have a lot of enjoyment with it! Adding a vernier tang sight will make it even more accurate later!

[leverman44]

That's a beauty of a High Wall ! I have the Uberti version High Wall Carbine and either shoot 405 gr. or .500.gr 45-70 torpedos out of it.

[M. M. Wright]

Beautiful rifle sir. Looks like it's going to be a shooter. Three 45-70s here, (I sold the trap door) and there is an 86 in 45-90 if that counts. I have a high-wall, Browning B-78 but it's a 30-06 with the tapered octagon barrel. You know, I sold that Browning when times got tight and took the buyers address so I could send him the sling swivels that came with it. Some years later I wrote to him and, since times were better for me, told him if ever he wanted to sell it back that I would be interested. Years later again and I get a letter saying his son now owned the rifle but wanted to sell it. So I have it back after a road trip to retrieve it.
Two of my 45-70s have slow twist barrels that will only stabilize light weight bullets so that's what I load for all of them. Obviously your rifle has a tighter twist since it likes 405s. Probably will stabilize anything.

[kaschi]

Thanks 2ndovc for the answer. I never realized that 1885s came both ways depending on who made them. If given the choice, I'd take the version which you mention is used on the Uberti. How were the original Winchester 1885s set up?

As for your comparison between the Sharps and the 1885, I agree that if owning only one or the other were the option, the 1885 would get the thumbs up due to the strength factor. About 15 years ago, I was bitten by the Sharps bug and bought a NIB Shiloh Sharps Military Carbine in 50-70. Beautiful, quality little gun! It's a keeper for sure. Someday I'd love to have an 1885, hopefully a C Sharps Arms. They are supposed to be nice but I've never had the opportunity to handle one.

[Ray Newman]

2ndOVC: your Browning .45-70 at 11.6 pounds is a lightweight. Back in 2007-08, Kirk at Shiloh-Sharps built me a .45-2.4” (AKA erroneously called a .45-90) M1874 Sharps. Sports a 34” heavy barrel with 6X MVA ‘scope it tips the scale at just about 24 pounds. It’s a rifle that can be shot all day without beating the me up. At that time, Kirk built (not sure if he still does) about 25 or so of these heavy “Tollefson Class” rifles as a “hobby” in his spare time.

[2ndovc]

Holy Cow! I think I'll stick with this one.

When I was in my early 30s I had a heavy barreled M1A with a double lugged receiver bedded into a fiberglass McMillan stock. That one was just over 15 pounds. I was still doing a lot of building and carpentry in those days so it was no big deal, but 20+ years later, 11.6 will do.

Thanks for the nice words guys. I can tell already this one is a keeper.

jb

[CowboyTutt]

Tutt,
! agree with you, as much as I kike my Sharps, I prefer the '85 action. No real reason honestly, mostly aesthetics and a personal preference.

jb

Jason, my experience pales in comparison to yours with single shot rifles. I want to further clarify that my statements of the Browning 1885 being superior to the Sharps is based upon cycling the action of a Pedersoli Sharps and a Browning (Miroku) 1885. The action of the 1885 was so much smoother in functioning, and yes, it is also stronger, imagine that from John Browning? I appreciate your expertise on the matter, my best friend has a Browning 1885 as well. It is a dreamy rifle. To me, its not about the strength of the action, but how it functions and IMHO the 1885 just works smoother and better. However, I have very limited experience on the matter and will defer to you. But if it were me, I would go for an 1885 Winchester, made by Miroku. Your new rifle is a keeper. Not sure you have enough comb height for a high tang sight though. Ways to work around that.

Regards,

-Tutt/Andy

[2ndovc]

Thanks Andy,
I'm no expert though, I'll leave that to some of the other guys. I just know what I like and enjoy shooting. My first rifle was a Savage / Stevens Favorite that My dad bought for me when I was five. Still have it, thousands of rounds later it's still a good little shooter.

The stock is going to need a leather cheek rest for sure, but I'll wait until I get the new tang sight on it first to get an idea as to how high it's going to need to be. It's going to have to be something classy too. Open to suggestions on that.

jb

[Griff]

The only 1885 I own is a Browning Low Wall in 45 Colt. It's action is smooth as glass, If I remember my history right; JMB designed the rifle and started producing them in 1878, (hence the original Brownings carrying the B-78 moniker). He produced 600 of them before selling the rights to Winchester in 1883 and their production began in 1885.

Although mine is in a pistol caliber, I feel it compares quite favorably to my Shiloh Sharps, in fit, finish and cycling. For what I bought it for, it functions perfectly. The cocking the hammer as the breech is raised is very sweet. Since I use mine in timed competition, having one less manual function is very handy. Since distances are not great the 24" ½ round/½ octagon barrel is handy and has more than adequate sight radius to handle my usually under 100 yard shots.

When Winchester (Miroku) produced the 1885 in .32-40 I wanted one bad... but didn't have the funding, by the time I got the funding they, were virtually gone...

[2ndovc]

A .32-40 would be a super cartridge in the '85. I keep watching for one in .38-55, mainly because I have a lot of components for it and love shooting my grandfather's 94.

jb

[2ndovc]

Just ordered a new tang sight from Lee Shaver.

Should be just the ticket.



jb

[CowboyTutt]

Lee makes a superb product. I went with a Kelley Extra Long range sight on my Enfield. Big, big bucks. Truthfully, it was the only thing available at the time. I think yours is a short or mid-range sight? Should be very accurate with the adjustable diopters. -Tutt

[2ndovc]

Lee makes a superb product. I went with a Kelley Extra Long range sight on my Enfield. Big, big bucks. Truthfully, it was the only thing available at the time. I think yours is a short or mid-range sight? Should be very accurate with the adjustable diopters. -Tutt

Midrange is correct. Even though we have a lot of wide open areas in the western half of Ohio, I don't get the opportunity to shoot much farther than 3-400 yds.

Still looking for a leather cheek rest. I've seen a few, but nothing that seems to look quite right yet.

jb