Win 1886 Extra light advice/review?

dkmlever · Post by **dkmlever** » Fri Apr 11, 2008 2:03 pm

I am thinking about picking up a Winchester 1886 Extra light version, straight grip, 45-70. My question is due to the fact I have never held one and none of the stores in my area have one I can "try out". So how do they shoot pretty accurate? Are they real bad thumpers in recoil? How do they carry in the field? Do they come up nice and point well? I know each of you may have a different opinion but let me know what you all think.

Post by **Hobie** » Fri Apr 11, 2008 2:10 pm

I like my SRC and can only imagine that the EL would be more of the same.

Leverluver · Post by **Leverluver** » Fri Apr 11, 2008 2:25 pm

My EL is at the front of the safe and the first one that goes with me out the door. I love my 86 Browning (26" oct) but it is not a lot of fun to pack around, and I ain't getting any younger or stronger. In my opinion, it is the best balanced and the best compromise of weight vs recoil that you can have. BTW, I don't really consider them a match to the original EL. The barrel is not as thin as an original, so they weigh more. The originals could get down to 7 pounds. Mine weighs a tad over 8 pounds and I wouldn't want it any lighter. I do not and never have shot popcorn fanny burp mouse loads. Even my p-dog load is a 350 cast at 1600fps and that would get a little uncomfortable in a lighter rifle with a steel butt plate. If you want to go to the top of the mountain (350 gr @ 2200fps or 400 gr @ 1950) you will be wanting to look at a recoil pad. The length of pull is short enough that you can add one without doing any wood removal or modification and therefore you can return it to original with just a screw driver. Until I get my 76 lightened up (and probably after), it is my "go to" rifle. You will not be disappointed.

KirkD · Post by **KirkD** » Fri Apr 11, 2008 3:02 pm

I owned one and would not have parted with it were it not for an original Winchester that came along that required some funding. It is a first class rifle. You will not be disappointed.

Lastmohecken · Post by **Lastmohecken** » Fri Apr 11, 2008 9:02 pm

I had one, and added a Lyman 66 recever sight to it, and a taller front sight if I remember correctly. It was accurate, but could have used a action job to make it a little slicker. I would still have it, but it developed a habit of misfiring, due to the rebounding hammer so I fell out of love with it, and sold it at a gunshow.

I now have a Browning 86 SRC and I really do like it a lot, and so far, no problems of any kind, and no tang safety or rebounding hammer to fret about.

Lloyd Smale · Post by **Lloyd Smale** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 6:13 am

mine does under a 1 1/2 at a 100 with cast 420s and thats with an apature sight. It would be scary to see what it would do if it could be scoped and someone was lacking in class enough to put one on it as my old eyes are getting tired

Bullet Bob · Post by **Bullet Bob** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 7:06 am

You can also get various slip-on, lace on, or in the case of mine, a Galco add-on pad that uses velcro, used to keep that steel buttplate from direct contact with heavier loads. I usually do use cowboy-action style light loads in mine, and still use the pad, because hey, why not? The gun has excellent balance.

Tycer · Post by **Tycer** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 12:17 pm

I love my EL, though I have made it uniquely my own. I had to lap the barrel to get it to proper cast bullet specs, I bought a new stock and shortened it to add a recoil pad for heavy loads, I cut a half cock notch and fitted the sear and removed the tang safety, added sling swivels, a Lyman 66, a front blade, refitted the mag tube retaining pin, pillar bedded the forearm, reduced the ejector spring, refaced the hammer to not contact the bottom of the open bolt......

Rimfire McNutjob · Post by **Rimfire McNutjob** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 4:07 pm

Tycer wrote:... refaced the hammer to not contact the bottom of the open bolt......

OK, that one confuses me. When I cycle the action on my Browning 71, the hammer is pushed back by the bolt beyond the sear notch and rides the bottom of the bolt. As the bolt moves forward and begins to clear the hammer, the hammer makes a small move forward into what I assume is the sear notch and the gun is in battery as the bolt competes its travel. How does one reface the hammer to not ride on the bottom of the bolt under cocking pressure from the hammer spring? Just trying to learn / understand.

Is this not applicable to my Browning due to a rebounding hammer? I didn't try any of the Winchester as they are toward the back of the safe and not as readily accessible. Would I see the difference if I grabbed a Win 71?

Tycer · Post by **Tycer** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 4:38 pm

The hammer rode the bottom of the bolt very hard, just like one of the Rossi 92's and several of the 94's I've had, but not all. The ones I've had that barely touched the bolt cycled much more smoothly. The bottom of my 86's bolt is curved like all the Rossis I've seen and some of the 94's. The hammer is pushed into the cocked position early in the bolt travel and then the hammer face rides up into the curve. I grind/file/stone the hammers to .001 clearance when the bolt is held up or the gun is upside down and I match the angle of the hammer face to the bottom of the bolt.

This pic is of an unmodified Rossi that came with the clearance that my 86 did not.

dkmlever · Post by **dkmlever** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 7:12 pm

Well guys, it looks like I bought one today from gunbroker, paid $850 including shipping and it already has a lyman receiver site on it. Hope I like it!

Tycer · Post by **Tycer** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 8:48 pm

Congrats!!!!

You'll love it!!

Rimfire McNutjob · Post by **Rimfire McNutjob** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 9:21 pm

Oh, I see ... there's a curve in the bolt bottom. Thanks for the picture. Makes perfect sense now.

Pete44ru · Post by **Pete44ru** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 8:41 am

I first bought a standard, Grade 1, EL - and the only thing I didn't really like about it was the plain, peanut-butter looking stick (Ugh !).

A few weeks later, I came across a Grade 2, with the gold inlays, engraving, and fancy wood, for $300 over what the Grade 1 had cost me. Duh !

I hunted & shot the Grade 2 for a year, decided that the Grade 1 was slightly more accurate & a tad smoother - so swapped out the wood and sold the Grade 2 (with Standard wood) for about what I had paid for it.

That left me with what I wanted in the first place - an 1886 with a very nice, smooth, metal polish/blue finish & killer wood.

Recoil-wise, IMHO, they kick less than many other .45-70's because they're a heavier gun - even the "lightweights".

BTW - I use only 300gr factory loads in mine, and refuse to shoot heavy(ier) bullets, likening it to self-abuse.

They are heavy though - noticably heavier than a M-92 or M-94 - so be prepared for that, if you're not used to it.
Since you have nothing to handle, seek out a gun show to travel to, so you can handle any 1886, so you can at least get a better sense of the gun.

Sixgun · Post by **Sixgun** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 8:50 am

The extra-lightweight is made to be a hunting gun, period. Even with mid range loads it belts you back a bunch. A load of 11 grains of Unique with a 400 grainer is tops for continued shooting on a Sunday afternoon. Its also no target gun by any stretch of the imagination as the ones I have shot (at least a dozen) usually go into 3 inches at 100 meters.

The 1886 ex-lw in 45-70 is my #1 choice when roaming the Rockies looking for elk. As an Easterner, I get tired real easy at those elevations, and I don't need no 10 pound rifle weighing me down. The 7 pound weight of the rifle pushing 400 grains of lead at 1700 fps will easily kill anything out to 200 meters. The rifle comes up real fast and is instantly on target---for me.

You personally have to decide what fits you best. If your priority is hunting, the ex-lw is for you. If you like to play and shoot a lot, snag the 26" oct. Below is my hunting rig--made in 1907-----------Sixgun

KirkD · Post by **KirkD** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 12:19 pm

The rebounding hammer has caused some fellows to experience inadequate hammers strikes. I never experienced that with mine, but some have. I would expect that this can easily be adjusted if it happens to your gun, but I've not done it, so someone more knowledgeable would have to weigh in.

dkmlever · Post by **dkmlever** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 2:23 pm

Thanks guys for all the feedback and advice. Yes, it is to be a hunting gun, cow elk late season, maybe doe deer. I live in CO so hunting elk I can get two tags one I go after with a scoped long range rifle the other is a fun hunt ususally open sited lever gun. I have a Browning 71 so I figure the Winchester will feel about the same. I am selling the Browning cause I got an original 71 that I will use. I looked at the Browning 1886 but do not like the saddle ring and I like the look of the half mag on the Winchester. I only own one 45-70 now a Ruger #3 so that was my prime motivation to look at the 1886.

Dastook · Post by **Dastook** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 6:25 pm

I love my 86 EL. Wouldn't part with it for nothin.

Tycer · Post by **Tycer** » Mon Apr 14, 2008 5:44 am

Pete mentioned weight.
My 1886 EL weight is 7.25 pounds stock
My last 336 was 6.5
My 20" Win 94 is 6.75

Pete44ru · Post by **Pete44ru** » Mon Apr 14, 2008 7:25 pm

During a hunt, 1/2 to 3/4 of a pound - or about 15% of the gun's weight - is a large difference when talking about relatively light objects.

It wasn't very long ago, that a very expensive, lightweight, custom boltgun came in at about 7lbs w/o scope.
We now have factory guns, like my Ruger .308 RSI that weighs 6lbs, bareback.

Winchester called the EL's lightweights, because they are/were lighter - than the standard 86's.
But just because they're the lightweights of their maker, doesn't mean that they're the lightest of their caliber & action style.