G&A Mag Article on .50-95 Uberti 1876

[Hobie]

This has been a topic of conversation at CAS and I am a bit concerned about the article. Anyone else read it? Any thoughts?

[cowboykell]

As ragged as that muzzle looks, I thought someone took a pipe reamer to it to give it a crown. I've never seen that much lead splatter. Someone bumping bullets again?

[J Miller]

Hobie,

Is this G&A article on the web yet? If so is there a link you could post?

Joe

[Hobie]

Hobie,

Is this G&A article on the web yet? If so is there a link you could post?

Joe

Not that I know of. I'll look.

[Ysabel Kid]

Just got the magazine in the mail today. Will try to read the article tomorrow. About to sign off for the evening - last night was one of those sleepless nights due to my back, and I'm about to drop!

[Chuck 100 yd]

cowboykell , According to the article the lead bullets he used were coated with some kind of chemical treatment like a Molly coat. That GOO is probably what is all over the muzzle. He claims no leading at all.
My concern is the loads and pressure levels he is running and would like to know where he got his pressure info from.
He claims to be loading to 20K psi for starting and to 26K for top end and hunting loads using jacketed bullets of over 400 gr.
The .50-95 used about a 300 gr. lead bullet and black powder for almost 1500 fps as a factory load. He claims
almost that for the 400 gr. jacketed Barns original.
I don`t think I would want to push my .50-95 that hard. I am happy with 1125 fps and a 350 gr. cast bullet for now.

[Leverluver]

When I see documented evidence of that rifle withstanding 100 rounds of 40KSI with zero change in tolerances, I will say fine and dandy. Short of that, the loads are irresponsible.

Remember Hobie me saying what you could get IF those pressures were acceptable. Problem is we still don't know if they are.

[Hobie]

Lord knows I don't want to load my rifle like he does that one. I've re-read the article several times now. I don't think he has a clue. Apparently, the editor doesn't either. I would think that their liability "siren" would be wailing!

[Chuck 100 yd]

Hobie , me thinks he is nuts !

[BenT]

What put the final nail in the article was when he wrote that he wished it had a scope mount on the barrel for a scout scope. My thoughts are that they make a gun like that is called a Marlin 45-70. My opinion is that he doesn't understand why people buy replica guns , to experience what that era had to offer not to modernize it.

[olyinaz]

What put the final nail in the article was when he wrote that he wished it had a scope mount on the barrel for a scout scope. My thoughts are that they make a gun like that is called a Marlin 45-70. My opinion is that he doesn't understand why people buy replica guns, to experience what that era had to offer not to modernize it.

BINGO! That's what finally pegged my buffoonometer.

Best,
Oly

[kaschi]

It seems sometimes that some writers in G&A and ST come out with some really off the wall remarks. It probably happens in other publications as well both shooting and non-shooting related. Don't know if they are doing it just for effect or if they are plain nuts. I remember one joker saying in an article about the Browning 92 that it was a perfect choice for brush hunting but the only thing missing was fancy grade wood and custom cut checkering! DUHH!!! Who the hell in their right mind would opt for that just to take it into the backwoods where it would probably stand a good chance of getting all nicked up?

[Nate Kiowa Jones]

Lord knows I don't want to load my rifle like he does that one. I've re-read the article several times now. I don't think he has a clue. Apparently, the editor doesn't either. I would think that their liability "siren" would be wailing!

I don't know that it would have a catastrophic failure but at those pressures I feel sure it is going to shoot loose pretty rapidly. The problem is there are too many points in the lockup that tend to get battered. The 2 toggle links have three hinge points and these hinge points don't have much surface area to spread the load over.

[Bis]

I hate to ask dumb questions, but the aurthor said that the loads were developed using a pressure barrel. If he maintains industry standards wouldn't that make it safe to shoot in this rifle?

I like the idea of mounting a scope on the gun for load development and then putting it back to original condition. I know with my old eyes I often wonder if it is my load or my eyes that are giving me bad groups.

[KirkD]

Hobie, I read your article, and I would have to agree completely with your concerns. You did an excellent job of writing them up. Frankly, I don't understand why a gun rag would get a fellow who describes himself as 'a modern shooter and hunter, hooked on scope, stainless actions and barrels, and synthetic stocks' to do a write up on a repro of a 19th century Winchester; the appreciation and knowledge simply isn't likely to be there. A much better article could have been written by a person who is very familiar with the '76, inside and out, and maybe even owns and shoots an original, so decent comparisons could be made. I'm planning to write a couple articles on the original Winchester Model 53, and I am spending close to a year gathering historical and other interesting information, not to mention owning two of them in different calibers and hunting with both of them. There is no way I would want to write an article on some type of rifle without having sufficient knowledge and experience behind it.

When I see the ballistics he produced, my first question is 'why?'. If a fellow is going to buy and shoot a 50-95, he is doing it for the love of the cartridge. If he wants to make a 45-70 out of his 50-95, then just get a 45-70.

[86er]

Good job Hobie! I read the article late last night and thought to myself "holy scrap". You pointed out very good instances where the information seems inaccurate, or just plain false. I picked up on a few lines where it sounded to me like the author was trying to emulate someone else's writing style (you can probably figure out who). I think this article give the reader a false perspective and is negligent publishing!

[Mike D.]

I dropped that rag years ago, after determining that most of the so-called "experts" that write for it are basically clueless.

[Leverluver]

Bis

That's just it. There is no industry standard for the 76 and it's cartridges. There is no SAAMI spec. There is no "standard" pressure to use as a target. Using a pressure barrel is meaningless. Heck, I can do that. What I DON'T know is what the rifle is good for. Until there is destrictive testing done, no one else will know either. There were rumors that the Chappys were "proofed" in the 40K area BUT that is just a one shot proof. That doesn't tell you the limits of the rifle over the long haul. Heck, virtually all the rifles Buck shot the 454C in took one shot but none of them would stand up to repeated shots. Again, until someone finds the max pressure that the rifle can contain for hundreds of repeated firings, with zero change in tolerances, and THEN reduce the operating pressures to 70% or less than that, I call BS. The factory certainly has no interest in testing the rifle so they can let us know what pressures we can run it at. They will say black powder or black powder equivalent pressures only. In their position, that's exactly the same thing I would say, at least until proper testing is done.

[Warhawk]

I believe that G&A is one of the gun rags that write gun reviews without ever actually firing the gun.

I dropped my subscription to G&A when Elmer Keith passed away and the gun notes column was no more.

[Nath]

Bet Bob Milek is spinning in his grave (or laughing his socks off).

I pretty much dropped that rag after he passed away

Nath.

[buckeyeshooter]

This is all useful information. I have been interested in aquiring one of the rifles, but want to have a good unsterstanding of the limits on the rifle and cartridge.

[Ysabel Kid]

Read the article this afternoon after work. Almost stopped after the introduction. Why anyone would push a reproduction 1876 like that is beyond me. If you want more performance, get a gun built for it. Geez...