.375 Wildcat, mod. 71

[getitdone1]

Years ago I bought an old Winchester model 71 (long upper tang) that had been rebarreled for a .348/375 bullet wildcat cartridge. Anyone here familiar with this wildcat cartridge? I don't recall what I paid for that gun but got it real cheap. Without giving it a second thought I had it rebarreled to 45-70 by a gunsmith who didn't know all he needed to know to make it feed right. I ended-up selling it for 400 dollars because the old guy I sold it too thought the fix would not be hard--and I think he was right.

I'm wondering what kind of muzzle energy this wildcat cartridge would produce? I see in my Cartridges of The World book that the founder of this great book, Frank Barnes, developed a wildcat cartridge he called the 416 Barnes that can produce over 4,000 ft lbs of ME. Has anyone here had or seen this one in use? It's based on the 45-70 case although I'd think the .348 case would also work.

I get along well right now with the recoil my Browning mod. 71 carbine .348 Winchester produces but I just got to wondering about how great a cartridge it was that I at the time had no interest in. With the lower velocity of this .348/.375 wildcat I'd think the typical 270 gr bullet used for the .375 H&H cartridge would penetrate a bunch and the 300 gr solid made by Hornady would give tremendous penetration--not that you'd ever need this solid unless you hunted in Africa.

Don

[JFE]

One version called the 375 Alaskan had some loads featured in Rifle mag's Legacy of Leverguns. Some of the top loads quoted in the article were:

250 gr 2672 fps
270 gr 2559 fps

Its a pity Winchester didnt come out with something like this (or a 40 cal) when they brought out the model 71. To my mind it would have been a more appropriate use of the heavy 71 action.

[getitdone1]

Found a company that can make the 348/375 wildcat. They call it the 375/348 Ackley Improved. As many of you know P.O. Ackley was a famous gunsmith and I used to have one of his books. There may be several wildcat 375's based on the 348 case but I'd guess this one would be the most popular. I don't know the power of this one but know it and the recoil would be "up there." It might require a special attachment of forestock to barrel like the 450 and 500 Alaskan. Got a reply from famous gun writer Craig Boddington years ago and he said he had a model 71 450 he was selling on consignment at a Southern CA dealer. He said it really kicked. I never did go take a look at it.

[Rimfire McNutjob]

... I don't know the power of this one but know it and the recoil would be "up there."

One version called the 375 Alaskan had some loads featured in Rifle mag's Legacy of Leverguns. Some of the top loads quoted in the article were:

250 gr 2672 fps
270 gr 2559 fps

The two loads listed by JFE above are just shy of 4200 ft-lbs.

[levers]

Years ago, I got 2 model 71's from a guy who said he'd sent them PO Ackley to "improved". One was the 348 Ackley Improved and the other was a 375 cal/348. He had reloading dies for both and the reloading data for the 375 was the "375 Payne Express". I never shot them much. I did fire form brass for the 375 and it was quite impressive. Alas, I too sold them off.

[Leverluver]

Unless you go custom, there is not much in the bullet choice department. No flat point bullets (38-55/375 Win) are made for those velocities. You could probably trim the cases enough to get a 300 or 270 round nose to crimp but consider this; when you improve the 348 case, it brings the bullet nose and the primer of the next case into a more axial alignment that is worrisome. I have a 348 AK-Imp and when you eject the magazine rounds after firing a few others and see perfect half-moon imprints of the meplat of the Winchester 200 ST on the next primer up, you will get religion real fast. I vowed that would never happen again. I wouldn't want even a round nose anywhere near the next primer, with that much recoil. Wayne Van Zwoll had (may still have) a 40-348 and it has been pretty much retired due to lack of appropriate bullets. Make sure you have all the pieces of the puzzle before you jump off the deep end. Oh and BTW, most AK-Imps on the 348 case have very short necks that cast bullets do not like. You have to shove way too much of the bullet down into the powder space. I wish I had never converted mine to AK Imp. Yes, it churns out the power but that is all it does. Everything else it did better as the parent round.

[Mike D.]

The only reason that I have not chambered an 1886 into .416 Barnes is a lack of appropriate jacketed bullets plus the fact that there are NO all CU bullets for our Condorland.