Client brought in a WR Model 1897 single-shot rifle chambered for 450 Express (450 x 3 1/4"). The rifle has been refurbished by WR and the bore is in great shape. However, the chamber is too small to chamber Kynoch factory ammo. The cartridge easily enters the chamber but stops about .030" from being flush with the end of the chamber. Hornady & Jamison brass cases are worse and stop about .4" before chambering. The chamber is about .003-.005" too small just forward to the rim recess. The solution is to ream the chamber with a SAAMI spec. reamer, which I have.

My question is: how common is it for 100+ year old guns to have chamber dimensions that are incompatible with current production ammo? This rifle carries British proofs & has no doubt been fired before. Could it be that modern .450 NE cartridges are larger than they originally were? This is a quality gun & inferior workmanship or damage are not an issue.

I have a Scholefield Field's Patent in 450 3 1/4" (at least that is how the gun was listed!) that has similiar issues.
I already have a double rifle in the same caliber, so didnt have to start fresh with new brass, just use my existing loads. They all seemed to chamber fine, but extraction after firing would sometimes involve a "ram-rod" technique to remove a stuck brass from the chamber.
Finally just picked a few select brass and turned them down to 3 1/8", which seems to have solved my problems. Just had to adjust the wadding accordingly. So yes, I share your pain!

If the rifle was made by WR in 1897, it may have used the old coiled-brass/foil-wrapped cartridges for the BP Express loadings,
and/or the old drawn-brass cases were highly variable, before the stronger/thicker-walled Nitro Express brass brought to us by both John Rigby and W. J. Jeffery in 1897.
I think John Rigby pioneered the improved brass and improved barrel steels,
and Jeffery industrial-espionaged the brass and went the quicker route of a single-shot and the thicker rimmed .400 S. Jeffery.
That would become known as the .450/.400 NE 3", actually the first ever "Nitro Express" cartridge.
The heavier-barreled single-shot survived proof even with the old barrel steel.

The first double rifle ever to survive proof for the .450 Rigby Special, (that would become known as the .450 NE 3.25") happened later that year, in November 1897, for John Rigby.
He wasted 4 sets of barrels before that, finally getting a new crucible steel for some slim barrels that could handle the proof.

If you use a standard .450 NE 3.25" reamer on that WR, sticking to BP or NFBPE loads would be wise, if it was made by WR in 1897.
Are the recommended load specifics marked on the rifle ?
.458 WINCHESTER MAGNUM PERFECTION

Non Illegitimi Carborundum

RIP, the rifle is an 1897 Patent action, not necessarily made in 1897.
All of these rifles were made for nitro cartridges.
I've run into this before and the simple fix can be accomplished two ways.
One, press the brass up into a FLS die without a shell holder.
This will size the brass farther down into the web. You will have to tap it out of the die with a brass rod or similar.

The other option is to trim off a bit of the die face with a lathe so the brass actually goes farther up into the die - same effect as option 1.
However, doing this with the thin rimmed 450 brass can be a pain, if the brass sticks in the die, it's easy to pull the rim off of the case. I've done this...

Could, of course, kiss the chamber with a finish reamer and solve the problem if the owner isn't a reloader.

Sorry, a bit of a tangent there...

I've found that modern brass, even Kynoch, can be a bit bigger than vintage brass.
When I started down the British rifle trail, I reloaded a couple rifles with original berdan primed Kynoch cases.
Other than the PIA of depriming, they worked perfectly - then primers ran short and the logical thing was to source boxer primed brass.
That's when the size difference became apparent.

Huvius,
Thanks.
So, at OP: This is a very common finding, or at least not an unusual or worrisome situation.

I need to finish off the Wal Winfer series.
BRITISH SINGLE SHOT RIFLES Volume 4 Westley Richards:
Oodles of Nitro Express chamberings there for the "Model of 1897."
Rifles such as:
7-pound .450/.400 NE 3"
7-pound .450 NE 3.25"
8-pound .500 NE 3"
9-pound .577 NE

Page 165:
"First mention of this model was made in the sporting press of February 15th, 1896. As it is spoken of by collectors as the Model of 1897 we shall continue in the same vein; although we have reservations."

It is a stout single-shot with plenty of barrel steel.
If it were mine (sigh), I would touch it with the reamer to fit the larger, modern, Nitro Express brass in best supply, as mentioned.
That would surely increase "shooter value."

The ulterior motive of my reply was to get in one more jab at the idea that the .450/400 NE "Magnum" Thin-Rimmed 3.25-Inch came before the .450/.400 NE Thick-Rimmed 3-Inch, aka .400 S. Jeffery.
Utter nonsense !

By hook or by crook, Jackman made the first "Nitro Express" cartridge ever, the .400 S. Jeffery of 1897 (a Jeffery's Farquharson single-shot),
followed soon after by the .450 Rigby Special double rifle, surviving proof in same year.


.458 WINCHESTER MAGNUM PERFECTION

Non Illegitimi Carborundum

This M1897 was made circa 1905. It's intended for NE cartridges and is marked "WR HIGH VELOCITY EXPRESS RIFLE", "CORDITE 70 480 MAX", and "450 EXP".

Before starting any work, a chamber cast was made and confirmed the grooves were .458. The bore or diameter of the lands is a very tight .445". I started with a .450" bushing and turned it in .0005" increments until it was a nice fit in the barrel.

My client has instructed me to ream the chamber.

Probably the best way to go.

Funny, I've referred to the underlever Westley as an 1897 Patent action, but I see now that it is more correctly called the "Model 1897"
There is no actual patent for the action as it was simply an adoption of an underlever to the existing 1881 patent.
One gets so accustomed to calling the many British rifles by patent year...
There is, of course, an 1897 patent of Westley Richards'. That being the detachable lock or "Droplock" as it's known.

Some of those old gunsmiths just ran reamer into the barrel until it just looked right..I had a friend, now deceased, that told me that and he was the most experienced person Ive ever known in such instances..

Reckon in those days that not all the gunsmiths were as good as we visualize them..I reckon so!