THE ACCURATERELOADING.COM GUNSMITHING FORUM


Moderators: jeffeosso
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Rebarrelling a 1885 low wall
 Login/Join
 
one of us
Picture of Bad Ass Wallace
posted
Given that the Browning low wall was made in such modern cartridges as 223, 243 and 260, what cartridges could an original 1885 low wall be rebarrelled for?

I'm thinking of getting one made up in 32/40 to be able to shoot 170gn cast bullets at arounf 1500fps.

Anyone ever done such a conversion?


Hold still varmint; while I plugs yer!
If'n I miss, our band of 45/70 brothers, will fill yer full of lead!

 
Posts: 1785 | Location: Kingaroy, Australia | Registered: 29 April 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
The original high wall and low walls were chambered in a huge number of cartridges. The original loading of 165 @ 1440 was even used in weaker Stevens 44 and Ballard rifles so the modern low wall should take that without problems.That load should develop no more than about 28,000 psi.
 
Posts: 7636 | Registered: 10 October 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
In his book, de Haas states that the low wall is quite a bit weaker than the high wall, but he also says the high wall is likely the strongest single shot ever made in the US. His opinion is that the low wall should be chambered in smaller cartridges or those limited to 42,000 psi. He also recommends(quite correctly) that the firing pin should be modified to mount from the front of the breechblock and be made with a smaller tip. This is good advise for any of the older single shots or for double shotgun to rifle conversions.
 
Posts: 1238 | Location: Lexington, Kentucky, USA | Registered: 04 February 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of asdf
posted Hide Post
There are several threads on this at the ASSRA forums. Do keep in mind that Browing has greatly modified the guts of the action, and they may very well have changed the dimensions of the breech and receiver as well.
 
Posts: 980 | Location: U.S.A. | Registered: 01 June 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
BA,
As you know from other boards with folks that are more knowledgable, on average, about the low wall, this is more than a slightly contentious issue. The modern low wall doesn't even have the same geometry as the old low wall, so that comparison is out the window even before getting around to the issue of modern metalurgy.

Just because the highwall is so strong (I wonder if it's really stronger than a Borchardt or 74 Sharps?), that has nothing to do with the low wall since the differences between the two are entirely devoted to the part of the action that gives it its strength.

The comparison to a Steven's 44 is also really not a great idea either. They put a lot of things in the Steven's 44 and just about all of them bigger than a .22 rimfire will shoot loose eventually.

If you want a .32-40, I think you are foolish to even consider a low wall when a highwall will give you all the advantages of the Winchester 85 design and all the strength you or the next caretaker of your rifle will ever need.

Just my two cents.

Brent


When there is lead in the air, there is hope in my heart -- MWH ~1996
 
Posts: 2257 | Location: Where I've bought resident tags:MN, WI, IL, MI, KS, GA, AZ, IA | Registered: 30 January 2002Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata  
 


Copyright December 1997-2023 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia