1895 Restore? or Leave it alone?|Restoration, Repair and Maintenance|Forum|Winchester Collector

The above advice is spot on, Kenpo (as is usual).

TXGunNut said
I’ll go a little further, if you don’t have headspace issues at this time you may be able to avoid them in the future by loading or buying milder loads than what is commonly found on the shelves for modern firearms. Like that gun, lots of great character and provenance to boot! I wouldn’t touch this old rifle other than to clean it and shoot it…if the headspace checks out OK. Cosmetic restoration will destroy that character, IMHO.
Mike
  

Unless you don’t like rusty guns. 

I will go even further than Mike, considering the state of metals chemistry when that rifle was built. 

The 1895 chambered for the .30 Gov’t 1906 has had more than its share of headspace issues over many years. The reason for Winchester’s ceasing production of that gun in that caliber has been argued extensively, to no agreement. The late Edwin Pugsley, who certainly was in a position to know, said it was because returning doughboys persisted in loading them with 8mm Mauser cartridges. But there are learned articles by qualified men to the contrary who have written that, with continued shooting, it is only a matter of time before headspace opens up.

To my knowledge, that has never been an issue with well maintained original 1895 specimens chambered in 30/40 Krag.

If the headspace checks out, I myself would handload to Krag pressures, which  do not always vary in linear fashion with velocities. I believe the Krag can handily kill anything in America that needs killing, provided the distance is not stupid. Our friend Bert has a lot of experience in the game field with the Krag, I believe including Elk. 

MidwestCrisis said
What do you intend to do with it?   Take it hunting once a year, shoot a target once a summer, or keep it in your truck?  Everything you should do to be safe has already been said. If it were mine I’d do the above to make sure it functions and is safe, with the story you have with the rifle, it would be the center piece of an AZ Ranger themed gun room or man cave. Hornady and Federal make reduced 06 loads. Just me.  My 1922 ‘95 in 06 is one of the rifles I take with me everywhere in the my sxs incase something shows up I don’t want around my livestock.
  

I really enjoy picturing this

MidwestCrisis said
What do you intend to do with it?   Take it hunting once a year, shoot a target once a summer, or keep it in your truck?  Everything you should do to be safe has already been said. If it were mine I’d do the above to make sure it functions and is safe, with the story you have with the rifle, it would be the center piece of an AZ Ranger themed gun room or man cave. Hornady and Federal make reduced 06 loads. Just me.  My 1922 ‘95 in 06 is one of the rifles I take with me everywhere in the my sxs incase something shows up I don’t want around my livestock.
  

Breech pressure, not muzzle velocity, should be the criterion for use in an old 1895 30/06. One is not directly related to the other. There are several ways of getting 150 grains of projectile to 2700 foot seconds,  each one generating different peak and average breech pressures. An ammunition manufacturer is likely to be more concerned with the economics of powder selection and blending than in minimizing breech pressures, when developing a low recoil load that achieves a targeted muzzle velocity. The manufacturer assumes its low recoil load will be used in “modern firearms in good condition” and is going to be concerned only that the load generate breech pressures not exceeding SAAMI specifications. In the case of the 30/06, that is 60,000 psi MAP (62,400 psi MPSA.)

In other words, whether the commercially available 2700 fs load operates at 40,000 PSI MAP or 50,000, say, can depend on powder selection. Even though manufacturers blend powders, we can illustrate the issue by comparing canister powders to achieve 2700 fs. Using a medium burn- rate powder like H4895 will result in a lower MAP than H4831. 

I would hope Hornady would be willing to disclose at least a range of MAP for its low recoil load. However, if you approach the public facing flack of ANY ammo company by starting the conversation with ” I have this hundred year-old gun and i want to shoot it with your ‘low recoil’ ammunition. How much breech pressure does it generate?” — all the flack sees is the Earth cracking open and his job disappearing into the Abyss. His wife will leave him and his children will curse his name. Of course he will hang up and not log the call. 

Believe it or not, the only practical way I know to get an approximate breech pressure for a handload is to go on eBay and buy a used Powley Computer, a cardboard slide rule of sorts that the late ballistician Homer Powley invented. It works well but uses powders many of which are obsolete. 

There may be — probably are — Web engines that will estimate MAP for handloads. I would consult one before cooking up ammunition for an original 1895 ’06. And look up the SAAMI limit for the Krag and stay at or it. 

Just my opinion. 

I called Hornady today and found out that the max pressure for the 30-06 reduced recoil loads is 58,000 psi. I will no longer be using them in my 1895.  I’m working on getting the pressure for federals reduced recoil loads, they are harder to get a hold of.  

The SAAMI maximum average pressure for the 30/40 Krag cartidge is 40K CUP. 

SAAMI does not list a piezo crystal PSI for the cartridge and there is no generally accepted conversion formula. However, the Europeans say roughly 47K PSI. 

10K PSI is a lot, to me anyway. 

I think it’s going to take handloading and a pressure estimator to make up a Krag equivalent load. Pressure is not a linear function of velocity.