Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
How might I obtain the necessary parts, original or new made, to convert my 1866 src to 44 Henry centerfire?
I want to keep my original parts unmodified and be able to use the centerfire parts from time to time.
[email protected] said I want to keep my original parts unmodified and be able to use the centerfire parts from time to time.
A consummation devoutly to be wished, but not possible, or at the very least, hugely impractical. Best content yourself with the unshootable gun you own, & buy a fine Uberti replica instead.
Why is it not possible? Wouldn’t it be possible to fabricate the centerfire parts?
I know that the cases are available as is the mold for the heeled bullet.
the point is not to shoot a look-a-like replica but to shoot the original.
[email protected] said
Why is it not possible? Wouldn’t it be possible to fabricate the centerfire parts?
Should have said “practical” rather than “possible.” But if cost is no object, yes.
I found this discussion about it here, you might have seen it already.
Bob
WACA Life Member--- NRA Life Member---- Cody Firearms member since 1991 Researching the Winchester 1873's
Email: [email protected]
November 7, 2015
Offline
Hugh-
It’s good to find a kindred spirit among collectors! I want to shoot every Winchester I own but have made a few exceptions, if I were fortunate enough to acquire an unmolested 1866 it would also be an exception to that rule. Yes, components for the CF round are available and if I had a converted 1866 I might consider acquiring them. Best source for conversion parts is likely a donor gun but I have little doubt that would be an expensive proposition as well. If original parts are modified for the conversion the value of the gun will decrease sharply, IMHO.
Your gun, your money, your call. When contemplating repairs to old Winchesters I remind myself that I am only the temporary caretaker of this little piece of history and try to act accordingly.
Mike
The two parts you need to convert to center fire if you want to save your original parts are the piston and striker for a 1866. “Winchester Bob .com” sells those for $50 each. I don’t know if they are in stock. I have bought those parts in the past to convert back to rim fire, I have never done it the other way. I suspect you could weld a tit or install a firing pin in the end of the new piston and grind off the points of the new striker to make it work, keeping the original parts if you decide to convert back. The length of the new firing pin will take some experimenting so it does not fire when the chamber closes.
The striker is threaded on the end of the piston, (firing pin), making removal difficult due to rust as well as the ejector is rusted in the bolt. It will require skill, patients, and the proper technique to remove old parts without damage to the gun. The 1866 receiver has a hole drilled in it to punch the the ejector pin out so the piston can be threaded out of the striker. The hole is under the side plate. Once you have done this to the gun it will be easy to convert back.
The 1866 firing pin is such that if dirty, rusted, or improperly fitted it can go off when closing the chamber. Not many people shoot them. T/R
Buy a new firing pin and striker from Winchester Bob. Grind off the two strikers and install a pin on the end of the firing pin shaft. The new pin has to be just the right length to hit the primer but not do so when cycling the action. The striker is screwed onto the firing pin to keep everything together. The conversions have a threaded bushing to replace the striker. Use 44 S&W Spl brass. It has to be cut shorter.
Edit: Sorry TR you typed faster than I.
TR is correct about the pin. Someone tried to take my Henry apart without removing the roll pin first. Snapped the firing pin, lost the striker and broke the pin into 2 pieces.
This may sound like the pot blackguarding the kettle but, of the number of 1866 Improved Henry rifles and carbines ever manufactured by WRA, I assume the number presently in “unmolested condition” to be relatively few. Those should not be modified for ethical and historical reasons.
If someone wants to perform surgery, let it be done on a mechanically sound but refinished or otherwise altered specimen that could never be a museum exemplar,
In that respect, I practice what I preach and like to acquire famous Winchester models that are mechanically sound and cosmetically restorable, or excellent reproductions, that I can shoot and hunt without guilt.
I like to think I’m doing my small part to preserve the brand’s legacy by demonstrating to the young and the increasingly unaware shooting fraternity just how graceful and impressive and useful these old designs are in the field.
At the same time, I appreciate and have vast respect for my colleagues who collect, protect, and serve as custodians for future generations, of the ever-shrinking inventory of near perfect original specimens.
- Bill
WACA # 65205; life member, NRA; member, TGCA; member, TSRA; amateur preservationist
"I have seen wicked men and fools, a great many of both, and I believe they both get paid in the end, but the fools first." -- David Balfour, narrator and protagonist of the novel, Kidnapped, by Robert Louis Stevenson.
Zebulon, the conversion to center fire with new parts does not alter the rifle in any way that would stop someone from putting the original parts back in. I would not permanently alter any of my Winchesters. I have not modified my Henry or 66. I shoot modified cases instead.
All 1866 rifles were manufactured by Winchester Arms Co. New Haven Arms Co. made the Henrys. Some early 66’s have New Haven barrels that bring a heafty premium. Winchester made around 1000 center fire 66’s. All of them, as far as I know, went to Brazil. The barrels are marked 44 B. Others have made their own. I am not sure what firing pin they used but they did use a bushing instead of the striker.
Chuck said
Zebulon, the conversion to center fire with new parts does not alter the rifle in any way that would stop someone from putting the original parts back…….
I have not modified my Henry or 66. I shoot modified cases instead.
…………..
All 1866 rifles were manufactured by Winchester Arms Co. New Haven Arms Co. made the Henrys.
Chuck, As always, thank you for shining the light. I had mistakenly assumed the receiver would have to be modified to accommodate a centerfire pin. Ive never owned or used a Henry or 66, nor studied an exploded diagram. Are there modern manufacturers who make parts kits to accomplish the conversion from rimfire? For academic reasons only, I’d like to learn a little more about the conversion process.
Am I correct in thinking the 44 Henry rimfire cartridge, when modified to centerfire, is what eventually came to be known as the 44 American after the Russian government rejected its heeled bullet.and demanded Smith & Wesson develop an inside lubricated centerfire cartridge, the 44 Russian, for its big revolver order? Do you modify Russian or Special brass for your converted Henry and 66?
My limited understanding of Tyler Henry’s abortive attempt to take over New Haven Arms, is it occurred while Oliver Winchester was in Europe. OW was not to be messed with, foreclosed his loan to NHA secured by liens on its assets, seized and transferred these assets to a new entity, Winchester Repearing Arms, in which Henry had no interest, leaving NHA a busted shell.
The killing stroke was patenting King’s Improvement and bringing the 1866 Winchester to market. I had thought this new rifle was at least initially advertised as the “Improved Henry” although made by WRA and bearing the Winchester brand. In time It was commonly known as “the Winchester” until the 1873 came out.
Have I got the history wrong? I read Herb’s chapter about the coup avidly because, for several years, I’d been a counsel of record in a couple of minority shareholder oppression lawsuits.
It looked to me like old Oliver knew how to knife fight and was not slow to cut off Henry’s air supply!
I appreciate your help and would welcome any schooling you’d care to give on these centerfire conversions.
- Bill
WACA # 65205; life member, NRA; member, TGCA; member, TSRA; amateur preservationist
"I have seen wicked men and fools, a great many of both, and I believe they both get paid in the end, but the fools first." -- David Balfour, narrator and protagonist of the novel, Kidnapped, by Robert Louis Stevenson.
November 7, 2015
Offline
Bill-
I have read a few accounts of Winchester’s revenge on Henry but that doesn’t exactly jibe with Winchester’s practice of putting an “H” (for Henry) on their rimfire ammo decades after the falling-out. Even a youngster like me has fired a few buckets full of 22LR with the “H” headstamp. That decision may have been made after Oliver’s passing. Maybe Bennett or another influential person understood Henry’s contribution and wished to recognize it. I’m sure Dan Shuey could have shed some light on this subject.
Mike
Zebulon said
Chuck, As always, thank you for shining the light. I had mistakenly assumed the receiver would have to be modified to accommodate a centerfire pin. Ive never owned or used a Henry or 66, nor studied an exploded diagram. Are there modern manufacturers who make parts kits to accomplish the conversion from rimfire? For academic reasons only, I’d like to learn a little more about the conversion process.
Am I correct in thinking the 44 Henry rimfire cartridge, when modified to centerfire, is what eventually came to be known as the 44 American after the Russian government rejected its heeled bullet.and demanded Smith & Wesson develop an inside lubricated centerfire cartridge, the 44 Russian, for its big revolver order? Do you modify Russian or Special brass for your converted Henry and 66?
I appreciate your help and would welcome any schooling you’d care to give on these centerfire conversions.
There are no parts kits. You have to remove the original 2 parts then modify the new firing pin by adding a pin to the tip. The new striker has to have the 2 points ground off that normally hit the rimfire case. This can be done to the original parts but I would not do this nor do I recommend this. The case you need is a 44 S&W Special. It just needs to be shortened. I am not sure about the development of the 44 S&W cartridge. I do know a little about the Americans, Schofield and the Russian pistols. I have always wanted a 2nd Model Schofield. This model was the best for the Calvary. The modifications to the latch allowed a mounted troop to easily reload while on horseback even with the saber in his other hand.
Here is a picture of my torn down Henry. Unfortunately there are no pictures of the striker or an unbroken firing pin. The broken firing pin is just under the inscribed side plate. On the left end of the firing pin it should be threaded where the striker would thread on. The other end of the firing pin moves the hammer back. Right above the right end of the firing pin is the bolt. The firing pin goes through the bolt. Along the upper edge of the bolt there is a small hole. This is where the infamous roll pin goes. Above the bolt is a magnet that is holding the broken roll pin and the extractor. On the left end of the extractor there is a hole. If the extractor was turned upside down it lays on top of the bolt and the roll pin goes through this too. So with the striker threaded on and the roll pin in everything stays together. Another thing is there is a notch on top of the firing pin toward the left side. The roll pin goes through the notched area. The extra room allows the firing pin striker to move back and forth to hit the case or when levered, backwards.
I found a picture of an assembled striker. Look at the picture on the right. The striker is thread on in the top picture and not in the bottom picture.
Chuck,
Nice pictures and a nice Henry, it looks as nice outside as inside.
I only count four toes on your left foot. T/R
Chuck,
Thanks for taking time to explain and illustrate what should be done. I think I’m beginning to grasp the process.
One more question: I get why you shouldn’t modify the original parts. But, if modern aftermarket parts aren’t available to modify, does that mean you have to acquire the parts from a donor gun? I’m assuming parts ordered from Uberti wouldn’t serve. EDIT: I OVERLOOKED TR’S COMMENT ON WINCHESTER BOB.
[COMMENT ON HISTORY OF HENRY CARTRIDGES AND VARIANTS REDACTED UNTIL I GET MY MIND RIGHT. ]
When re-creating a 44 American cartridge OR THE centerfire version of the 44 Henry, i’d think the easiest way would be to shorten a Special case or start with the shorter but harder to find Russian case. In either event I assume you’d load the larger diameter heel-base bullet to match the bore of the particular Henry or 1866. Is that how it’s done. Chuck?
- Bill
WACA # 65205; life member, NRA; member, TGCA; member, TSRA; amateur preservationist
"I have seen wicked men and fools, a great many of both, and I believe they both get paid in the end, but the fools first." -- David Balfour, narrator and protagonist of the novel, Kidnapped, by Robert Louis Stevenson.
OK, I’ve sat on the sidelines long enough. Per my understanding of the development of cartridges, the .44 Henry centerfire was not the genesis of the .44 American number 3. What I got years ago from Dan Shuey was they were two entirely different cartridges developed on their own but very close in dimensions. The .44 Henry centerfire was just what its name says. I think you will find the .44 American number 3 was a modification of the .44 Russian. I tire of referring back to my article in the “Collector” about a modified 1866 SRC I own that seemed capable of firing .44 Henry rimfire, .44 Henry centerfire, plus .44 American number 3 cartridges. I suggest you look it up and look at the table of cartridge dimensions. With a nod to Tom Reabe, the carbine retained its rimfire strikers plus had an old centerfire striker. This likely worked with copper cased cartridges. The centerfire striker was made by a professional but made after it left the factory, I THINK. The picture in the article shows it rather well. I don’t know it would work with SOLID HEAD BRASS cartridges, but if it did the centerfire striker might then be capable of slam firing. As an addendum, Starline ran a batch of .44 Russian brass a couple of years ago and may be easier to use rather than cutting down .44 Spec. I also suggest looking at my article where I refer to an even earlier article on getting a model 1866 set to use centerfire ammo. This is not a totally new idea. Some of this was discussed on this forum but a few months ago, too. Tim
tim tomlinson said
OK, I’ve sat on the sidelines long enough. Per my understanding of the development of cartridges, the .44 Henry centerfire was not the genesis of the .44 American number 3. What I got years ago from Dan Shuey was they were two entirely different cartridges developed on their own but very close in dimensions. The .44 Henry centerfire was just what its name says. I think you will find the .44 American number 3 was a modification of the .44 Russian.
Roy Jenks, official S&W historian, describes the evolution this way: first #3s were chambered for the Henry RF, but at the Army’s request (since S&W was striving for an Army contract), chambering was changed to a CF case of the same dimensions, which S&W designated .44/100. When the Russian contract was later secured, the case was enlarged in diameter to accept the full bullet diameter, i.e., no longer used a heel bullet.
Quite common for many of these nearly identical cases to interchange. I have a Ballard originally chambered for .44 Long RF, but converted to CF; shoots the .44 Russian like it was made for it.
Good morning, Tim. Thank you for citing your article, which I am going to locate and study. I was unaware of it, my excuse being I only joined this Association fairly recently (January, 2023.)
That the 44 Henry centerfire and the 44 American were developed independently — that is, without consultation – certainly makes sense, given the times and the relationship Tyler Henry had with Smith, Wesson, and Oliver Winchester.
But wasn’t Henry the common factor in both cartridges? Whichever of the two rounds was the later designed, given that one can be fired in a weapon chambered for the other, despite the minor differences in cartridge dimensions, it’s not a stretch to conclude the designer of the later round had at least gotten a close look at the earlier one.
I do question that the American was an offshoot of the Russian cartridge because, at least according to Roy Jenks, Smith & Wesson first attempted to interest the Russian government in its large frame revolver chambered for a heel-bullet 44 of its design, which only later was named 44 American, after the Russkies insisted on an inside lubed bullet.
- Bill
WACA # 65205; life member, NRA; member, TGCA; member, TSRA; amateur preservationist
"I have seen wicked men and fools, a great many of both, and I believe they both get paid in the end, but the fools first." -- David Balfour, narrator and protagonist of the novel, Kidnapped, by Robert Louis Stevenson.
Zebulon said
Thank you for citing your article, which I am going to locate and study.
Direct link for you Bill: https://winchestercollector.org/magazines/201503/50/#zoom=z
1 Guest(s)
