Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
Bulge in case corresponding to ring in chamber? Amazingly, the round at 17,000 psi has less of a bulge than the one at 15,900 psi. I fired 20 rounds through it. Having said that, is it safe to shoot?
I certainly would not shoot it again. The steel inside the bulged area has been work hardened as a result of being stretched and stressed. Eventually it will crack, fracture, or shatter.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
What year was your Model 86 made?
Have you been shooting a lot of smokeless in it?
Sincerely,
Maverick
WACA #8783 - Checkout my Reloading Tool Survey!
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-research-surveys/winchester-reloading-tool-survey/
Maverick said
What year was your Model 86 made?Have you been shooting a lot of smokeless in it?
Sincerely,
Maverick
Circa 1910 and these were the only rounds I ever fired through it.
steve004 said
Possibly why the rifle was available when you acquired it?
I don’t believe the previous owner ever fired it nor was aware of it.
Also, not something that would be readily apparent at a gun show or even if offered for sale at a big name auction house.
I assume the cartridge was hard to eject.
I had an antique 1886 with a similar problem, it was cracked between the chamber and the magazine hole in the receiver. I returned the gun to the owner for refund. I’ve seen 76s and 73s with the chambers blown down, crack in chamber to magazine hole. You have to remove the magazine tube to see it, bummer. T/R
November 7, 2015
Online
Ian-
I’m thinking chamber issues and would not shoot even low pressure loads until a chamber cast and/or careful case measurements can be obtained. Could be an undersize sizing die, may want to measure a sized case if the subject case was full length resized before loading. I have a 45-70:sizing die that is very much undersize. A careful measurement of the fired case may be useful as well. If the latter measurement is much over max I see an investment in Cerrosafe in your future. It’s quite possible you need to neck size cases for this rifle but you could also have a chamber one round away from going from together to apart. I wouldn’t want to be there when that happens.
Proceed with caution, my friend!
Mike
TR said
I assume the cartridge was hard to eject.I had an antique 1886 with a similar problem, it was cracked between the chamber and the magazine hole in the receiver. I returned the gun to the owner for refund. I’ve seen 76s and 73s with the chambers blown down, crack in chamber to magazine hole. You have to remove the magazine tube to see it, bummer. T/R
Actually, not difficult to remove at all. I fired several rounds that bulged less than a second load that bulged more, and it was only after firing a few of these I noticed the bulge and observed it on the first ten rounds previously fired.
TXGunNut said
Ian-I’m thinking chamber issues and would not shoot even low pressure loads until a chamber cast and/or careful case measurements can be obtained. Could be an undersize sizing die, may want to measure a sized case if the subject case was full length resized before loading. I have a 45-70:sizing die that is very much undersize. A careful measurement of the fired case may be useful as well. If the latter measurement is much over max I see an investment in Cerrosafe in your future. It’s quite possible you need to neck size cases for this rifle but you could also have a chamber one round away from going from together to apart. I wouldn’t want to be there when that happens.
Proceed with caution, my friend!
Mike
Good advice. T/R
mrcvs said
steve004 said
Possibly why the rifle was available when you acquired it?
I don’t believe the previous owner ever fired it nor was aware of it.
Also, not something that would be readily apparent at a gun show or even if offered for sale at a big name auction house.
I find this very plausible. I’m just thinking that the last owner who used/fired this rifle may have thought it prudent to no longer own the rifle. It may have changed hands several times since then and as many dealers and collectors don’t fire many of their rifles, it doesn’t come apparent until someone comes along who does fire it. Many dealers have the disclaimer that they don’t warrant the shootability of an antique/vintage rifle.
steve004 said
mrcvs said
steve004 said
Possibly why the rifle was available when you acquired it?
I don’t believe the previous owner ever fired it nor was aware of it.
Also, not something that would be readily apparent at a gun show or even if offered for sale at a big name auction house.
I find this very plausible. I’m just thinking that the last owner who used/fired this rifle may have thought it prudent to no longer own the rifle. It may have changed hands several times since then and as many dealers and collectors don’t fire many of their rifles, it doesn’t come apparent until someone comes along who does fire it. Many dealers have the disclaimer that they don’t warrant the shootability of an antique/vintage rifle.
I, or my heirs, will send it down the road someday, as well. I don’t think this is even the least bit unethical. It’s sold as a collectible rifle, not as a deer rifle or even target rifle.
This may not be a popular opinion here, but I’m wth Bert regarding potential risk from the damage. That being said, I would tag it not shoot able and sell it with that clearly disclosed(as the last guy should have) even if that meant I took the lump on price. Furthermore if i kept it, I would make sure my heirs understood very clearly to do the same so they would avoid any liability as well. I could not with a clear conscience ever let anyone shoot it without knowing beforehand it was compromised. Don’t mean to sound judgemental, just think my fellow collectors are worth more than a few bucks.
Pwog said
This may not be a popular opinion here, but I’m wth Bert regarding potential risk from the damage. That being said, I would tag it not shoot able and sell it with that clearly disclosed(as the last guy should have) even if that meant I took the lump on price. Furthermore if i kept it, I would make sure my heirs understood very clearly to do the same so they would avoid any liability as well. I could not with a clear conscience ever let anyone shoot it without knowing beforehand it was compromised. Don’t mean to sound judgemental, just think my fellow collectors are worth more than a few bucks.
I don’t know. Most or all auction sites state they sell firearms with no disclaimer as to being able to shoot it, and if you wish to shoot it, have a competent gunsmith assess it first.
Your right, they do. Perhaps I’m too rigid in my opinion. Although I think there is a difference between a consignor who can’t know there is a problem unless told, and an owner who doesn’t disclose when he does know. A slippery slope for sure. I would be interested in other opinions, knowing there might not be consensus.
This is an interesting discussion with multiple perspectives a person could take. I often read the disclaimers sellers and gun sites post about not firing until a competent gunsmith has checked it out (or advertised as, “collector item only”). Of all the hundreds of thousands (millions?) of such pieces that are sold every year with such a disclaimer, I wonder how many are actually put in the hands of a competent gunsmith?
That would be the bind I would feel – even if I sold it with such a disclaimer – knowing that the buyer’s likelihood of actually doing that is very low.
If possible I get the seller to agree to take the gun back if it doesn’t feed and fire properly. That’s possible with some dealers but not with the auction companies. Some things you can see others like yours you find out the hard way. If your going to sell the gun as is you need to disclose the problem. This gun is very visible after your post and someone could get hurt.
I have heard of chambers being sleeved but with a 45/70 lightweight the barrel might not be thick enough. The gun is modern and who knows what load someone will put in it. If you part it out your still left with a bad barrel. Maybe a very good gunsmith can make what you need or repair it. T/R
Pwog said
This may not be a popular opinion here, but I’m wth Bert regarding potential risk from the damage. That being said, I would tag it not shoot able and sell it with that clearly disclosed(as the last guy should have) even if that meant I took the lump on price. Furthermore if i kept it, I would make sure my heirs understood very clearly to do the same so they would avoid any liability as well. I could not with a clear conscience ever let anyone shoot it without knowing beforehand it was compromised. Don’t mean to sound judgemental, just think my fellow collectors are worth more than a few bucks.
There’s literally thousands of guns with shootability problems sold every year – and the sellers (i.e. the last person to own it) had no clue. They think the rifle is fine, because they don’t know otherwise. Many rifles change hands multiple times and a shootability problem never comes to light. I’ve had rifles here for decades that I’ve never fired. It’s possible one or more of them has a problem. Should I take them to a, “competent gunsmith” even though I have no interest in shooting them? And there’s a fair chance the next guy to own them won’t shoot them either. Of those I have shot, I haven’t taken them to a gunsmith prior to shooting them. Most things in life are a roll of the dice. I might be hit by a drunk driver today, but probably not. There is a greater chance I will be hit by a drunk driver than a rifle blowing up on me at the range.
But I’m not saying there’s zero chance. I do what I can. I drive defensively. And when I shoot these old rifles, I always shoot mild loads. And I don’t shoot other people’s reloads, etc.
I’ve been lucky so far. Until I decided to shoot the Lee Navy I had no problems. The Military rifle is probably safe to shoot with light loads but does have excessive head space. The Sporter on the other hand should not be shot. The sewer pipe barrel causes too much pressure.
1 Guest(s)
