I do find it interesting that these two M-1885 S.S. rifles we're mfg. in 1894.

BERT Said,

Interesting, but I have yet to ever find it listed in any of the period Winchester catalogs.

Both of the 50-3 ¾” rifles were apparently ordered by the same buyer (the Order # is the same for both), and interestingly each with its own specified barrel size and rifling twist rate. 

Both rifles (s/n 63042 and 66662) were received in the warehouse on March 13th, 1894 and shipped to Order # 8884 on March 15th, 1894… 4-years later than the Winchester cartridge board.

S/N 63042

S/N 66362

Bert

Brady,

Very interesting and important also.

Tell that to the 1890 Winchester Cartridge Board!
On that board it is listed as the “50-140 Express, Winchester Single Shot”. That name / nomenclature is very specific towards calling it a Winchester cartridge. Right above it are two 40 Express Winchester Single Shot cartridges, one being the paper patched version the other being the grooved bullet version. When you look at the other cartridges on the board, there are plenty others that are cartridges marked with the word “SHARP’S” on the board above and below the 50-140 Winchester Express and elsewhere on the board.
The cartridge was certainly not a cataloged cartridge. Just like the 70-150 Express cartridge. It also is on the board. They’re certainly considered experimental and I don’t think any know boxes of cartridges are known for either of them.

Sincerely,
Maverick

I'm enjoying the additional comments and information, as we all can benefit from thread post!

There still hasn't been any printed information known or listed in Brochures or Catalogs, of this .50-140 cartridge, by Sharps or Winchester, but some very interesting stuff has been brought back to light.

Winchester who was pretty good at promoting they're products back in the day, and nothing in print has been found in a Winchester brochures, or catalogs, yet we see examples on an 1890 cartridge board, and Bert, clearly shows records, from the factory ledgers, in 1894, of two 1885 S.S. Rifles with this interesting cartridge.

Tony

steve004 said
Tony -
As you may recall, there has been no finality in positively identifying what .50 caliber cartridge the Camp .50 took.  No one has ever seen a box of cartridges.  The cartridges in the group below all fit the chamber of my Camp 50. They are, 50-70 shot, 50-95 shot, 50-110 shot and regular 50-110 cartridge.  I'm not saying they all feed through the action.  But given they all fit the chamber, I wonder if the .50-140 cartridge would fit the chamber?!  I'm sure I'd have to take the barrel off to try.

View post on imgur.com

The shot of the rifle with a cartridge sitting on top of the magazine follower - the cartridge is a .50-110 shot cartridge.  Sorry about my poor job of adding photos.

View post on imgur.com

Steve,

In the Frank Barnes, "Cartridges of the World", 13 th edition, which is one of the relatively older editions, as it mostly hasn't changed besides more modern graphics. IMO! The facts inside are the same.

Under the .50-140 (3 1/4 inch, Sharps, .50-140 Winchester Express cartridge listing on page #158, at the end of the General Comments, it states, "Sharps rifles used .509-inch diameter bullets, while Winchester used .512 inch diameter." Interesting!

Steve,

It also states, "The Basic duplicates this case"! Again Interesting, as I understand this to reference the "Basic .50 Caliber". 

Tony

Maverick said

Bert H. said
It is not a "Winchester" cartridge... they never claimed it, or even catalogued it.
  

Tell that to the 1890 Winchester Cartridge Board!
On that board it is listed as the "50-140 Express, Winchester Single Shot". That name / nomenclature is very specific towards calling it a Winchester cartridge. Right above it are two 40 Express Winchester Single Shot cartridges, one being the paper patched version the other being the grooved bullet version. When you look at the other cartridges on the board, there are plenty others that are cartridges marked with the word "SHARP'S" on the board above and below the 50-140 Winchester Express and elsewhere on the board.
The cartridge was certainly not a cataloged cartridge. Just like the 70-150 Express cartridge. It also is on the board. They're certainly considered experimental and I don't think any know boxes of cartridges are known for either of them.

Sincerely,
Maverick
  

Interesting, but I have yet to ever find it listed in any of the period Winchester catalogs.

Both of the 50-3 ¾" rifles were apparently ordered by the same buyer (the Order # is the same for both), and interestingly each with its own specified barrel size and rifling twist rate. 

Both rifles (s/n 63042 and 66662) were received in the warehouse on March 13th, 1894 and shipped to Order # 8884 on March 15th, 1894... 4-years later than the Winchester cartridge board.

S/N 63042

S/N 66362

Bert

Bert H. said

It is not a "Winchester" cartridge... they never claimed it, or even catalogued it.
  

Tell that to the 1890 Winchester Cartridge Board!

On that board it is listed as the "50-140 Express, Winchester Single Shot". That name / nomenclature is very specific towards calling it a Winchester cartridge. Right above it are two 40 Express Winchester Single Shot cartridges, one being the paper patched version the other being the grooved bullet version. When you look at the other cartridges on the board, there are plenty others that are cartridges marked with the word "SHARP'S" on the board above and below the 50-140 Winchester Express and elsewhere on the board.

The cartridge was certainly not a cataloged cartridge. Just like the 70-150 Express cartridge. It also is on the board. They're certainly considered experimental and I don't think any know boxes of cartridges are known for either of them.

Sincerely,

Maverick

Anthony said

Bert H. said

Chuck said

Bert H. said
In answer to your question, Winchester manufactured just (2) high-wall rifles chambered for the Sharps 50 3-1/4 cartridge.
Bert
  

Sharps went out of business in 1881.  There are no records stating that Sharps ever manufactured this cartridge.  In my opinion, unless someone can produce a Sharps document saying otherwise, this is a Winchester cartridge. 
  

It is not a "Winchester" cartridge... they never claimed it, or even catalogued it.
  

I am no authority on this and won't pretend to know any more about this than both you gentlemen, as I feel you're both correct in you're statements. Most of this information that I have in my notes from over the years are acquired from Frank Barnes, "Cartridges of the World", and a few other sources from the internet, over the last few years. It's something that I enjoy updating.
Sharps never cataloged the 50-140 cartridge in any of their firearms. They did however experiment with the 50-140 cartridge for their Sharps/Borchardt rifle,(1878). Winchester never manufactured the 50-140 cartridge on a commercial basis either, but did load the 50-140 cartridge with a 473 grain bullet.
UMC, was known to have Brass cartridges for the 50-140 cartridge, and manufactured them as an available item for re loaders on the commercial market, as hand loaders of the day would load a paper patched, 700 grain bullet in the cartridge case for the mighty Buffalo herd that was dwindling rapidly. 
With the Sharps Rifle company going defunct in 1881, as Chuck stated, and this cartridge never advertised by Sharps or documented in print, and the Buffalo herd almost gone by 1880, and Winchester doing they're own 50-140 cartridge experimenting, never documented the 50-140 cartridge in they're catalogues either, as Bert stated. We know that only a couple Winchester rifles were known to be made in the model 1886, (3, 50-100-450, according to John Madl research). 
So the timeline between the 1880/1881 to 1886/1888, (approximate years of the mystery behind the 50-140 cartridge), isn't very well documented.
To my point, the 50-140 cartridge, (originally believed to be loaded from the 50-90 cases),  was never officially documented, as their are many similarities, (this is where I get in trouble), with the various closely related cartridges as the, 50-90, 50-100, 50-105, 50-110, 50 EX. all have dimensional similarities besides the length being the difference. Because of these cartridge length dimensions, each stands alone. Madl states over 5000, m-1886's we're manufactured in these various .50 caliber Rifles.
Bert, states in his research survey and printed in the WACA Collector Winter 2021, that approximately under 500 we're mfg. in the few various .50 caliber cartridges, including the 2 in the Sharps .50 3-1/4. 
The 50-140, (3 1/2-inch long), will always be refereed to as the 50-140 Sharps,(50-140 Express), until proven otherwise.
In some of my information statements here, there is some apple and oranges comparisons, from my notes as I tried to explain this the way I view this, as I do find this interesting. Sorry for the confusion. The quest goes on!
Tony
  

Steve, where can I find the info about Sharps experimenting with the 50-140?

Winchester did make 50-140 EX ammo, but probably not much.

Here is a pic of the 3 ea 50 cal cartridges for the 86 next to a WRACO 50-140 EX board dummy and a loaded round.  Next pic is the head stamps for the 2 50-140 EX.

Bert H. said
In total, Winchester manufactured at least (875) .50 caliber Single Shot rifles.  The actual total cannot be determined until such time as I have found all 30,000 of the Single Shots manufacture in the 110000 - 140000 serial range.
As I published in my article (Winter 2021 Collector magazine), this is what I surveyed in the factory ledger records;

50 ELEY
512
0
0.47%

50-90 Sharps
3
0
0.003%

50-95 WCF
253
1
0.23%

50-100-450 EX
2
0
0.002%

50-110 EX
99
3
0.09%

50 Sharps 3 1/4"
2
0
0.002%

There's a lot to lust after here.  But a Winchester Single Shot in .50-100-450, paired with a M1886 in the same chambering... that would be a pair to have

As I published in my article (Winter 2021 Collector magazine), this is what I surveyed in the factory ledger records;

As you may recall, there has been no finality in positively identifying what .50 caliber cartridge the Camp .50 took.  No one has ever seen a box of cartridges.  The cartridges in the group below all fit the chamber of my Camp 50. They are, 50-70 shot, 50-95 shot, 50-110 shot and regular 50-110 cartridge.  I'm not saying they all feed through the action.  But given they all fit the chamber, I wonder if the .50-140 cartridge would fit the chamber?!  I'm sure I'd have to take the barrel off to try.

View post on imgur.com

The shot of the rifle with a cartridge sitting on top of the magazine follower - the cartridge is a .50-110 shot cartridge.  Sorry about my poor job of adding photos.

View post on imgur.com

steve004 said
Tony -
All very interesting.  All these .50's make for quite the confusing/intriguing topic. Thanks for outlining the information from various sources as well as including your thoughts.  
I'll insert, there's also my Standard Arms Camp .50
  

Steve,

I left myself wide open as intended, to not only learn more but to enhance the knowledge here, as I could sure use the expanding!

If I remember correctly, the "Camp 50", took a 50-95 cartridge. Am I wrong in my memory of that, as I do remember some discussion about it, but not the finality of the cartridge.

Tony

All very interesting.  All these .50's make for quite the confusing/intriguing topic. Thanks for outlining the information from various sources as well as including your thoughts.  

I'll insert, there's also my Standard Arms Camp .50

Bert H. said

Chuck said

Bert H. said
In answer to your question, Winchester manufactured just (2) high-wall rifles chambered for the Sharps 50 3-1/4 cartridge.
Bert
  

Sharps went out of business in 1881.  There are no records stating that Sharps ever manufactured this cartridge.  In my opinion, unless someone can produce a Sharps document saying otherwise, this is a Winchester cartridge. 
  

It is not a "Winchester" cartridge... they never claimed it, or even catalogued it.
  

I am no authority on this and won't pretend to know any more about this than both you gentlemen, as I feel you're both correct in you're statements. Most of this information that I have in my notes from over the years are acquired from Frank Barnes, "Cartridges of the World", and a few other sources from the internet, over the last few years. It's something that I enjoy updating.

Sharps never cataloged the 50-140 cartridge in any of their firearms. They did however experiment with the 50-140 cartridge for their Sharps/Borchardt rifle,(1878). Winchester never manufactured the 50-140 cartridge on a commercial basis either, but did load the 50-140 cartridge with a 473 grain bullet.

UMC, was known to have Brass cartridges for the 50-140 cartridge, and manufactured them as an available item for re loaders on the commercial market, as hand loaders of the day would load a paper patched, 700 grain bullet in the cartridge case for the mighty Buffalo herd that was dwindling rapidly. 

With the Sharps Rifle company going defunct in 1881, as Chuck stated, and this cartridge never advertised by Sharps or documented in print, and the Buffalo herd almost gone by 1880, and Winchester doing they're own 50-140 cartridge experimenting, never documented the 50-140 cartridge in they're catalogues either, as Bert stated. We know that only a couple Winchester rifles were known to be made in the model 1886, (3, 50-100-450, according to John Madl research). 

So the timeline between the 1880/1881 to 1886/1888, (approximate years of the mystery behind the 50-140 cartridge), isn't very well documented.

To my point, the 50-140 cartridge, (originally believed to be loaded from the 50-90 cases),  was never officially documented, as their are many similarities, (this is where I get in trouble), with the various closely related cartridges as the, 50-90, 50-100, 50-105, 50-110, 50 EX. all have dimensional similarities besides the length being the difference. Because of these cartridge length dimensions, each stands alone. Madl states over 5000, m-1886's we're manufactured in these various .50 caliber Rifles.

Bert, states in his research survey and printed in the WACA Collector Winter 2021, that approximately under 500 we're mfg. in the few various .50 caliber cartridges, including the 2 in the Sharps .50 3-1/4. 

The 50-140, (3 1/2-inch long), will always be refereed to as the 50-140 Sharps,(50-140 Express), until proven otherwise.

In some of my information statements here, there is some apple and oranges comparisons, from my notes as I tried to explain this the way I view this, as I do find this interesting. Sorry for the confusion. The quest goes on!

Tony

Nevada Paul said
"The point being made by me and I think others, is that over the years, many loading manuals have reduced their maximum loads due primarily or exclusively to liability concerns, and not necessarily because someone blew up a firearm from the previously posted loads.  Think of Zeb's quote 'corporate house counsel have the imagination of a frightened child alone in the dark'.  Those corporate attorneys are afraid of what may happen, and not necessarily reacting to anything which has actually happened"
  

Paul, my point was not that corporate counsel for our powder manufacturers suffer from paranoia or cowardice, but rather that their fear of a large tort verdict is because they are peculiarly exposed personally to its consequences, unlike most other senior management. 

A major cause of the reduction in maximum loads and the attendant lowering of predicted velocities, was a change by the industry from Copper crusher estimates of breech pressure to the precise measurement by piezzo crystal technology of the rise and fall of breech pressure over time, producing a much more useful profile, not just a single number.

In many cases when this newer technology was put in practice,  it became apparent that the maximum published charge of a certain powder that produced the velocities published did so at at breech pressures that were actually imprudent, which is a matter of engineering science, not a legal issue for lawyers to debate. 

Modern American firearms can withstand proof loads that exceed commercial ammunition by several orders of magnitude, but not continuously without consequence. One function of S.A.A.M.I. is to publish a set of breech pressure numbers to which commercial ammunition should conform, or at least not exceed.

The American tobacco cases and the resulting massive settlements inspired generations of tort lawyers to replicate the phenomenon in other Industries. For a variety of reasons, some people do get hurt handloading and shooting their handloads.  

Not every handloader is smart or reasonable. If one gets hurt, he may convince himself the powder mysteriously became an overload. He lost an eye. He hires Jim Striver, an ambitious tort lawyer. What Jim really wants is not one hurt client but enough of them to prosecute a class action. Class actions are peculiarly lawyer made lawsuits that primarily benefit the lawyers who prosecute and settle them. Manufacturers are usually inclined to settle them on terms that grease the plaintiffs' lawyers but don't cost the company so much the shareholders want blood. At worst, replacing corporation counsel and some sacrificial vice president is usually an acceptable amount of blood.

The powder manufacturers do not like to publish a load that is going to exceed the S.A.A.M.I. breech pressure profile.  Even the most unimaginative CEO can see himself in a depositiom room trying to justify publishing a load that produced breech pressures in excess of the S.A.A.M.I. profile. Not a good look. The plaintiff still has to prove excessive breech pressure was a producing cause of the injury but not necessarily by direct evidence. 

Chuck said

Bert H. said
In answer to your question, Winchester manufactured just (2) high-wall rifles chambered for the Sharps 50 3-1/4 cartridge.
Bert
  

Sharps went out of business in 1881.  There are no records stating that Sharps ever manufactured this cartridge.  In my opinion, unless someone can produce a Sharps document saying otherwise, this is a Winchester cartridge. 
  

It is not a "Winchester" cartridge... they never claimed it, or even catalogued it.

Like many of you I love shooting old guns. One possibility we need to always consider is that with rare exceptions none of our guns came to us unfired. Some have undoubtedly endured some rather stout loads over the years. We'll never know until we fire the load that crosses a threshold we can't see. Max loads are for guns in good condition and even then they could have a cumulative adverse effect. I'm no attorney but I suspect a shooter injured while shooting a 120-year-old rifle will need the Devil himself as counsel to win against the publisher of a reloading manual. Gotta cut these old guns some slack!

Mike

The only people seemingly free of this risk are the Weatherby addicts. I have never heard of a Mark V action being damaged or damaging its shooter, as long as you don't count cuts and concussions caused by recoil. There are two possible reasons for  this. First, the breech of the action resembles that of a 16" gun in a main battery of New Jersey (BB 62). Second, the published velocities of Norma ammunition for the .378, .416, and .460 Weatherby cartridges, whether completely accurate or not, together with the actual horrendous  recoil they produce, is so intimidating nobody is inclined to say, "That's too slow."  After their head clears.