Log In
It’s a rainy day here so sitting in the gun room looking at the history. So let’s say it’s 1905 & you’re buying a hunting rifle. Collecting them at this time is not a consideration & your only two choices are m1886 in 33Win($25)with factory loads offered by Winchester, Western, Remington with a 200 grain soft point bullet at a MV of 2020 fps, or, a m1895 in 35WCF($30) with cartridges offered by the same manufacturers with a 200 grain soft point bullet at a MV of 2050 fps.
Interesting to hear what some of you will choose if you were back in the day not considering collector demand or value.
RickC
September 22, 2011
Offline
The Winchester 1886, more traditional design, tubular magazine, would have been more familiar to me in all likelihood.
I think I would be wanting the bigger bullet with the 35 for my intended use but the standard shotgun butt on the 33 would’ve made me want it also. Most people tend to want the latest & greatest with anything, so the 1895 35WCF might have been my choice, but I would’ve requested a shotgun butt.
RickC
November 1, 2013
Offline
Using SP bullets, it’s the difference between 6 & half a dozen…or the diff between .38 & .44-40. The .35 came out only about a yr after the .33, so why TWO almost identical cartridges? He who can explain that conundrum can explain the reasoning for the .38 & .44-40 duo.
There would have been a good reason for two diff carts IF the .35 had been loaded with spitzer bullets, but I can find no evidence they ever were.
clarence said
Using SP bullets, it’s the difference between 6 & half a dozen…or the diff between .38 & .44-40. The .35 came out only about a yr after the .33, so why TWO almost identical cartridges? He who can explain that conundrum can explain the reasoning for the .38 & .44-40 duo.There would have been a good reason for two diff carts IF the .35 had been loaded with spitzer bullets, but I can find no evidence they ever were.
I would agree clarence. All marketing imo.
November 19, 2006
Online
I would definitely go with the ’86 in .33. Mainly because the ’86 is a much better rifle to handle and shoot. I agree the cartridges are very similar – probably not much you could do with one that you couldn’t do with the other.
November 9, 2008
Offline
I would go for the 86, because it’s my favorite Winchester model. I like and do have a few 95s
November 19, 2006
Online
I have always found the ’95 to be very awkward to carry. Shooting isn’t so bad – if it is equipped with a shotgun butt. Of course, I would say the same for shooting an ’86 – I vastly prefer the shotgun butt. An M1886 extralightweight with 22 inch barrel, half mag and in .45-70 is a feather to carry – handles extremely well in my opinion.
having a original 1886 and a repo browning 95 in 30-40 krag, i lean towards the 86 over the 95, 86 easier to reload and handier for me to carry, 95 a little harder to reload(i have to look at it while reloading) and not as easy to carry with out changing your grip.
March 31, 2009
Offline
I’ve shot my 95 in 35 WCF at 2200 FPS with a 250 grain bullet. Even with a shotgun butt it hurts very quickly. Never shot a 33 WCF. The 33 will shoot a 200 grain bullet at 2500 FPS. Either would do a job on most anything.
February 18, 2011
Offline
Adding my name to the 1886 fan list. I have one ’95 in 30-06, something of rescue-gun needing a new butt-stock… Still awaiting! Yet… the ’86 design is just much more to my taste as well as the it more compact length cartridges it takes. Seems to operate smoother, more positively.
Other than a Browning Miroku carbine from early nineties in 45/70, my several original ’86 models all in .33 Win. Such as yet coming in reasonably priced with decent examples in 33 Win, relatively affordable. Never fired any of the Wins, but do enjoy! Such: two extra lightweight rifles and one full mag model. All coincidentally from 1903.
Best & Stay Safe!
John
iskra said
Adding my name to the 1886 fan list. I have one ’95 in 30-06, something of rescue-gun needing a new butt-stock… Still awaiting! Yet… the ’86 design is just much more to my taste as well as the it more compact length cartridges it takes. Seems to operate smoother, more positively.
Other than a Browning Miroku carbine from early nineties in 45/70, my several original ’86 models all in .33 Win. Such as yet coming in reasonably priced with decent examples in 33 Win, relatively affordable. Never fired any of the Wins, but do enjoy! Such: two extra lightweight rifles and one full mag model. All coincidentally from 1903.
Best & Stay Safe!
John
Iskra appreciate your reply.
March 23, 2010
Offline
For myself I would have gone with the .33 Model 1886.Easier to carry,nicer looking rifle,good for what I would be hunting and $5.00 cheaper.Remember $5.00 was a lot of money in 1905.
I don’t think Winchester did itself any favors using crescent butts as standard. ??♂️
November 19, 2006
Online
iskra said
Adding my name to the 1886 fan list. I have one ’95 in 30-06, something of rescue-gun needing a new butt-stock… Still awaiting! Yet… the ’86 design is just much more to my taste as well as the it more compact length cartridges it takes. Seems to operate smoother, more positively.
Other than a Browning Miroku carbine from early nineties in 45/70, my several original ’86 models all in .33 Win. Such as yet coming in reasonably priced with decent examples in 33 Win, relatively affordable. Never fired any of the Wins, but do enjoy! Such: two extra lightweight rifles and one full mag model. All coincidentally from 1903.
Best & Stay Safe!
John
John – so what kind of shape is the rest of your 30-06 M1895 in? By the way, I think several of my .33’s were also made in 1903. I think 1903 was a very popular year for the .33. You mention you have two extra lightweight .33’s? Technically, to be called as such, these would have to have 22 inch barrels?
November 7, 2015
Offline
I’m a TR fan now, quite likely I would have been one then as well. That may have pushed me towards the 1895 but if I planned on carrying the rifle much I’m pretty sure I would have leaned towards the classic lines and easy balance of the 1886. That $5 price difference would be something over $100 now and I’m pretty sure that would have come into the decision process. I feel my choice 115 years ago would be the same as today, the 1886; just for different reasons.
Mike
I’ve been reading the replies and very interesting. I’m glad that I kept a model 86 in 33Win. I had two and sold the nicer one & after reading these posts I’m glad I kept the other. 33 & 35 parked here n the photo.
RickC
December 14, 2009
Offline
I thought the reasoning for the box magazine 1895 was so pointed bullets could be used whereas the tube mag guns could not be loaded with pointed bullets because of the risk of the bullet striking the primer on the cartridge ahead of it. Winchester saw the military rifles like the Krag and Lee types using spitzer bullets and probably thought that was the way to the future. Remington solved that with the spiral mag some years later. Correct me if I am wrong? I have hunted with both 1895 and 1886 and the ’86 is easier to carry as it has better balance. In the day I would likely have opted for the traditional rather than the most modern.
November 19, 2006
Online
Dave K. said
I thought the reasoning for the box magazine 1895 so it pointed bullets could be used whereas the tube mag guns could not be loaded with pointed bullets because of the risk of the bullet striking the primer on the cartridge ahead of it. Winchester saw the military rifles like the Krag and Lee types using spitzer bullets and probably thought that was the way to the future. Remington solved that with the spiral mag some years later. Correct me if I am wrong? I have hunted with both 1895 and 1886 and the ’86 is easier to carry as it has better balance. In the day I would likely have opted for the traditional rather than the most modern.
Dave – you might be right but I had always assumed the thinking behind the ’95 action was that it could handle cartridges that were too long to be handled by any other Winchester lever action. I assumed they saw that the wave of the future was smaller bore cartridges at higher velocity. The .30-03 and .30-06 outshone the .30-30 by a far margin as far as both velocity and range of bullet weights. They needed a lever rifle to handle those cartridges. It certainly gave them something the competition didn’t have – Marlin, Savage and Remington did not have lever rifles that could handle .30-06 length cartridges. Also, the .405 in a lever action repeater was something none of their competitors could hold a candle to.
In modern times, everyone wants a bolt action rifle, so the significance of a lever action repeater that could handle the .30-06 doesn’t mean much. Back then, lever action repeaters were much more the preference and a significant portion of the market wouldn’t consider a bolt action. My Dad, who bought an ’86 in .33 as his first deer rifle never considered a bolt action. Very few in our extended family deer camp used a bolt action.
December 14, 2009
Offline
steve004 said
Dave K. said
I thought the reasoning for the box magazine 1895 so it pointed bullets could be used whereas the tube mag guns could not be loaded with pointed bullets because of the risk of the bullet striking the primer on the cartridge ahead of it. Winchester saw the military rifles like the Krag and Lee types using spitzer bullets and probably thought that was the way to the future. Remington solved that with the spiral mag some years later. Correct me if I am wrong? I have hunted with both 1895 and 1886 and the ’86 is easier to carry as it has better balance. In the day I would likely have opted for the traditional rather than the most modern.Dave – you might be right but I had always assumed the thinking behind the ’95 action was that it could handle cartridges that were too long to be handled by any other Winchester lever action. I assumed they saw that the wave of the future was smaller bore cartridges at higher velocity. The .30-03 and .30-06 outshone the .30-30 by a far margin as far as both velocity and range of bullet weights. They needed a lever rifle to handle those cartridges. It certainly gave them something the competition didn’t have – Marlin, Savage and Remington did not have lever rifles that could handle .30-06 length cartridges. Also, the .405 in a lever action repeater was something none of their competitors could hold a candle to.
In modern times, everyone wants a bolt action rifle, so the significance of a lever action repeater that could handle the .30-06 doesn’t mean much. Back then, lever action repeaters were much more the preference and a significant portion of the market wouldn’t consider a bolt action. My Dad, who bought an ’86 in .33 as his first deer rifle never considered a bolt action. Very few in our extended family deer camp used a bolt action.
Steve, Good points. My understanding is that the bolt action rifles became more popular when the soldiers returned from World War 1and many were familiar with this of action.
