IN 1987 I bought a Browning 1886 45-70, 26" octagon barrel' Made in Japan by Miroko. Just about the sweetest lever action I ever cycled! A friend died and left me all his 45-70 Target loads. I ended up in a side match for Speed Rifle. This is for any lever action in a rifle cartridge. On an empty chamber with 10 in the magazine. At the buzzer shoot as fast as you can offhand. Fastest time wins (5 seconds added for every miss) This time the target was a 16" steel plate at 125 yards. I was the first shooter, so I had a clean target. At the buzzer my first shot was dead center. so that was my aiming point for the next 9. It made it in 4.7 seconds. I ended up beating the then current State Champ by almost 2 seconds. (My friend's ammo won his first match, a year and a half after he died!)
In 2005 Davidson's was having a sale and I bought a Winchester 1886 45-90 26" Octagon Take Down 1/501. Also made in Japan but about the worst lever gun I've ever cycled! The guy that assembled my first one must have retired. (Sold to Cabela's several years ago!)
In that same 2005 purchase I bought a Winchester 1885 Low Wall in 38-55. I installed a Lyman 17 globe front sight and a Lyman tang sight. I took this rifle to a small range out in the sticks so people would leave me alone while I got it dialed in. Using a Bear Creek Moly coated 300 grain FN bullet over 8.0 grains of Trail Boss, (Virgin, but FL sized Winchester Brass and Federal 210M primer) I got the sights adjusted for 100 yards. This is a super slow load and I was told it was accurate! On a fresh target I fired my first three shots and the group was about dime sized! So I fired 17 more aimed slow fire all at the original hole. I ended up with a 20 shot group that was the size of a Nickel!
I have had Rossi, Navy Arms, and Browning Model 92's. All told about 15 total. The smoothest? Of course, it was the Japanese Browning! The Navy had a 20" octagon barrel and was very heavy! IT was great at Cowboy Action matches in moving targets! I'm now down to one 357 stainless SRC and a 45 Colt blue 20 inch carbine. Some were much better than others, but none was truly "Bad."
I have a mountain of Browing designed shotguns and handguns, but I down to these four rifles, and they will have to be pried from my cold dead hands.
Let's keep it to rifles, and share your experiences.
Ivan
Last edited by Ivan the Butcher; 04-05-2023 at 12:15 PM.
I have a 1904 vintage 1892 that I picked up at a local Gun Show. Cost was 600 dollars and a previous owner had sent it to Winchester for a new barrel in 357 Magnum and a complete re-finish so it's not a collectable but is a very pretty shooter. BTW, the high grade wood is also courtesy of that previous owner. From a rest using Marbles rear peep and front bead I've manage sub 1 inch groups at 100 yards, so it's a very accurate sample. Cycling with 357 Magnums is flawless, with 38 special you have to put a bit of a hitch in the lever movement or it will jam. Note, I've been told that the preferred variant of the original 1892 for re-barreling in 357 Magnum was one in 32-30 because the magazine tube is perfectly sized for the 357 Magnum.
I’ve always wanted an 1895 in ‘06 or .405, but have heard the ‘06 in that action is not a particularly good idea, and the .405 is said to be abusive due to the stock design. So until now the only lever action I have is a ‘50s 1894.
I wouldn’t mind having an 1892 in something other than .44 Magnum. A friend had one of the Japanese Brownings in 44. It was a meanie! I’ll probably never see one that I have to buy. Prices are high, like everything else. I can’t see iron sights on a rifle anymore, which further discourages buying that kind of rifle, but they are indisputably handy.
I have one lever action repeating rifle. It is all I need.
It is chambered for the 405 WCF cartridge and with full powered loads, you know when it goes off. My reloads use the 300 grain Lyman 412263 bullet over 28 grain of 5744. It about duplicates the 40-72 blackpowder load. A very comfortable load and one capable of anything I will hunt.
I have two boxes, less 4 rounds, of factory loads. Maybe 100 reloads. Enough for the rest of my life.
1896 vintage Winchester Model 1892 .32-20 saddle ring carbine
1941 vintage Winchester Model 94 .32 Winchester Special
1904 vintage Winchester Model 1895 .405
1924 vintage Winchester Model 90 .22 Long Rifle
All are great, dependable, satisfying guns to use. All have been put to work, hunting, range, and for plinking entertainment (even the Model 1895 .405).
The .22 pump is a darling. Both the Models 1886 and 1892 are slick and most gratifying designs to use. The Model 1895 is a hoot as well as being very positive to use. The Model 1894 action is my least favorite of Browning's lever-action designs, being less smooth than the others. There's probably a good reason for the design change from the '86/'92, but in my opinion a medium sized, "tweener," rendition of the design of the Model 1886 and Model 1892 would have been the superior choice as it is notably smoother in operation than the Model 1894 design. Heresy I know to say that, but there it is.
Oh, nearly forgot a few of the several models of Winchester's successes with several model variants of Browning's simple bolt-action single-shot .22 rim fire design.
1932 Winchester Model 60
Pre-1938 Winchester Model 67
Pre-1938 Winchester Model 68
Last edited by bmcgilvray; 04-04-2023 at 08:59 AM.
I'm a HUGE fam of Lever Action Rifles and own my share of them and more. My "JM" Marlin 1895 has an octagon barrel, a pistol grip stock and a pretty darn nice American Walnut stock. I have some hot 405 grain SJSP hunting rounds but enjoy shooting hand loaded 300 grain LFN hard-cast bullets best. I load them somewhat light so my shoulder is still attached to me when I am done shooting.
As much as I do love my 45-70, my favorite big bore L/A rifle is my Marlin 38-55! It is much lighter in recoil, shoots very flat, more accurate than one can actually shoot and I had Marlin hand select a custom checkered walnut stock for it - back in the day they actually would do those things. It was a small run special edition and I can shoot it all day long with hand loads and not have any aches or pains. The 38-55 is what I'd use for long range SASS matches when they did them at 100 yards. I could consistently break sporting clays at that distance and still look at it as my fav. big bore L/A rifle. Got a bunch of others in pistol and RF calibers too.
The Browning 1895 in 30-06 made in 1985 is my favorite JM design at the moment. Someone did a nice job adding the old redfield peep and front pinned blade sight. Also a sling mount was added to the barrel. The leather butt pad is well done. The rifle looks to have wear and bluing loss of a much older gun. I need to get this one out and use it it much more than I have in the year I have owned it.
In 1987 I moved from SE Idaho to Montana and began hunting the heavy timber. I had it in my mind that I wanted a faster second shot and narrowed it down to a BLR in 284 Winchester. I could not find one locally but a friend saw one for sale in 308 Win. It was a first month issued BLR 81 with a manufacture date of December 1980 from the factory papers with it.
I have used it for everything from cottontails to moose and loved every minute of it. It is not and never will have a benchrest trigger. It has a 2x7 Leopold scope and does just fine with that. Longest shot to date was 365 yards on an antelope that stood up during a long stalk.
I own a couple of Rossi 92's, sold a more modern BLR in 358, and have shot several Garands and a Browning 50 cal at Knob Creek. I have read JMB's biography and consider both he and his father men far ahead of their times.
I’ve always wanted an 1895 in ‘06 or .405, but have heard the ‘06 in that action is not a particularly good idea, and the .405 is said to be abusive due to the stock design. So until now the only lever action I have is a ‘50s 1894.
I wouldn’t mind having an 1892 in something other than .44 Magnum. A friend had one of the Japanese Brownings in 44. It was a meanie! I’ll probably never see one that I have to buy. Prices are high, like everything else. I can’t see iron sights on a rifle anymore, which further discourages buying that kind of rifle, but they are indisputably handy.
Why is the 95 in 30/06 a bad idea? I've owned a Miroku version for many years. It will handle any 30/06 ammo made. Check out the huge locking block behind the bolt.....Bolt ain't going anywhere...Miroku also chambered the 95 in .270. But they were slow sellers and discontinued after only a few were made.
The bottom rifle is a model 99 Winchester .22. It was Browning's first bolt action offering to Winchester. All their later .22 single shots were based on this rifle. Many models up to the early 60s were variations of this rifle.
The top rifle is a model 58 Winchester. Probably the cheapest Winchester ever produced. The stock is even made from flat lumber.
Browning offered Winchester drawings for a slide action .22 rifle. Winchester told him they didn't think it would work. So Browning went back to his shop and built the 1890 slide action and took it back to Winchester and told them it seems to function well.
Why is the 95 in 30/06 a bad idea? I've owned a Miroku version for many years. It will handle any 30/06 ammo made. Check out the huge locking block behind the bolt.....Bolt ain't going anywhere...Miroku also chambered the 95 in .270. But they were slow sellers and discontinued after only a few were made.
I don’t know, Mike. I’ve heard the action lets the high pressure rounds stretch cases. Have you ever noticed that? I have no firsthand knowledge. I’d be interested in your opinion. I still may weaken someday and buy a ‘95.
Last edited by M29since14; 04-05-2023 at 07:26 AM.
I don’t know, Mike. I’ve heard the action lets the high pressure rounds stretch cases. Have you ever noticed that? I have to firsthand knowledge. I’d be interested in your opinion. I still may weaken someday and buy a ‘95.
NOPE. Have all shot manners of 06 in mine. No problems. Look at the wide receiver, huge wide bolt and lock lug. Browning knew what he was doing when he designed this rifle. I have never read or heard of one stretching. It was chambered in......
Why is the 95 in 30/06 a bad idea? I've owned a Miroku version for many years. It will handle any 30/06 ammo made. Check out the huge locking block behind the bolt.....Bolt ain't going anywhere...Miroku also chambered the 95 in .270. But they were slow sellers and discontinued after only a few were made.
I believe the operative phrase here is “Miroku version” . There are more than a few reports of stretching in original Winchester Model 1895’s chambered for the 30-06. Maybe this is all conjecture but these were reported long before the internet echo chamber and in days when journalists had to be able to back up their claims.
The Miroku rifles are made from much better grades of steel.
This is a new 1892 Deluxe Takedown that I stumbled upon at Kittery Trading Post. I went for boots but checked inventory the night before. Salesman didn’t even know it was on the rack yet:
This is a 1990s production 1892 Deluxe with a nicely engraved receiver:
I confess that I have not fired either one - both are LNIB condition. However, I should be getting an 1892 Deluxe Trapper Takedown this summer and THAT will get used!
I believe the operative phrase here is “Miroku version” . There are more than a few reports of stretching in original Winchester Model 1895’s chambered for the 30-06. Maybe this is all conjecture but these were reported long before the internet echo chamber and in days when journalists had to be able to back up their claims.
The Miroku rifles are made from much better grades of steel.
I don't believe they could do a take down with a saddle ring carbine, so it would have to be a rifle. A 16-inch short rifle? That would be something to see.
I don't believe they could do a take down with a saddle ring carbine, so it would have to be a rifle. A 16-inch short rifle? That would be something to see.
Why is the 95 in 30/06 a bad idea? I've owned a Miroku version for many years. It will handle any 30/06 ammo made. Check out the huge locking block behind the bolt.....Bolt ain't going anywhere...Miroku also chambered the 95 in .270. But they were slow sellers and discontinued after only a few were made.
The bolt face is thin on the orig design,,thin for the use of the 30-06 cartridge when loaded to the max.
The case will in some instances set back into the face of the breech bolt causing the excess H/S problem often mentioned in the Mod95 chambered in 30-06,,but that doesn't seem to be a problem in the other calibers.
It isn't a problem in the other calibers as they don't generate the chamber pressures that the 30-06 ultimately got up to.
Likely some handloaders helped the situation along as well. Always trying for a bit extra speed and energy from any cartridge.
The locking lugs and bolt assembly itself hold just fine.
The rifles that develop the issue will show a depression of the case head in the bolt face itself. That is the set-back and the excess H/S it causes.
I'm guessing the modern repros beefed up the bolt face and built of modern alloy steels also help with the problem to make it a non-issue .
The bolt face is thin on the orig design,,thin for the use of the 30-06 cartridge when loaded to the max.
The case will in some instances set back into the face of the breech bolt causing the excess H/S problem often mentioned in the Mod95 chambered in 30-06,,but that doesn't seem to be a problem in the other calibers.
It isn't a problem in the other calibers as they don't generate the chamber pressures that the 30-06 ultimately got up to.
Likely some handloaders helped the situation along as well. Always trying for a bit extra speed and energy from any cartridge.
The locking lugs and bolt assembly itself hold just fine.
The rifles that develop the issue will show a depression of the case head in the bolt face itself. That is the set-back and the excess H/S it causes.
I'm guessing the modern repros beefed up the bolt face and built of modern alloy steels also help with the problem to make it a non-issue .
Did this happen on your personal rifle? Can you show an instance where this happened? Or did ya just read it somewhere?
Did this happen on your personal rifle? Can you show an instance where this happened? Or did ya just read it somewhere?
..No I didn't just read it somewhere.
I've seen it on a few in the last 50+ yrs of gunsmithing & restoration work.
I've fixed a couple as well with the standard gunsmith's repair method too..
No.. it hasn't happened on my personal rifle,,a 1916 mfg 30-06 restocked by John Oberlies of Dayton, Ohio likely in the late 20's.
I'm careful with it. I load conservatively and have said that here in the past.
Did 'ya' think I just made it all up?
You should know better than that.
"..Can you show an instance where this happened?..."
No, I didn't bring the subject up and never thought it was some sort of an oddity I had to document for future generations to see when I did come across it..
I believe that Col. Charles Askins wrote an article on the Winchester Model 1895 rifle which appeared in the 1973 Guns & Ammo Annual which stated that the Model 1895 action was prone to headspace issues in .30-06.
I tend to believe that there have been enough reports of trouble with the .30/06 in original Winchesters that there is something to them, but I’d hope Miroku took the necessary steps to shore up that matter. Given that, and in light of the fact that I’ve never been an “adventurous handloader,” I still think a ‘95 in .30/06 is a worthwhile goal.
I do appreciate the input from 2152hq. I suppose I could change horses and look for a .405 or .30-40, but I’ve had my heart set on an ‘06 for years and hate to readjust now.
I'd be tickled pink with either an original Winchester Model 1895 or a Miroku if chambered for .30-06. I'd just treat it like I do my low-numbered Model 1903 Springfield and use it with handloads that mimicked original .30-06 ballistics. Say, 2700 fps with 150 grain bullets, obtained from moderate charges of medium burning powders.
That is basically my thinking. That type of power would be perfectly adequate for anything I’d want to use a ‘95 for, and no doubt easier on the shooter than more vigorous stuff.
I have owned many original and modern day copies of the 1885, 1886, 1892 and 1894 Winchesters.
Had a Miroku made take down 1886 rifle in 45-70. 26" full octagon barrel, blue receiver. But it was heavy and I did not like the rebounding hammer as it resulted in too many FTF with magnum primers. Beautiful gun though. I traded it for an equally nice Uberti 1873 45 Colt rifle with their beautiful case hard type finish. It's much lighter too.
I decided on the trade after lucking onto a well used but well cared for Model 71 348 Winchester. Got it for a good price because it was tapped for a side scope mount. Action is as slick as glass and the rifle balances beautifully and comes up to the shoulder perfectly for me. Shot it very well with iron sights but I've just installed a Williams receiver "peep" which lets me get on target quicker. The 71 is a refinement of John Browning's 1886 action.
Also have two model 1885s, hi wall that has been re-bored from 32-40 to 45-70 and a lo wall 22 rim fire. The hi wall has an excellent bore. I had the lo wall re lined as the original rifling would not do better than 3" at 30 yards regardless of ammo.
Had a brand spanking new Uberti hi hall sporter in 45-70. Very light weight and handy but a beast to shoot with anything but trapdoor level loads. I traded it for a nicely refinished model 94 take down in 38-55, my first model 94.
I have owned many 94s in various calibers and configurations, all pre-68 rifles. These included 32 special and 30-30 rifles from the 50s. Both 20" round barrels and a nice model 55 take down 32 Special from the thirties. This was a half magazine lighter weight version of the model 94. All these were traded or sold. Still have a pair of 24" octagon full mag rifles in 30-30 and 32-40. And the 38-55 take down.
The model 92 is covered as well. Original Winchesters in 25-20, 32-20 and 38-40. And a nice little Rossi copy in 38/357 mag.
Except for the model 71, all of the original Winchesters in my collection are pre 1930. The two '85s are pre 1898 antiques. They all show honest use but are fully functional. All the 94s and the 71 can do less than two inch groups at 100 yds. The 38-40 model 92 is the worse of the lot and so is getting a barrel liner. Couldn't get it to do better than 6" at 30 yards! It also has not a whit or original finish on the metal so I may splurge for a re blue if it shoots well when back from the shop.
The modern repro 1895 rifles in 30-06 (or 270Win) will not give you any of the problems that the original mfgr Winchester rifles did.
Yes the orig were made in a long list of calibers incl the 30-06. But the 30-06 of that introduction time (pre WW1) was loaded to a lower chamber pressure than the manufacturers did post-WW1.
There were only 2 30-06 loads offered at the time these rifles were placed on the market in 1907.
The ammo for them was either loaded with 150-grain bullet w/a muzzle velocity of 2,700 fps, or a 220-grain bullet w/a vel of 2,200 fps.
These cart did not exceed breech pressures of 46,000 to 48,000 pounds psi.
Then post WW1 commercial OTC ammo was offered in multiple bullet weights, vel surpassing 3000fps and chamber pressures in the 52K to 56K psi range.
Today we have 60K as a max SAAMI pressure for the 30-06.
Remember the rifle was designed for a 30-06 cartridge that developed 46 to 48K psi at the time,,which is what we consider now to be Max chamber pressure for the 30-40Krag.
Win pulled the 95 in cal 30-06 in 1925 I believe when the Model 54 was introduced. The 54 was entirely capable of handling the ammo of it's day.
It's a story line that follows many great classic and favorite firearms.
The ammo they were made to shoot is not necessarily the same as what is made today even though the name of the caliber is still the same.
The repro 95 is the next one in that Model 95 line.
Stronger, some redesign likely and modern steel and heat treatment.
..and some things we might not adore like a tang safety.
Progress..
JM Browning designed rifles
Some day maybe a .30/06! 
Linear Mode
