Home Forums Lever Action Central Big Bore Levers Which is the strongest action? Win 1886 or Win 1895?

Among the Miroku-made Winchesters, which has the strongest action? A 1886 or 1895? Also, can a new Win 1886 handle Marlin safe .45-70 loads?

Here is a little exert from a guy that built one of the very first .500 Smith and Wesson leverguns and also did test on the major leveractions and if they could take the .454 Casull.



The Winchester '86 is much stronger than the Marlin '95 with those in the no saying it can be safely loaded to 50 KPSI.
Jayco

I agree that the 1886/71 is stronger than the Marlin 1895 and that the Winny 94 is not. And yes, 50K PSI is generally regarded as the safe operating pressure limit in the 1886. The Marlin is at least 5k-7K less than that. None of this is what he was asking about, though.

The Winny 1895 is a different story. Early versions(1st generaton) were not nearly as strong as 2nd and 3rd (modern) variations of which he speaks. (However, they were about as strong as a modern Marlin 1895). To say a modern Win 95 is weaker than a 86 is simply not correct, nor close. If you look at the chamberings, they include both the 30-06 and the 270 Win. These cartridges routinely churn up WELL over 55K PSI and often over 60K PSI.

Take a look at what Fred Zieglin of Z-Hat does with a 1895. Ever heard of the .411 Hawk or .375 Scovill built on 1895s?

Modern 1895s are chambered for MUCH higher pressure cartridges than any of said other lever guns ever were or ever will be......

Agreed.I guess I should have posted the whole quote..This was a talk with Jim Taylor and Buck Elliot on leverguns.com about the strengths of the traditional leverguns for .454 Casull use...

Just remember that pressure is always and only relative to the resistance of the system in place to contain it... If the pressure does not exceed strength of the containment apparatus, all is well. The Freedom Arms .454 revolver has a built-in 100%+ safety factor - that is, it will contain pressures in excess of 100% overload. That said - DON'T try to find out how much or how high that is... We did succeed in breaking a .454 at F.A., but only after much tedious loading and firing of ammunition no one could conceivably load by accident or mistake. The gun never did "blow up," it just finally "broke..."

In my own .454 levergun tests, back in the late '80s, we did manage to ruin a few Winchester '94s, and one Marlin 336. The Marlin failed after the fewest rounds of factory-equivalent ammo, digesting only a handful of rounds (somewhere short of 20, if memory serves...) before the action would no longer lock up safely or securely.

Next to fall was a brand-new Winchester '94 Big-Bore AE, which stretched and flowed like taffy, as the bolt tried to climb up the locking lug and out of the top of the receiver, peening the lug recesses in the receiver terribly, and noticeably stretching the right side wall of the receiver. In their infinite wisdom, Winchester (USRAC) beefed up the receiver in the wrong place, while cutting ALL the strength out of the right receiver wall, to allow for their ill-conceived "angle ejection" modification. The '94 that performed best in my testing was a well-used carbine, made in the 1920s. It was still tight and crisp when we screwed the .454 barrel into it, but even it became dangerous and unserviceable in fewer than 50 rounds.

The whole point of the testing was to prove to various and sundry doubters that the 1894 Winchester was NOT a suitable platform for the powerful .454 Casull round - and WHY. The guns used (and used up...) in the tests were donated to the cause by those very Doubting Thomases...! It doesn't get much better than that.

BTW, the same Sharon barrel was used in all the tests, and it emerged unscathed. It was finally rethreaded and rechambered to .45 Colt and installed in a Browning '92, where it still resides -- a 24", octagon beauty.

The 1894 and 1895 Winchesters are NOT particularly strong actions, having llooooooonnnnngg receiver walls and angled, rear locking bolts. In short, physics and geometry are against them from the outset. As mentioned above, the '94 AE suffers the further indignity of having the only strengthening metal available to it REMOVED to make way for the abominable ejection system.

The '86/M-71 and '92 Winchesters are by far the strongest of the "traditional" lever actions, with the nod going to the '86/71, with its square-to-bore vertical lockup, which situates the lugs about 2/3 the distance back from the breech-face as compared to a '94 or '95. The '86's receiver walls are robust and not chopped up or hollowed out as are those on the '94, in particular.

The new Browning/Winchester 1886 and Model 71 are virtually identical offerings, made of good, through-hardened steel, and will serve as the basis for some VERY powerful loading.

Be careful, and don't try this at home...

Regards,


Jayco

Here is some more of that conversation about "traditional" lever actions some might be interested in.This does pertain to the the ops question about the Winchester being able to use hot Marlin loads....

ANY of the lever guns mentioned in this discussion ARE SAFE WHEN USED WITH THE CARTRIDGES AROUND AND FOR WHICH THEY WERE DESIGNED, AND VICE VERSA. (With a possible caveat concerning the .454 Puma...)

The Winchester and Marlin guns chambered for such hot little numbers as the.307 and .356 WILL WORK WONDERFULLY WELL WITH THOSE CARTRIDGES, provided they are not 'hot-rodded.'

There is a TREMENDOUS difference between 52,000 psi and 65,000 psi (or CUP, if that is the term in your head -- although they are NOT the same.)

Rapid acceleration to 65,000 psi, using even slow-burning pistol powders, such as W-296/H-110, produces a significant SHOCK to all parts of the gun, which leads to battering of loose-fitting parts, such as Jim mentioned. Even closely-fitted mechanisms have SOME play, or they won't work -- line-to-line fit has a tendency to bind things up in a hurry, particularly when you introduce a little HEAT into the equation.

Is a new Marlin 336 "stronger" than a solid, sound Winchester Model 1886 or 1892? NO...

The Marlin may (or not) be made of stronger materials, but the DESIGN of the locking mechanism is not as stout as that of the '86 or '92 Winchester. THAT is why in all the .454 test programs I'm aware of, the Marlins failed SOONER than the various Winchesters, when subjected to the pressures generated by the .454 Casull round -- somewhere in the vicinity of 62,500 to 65,000 psi. FAR BEYOND stresses ANY of those rifles were originally designed to encounter.

Lastly -- Just because John Browning designed the 1894 AFTER he had already built the '86 and the '92 DOES NOT MEAN that it is in any way an "improvement" over either of its predecessors. It is DIFFERENT -- it employs a different lockup, albeit on the same principle, and its lever's toggle linkage is a clear departure from its ancestors' mode of operation as well.

The idea was to put a smaller-diameter cartridge - of approximately the same overall length as those used in the '86 - into a lighter, trimmer receiver, which the '94 accomplishes very well. The '94 is NOT Browning's strongest or best-engineered lever-action rifle. He set the mark with the '86, and everything else that came after was intended to fill in all the gaps around the OUTSIDE, as it were, of the '86's PERFECT mechanism AND to protect Winchester's position in the market.

SCORES of rifle mechanisms were designed and patented by the Browning’s, and the patents SOLD to Winchester, with that one idea in mind. Browning's genius for getting around his own patent claims saved the day for the Big Red W time after time.

Jayco

I have a Model 1895 in .405 Winchester. It was designed for that cartridge after Teddy R decided to go to Africa. With all due respect, how can a '95 be considered a weak action if it can handle the .405?

I also have a Model 71 and I am in love with it. Model 1886s are my favorites and it came in the big .50.

FWIW, the reason the .405 was in the Winchester M1895 was that the .405 was too long for a Model 1886 action, so strength wasn't the issue that length was.

I didn't see anybody declare the Winchester M1895 to be a weak action (although it's not particularly strong) - just that the M1886/86 is stronger.


.

The 1886 is one on the great rifles of all time. The Model 71 is an update and even stronger. Too bad the .348 fell out of favor.

1886.

Thanks logcutter for the great write up. I had a Calvary carbine in 30 US when I was a kid and wish I would have held on to it, but such is youth. Love those 86 & 71 levers, just waiting on the right one to trip my trigger before I buy. Otis.

Compared to the Henry, Models 1866, 73 and 76, all of the actions in the discussion are pretty strong.

Many of the original Model 1895 rifles were returned
to the factory for repairs in the stock grip areas.
Winchester stopped chambering the 1895 in 30-03 and 30GOVT 06 because of problems with owners confusing the
8mm Mauser WWI cartridge with the 30 -06.
It rightly caused lots pf problems. Winchester did a thorough investigation but still decided that nothing is proof against idiots.

The 86/71 is a stronger rifle.
design....

1886

450Fuller, my 1895, designated as ".30GOVT" is chambered in .30-40. However, I do know the rifle was also chambered in '06.

I own and shoot/hunt with 1892, 1886, and 1895 and find them all well suited for their intended purpose and some non intended purposes such as African DG.

For successful hunting performance, I have found no reason for "hot rodding" any of them. And they are not limited to plinking bunnies or deer.
-1892 .357 magnum has been proven great for deer, feral hogs, close in varmints and such.
-1886 .45-90 has done the same for many deer-like critters, Bison, elephant, Cape Buffalo, leopard, etc.
-1895 .405 has been fun with much American deer sized game, Water buffalo, Cape Buffalo, feral hogs, warthogs, Nilgai, Red deer, and other exotics.

BTW, to me the term "Hot Rodding" means loading rifles up to or above their design limits (a risky business at best).

The same people "in the Know", have told me that low 50s are the upper safe operating pressures for the 1886 and 1895. Those were folks in the bullet and ammo business that have done extensive testing of their products. I have personally not exceeded 48,000 PSI with my ammo for the 1886 or 1895 - it was just not needed for hunting; including ele and big bad bovines. The spotted kitty was taken with a 300 grain .458 Nosler PP which nailed it to the ground - not a wiggle or flop.

The 1895 was a good -rifle, I shot my first bull elk with a .405 WCF. But as John Taylor states in his "African Rifles and Cartridges",
the 300 gr bullet lacked sectional density and lost velocity fast. The 450 or 50 Alaskans will show just how strong the 1886/M-71
actions are with Winchester or nickle steel in a stronger action. An 1895 in 35 Whelen tends to be a balanced rifle, and the
35 Winchester was a good cartridge. But the 348 or 348 Ack Improved were better in the Model 71.

The OP is talking about WINCHESTER 1895s and not Marlins. The former is a much stronger action but I agree the 71 (86) is stronger

450Fuller,
I am unfamiliar with the John Taylor that you reference, but do agree with him that on some applications of the 300 grain .411 bullets for the .405 WCF.

That was one reason for my using 400 grain .411 Woodleigh bullets (actually only one bullet needed) to take my Cape buff. Another reason was that it was a fun project.

It worked out so well that I have now been able to transfer those 300 and 400 grain loads to my Simson Suhl .405 double rifle . It was regulated with factory Horndy 300 grain ammo at 2225 fps (and my 300 grain hand loads at 2250 fps) to sub moa R&L groups at 50 yards. Fortunately, my 400 grain Woodleigh hand loads at 2050-2060 fps also regulate well.

It would be fun to take the Simson and 400 grain Woodies back to Africa for hippo and ele. However, since my 1886 .45-90 is my ele gun, maybe some other beastie with the Simson!

Cr; I bought a good supply of the 405 designed 300gr North Fork solids for my 405 and based on what I've experienced, I have no doubt they will penetrate well enough to kill a buffalo or for that matter anything else, including elephant and rhino.

Hello Jorge!

Indeed!

Used my 1895 405 to launch a 300grain NF cup point solid on a large water buff and it hit the ground dead! All senses went into slo mo and I can still see the critters head bounce as it hit the ground. Bullet took out both shoulders and messed up all insides nearby.
I was going to use that load on my Cape Buff hunt but a couple of buddies talked me into the 400 grain game. One of them yelled "stop here" when I reached 2076 fps while load testing - it seemed that was his regulation load for his 450/400 DR that had taken multiple ele and buff in Africa. It worked for me too.