Uberti 66

[bladeracer]

Considering the 1866 Winchesters were originally only chambered in .44 rimfire l don't think the sights were designed with bison shooting in mind. Still reckon someone has f*cked with it if it was filthy dirty inside, ( low pressure sqib loads are common with cowboy action), it don't work right and feels like it's 150 years old. I've handled an original '66 and it was as smooth as silk.

The action is quite smooth, it's just obvious that it's a primitive and over-complex design when you operate it They use the levers to operate it without taking advantage of the leverage to make it easier. Throwing the lever with the hammer down takes over 2kg of force and the 3.84kg weght of the rifle will happily hang on the trigger scale without firing. I measure the break at 4.14kg!
An original '66 has probably had so many people inside it by now that it's unlikely to represent the era very well at all.

Started loading ammo for it tonight.
Slugged the bore at .3555" which seems tight?
And a .358" bullet dropped down into the throat pretty easily.

[Stix]

Throwing the lever with the hammer down takes over 2kg of force and the 3.84kg weght of the rifle will happily hang on the trigger scale without firing. I measure the break at 4.14kg!

You a right hander...?
BETTER HOLD MINUTE OF BUFFALO TO THE LEFT...!!!

[Gamerancher]

Okay, .358 is the correct size bullet. The action is not a very strong one and combined with the brass frame is easily ruined with high pressure loads.
Mike Venturino, in his book [u]Shooting Lever Guns of the Old West[/u] states the following,
"C.O.L is critical, over 1.55" they will be too long for the lifter and if they are under 1.45" they are too short and will allow the next round in the magazine to intrude into the lifter and bind the gun up."
That sounds to me like the problem you had with it.
He goes on to suggest that beveling the front edge of the lifter makes them less sensitive to C.O.L. but doesn't say by how much.
Here is a copy of the page in his book that has the reloading data .
Note: You can use AP -70 as a substitute for Unique. I'd also try Trailboss in it.

1866 data.jpg (120.07 KiB) Viewed 8529 times

[bladeracer]

Okay, .358 is the correct size bullet. The action is not a very strong one and combined with the brass frame is easily ruined with high pressure loads.
Mike Venturino, in his book [u]Shooting Lever Guns of the Old West[/u] states the following,
"C.O.L is critical, over 1.55" they will be too long for the lifter and if they are under 1.45" they are too short and will allow the next round in the magazine to intrude into the lifter and bind the gun up."
That sounds to me like the problem you had with it.
He goes on to suggest that beveling the front edge of the lifter makes them less sensitive to C.O.L. but doesn't say by how much.
Here is a copy of the page in his book that has the reloading data .
Note: You can use AP -70 as a substitute for Unique. I'd also try Trailboss in it.

1866 data.jpg

Yep, I wasn't going to bother sizing or checking these, just lube or PC and run them.
The striker is only held to the bolt by a small pin that extends into a groove on the striker. I would think if the linkages failed and allowed the bolt to shoot back, that the striker would continue out the back of the receiver into your face - not something I particularly want to test. I'm happy to shoot light loads if I can maintain decent accuracy from them.

Looks like a good book, and I loooooovvvvveeeee books, but I don't want to spend that sort of money on such a specialised subject, at least not until I'm thoroughly hooked on the old-style levers I'll see if I can get it through the library though.

Yep, the first time I opened the action I could see the design was going to require both maximum and minimum cartridge lengths to be able to function. The loading gate simply slides a round directly into the lifter rather than into the mag tube, and the gate is all that stops the round from being pushed back into the receiver. The round needs to be short enough to clear the front of the lifter without catching in the end of the magazine, but still long enough to prevent the next round from encroaching into the front of the lifter. That is a problem with the S&B I've fed through it so far though. The lifter is 1.595" long, the S&B 158gn LRN is variable, but around 1.510" to 1.530" long. The lifter has a feed ramp at the front of it which pushes long cartridges back into the tube as it rises - in this case about 60-80-thou (1.5mm to 2mm). It's not jamming the action, it just requires more effort to lever the lifter up as it pushes the rounds back against the magazine spring, it's just poor design. Rather than using levers to make the action work with less effort, the levers seem to be designed purely to make the action work, with no regard at all for using that available leverage to reduce the effort required, if you see what I mean. Like using a six-foot crowbar to lift a 500kg rock, but pushing it a foot from the bottom instead of at the far end of the lever. I can see it would've been astonishingly impressive in its day (until a simple failure-to-extract puts it right out of the fight until it can be stripped and reassembled...without losing any of the 26 pieces you needed to remove), but it's a poor design by today's standards.

Trailboss is what I was planning to run. I have AP70N and AR2205 I was going to use for hot loads if I managed to find a .357 Mag, but I'm not going to run anything hot in this old girl at all, 1000fps should do me just fine.

[bladeracer]

Been busy with the cows, swapping an engine in a bike and working on the Uberti - the fun bit

The stock sights are horrendous for precision shooting, the front sight bead covers an A4 page at 50m.
And the rear buckhorn sucks as well, probably works like a ghost ring for huge targets under fifty meters though.
Trying to mount a peep sight or scope is virtually impossible without drilling the brass receiver somewhere, and I'm loathe to do that.
But, since the side plates of the receiver come off I decided to make a new left side plate that includes a mounting bracket above the action. Couldn't get any brass plate so I did it in aluminium.
And I made a new front sight that simply attaches to the muzzle and held in place by the magazine tube plug.
I'll test shoot it tomorrow to see if they're an improvement.
Then I need to finish the final shapes and polish them up.

[bladeracer]

The new sights are a huge improvement, and I finally have something I can work with.
I tested two bullets today from Berry's, the 158gn Hardcast and the 125gn Plated.
The Hardcast are no better than my own cast bullets, pretty hopeless.
But the Plated bullets group nicely around 50mm rested at 50m.
I'll have to get some jacketed bullets as well to see if they shoot even better, but the Plated bullet will do the trick for now.

[bladeracer]

Got a range of jacketed bullets to test in the .38 now.
Empty Starline brass, Hornady 110gn XTP, 125gn XTP, Lee 125gn cast, Berry's 125gn Copper Plated FN, Berry's 158gn Hardcast, Hornady 200gn Interlock RN, and S&B factory loaded 158gn LRN.

20180410_182922b.jpg (247.05 KiB) Viewed 8434 times

Will be curious to see what velocity I can get with the 200gn bullet with light loads.
I'm also curious to try it single-loaded with the bullet out as far as it can go to see if it's any more accurate.

20180410_183027b.jpg (268.93 KiB) Viewed 8434 times

I've only been shooting 4.5gn Trailboss loads behind the 158gn and 125gn bullets so far, with the 158gn running just about right on 1000fps. I haven't noticed a sonic crack to the 125gn so I think they're still subsonic. I can't imagine you'd even see any pressure signs in this design, the toggles would likely let go immediately as there's really nothing else that can "give" a little to warn the shooter.

Also have to load up some .30-06 test loads if I can find time.
I'm only trying the Hornady 178gn BTHP initially as I'm curious to see how well she might be able to shoot.

[in2anity]

Wow how resourceful BR - how do you attach that front sight? In a time passed I would have said that additional junk may have interrupted the harmonics, but based on my own findings with 92 I don’t think it would really be that detrimental (yet it adds a hell of a lot of function!)

[bladeracer]

Wow how resourceful BR - how do you attach that front sight? In a time passed I would have said that additional junk may have interrupted the harmonics, but based on my own findings with 92 I don’t think it would really be that detrimental (yet it adds a hell of a lot of function!)

The sight simply fits around the octagonal muzzle and the mag tube, and is held in place by the mag tube plug. I still need to finish the final shape, and polish both pieces to a nice shine.

Yes, with the magazine and fore end hanging off the barrel, I think accuracy is already compromised Particularly as the magazine changes its weight and spring pressure against the barrel with every shot.

That's primarily why I cut the mag down to five rounds on the Norinco, and deleted the screw that fixed the fore end to the barrel. Now the fore end and mag are only held in place by the barrel band, and limited in moving forward by the fore end butting against the back of the screw lug that is dovetailed into the barrel.To remove it you have to pull the barrel band forward and then you can pivot the wood down and pull it out of the receiver. I have also modified my natural offhand stance to support the rifle under the receiver instead of by the fore end. That way my grip also can't effect barrel harmonics shot to shot. I still need to make a lanyard for the follower as I have launched it down range a couple times during sloppy reloads - something I'm keen to avoid at the range

[bladeracer]

I made up some test ammo with the 110gn XTP on 4.5gn of Trailboss.
Only got one round down range, but it failed to extract the case, which locks the action up - bugger.
Walked back to my office to disassemble it and couldn't be bothered walking out again last night.
But I shot twelve rounds just now off the bench at 100m into a group 150mm wide and 106mm tall - looks promising.

20180413_130334b.jpg (602.48 KiB) Viewed 8401 times

Managed to shoot some more 110gn XTP's on 4.0gn and 3.5gn of Trailboss, but I didn't bother with the chrono.

[bladeracer]

More ammo testing.

20180418_135321b.jpg (476.29 KiB) Viewed 8385 times

Berry's 125gn Plated is still the most consistent, but the 110gn XTP shows real promise.
I loaded some 200gn RN's on 2.2gn of Trailboss but the first only got halfway down the bore.
I'll try them on 3.0 and 3.5gn.

[bladeracer]

I loaded some 200gn RN's on 2.2gn of Trailboss but the first only got halfway down the bore.
I'll try them on 3.0 and 3.5gn.

3.0gn of TB got further down the bore but was still a squib.
3.5gn punched the 200gn bullet downrange so I loaded five rounds.
Accuracy is on par with the 125gn Berry's Plated, but it shoots 480mm low at 50m...at 400fps
Very surprised it grouped so well after strolling down the range.

.38 is supposed to be a .357" bore, but this slugs at .355", and the recovered bullets are .355", despite starting out at .358".
As the 66 was never designed to shoot 200gn jacketed bullets, I've erred on the side of caution to protect the action, and my face. I was hoping to calculate bolt thrust, but the tight bore makes for a very wild guesstimate of chamber pressures - just how much pressure does it take to swage a jacketed bullet down three-thou?

Using recoil calculation, the 110gn XTP at 1300fps makes 1.3J, and the 158gn cast at 1000fps makes 1.6J, the 200gn at 500fps makes just 0.7J. If I can push the 200 to 800fps it makes 1.6J. But, does an over-size jacketed bullet affect recoil energy calculation?

I wanted to try the 200gn bullet to see if I could use the .38 on the 200m ram, but it looks like the lighter bullets hold more energy due to their velocities, I don't think I can get enough powder in the case to push the 200gn much faster than 800fps, unless I switch to AR2205. Although I can fit more than twice as much AR2205 in, it barely produces any more velocity at similar pressures, but I'll give it a try just in case.
The 110gn at 1300fps holds 220ft/lbs at 200m.
The 125gn at 1200 holds 235ft/lb.
The 158gn at 1000fps holds 240ft/lb.
The 200gn at 800fps holds just 210ft/lb.
If I can push the 200gn to 1000fps it holds 300ft/lb.
A 240gn .44 though at just 1000fps holds 360 ft/lbs at 200m, 20% more than the hottest .38 I'm likely to try, and a full-power .44 load holds 700ft/lb. Oh well, more load development to be done with the .44 as well to find some accuracy to match the .38

[in2anity]

Good progress Blade, you’re definitely squeezing the most out that little 66! I’d be scared loading too far under mins but I suppose if you’re acutely aware of when squibs occur then there’s nothing really that can go wrong right? Just knock em out with some dowel right?

[bladeracer]

Good progress Blade, you’re definitely squeezing the most out that little 66! I’d be scared loading under mins but I suppose if you’re acutely aware of when squibs occur then there’s nothing really that can go wrong right? Just knock em out with some dowel right?

No knocking required, just push them out with a length of 6mm aluminium rod.
I like messing with light loads so I get lots of squibs - they don't do any harm.
With this toggle-lock action I'm much more concerned about warmer loads than squibs. .38 Special runs around 16-17,000CUP, and +P runs around 19,000CUP. Uberti say not to run +P, so I guess the action is rated to maybe 17,000CUP max for extended use, which as far as I can determine is roughly the same pressure as .22LR (24,000psi max). According to ADI, the 110gn XTP at 1100fps is around 17,000CUP, but I'm making 1300fps, probably due to the bullets being over-size for the bore. The 125gn at 1000fps is around 17,000CUP - I'm close to 1200fps. 158gn cast at 850-900fps makes almost 17,000CUP - I'm seeing 1000fps. I don't have any numbers for 200gn jacketed bullets, but the 170gn at 850fps makes 16,000CUP. A 200gn at 1000fps would be pretty hot, but I'd be willing to try them for the ten-rounds needed to drop the rams at 200m, but it's still far short of the knock-down energy of the .44. I might resort to it if I can't make a good .44 load, but I don't think it'll be necessary.

For practicing, I'm happy to shoot lighter loads that are less accurate, but for actual competition I need the best accuracy I can find. At this point I'm pretty happy with the accuracy of the .38 for CLAS I think. I'll keep practicing with it but I need to work out an accurate load for the .44 now.

[in2anity]

Good progress Blade, you’re definitely squeezing the most out that little 66! I’d be scared loading under mins but I suppose if you’re acutely aware of when squibs occur then there’s nothing really that can go wrong right? Just knock em out with some dowel right?

No knocking required, just push them out with a length of 6mm aluminium rod.
I like messing with light loads so I get lots of squibs - they don't do any harm.
With this toggle-lock action I'm much more concerned about warmer loads than squibs. .38 Special runs around 16-17,000CUP, and +P runs around 19,000CUP. Uberti say not to run +P, so I guess the action is rated to maybe 17,000CUP max for extended use, which as far as I can determine is roughly the same pressure as .22LR (24,000psi max). According to ADI, the 110gn XTP at 1100fps is around 17,000CUP, but I'm making 1300fps, probably due to the bullets being over-size for the bore. The 125gn at 1000fps is around 17,000CUP - I'm close to 1200fps. 158gn cast at 850-900fps makes almost 17,000CUP - I'm seeing 1000fps. I don't have any numbers for 200gn jacketed bullets, but the 170gn at 850fps makes 16,000CUP. A 200gn at 1000fps would be pretty hot, but I'd be willing to try them for the ten-rounds needed to drop the rams at 200m, but it's still far short of the knock-down energy of the .44. I might resort to it if I can't make a good .44 load, but I don't think it'll be necessary.

For practicing, I'm happy to shoot lighter loads that are less accurate, but for actual competition I need the best accuracy I can find. At this point I'm pretty happy with the accuracy of the .38 for CLAS I think. I'll keep practicing with it but I need to work out an accurate load for the .44 now.

An 1894CB 24” LTD 44rm went up on abused guns today - I desperately tried to buy it as those things are rarer than hen’s teeth - but the thing sold in about 11 seconds flat oh well, just gotta make do with the Chiappa!

[bladeracer]

If the Marlin is Microgroove I'd consider the Chiappa to be the better rifle.

[in2anity]

If the Marlin is Microgroove I'd consider the Chiappa to be the better rifle.

Nope the CBs are deep cut ballard style - it was really well priced too - i'm kicking myself for not being a bit more aggressive in pursuing it

[Gamerancher]

Whilst I admire your ingenuity in manufacturing your adapter plate to mount the Williams sight on this rifle, you may want to consider the rules if you were thinking about using it for CLAS competition.

4.1.1 Rear sights: May be open sights, receiver or tang sights manufactured for the rifle
they are mounted on, if requested by a Match Official or the Technical Committee
the competitor must provide documentary evidence of this. No Olympic type sights
or extended mounts are permitted. Front sights must be a post or bead, may be
hooded or if interchangable may use post or bead inserts only.

[bladeracer]

Whilst I admire your ingenuity in manufacturing your adapter plate to mount the Williams sight on this rifle, you may want to consider the rules if you were thinking about using it for CLAS competition.

4.1.1 Rear sights: May be open sights, receiver or tang sights manufactured for the rifle
they are mounted on, if requested by a Match Official or the Technical Committee
the competitor must provide documentary evidence of this. No Olympic type sights
or extended mounts are permitted. Front sights must be a post or bead, may be
hooded or if interchangable may use post or bead inserts only.

Bugger - that puts the Uberti out then. Accuracy with the original sights is non-existent
I can't see any other way to mount a peep or tang sight without drilling the receiver, which I'm not going to do. I also can't see any value at all in putting the original sights back on, but I might look at putting some Ruger Fire Sights on her instead.

To build this Uberti into a rifle that is only suitable for competition would be an atrocity, so that isn't an option.
Being out of CLAS though gives me an excuse to mount a scope (why I left the mount plate long) and see what she's really capable of, thanks GR

[bladeracer]

My plan today was to shoot her at 40m, 50m, 75m and 100m and record the sight settings and holds, oh well

[in2anity]

Whilst I admire your ingenuity in manufacturing your adapter plate to mount the Williams sight on this rifle, you may want to consider the rules if you were thinking about using it for CLAS competition.

4.1.1 Rear sights: May be open sights, receiver or tang sights manufactured for the rifle
they are mounted on, if requested by a Match Official or the Technical Committee
the competitor must provide documentary evidence of this. No Olympic type sights
or extended mounts are permitted. Front sights must be a post or bead, may be
hooded or if interchangable may use post or bead inserts only.

GR I have a Marble tang and Lyman interchangable front (with the blade insert) on my 1892 repo - would that still be legal for CLAS do you think?

[bladeracer]

GR I have a Marble tang and Lyman interchangable front (with the blade insert) on my 1892 repo - would that still be legal for CLAS do you think?

I think the problem is that I've mounted it to avoid drilling the receiver is all? If I drill and tap the receiver and mount the Williams directly to it I think it'd be okay?

I am curious what an "Olympic type" sight is though.

[groundhog]

The tang and the 17A foresight should be ok, provided that the Marbles wasn’t made specifically for another rifle.

Olympic type sights refers to Anschutz Smallbore Type sights as used in Olympic competition it is not such of an issue here but has been an issue in the US.

[in2anity]

The tang and the 17A foresight should be ok, provided that the Marbles wasn’t made specifically for another rifle.

Olympic type sights refers to Anschutz Smallbore Type sights as used in Olympic competition it is not such of an issue here but has been an issue in the US.

Thanks GH