Chapparel 1876 .45-60WCF

[Grapeshot]

I'm not sure where to post this, but since it is a big bore LEVER gun, it might fit in here.  This is for those Pards that have gotten or are getting the Chapparel 1876 Winchester in .45-60 WCF.

First, if you are modifying .45/70 cases, you have to shorten your .45-70 cases from 2.10 inches to 1.88 inches.  I used a Lyman case trimmer with a .45 Caliber pilot and a dial caliper to shorten one case to 1.88 inch.

I had a .45 Colt case trimming die that is used by using an RCBS press, a hacksaw and fine cut file.  Lubricating the shortened .45-70 case, I ran it into this trim die until it was flush with the top.  I then gave it a couple of passes with the file to true up the mouth.

Once that was done, I made sure that the die's locking nut was tightened down so it would not move.

The rest of the 89 cases I lubed and ran into the trim die until they protruded through the top of the die.  I then used the hack saw to cut off the excess and the file to true up the mouth.

After I had all the cases I wanted, I champhered the case mouths.

At this point in time, the cases are a bit bottle necked in shape.  I then ran them up through a .45/70 Sizing Die.  Then through a .45/70 case mouth belling die to set them up for a .458 bullet.

After seating Remington Large Rifle Magnum Primers, I loaded the cases with a variety of .458 bullets and a 50 grain by volume Hogdon 777.  An NEI 390 grain Gas Checked Model, a Rapine 405 grain Hollow Based bullet and a Lee 405 grain RNFP were used to fire form the cases.  To crimp them I first ran them SLOWLY up a .45 Colt Taper Crimp die.

Knowing that I was going to have to have a real crimping die and a sizing die for the .45/60 I CALLED Lee Precision using their contact number from their web site.  They had the dies on hand and I ordered a sizing die and a seating/crimping die.

This did not prove to be a practicle solution as the crimp die would not crimp.  I may have trimed the cases to short, or their die was not as precise as they claim.  Anyway, I had a Lee .45-70 factory crimp die that I was not using, so I filed the sliding collet shorter, trying to crimp every few strokes until it would crimp the cases as slick as a whisle.

After Firing the rifle with my modified cases,  I reloaded with the same bullets and primers, but reduced the powder charge to 40 grains, by volume, of 777, and used the new sizing die and seating die and the modified FCD.  I took it to the range again and had a blast as I made an old frying pan dance at 100 yards with those heavy bullets.

I've reloaded a batch using some smokeless loads and some Hornady 350 grain JSP's and some Montana Swaged 300 grain RNFP's in .458 diameter.  I hope to check them out by the end of next month, if the weather cooperates around the midatlantic eastern states.

I checked the rifling and it is faster than the originals.  It came out to 1:22 inches.

[Black River Smith]

For the second time I saw and handled one.

Well this time I handled two.  The people from Chapparel were exhibitors at the St. Louis NRA Convention.  This rifle just looks fabulous.  Nice wood and metal.  We finally have an 1876 out on the market.  Some day I will own one.

[Grizzly Adams]

We finally have an 1876 out on the market.  Some day I will own one.

Actually, it's better than that.  We have TWO out on the market.  Uberti is also making a fine copy of the Winnie 76.

Grapeshot, amigo, I was so tired after reading of your adventures that I had to have a couple of adult beverages!  Man, you are working hard!  Glad your having fun, and keep us posted on your progress.  Thanks.

[Pedro]

Are they the same ?

[Deadeye Don]

Are they the same ?

Well that is certainly a loaded, complex question.  I am sure answers will be coming soon.

[Fox Creek Kid]

Are they the same ?

No. The Chapparal is more authentic than the Uberti.

[Deadeye Don]

Well that is certainly a loaded, complex question.  I am sure answers will be coming soon.

No,  the Uberti model is much nicer and more authentic than the Chapparal model.

[Fox Creek Kid]

Deadeye Don, have you compared them to an original? I read the Uberti'76 is a '73 on steroids w/  wrong rear sight as well.  The only real fault w/ the Chapparal was the wood which I hear has now been changed to walnut. There was a thread here as well ( I can't find it in a search) w/ a link to a SASS Wire thread and a man who owned original '76's examined the Uberti & Chapparal side by side at a show and deemed the Chapparal far more authentic. I wish I could find the thread.

[Grizzly Adams]

FWIW, the rear sight on the Uberti is just as "authentic" as the one on the Chaparral - just different.  Winchester mounted a number on different sights on all of their models, so there is not just one for any given model.   The Chaparral has a sporting leaf or ladder sight, like the one found on carbines that a lot of folks complain about.  Me?  I love that kind of sight!  The Uberti comes with the familiar buckhorn sight.  Just as good - or bad, depending on your taste and eyes!

As to which is "more authentic", that is a matter of opinion - and you know about opinions!  FWIW, I think we are lucky to have two to choose from.  Before making a decision, I suggest you look at some guns and see which you prefer. 

It should be noted that the Uberti 73, while differing in some small details (improved firing pin desighn) is beyond all doubt an excellent copy of the Winchester 1873.  What differences that exist are meaningless when it comes to the shooting and performance of the arm. 

I have three original 1876s, and if either of these makers is coming close, we are all blessed!

[Delmonico]

You know how funny it is folks often whine about the minor details on replica arms, but the biggest one that shows first to some folks sticks out like a sore thumb, not that I would bother with it, that is of course the wood.  Only a very few of these carried wood from Juglans regia (often called English Walnut)  rather than Juglans nigra (American Black Walnut).  If they had this wood on them it was rare and very high grade, not the slightly better than firewood stuff we often see today.   Acually very little affordable Black Walnut today looks like the stuff used in this time period because of the age of the tree at the time of cutting. 

Of course it just depends on the details one concerns your self with, me I consider them close replicas and don't sweat the details to much, everyone in CAS or Living history I've ever met are good on the details that they know well or that concern them, they lack where their knowledge does. 

[Black River Smith]

everyone in CAS or Living history I've ever met are good on the details that they know well or that concern them, they lack where their knowledge does. 

Well, ignoring the harsh remarks from this boards moderator.  Being a CAS shooter and a historian enthusiast, I will add that FCK's remarks are correct.  I talked to three Chapparel folks at the St. Louis NRA show.  They stated that their guns were measured and designed off the specs of an original 76's. They stated, as other authors of articles, that the Chapparel internal parts are interchangeable with originals.  Whereas Uberti, also present at the St. Louis NRA show, stated there are internal design changes to the action.

Also, when I made my first statement here I was fully aware of the Uberti gun(seeing both first hand at the NRA show) and I do appreciate that they have one out.

I myself am not as concerned about the rear sight as much as I would be concerned about a nice front sight. I changed the Uberti 66 front sight on my gun.   In the Wilson Winchester book, pictures show rear sights as: a sporters; a ladder; a modified Henry; a military rifle; and a custom 4 leaf flip-up sight.

[Delmonico]

Since I have not compared the three together my comments are only concerning to wood on replicas, a detail that few see to really care about, a detail that screams at those who know a bit about wood.  Cost is the reason of course, but it still does look wrong no matter how much other detail is right.  It just seems funny to me so few care.  But as in all things every one has different details they spot right away, intermal parts only show up when you open the action, wood is there for all to see.  The comments are only harsh if the shoe fits.  I don't wear shoes or boots that don't fit.

[Black River Smith]

"The Gunfighters" by Rosa has a page with 4 standard '76 rifles pictured.  3 of the 4 have the ladder rear sight.  The other has a sporter.  "The Illustrated Book of Guns" by Miller features the same photo.

Make your own decisions about what is right.  I like either.

To me, the sporter is probably just as functional on todays guns because of the limited range that we shoot at compared to back then.

[Grizzly Adams]

The ladder or sporting leaf was the most common put on the 1876 (I know, I have three originals with that sight). But, as Black River points out, not the only one.  The truth is, that Winchester would put anything the customer wanted on the rifle!  I am not sure why some folks seem to think that the sights fitted by any importer  have some significance - this is a rifle, and most of us change out the sights to fit our needs.  These reproductions are shooters - not collector items!  The funny part is that most shooters hate the ladder type sights commonly found on carbines - and the ladder or sporting leaf sight often seen on the 1876,  is nothing more than a longer version of the carbine sight- yep, the one everyone complains about!

But....I happen to like sporting leaf or ladder sights!

As for any of these reproductions being "interchangeable" with the original, I will have to see it, and not just hear it from someone trying to sell me a rifle!  I would consider that exciting, only because it would provide replacement parts for originals.  As far as I am concerned, of primary importance is does the thing shot, and does it at least look like the original!

Now, I think I will go play the banjo for a bit!

[Grapeshot]

Personally, I did not like the rear or front sights on my M1876.  I ordered a set of Marbles, buckhorn rear and an ivory bead for the front.  Winchester used to do the same for their customers and there are a variety of rear and front sights on Winchester Rifles.

I like the ivory bead and buckhorn.  It lets me see the front sight so I can put it over the target.  It almost covers a 12 inch frying pan at 100 yards, but I can still hit it.

[Delmonico]

Since the 1876 was designed primarly as a big game rifle that would be a very nice set up for that.  The ladder sight is a pain in the butt for hunting.  If I decide to buy one of the 76's sometime that is what it will be for as well as several other folks who plan on buying one.  The ladder rear sight was more designed for military purposes.  For distance volley fire the Sarge just has to tell everyone where to set the sight and let the volleys begin. 

For long range target shooting, a tang rear sight would be the way to go. 

[quigleysharps4570]

I bought a Chaparral a couple weeks ago. Was disappointed in the rear sight that came with it...appears to have been tweeked a little and the ladder is a real bear to raise and lower. They are sending a new one. Other than that...no complaints. Been working on a smokeless load for her with a 300 gr. flatpoint bullet cast from my Lyman mould. Still have work to do but I'm gonna wait on the new sight now. This target was 10 shots at 50 yards...sitting in the Kansas sun with sweat running in my eyes might've hindered me somewhat on this group.

[concho]

If you were shooting off hand on that target ? Ok ! if resting the rifle at 50 yards on that target ? sell it Quick !