1873 in 357 how strong is the action

[sharps50/70]

I was looking today at a very nice, new, Uberti 1873 rifle in 357 Mag.  I've always heard that the '73 action was not that strong due to the toggle/link construction.  The 357 Mag cartridge is rated at over 30,000psi for rifle or pistol, the 45/70 in a Winchester 1886 is rated at only 28,000psi.  Do the '73 rifles stand up to the high pressure for continued use?  Even for just load development and hunting? Anyone have any experience with the rifle and caliber combination?

As an aside, I see that the 1866 can only be chambered for the 38 special, not the 357 Mag.

Thanks,

Rich

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy

Interesting question. I have never heard a definitive answer. Yes, it is true that the '73 action is not as strong as it's successor, the Model 1892. Totally different lockup, '92s are stong enough to be chambered in 44 Magnum and 454 Casul. The '73 toggle link action simply does not lock up as securely, and the frame of a '73 is much more 'skeletonized' than a '92. Even though a '92 weighs less than a '73, the cross sections of steel in a '73 are less robust and will not take the battering punishment of heavy recoil like a '92 will with its bank vault type lockup. The question always gets raised that since it says 357 Magnum on the barrel, it should be good for any SAAMI spec load in that caliber.

By the way, in this situation it isn't necessarily so much an issue of PSI as it is the amount of force the bolt is subjected to in recoil. The barrel on a toggle link rifle is easily strong enough to take the PSI of the 357Mag. There is a lot of steel there. But the bolt does not see pressure, expressed in PSI, the bolt and the lock up of the action sees a straight thrust backwards which would simply be force, expressed in pounds, not pressure. Of course, the higher the pressure of the cartridge, the more force the bolt will be subjected to. Both 357 Mag and 44 Mag operate at about the same maximum pressure. But the force on the bolt with a max load of 44 Mag is much greater than the force on the bolt of a 357 Mag because of the greater diameter of the 44 Mag round. Don't forget, pressure is a measurement of pounds per square inch. Force is simply pounds (or Newtons, or whatever). Subject a tiny area to huge pressure and the total force can still be relatively minor. Subject a huge area to tiny pressure and the total force can be substantial. That's how hydraulic and pneumatic cylinders work. If you have a huge piston, and just put in a little bit of pressure, you can still get a lot of force. Think of the cartridge and the barrel as the cylinder of a pneumatic cylinder. Think of the bullet, (or the bolt) as the piston. As you apply gas pressure from the powder charge, the pressure drives the bullet forward. It also wants to drive the bolt backwards. The amount of force the bullet, and the bolt will be subjected to is directly proportional to the Area of the base of the bullet (or the area of the bolt face) and the pressure of the gas. Pressure = Force/Area. Pounds per Square Inch. Flip it around and Force = Pressue X Area. Without worrying too much about units, if you divide the Area in half, but keep the pressure the same, you get half the force.

This much I do know. A friend of mine bought a used '73 in 357 Magnum a few years ago. He brought it to a gunsmith to get a little bit of work done to it, and the gunsmith found a hairline crack in the frame. The smith said it looked like too many hot 357s had been run through it. My friend returned the gun to the dealer and got his money back.

If I owned a toggle link gun chambered for 357 Mag, I would not run a whole lot of full powered 357 Mag ammo through it. Just my opinion. A gun may be labelled for a specific caliber. Whether or not it can sustain a steady diet of it may be a different matter.

As far as the '66 is concerned, the action is basically the same as a '73, except the frame is made of brass, not steel. Pound it too much with recoil and you probably will not crack anything, instead you will batter the mortises where the toggle links seat out of shape and ruin the headspace. That's why the 66 is not offered in 357 Magnum. If you read Lever Guns of the Old West by Mike Venturino, he talks about a brass framed Henry in 44-40 that he was thinking about buying until the owner ruined it by putting a box of high powered 44-40 rounds through it.

[sharps50/70]

Driftwood,

Good answer!  Thanks,

Rich

[Roland]

So if I want an 1873, whats the best caliber to choose in regards to endurance? .44-40, .45colt? I would like to buy ammo mainly from stores and not load my own most of the time. Or should I just skip all the worrying and go for an 1892 in .357mag? I should be able to run the hottest loads available through a 92 without worrying the tiniest bit as I understand.

[Deadeye Don]

So if I want an 1873, whats the best caliber to choose in regards to endurance? .44-40, .45colt? I would like to buy ammo mainly from stores and not load my own most of the time. Or should I just skip all the worrying and go for an 1892 in .357mag? I should be able to run the hottest loads available through a 92 without worrying the tiniest bit as I understand.

Hands down 44-40.  Original caliber for that gun and if you use black powder you will thank your self down the road.  I would buy both a 73 and 92.   

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy

If you are going with factory ammo, either 45 Colt or 44-40 is fine. Just stay away from the special high powered stuff that is sometimes offered in 45 Colt. Any standard SAMMI spec 45 Colt or 44-40 ammo will be fine in any toggle link gun. If you want to run hot loads, grab a '92. They lock up like a bank vault and are stronger than a toggle link gun.

However, we have not discussed shooting factory 38 Specials in a '73 chambered for 357 Mag. Frankly, I don't know the answer to that one. Toggle links often tend to be Over All Length sensitive and may not feed the shorter 38 Sp ammo well. However I seem to recall that Uberti has made their more recent offerings more OAL tolerant. I do not know. Perhaps some other owners of .357 chambered toggle links will chime in.

[Roland]

It's obviously the only solution. So one 1892 in .357mag, one 1873 in .44-40

But I need a .22lr gun first IMHO, looking at a Henry Golden Boy, also heard 1873's used to come in .22 short, I would be the happiest man alive if they started selling 1873s in .22lr. The ultimate plinking rifle.

[Driftwood Johnson]

I'm pretty sure the '73 was not chambered for 22LR, only 22 short or 22 long. Personally, I can't imagine using a big heavy rifle like the '73 as 22. I have my Dad's old Winchester Model '06 which is an inexpensive version of the Model 1890. It's a real nice little plinker. When I was a kid a neighbor across the street had an 1890 with an octagonal barrel, and I have always wanted one of them after he showed me his. They were the classic gallery rifles used in shooting galleries.

[Roland]

Yes but I figured as it was made in .22 short, which is a weaker cartridge than .22LR and quite similar in size, I imagined it should be an easy task to make a .22LR version of the 1873. Maybe a carbine version would be good without being too heavy. Alas I am never happy with the guns that are available in this world

Well I suppose I will be happy enough if I can find a Marlin 39 or 9422 around here somewhere.

[Dr. Bob]

Go for the Marlin 39!  You'll be real happy with it!   Had one and every time I think about it I kick my backside for selling it!

[Driftwood Johnson]

Yeah, get a Marlin 39a. I have one, they're great. I'd take that hands down over the Henry every time.

[Roland]

Well... As it happens, new 39As are insanely priced over here, about 1200 dollars or so. Thats pretty... Insane. So what I have decided is get a Winchester 9422, found this one from 1974 with a scope in Sweden, will buy it as soon as I got all the arrangements worked out!



Also this would indicate the gun of my dreams exist in reality too:
http://www.huntamerica.com/wwwthreads/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=640569&page=0&fpart=1&vc=1

I believe the 1873 in .22lr must be alot like the 39A, they are both made for much bigger cartridges.

[Driftwood Johnson]

I believe the 1873 in .22lr must be alot like the 39A, they are both made for much bigger cartridges.

Howdy Again

Not true. The Marlin Model 39A is designed specifically for 22 RF cartridges. Don't confuse it with the much larger Marlin 336, which is based on the Marlin 1894 design. The Model 39A has a very small frame, and the bolt only travels far enough to eject a 22 Long Rifle shell. It's lockup is different than the larger centerfire rifles, nowhere near as strong. An extension of the lever simply holds the bolt in place, unlike the centerfire rifles which use a large, vertical locking block. The Marlin Model 39A is based on the Marlin Model 1891 and Model 1892, which were chambered for 22 RF and 32 RF ammo. The Model 1891 loaded from a side gate, much like most lever guns, the Model 1892 loaded directly into the magazine tube.

[Driftwood Johnson]

Here is a photo of a Marlin Model 1894 at top, and a Marlin Model 39A at the bottom. This 1894 is chambered for .357 Magnum. It is basically the same as the original Model 1894 which was chambered for the 44-40 cartridge, The smaller 39A is chambered for 22 Long Rifle. The frame is considerably smaller than the 1894, although the buttstock and for end on the Model 39A are full sized for an adult.

[Roland]

Hmmm looks like I am wrong.l I have certainly gotten the wrong impression then, based on the articles I've read I've gotten the idea that the 39 was pretty much based on a centerfire action and modified for .22 rimfire and it was quite beefy and heavy compared to the Winchester 9422 or Browning BL-22, both who where made for the .22 from scratch. But that this example of "over-engineering" also made teh Marlin the most durable and solid rifle of them all.

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy Again

I'm pretty sure the Winchester 9422 is built on the original full sized frame of the Model 1894. Just like the 45 Colt versions were. The 1894 frame is a bit longer than a 1892 frame to be long enough to handle the 30-30 cartridge and other similar lengthed cartridges like the 38-55 and the 32 Winchester Special. I'll probably get slammed for this, but the 9422 was a misguided attempt by Winchester to find a new market for the Model 94 when Winchester was struggling to stay afloat.

Unlike the Marlin 39A which is specifically designed for the 22 RF cartridge. Yes, the Marlin 39A has a full adult sized stock and fore end, so it does not feel toylike when shot by an adult. But the frame and action are quite small and specifically designed for the 22 Long Rifle cartridge.

If I had stepped back a bit when I took those photos you would have seen that the Marlin 1894 in the photo has a very short 18 1/2" barrel, the Model 39A has a longer barrel, probably 24" or so. I don't really remember, I never measured it.

[Roland]

Well I've come close enough to that 1873 with this:
http://www.buffaloarms.com/browse.cfm/4,5873.htm