Winchester's 1903 44-40 W.H.V. Draw Set

[Savvy_Jack]

This is a 1903 44 W.H.V. "Draw Set". This was Winchester's first year production of this cartridge. The cartridge in this set contained 20.8gr of Sharpshooter powder. Dissected REM-UMC loads of the time-frame also used 20.0gr of Sharpshooter. By 1945, Winchester's cartridge powder samples had dropped to 14gr of Sharpshooter powder and discontinued. Remington still sold HV loads into the 1970's, but they were no more than normal pressure/velocity loads. Remington's final offers were called "Express" loads and matched Winchester's normal "substandard" load performance by 1979.

 

[Jim Watson]

You don't get 1750 fps without putting in some fuel.

I wouldn't call it "substandard", just what the British call "Nitro for Black" and easy on 1873s.

 

[ligonierbill]

Any equivalent current powder to Sharpshooter? What kind of performance did these rounds achieve (or at least were advertised to achieve)?

 

[Savvy_Jack]

Any equivalent current powder to Sharpshooter? What kind of performance did these rounds achieve (or at least were advertised to achieve)?

Hard to say what is "equivalent" because of so many variables. However, there are powders that can be used and all are published in Lyman's 49th.

44-40 Smokeless powder transition years can be found here: https://sites.google.com/view/44winchester/powders/smokeless-powders-transition-years?authuser=0

This is were we separate the 44-40 as a "rifle cartridge" and a "revolver cartridge". While Colt was not approving smokeless loads in their revolvers until 1909, Winchester had been manufacturing this HV load for their Model 92' since 1903.

For rifle use, to be able to replicate accurate normal loads at longer distances or to replicate HV loads, one must use mid-range rifle powders. Reloader 7, 2400 and IMR-4227 best fit the bill. For HV loads, 2400 and IMR-4227 are best. You can not get enough Reloder 7 in the case to reach HV velocities.

A published 23.5gr of Reloder 7 with a 240gr...yes, 240gr lead bullet will give you 1,250fps at less than SAAMI max pressures. This is an unpopular powder because guys don't like the left over powder, called "skeletons" that stay behind in the barrel, chamber and anywhere else. Small price to pay for the best accuracy when properly loaded with a 220gr lead bullet @ 1,350fps. The powder burns too slow for revolvers and velocity suffers.

2400 and IMR-4227 were mid-range rifle powders years before they adopted the "Magnum" name. IMR-4227 is what I use for 260 yard shots at nearly 1,700fps in my Marlin 1894CB.

Here are my test results and the loads I call me "go-to" loads because of my test results. They include the popular Lyman published max loads.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...ko5yReJ9a-ER32YsENTgJGJs4/edit#gid=2085097263

It is extremely important to understand that the shooter can exceed the strength of the firearm before any of the popular "over-pressure" signs can be seen on the 44-40 cases.

 

[ligonierbill]

Thanks. Unfortunately, I'm in the "weak action" section with an Italian repro '73. The upside is I use the same loads in the rifle and my repro "Frontiersman" revolvers. Certainly enjoying the old 44.

 

[Savvy_Jack]

Thanks. Unfortunately, I'm in the "weak action" section with an Italian repro '73. The upside is I use the same loads in the rifle and my repro "Frontiersman" revolvers. Certainly enjoying the old 44.

I'd say the next best thing for both rifle and revolver is Unique. That is best for the revolver and second best for the rifle. Although I have never used it yet, Bullseye should come in third.

For Plinking, I use Trail Boss in both. Slow velocities but still very accurate. For rifle, I get right at 1,000fps but can still ding at 265 yards.

 

[ligonierbill]

Oh yeah, Unique is what I use if I'm going smokeless. Usually I shoot on the dark side, Black MZ (no longer produced) or FFg. But 8.8 gr Unique yields 845 fps from a 4 3/4" Cimarron P and 1,270 from a 24" Navy Arms 1873, both made by Uberti. Shooting Hunters Supply 0.427 200 gr cast.

 

[Scorch]

Most HV rifle/pistol cartridges were dropped after the 1950s due to legal liability. They were high-pressure cartridges designed for rifles that fit into a revolver chambered for the same cartridge. NOT a good idea. Many, many revolvers were turned into magnetic debris by high-velocity cartridges. Famously, a 32-20 HV cartridge could launch a 100 gr bullet at 1,900 fps out of a rifle, compared to 1,400 fps for a standard 32-20 out of a similar rifle. That same 32-20 HV cartridge could be fired in a small-frame Colt Police Positive or a small-frame S&W revolver (both chambered for 32-20 cartridge), often damaging the firearm and the user.

 

[ligonierbill]

Loading data still includes different rifle and pistol data, and 32-20 is the one cartridge that I have loaded differently. Until I sold my rifle recently, I was running high velocity loads. Today there are a fair number of '92s around, including new repros, but it has been awhile since anyone chambered a revolver in 32-20. Anyone loading for a pistol needs to take care in reviewing published data.

My revolver is a pretty strong Colt Official Police, circa 1923, but I would never put one of the rifle loads in it. One reason I sold the rifle.

 

[Jim Watson]

it has been awhile since anyone chambered a revolver in 32-20.

Buffalo Arms shows .32-20 SAAs although not in stock.
I doubt a .32-20 WHV would bother a revolver also made in .357 Magnum.

I have seen several theories about the relatively high incidence of bulged barrels in .32-20 revolvers, especially S&W M&P .32.

 

[Savvy_Jack]

All speculations folks. Post facts and keep the speculations as such.

Yeap, never could figure out why all of a sudden productions stops on these but yet soar for the 45-70's, 45 Colts and a few others. I guess those are smart shooters and those that shoot the 44-40 and 32-40 are just idiots.

I can assure you if it can sell, they will sell it. If they couldn't, Buffalo Bore would not be in business.

If it is a popular load, it's okay....if not...it's because it blows guns up...

Winchester manufactured the 44-40 HV from 1903 to about 1945. I guess after 42 years of blowing up revolvers and 73', Winchester finally pulled them from the shelves? Or did people just all of a sudden become stupid? See how silly that sounds?

 

[Jim Watson]

By 1945, two wars had taught the advantages of really powerful bolt actions and automatics. I SPECULATE that they did not sell enough souped up .44s to bother with.

I saw .32-20 HV in the ammo tables of 1960 Gun Digest. Last of the heavy loads stll in production or just a carryover in print? I don't know and I don't have a real catalog of that era.

The guy I bought my 1892 from had used old heavy reload data but the little Browning patent does not show undue wear. I loaded the nitro-for-black, ample for CAS.

 

[Savvy_Jack]

By 1945, two wars had taught the advantages of really powerful bolt actions and automatics.

That would be my guess!

 

[Mike Irwin]

" They were high-pressure cartridges designed for rifles that fit into a revolver chambered for the same cartridge."

The various high velocity variants were also well known for taking the side plates off of older BP Winchester 1873s. Apparently the weak toggle closure would fail and allow the case head to back out and blow out, dumping a bunch of high pressure gas into the receiver.

 

[Savvy_Jack]

" They were high-pressure cartridges designed for rifles that fit into a revolver chambered for the same cartridge."

The various high velocity variants were also well known for taking the side plates off of older BP Winchester 1873s. Apparently the weak toggle closure would fail and allow the case head to back out and blow out, dumping a bunch of high pressure gas into the receiver.

Let me help you out a little bit. Lets rephrase that a little so it sounds a little more positive rather than negative.

Here ya go....... "They were high-pressure cartridges designed for the Winchester Model 1892. to give better ballistics than it's ancestors. The cartridge was manufactured from 1903 to 1945, nearly 45 years of great service before being phased out by better high power cartridges after WWII."

Of over 42 years in service...a whole Generation..., (by Winchester, Remington, Peters and a few others) I have seen how many blown rifles by morons that don't know how to read? How many blown Springfield 73' do we see by folks using loads that exceed Springfield pressures? HOw many shotguns? How many Colts to we see blown by using handloads with too much pressure? How many 357 and 44 Magnums do we see blown by guys loading them too hot? A hell of a lot more than any 44-40's. Have you worked at your job for 42 years yet?

"Apparently"?

Yes, words from folks that the 44-40 was available for a variety of loads suitable for many jobs. From 140gr small game loads to 250gr handloads back in the 30's (of which I have no desire to shoot), to shot game loads in various sizes....and yes, High Velocity loads to reach out there and touch something with a bit less trajectory.

I have never in my life seen a bunch of pansies so scared of the words "High Velocity" before. Lets make hot loads for everything out there BUT the 44-40 because.....oh never mind.


What's wrong with you? You read too much, drink too much red cool aid!

Still a pretty cool Draw Set though or did you forget what the topic was all bout?

 

[Mike Irwin]

Sure... LOTS of things positive about the side plates of your 1873 spinning off because you loaded an HV into your rifle...

Sparks! Smoke! Excitement!



Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

 

[Mike Irwin]

But, I guess the .44-40 HV load that wasn't really high velocity or high pressure....


Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

 

[Mike Irwin]

Oh, and apparently you didn't care what your original post was about, or you.... forgot...., when you started yapping about Unique and Trail Boss and handloads...

Nice draw set, though.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

 

[Savvy_Jack]

Yeah, nice draw set

No, don't shoot HV loads in Winchester 73'. Any caveman knows better. Its just that some folks on these forms, staff members directly, just cant help but make remarks about them. They just can't stand it!

They are so dangerous, and after 42 years of manufacturing by at least four ammunitions factories....today...even Lyman's 49th handloading manual lists High Velocity loads for use in the Strong Action rifles like the model 92'...enjoy!

 

[ghbucky]

I got no dog in this argument, but I would like to take a risk of detouring back to the OP and ask:

What is a 'draw set'?