C. Sharps Arms 45-70 power level

[de1216]

Howdy folks,

What input would y'all have on how high in the power level can you go with 45-70 in the C. Sharps Arms (Montana) rifles?

Can they safely handle the same heavy loads (whether handloads or factory heavies from Garrett etc) as a Ruger No. 1 set up with long barrel like the Lyman Centennial Edition?

I am weighing whether to spend $ on removing the Ruger safety and having a quality vernier tang sight and appropriate front sight installed, or sell the Ruger and get a C. Sharps reproduction 1874 Sharps or Winchester 1885.

The Lyman Centennial scope isn't satisfactory.

Does the Ruger barrel quality merit the investment?

D.

[dhd]

Either of the rifles you listed are considered very strong. Shiloh Sharps rifles are considered very strong too. Handling the recoil of heavy loads needs a heavy rifle or the willingness to take the butt whipping to come. Not my idea of fun.

To add a tang for the attachment of a rear staff to the Ruger is possible (Google it) the trigger won't be quite the same. I also seem to remember the safety will either gone or modified and a longer and larger barrel will be part of the deal. None the less, some of the conversions will begin to look like the English long range target rifles, what I personally consider very beautiful rifles. A not inexpensive undertaking.

Now a C Sharps 1874 with the above would be an easy purchase and ready to go from them. Now you add better wood, pewter fore end cap, good sights, and have the barrel drilled and tapped for MVA scope bases and scope. Quite pricy also.

I have a C Sharps 1885 45 2.1" set up as a heavy target rifle (minus the scope) and it lacks for nothing accuracy wise. Never has it seen a jacketed bullet or smokeless powder.

My eyes like a Remington no3 (Hepburn) or a Sharps 1878 best. I also am a proud owner of a Dave Crossno Remington no3.

[500fksjr]

Oct 3, 2017 9:41:11 GMT -5 dhd said:

Either of the rifles you listed are considered very strong. Shiloh Sharps rifles are considered very strong too. Handling the recoil of heavy loads needs a heavy rifle or the willingness to take the butt whipping to come. Not my idea of fun.

To add a tang for the attachment of a rear staff to the Ruger is possible (Google it) the trigger won't be quite the same. I also seem to remember the safety will either gone or modified and a longer and larger barrel will be part of the deal. None the less, some of the conversions will begin to look like the English long range target rifles, what I personally consider very beautiful rifles. A not inexpensive undertaking.

Now a C Sharps 1874 with the above would be an easy purchase and ready to go from them. Now you add better wood, pewter fore end cap, good sights, and have the barrel drilled and tapped for MVA scope bases and scope. Quite pricy also.

I have a C Sharps 1885 45 2.1" set up as a heavy target rifle (minus the scope) and it lacks for nothing accuracy wise. Never has it seen a jacketed bullet or smokeless powder.

My eyes like a Remington no3 (Hepburn) or a Sharps 1878 best. I also am a proud owner of a Dave Crossno Remington no3.

Ditto....I have a C Sharps 74 in 50 alaskan...its a mouthful to shoot but its fun for a few rounds !!!

[Deleted]

de1216,

I have a email from the production manager at C Sharps answering your question. Send me a PM with your email.

[nolongcolt]

Have the rifle in question but shoot mainly blackpowder in it. Its a strong rifle but not like the Ruger. If you want to shoot smokeless barn burner loads get a Ruger. The Sharps are fine with Trapdoor equivalent factory loads and a bit more if wanted but it wont take the pounding the Ruger will.

[pacecars]

I know that the Shiloh people will tell you there rifles will take Ruger loads in .45-70. I only shoot BP in my Shilohs and don't own a C Sharps so can't really help you there but I would imagine a call to the good folks in Montana would help.

[dhd]

Oct 5, 2017 16:38:21 GMT -5 pacecars said:

I know that the Shiloh people will tell you there rifles will take Ruger loads in .45-70. I only shoot BP in my Shilohs and don't own a C Sharps so can't really help you there but I would imagine a call to the good folks in Montana would help.

They'll say the same. It's been a while since mine came from Big Timber, but I asked and was told it could take any factory 45/70 ammo. John Schoffstall did tell me they were intended for Black Powder, but the rifle's strength was not an issue. Consider the modern steels and the size of the action and block compared to a No1.

I intended to load white powder in mine, but I either came to my senses or sobered up and never fouled the bore with white powder or (I can't believe I can even say this) a copper jacketed bullet.


I just had a taste of vomit in mouth even thinking of a copper jacketed bullet and white powder in a Sharps (or Winchester Highwall either). Where is that bottle of bourbon......

[de1216]

None of my 45-70 rifles have been fed jacketed since I got them ..... Marlin 1895 & 1895CB, Ruger No. 1 with 22" bbl, and a Lyman Centennial model. Likely will part with the Lyman Centennial to put funds to a C. Sharps 1874 or their 1885 Winchester replica.

The things remaining on "The list" are getting into the expensive category. Takes longer now to check something off the list.

I see a few Lyman Centennial No. 1 rifles lingering a long time at the price point the seller is asking. Like anything else, maybe eventually someone will want one bad enough to pay that much if the seller feels like waiting long enough. Wonder how much it will cost to have one of those shipped considering the weight of the wooden case added in with everything else in the package? I bought mine locally and only had to deal with carrying it to/from the car.

D.

[dhd]

This is just a FWIW, from me to you, but having bought the 1885 instead of the 1874, if I had to do it all over again, I would have gotten the 1874. Personal reasons mainly (stock shape and triggers), but as far as accuracy goes, I could not be happier and don't know how it could be better! The scopes from MVA were not made yet, so I couldn't have gotten it drilled and tapped for them. I would not even consider buying one without it being drilled and tapped regardless of what brand of tang/front sight you use. Just like everything else, you get what you pay for on tang sights. Repeatability rules and cheap sights don't make the cut for long......

I don't know what your list is but I can make an educated guess. You really only get one chance at the wood upgrade and you are the only one that will regret not getting it. Get it. Checkering? I have one with and one without. Makes no difference to me except the one without is easier to fix any booboos that will invariably happen. Shotgun butt! Barrel length should be longer, not shorter within reason. 30" is about perfect and heavier is better to me. Mine are both what C Sharps would list as Heavy No 1 and get as fast as a twist as they will go. No downside to a faster twist, but the reverse is not true. If your wallet will allow, go with MVA or Baldwin tang sights and their corresponding front globe with spirit level. If you plan to hunt with it, the barrel sight by C Sharps is not bad, hut neither rifle I have has them and would not want them (don't hunt with mine). If you don't cast, consider it! I have about $1500 in moulds for both of mine and have found the better the mould, the better the bullet and accuracy. I go heavy, not light on mine. I won't get into lubes, Paper Patching, or black powder here as my thumbs would fall off before I got it all typed in....

[de1216]

Pretty close to deciding to part with my Ruger Lyman Centennial. I really want the C. Sharps 1874, although the cost to put a MVA scope on the Ruger in place of the Lyman that came with it is still WAY less than the price for a C. Sharps.

Keep an eye on Ruger Forum.... If I let it go I'll post there and also refer to it here.

D.

[rkcohen]

no.

that's what the folks at Shiloh will tell you - look at lever gun pressures and you're "on it"

just curious what - what are you shooting at that needs more power than that?

[bradshaw]

Oct 11, 2017 16:28:47 GMT -5 dhd said:

This is just a FWIW, from me to you, but having bought the 1885 instead of the 1874, if I had to do it all over again, I would have gotten the 1874. Personal reasons mainly (stock shape and triggers), but as far as accuracy goes, I could not be happier and don't know how it could be better! The scopes from MVA were not made yet, so I couldn't have gotten it drilled and tapped for them. I would not even consider buying one without it being drilled and tapped regardless of what brand of tang/front sight you use. Just like everything else, you get what you pay for on tang sights. Repeatability rules and cheap sights don't make the cut for long......

I don't know what your list is but I can make an educated guess. You really only get one chance at the wood upgrade and you are the only one that will regret not getting it. Get it. Checkering? I have one with and one without. Makes no difference to me except the one without is easier to fix any booboos that will invariably happen. Shotgun butt! Barrel length should be longer, not shorter within reason. 30" is about perfect and heavier is better to me. Mine are both what C Sharps would list as Heavy No 1 and get as fast as a twist as they will go. No downside to a faster twist, but the reverse is not true. If your wallet will allow, go with MVA or Baldwin tang sights and their corresponding front globe with spirit level. If you plan to hunt with it, the barrel sight by C Sharps is not bad, hut neither rifle I have has them and would not want them (don't hunt with mine). If you don't cast, consider it! I have about $1500 in moulds for both of mine and have found the better the mould, the better the bullet and accuracy. I go heavy, not light on mine. I won't get into lubes, Paper Patching, or black powder here as my thumbs would fall off before I got it all typed in....

*****

dhd.... bandage your fingers and type. There’s plenty of room for intelligent reviews of single shots.

de1216, with the original thread.... Strong as these American Sharps may be----brilliant design----intuitively and aesthetically it makes no sense to pretend it is a modern High Power rifle. On the firing pin alone, I would be leary of stuffing the old side hammer with crater-makers tailored to a Ruger Number One.
David Bradshaw

[dhd]

That's high praise coming from you David. I've spent a lot of time with them, but there are others with way more knowledge than I'll ever have. I learned through asking questions, bought only great quality molds, use mainly Swiss powder, and bought fantastic quality rifles/barrels/sights.

Paper patching is coming back into it's own and while it can be another steep learning curve, they can be made to out shoot grease groove bullets. You can't shoot them as quickly (rounds per minute not speed) so it's hard to compete under the clock using them.

I've described loading properly for a BPCR as a graduate course in reloading. It part of the reason I enjoy shooting these revolvers with my own cast bullets. It's all in the details and you can't ignore any of it and get the gilt edge accuracy I desire.

Let's see, brass that fits the chamber correctly (plan on annealing the brass), proper dies (up to 5 per caliber), quality powder of the proper granulation, proper compression of that powder,  proper alloy!!!!, fast twist for caliber, proper cleaning (actually easy), and as far as the shooting goes follow through is a must. OK, I'm OCD with my toys, but it works....

[de1216]

Certainly there is nothing here in Delaware that requires extreme powered rifles. My refridgerator would be a challenge to stop mid-charge, but it's not likely to do so nor eat my liver.

If all the gun purchases that were motivated by "just because" never happened, the gun trade would be entirely different.

I see a lot of vehicles on the road driven by folks who will never likely "top-end" their car.

No big bears or cape buff in my world, but I do have a place to shoot across 3 farms' distance at fox, coyote and woodchucks with the appropriate rifle


D.

[pacecars]

Of all the Shiloh rifles I have owned I only shot smokeless in one and that was a .40-50 SBN and that was just because I found a great deal on commercially loaded ammo and it was cheaper to get the brass that way. I felt dirty after I did it. The .40-70 SBN, .45-70, .45-100 and .50-70 have all been loaded with black powder. If you want a .45-70 for max loads just go with a Ruger No.1, the Sharps are meant for BP nd are at their best with it