|
Post by potatojudge on May 4, 2021 19:15:02 GMT -5
What's the vintage glass you have set back? Kahles Super Helia variable or a Schmidt and Bender 6x. One goes on this, the other on a Husqvarna 1640 in 243. Sounds like Burris 1 inch rings with the plastic inserts might work with the inserts removed. I’ll have to dig a set out of the parts bin tonight.
|
|
jwp475
.375 Atomic
Posts: 1,084
|
Post by jwp475 on May 18, 2021 10:29:01 GMT -5
Beautiful rifle.
|
|
jwp475
.375 Atomic
Posts: 1,084
|
Post by jwp475 on May 18, 2021 12:07:41 GMT -5
What are the differences of the B78 VS the 1885 Highwall
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on May 18, 2021 16:15:09 GMT -5
Well I thought a 26 mm tube probably meant 1 inch, nope. That was an old Kahles Helia Super 3-9. So I sourced an old Schmidt and Bender 6x42 that was sold as a 1 inch tube. Turned out to be 26mm too! So I’m at a crossroads. Just use a 1 inch gloss Leupold, which won’t match the gun like a steel tube would, source uncommon 26mm Leupold rings to fit the bases, or buy a PTG reamer and make these 1 inch rings 26mm. Or break down and put 30mm rings on it and go with other vintage glass I’ve got set back. Edit: or use 26mm reducers in 30mm rings, a $15 fix. Also, reaming scope rings sounds like a losing proposition from what I read. ***** My Remingtion M6 .308 pump carbine mounts a Schmidt & Bender 4x36mm----with 26mm tube----via Holden Iron Sighter base/ring setup. 26 mm is too thick to accept most 1-inch rings. The Holden Iron Sighter is the best of all see-through mounts. Raises the scope to the dignity of a carry handle, which a stand hunter might not appreciate. Leupold 26mm rings would be the cream, if you can find ‘em. David Bradshaw
|
|
rvolvr
.30 Stingray
Posts: 275
|
Post by rvolvr on May 18, 2021 19:08:52 GMT -5
What are the differences of the B78 VS the 1885 Highwall The B-78 was first listed in Gun Digest in the 1974 edition, and continued thru 1984. The 1885 was introduced in 1985, but didn't make that GD edition, showing first in the 1986 book. The only difference I can see is the 78 had a pistol grip and Monte Carlo comb, while the 1885 was/is a straight grip, and no Monte Carlo. Descriptions for both are otherwise pretty much identical. Both made in Japan.
|
|
|
Post by potatojudge on May 18, 2021 20:57:39 GMT -5
What are the differences of the B78 VS the 1885 Highwall I think the main internal difference is the more complicated trigger mechanism in the B78
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on May 19, 2021 7:22:41 GMT -5
What are the differences of the B78 VS the 1885 Highwall I think the main internal difference is the more complicated trigger mechanism in the B78 ***** Very interesting. I know guys who will buy a Belgian FN in a minute, yet wrinkle their nose at the same gun made in Japan by Miroku. I was offered my choice between Beretta and Miroku over/unders, and Spanish side-by-sides to shoot pheasants in England. (The English call it shooting, not hunting.) I selected a Miroku over/under. Not that the Beretta is not damn good. A lot of ammo gets poured through these guns, and I was told the Miroku exhibit very high durability, with the Berettas right up their. Spanish and English shotguns exhibit much higher downtime. Years ago, Fran Longtin, the service manager for law enforcement at S&W, described Japanese manufacturing this way: “When I show a specification package at the factory in Japan, they say, ‘Is that all you want?’ When I show the same specification package here, they want to argue.” (Note: Smith & Wesson was owned by Bangor Punta at the time.) I would a appreciate a tutorial on Browning models 78 and 1885 lockwork. The guts of Bill Ruger’s No. 1 are pure simplicity, which encouraged me to hunt these guns in nasty weather without a thought. Knowing it’s a simple teardown at the end of the day. David Bradshaw
|
|
|
Post by dutchman on May 19, 2021 12:38:24 GMT -5
I think the main internal difference is the more complicated trigger mechanism in the B78 ***** Bangor Punta Haven't heard that in a long time - my first wife had one of those . . .
|
|
rvolvr
.30 Stingray
Posts: 275
|
Post by rvolvr on May 20, 2021 14:45:12 GMT -5
I think the main internal difference is the more complicated trigger mechanism in the B78 ***** I would a appreciate a tutorial on Browning models 78 and 1885 lockwork.... David Bradshaw A google search for " comparison of Browning B78 and 1885 actions", in response to David's comment, instantly located the following very good article www.texas-mac.com/Comparing_Brownings_Model_1885_and_B-78_Rifles.htmlas well as several discussions on well-known forums.
|
|
|
Post by kings6 on May 20, 2021 14:46:43 GMT -5
I know the gunsmith who I had install a Canjar trigger on my 7mag B-78 said never again. Not sure if it was in response to the factory trigger set up of the Canjar parts.
|
|
rvolvr
.30 Stingray
Posts: 275
|
Post by rvolvr on May 20, 2021 16:58:43 GMT -5
I purchased a slightly used 1885 in .45-70 from a friend in 1994, and have thoroughly enjoyed it ever since. It's a beautiful gun, with two exceptions - both strictly cosmetic. There's the standard Browning "gold-plated" trigger, which my classic tastes see as border-line bling. And, there's the "hole" behind the hammer, reminiscent of a Super Blackhawk Hammer in a Bisley grip frame. But, with the beautiful classic stock lines, 28 in. octagon barrel, incredibly sexy Hi-Wall action, and decent wood, I have willingly overlooked these minor irregularities. I've been a very faithful Ruger customer for a lot of years, with a #1-B in 7 Mag as my very first "store-bought" hunting rifle, and a #1-S in .45-70 purchased several years later. Much as I like them, if I absolutely HAD to sell any guns today, those two Rugers would go before the Browning.
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on May 20, 2021 19:43:27 GMT -5
I purchased a slightly used 1885 in .45-70 from a friend in 1994, and have thoroughly enjoyed it ever since. It's a beautiful gun, with two exceptions - both strictly cosmetic. There's the standard Browning "gold-plated" trigger, which my classic tastes see as border-line bling. And, there's the "hole" behind the hammer, reminiscent of a Super Blackhawk Hammer in a Bisley grip frame. But, with the beautiful classic stock lines, 28 in. octagon barrel, incredibly sexy Hi-Wall action, and decent wood, I have willingly overlooked these minor irregularities. I've been a very faithful Ruger customer for a lot of years, with a #1-B in 7 Mag as my very first "store-bought" hunting rifle, and a #1-S in .45-70 purchased several years later. Much as I like them, if I absolutely HAD to sell any guns today, those two Rugers would go before the Browning. ***** By chance, would you have brought your heavy octagon .45-70 to the Firing Line at the conclusion of an IHMSA silhouette match in Pelham, New Hampshire, to share with the steel shooters for an impromptu go on rams @ 200 meters? If so, I took my turn. We shot heavy, cast bullets, and the rifle was dialed in. Octagon pullman axle of a barrel, beaucoup heavy for an offhand, but that’s the way we shot. David Bradshaw
|
|
rvolvr
.30 Stingray
Posts: 275
|
Post by rvolvr on May 20, 2021 20:16:45 GMT -5
I purchased a slightly used 1885 in .45-70 from a friend in 1994, and have thoroughly enjoyed it ever since. It's a beautiful gun, with two exceptions - both strictly cosmetic. There's the standard Browning "gold-plated" trigger, which my classic tastes see as border-line bling. And, there's the "hole" behind the hammer, reminiscent of a Super Blackhawk Hammer in a Bisley grip frame. But, with the beautiful classic stock lines, 28 in. octagon barrel, incredibly sexy Hi-Wall action, and decent wood, I have willingly overlooked these minor irregularities. I've been a very faithful Ruger customer for a lot of years, with a #1-B in 7 Mag as my very first "store-bought" hunting rifle, and a #1-S in .45-70 purchased several years later. Much as I like them, if I absolutely HAD to sell any guns today, those two Rugers would go before the Browning. ***** By chance, would you have brought your heavy octagon .45-70 to the Firing Line at the conclusion of an IHMSA silhouette match in Pelham, New Hampshire, to share with the steel shooters for an impromptu go on rams @ 200 meters? If so, I took my turn. We shot heavy, cast bullets, and the rifle was dialed in. Octagon pullman axle of a barrel, beaucoup heavy for an offhand, but that’s the way we shot. David Bradshaw No, unfortunately, it wasn't me. Although I shot a couple matches at Pelham, that was in the early 80s, well before I acquired my 1885. My gun is factory stock. The barrel starts out round (dia. 1.165 in.) immediately forward of the chamber. At approx. 0.75 in. forward, it transitions rapidly to octagon such that at 1.250 in. forward, it's full octagon at 1.050 in. across. It then tapers straight to the muzzle, measuring 0.735 in. across, ending at 27-3/4 in. total length. It must have been a blast to shoot 200 m rams. Wish I was there!
|
|
|
Post by bradshaw on May 21, 2021 8:26:29 GMT -5
***** By chance, would you have brought your heavy octagon .45-70 to the Firing Line at the conclusion of an IHMSA silhouette match in Pelham, New Hampshire, to share with the steel shooters for an impromptu go on rams @ 200 meters? If so, I took my turn. We shot heavy, cast bullets, and the rifle was dialed in. Octagon pullman axle of a barrel, beaucoup heavy for an offhand, but that’s the way we shot. David Bradshaw No, unfortunately, it wasn't me. Although I shot a couple matches at Pelham, that was in the early 80s, well before I acquired my 1885. My gun is factory stock. The barrel starts out round (dia. 1.165 in.) immediately forward of the chamber. At approx. 0.075 in. forward, it transitions rapidly to octagon such that at 1.250 in. forward, it's full octagon at 1.050 in. across. It then tapers straight to the muzzle, measuring 0.735 in. across, ending at 27-3/4 in. total length. It must have been a blast to shoot 200 m rams. Wish I was there! ***** rvolvr.... looking back, the rifles don’t match. Nor the timing. The Browning B-78 an IHMSA shooter brought to the line for after-match fun had a HEAVY octagon barrel, probably 30 or 32-inches. Semi-pistol grip stock. Globe front sight with bead. Vernier rear sight. The trigger was horrible. It would take three Ruger No. 1 triggers to weight that much, and together they’d be smoother! I knew I had to Hold & SQUEEZE. In this case, I’d rather have a The temptation on a lousy trigger is to lose patience. In this case, I’d much rather have that junkyard trigger on a light rifle for offhand. The.45-70’s ZERO was not right for me. Squeezing the bead center of the ram's 12-inch back-to-belly line, my shot slipped just under @ 200 meters. Chambering another of the big lipstick bullets, my bead now hovered on the line of the back. BOOM!... CLANK! The big bullets are easy to spot. David Bradshaw
|
|
jwp475
.375 Atomic
Posts: 1,084
|
Post by jwp475 on May 21, 2021 17:29:55 GMT -5
The 1885 Highwall that I had rebored to 35 Whelen had a very nice trigger pull when I purchased. My bolt rifles are set at about 2 pounds and crisp. My 1885 trigger was/is good enough as it came to be very close to my bolt rifles.
|
|