r i

c

1

The Magazine for Shooters (ISSN 01 62-35831

Volume 14, Number 3 May- June 1982

IN THIS ISSUE DEPARTMENTS

Lenard M Brownell, 1922-1982 ............................. 7

18

22

28

Two-Ounce Conversions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Stuart Otteson 29

Mach I11 Handgun. .......................... Philip Briggs 32

Versatile Rifles ............................ Ronald E Elbe 34

.460 Weatherby - How Good? . . . . . . . . . . . . . John Del Savio 36

1903 Springfield .......................... Frank de Haas 38

40

Pushbutton Ballistics ...................... Edgar 1 Young

Safari Rifle.. ................................ Ken Howell

Bullet Performance on Big Game. . . . . . . . . . . Mike Venturino

Accuracy of Model 70s. . . . . . . . . Richard R Golze S Don Zutz

Spotting Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - 5

Dear Editor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Rifle Patents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Classic Rifles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

American Gunmakers. . . . . . . . . . 14

Aiming for Answers . . . . . . . . . . . 1 6

Trophy Pointers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6

ON THE COVER

The Big Five Masterpiece Collection of fine - *

hunting rifles is off to a good start with this, the first of five commissioned by Safari Club International. For a closer look at this work of fine art, see the photo series in this issue. Photograph by Tom Turpin

Rifle Magazine, copyright 1982. is published bimonthly by Wolfe Publishing Co.. Inc.. (Dave Wolfe. President) P.O. Box 3030, Prescott. Arizona 86302. Telephone (602) 445-7810. Second Class Postage paid at Prescott. Arizona and additional mailing offices. Single copy price of current issues . $2.50. Subscription price: six issues - $13.00, 12 issues . $25.00; 18 issues - $37.00. (Outside U.S. possessions and Canada . $16.00, $31 00 and $46.00.1 Recommended foreign single copy price - $3.00 Advertising rates furnished on request. All rights reserved.

Publisher of Rifle is not responsible for mishaps of any nature which might occur from use of published data. or from recommendations by any member of The Staff. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written permission from the editor. Manuscripts from free-lance writers must be accompanied by stamped self-addressed envelope and the publisher cannot accept responsibility for lost or mutilated manuscripts.

Change of address: please give six weeks' notice. Send both old and new address, plus mailing label if possible, to Circulation Cept.. Rifle Magazine, P.O. Box 3030, Prescott. Arizona 66302

The Staff Dave Wolfe, Publisher Ken Howell, Editor Jana KOSCO, Advertising Manager Wyatt Keith, Assistant Editor Dave LeGate, Art Director Mark Harris, Staff Artist Barbara Pickering, production Supervisor Joyce Bueter, Circulation Director Susan Barney, Circulation Manager Terry Bueter, Accounting Shelley Goff, Executive Secretary R.T. Wolfe, Ph.D., Consultant

Technical Editors

John Bivins Bob Brackney Bob Hagel A1 Miller Ludwig Olson Stuart Otteson Homer Powley Layne Simpson Ken Waters

4 RIFLE 81

ONE-TIMER was the Colt- companion rifle taking the same A Burgess. In production for a ammunition as the Colt Frontier little more than a single year, it was single-actionrevolver. Colt’s sole venture into the competi- tive production of lever-action rifles that began in the 1880s.

Buyers were given the choice Of a rifle with a twenty-five-inch octagon, half-octagon. or round barrel. Least

” I - -

Product of the fertile design genius popular was’ the half-octagon. Longer of Andrew Burgess, that prolific barrels could be ordered for an addi- firearms inventor from Owego, New tional charge of one dollar per inch. York, the rifle that Colt referred-to as their magazine rifle,, had its The over-all length of the rifle was beginning in 1882, when the big manu- 42-314 inches. Carbines weighed 7-114

to design a lever-action rifle for them. 8-112 pounds; and octagon-barrel rifles weighed 8-314 Dounds.

Evidently, Burgess lost no time in

from his experience with the earlier length to the muzzle. The 1883 Colt

and patent a stronger action that as twelve for the carbine and fifteen

as 9, 1883 - the date that the verbatim here because it is not clear to first Colt-Burgess rifle was manu- me whether those numbers refer to

magazine capacity alone or include a factured. cartridge in the chamber.

Although the action was actuated by a linkage arrangement between All the rifles were fitted with curved lever and breechbolt, this time, rifle-style butt plates, and tRe carbines Burgess used a solid link incorporat- had the typical reversecurve carbine ing such an increase in action strength butt. Steel plates were used on both as to render it far stronger than its types.

I

facturer of skguns engaged Burgess pounds; round-barrel rifles weighed

going to work on the project, profiting

Whitney-Burgess design to develop

could be put into production as early

The magazines were all full-

catalog listed the “number Of shots”

for the rifle- The catalog is quoted

most popular competitor, the Model 1873 Winchester.

Like that famous rifle, the Colt- Burgess was chambered for the .44 Winchester cartridge, which was later to be dubbed the .44-40. Unlike the Winchester, however, that was the only cartridge for which it was offered. Obviously, the intent was to provide a

The illustration at the left shows a standard version of the Colt-Burgess sporting rifle - with the octagon barrel that most of these rifles had, by a ratio of more than two to one. The rare de luxe specimen below was a special-order rifle with a finely checkered pistol-grip stock and a silver initial or monogram plate inlaid in the butt stock.

In his book The Rifle in America, Phil Sharpe stated that there was no record of a Colt-Burgess rifle having been produced with a pistol-grip stock, but as my photograph shows, there was a t least one such rifle made. To set the record straight, note also that the correct length of the rifle barrel was twenty-five inches rather than twenty- four, a fact borne out by the old Colt catalog.

Most Colt-Burgess rifles and carbines were plain sporting arms without checkering or other embellish- ment. However, the rifle in the photo-

1 2 RIFLE 81

graph has finely executed checkering on a good grade of walnut, and the photograph of a ColtiBurgess rifle in Haven and Belden’s book A History of the Colt Revolver shows an exceptionally handsome stock with somewhat unusual checkering pattern, as well as an engraved receiver, attesting to the fact that some of these rifles were produced in fancy grades.

The standard finish combined a color case-hardened receiver, lever, and hammer with the barrel either blued or browned, as was the tubular magazine. The sights were the usual pairing of a german-silver blade in front and a leaf with a notched elevator set in a barrel dovetail in the rear.

Prices listed in the 1883 catalog were twenty-five dollars for the carbine, twenty-seven for a plain sporting rifle with a round barrel, and twenty-nine for a rifle with either an octagon or a half-octagon barrel.

rifles and carbines were produced, with approximately six out of ten

\ being rifles. About two thirds of the rifles were made with octagon barrels. The Colt-Burgess was discontinued in November, 1884, after a mere sixteen months in production. Story has it that Winchester, fearing the competition that this superior rifle would pose for their weaker-actioned Model 1873, sought to induce Colt to give up the manufacturing of lever- action rifles. Winchester had plans to produce a revolver, and knowledge of these plans may well have been the motivation for Colt’s decision to drop the Burgess rifle.

Whether this is a fact or merely a happenstance, I can’t say. Colt engi- neers were already working on the design for their “Lightning” slide- action rifle, and there may have been a decision to concentrate on it rather than to have two types of rifles. Almost a hundred years later, all this is sheer conjecture. The facts aren’t known.

Colt-Burgess rifles are splendid pieces for collectors and should be preserved as such. This does not mean

loaded .44-40 cartridges are purposely loaded to low pressures and velocities and would be perfectly safe in one of these rifles in good, sound condition. But no high-speed handload should be used! And if such a rifle is fired, it should be cleaned well before it is put away. I t is not use but rather abuse that destroys the value of a collector- grade firearm. 0

I A total of only 6,403 Colt-Burgess

’

1 that they shouldn’t be fired. Factory-

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A HIT AND A MISS. YOU AND A ZElSS RIFLESCOPE

The introduction of the new C-Series riflescopes marks another Zeiss breakthrough for the American hunter. Tested against the three leading scopes sold in the United States, our new Zeiss riflescopes withstood grueling tests to prove that these scopes offer you the best in total perform- ance. Brilliant image quality, high light transmission, precision wind-

age and elevation adjustment, shock proof, water and fog proof- it’s all there and more!

To compare for yourself, the scope that could mean the dif- ference between a hit and a miss, see your local Zeiss dealer or call 800/446-1807. We think you’ll agree-the name makes the dif- ference but the difference made the name.

Carl Zeiss Inc , OneZeiss Drive. Thornwood, NY 10594

MAY-JUNE 1982

r

1 '1 Llbrary

The Art of Bullet Casting

This is a reprint of all the Donaldson Handloader over the years, plus previo

Softbound, $9.95 Hardbound, $16.50

.

S SOON AS Remington came A out with their current two-ounce trigger in 1968 - which is nothing more than a rather straight-forward conversion of their production trigger - rival designs began to appear. Remington’s original two-ounce trigger was difficult and costly to make, and there was no imitator. In contrast, the current trigger is a natural for gunsmith conversions, four of which are examined here.

The delivery of the original Remington two-ounce triggers was often very slow, causing a lot of problems for gunsmiths who were constructing benchrest rifles. In 1967, a noted writer and benchrest com- petitor who was having exactly that kind of problem in getting his latest rifle put together managed to wangle a prototype of the new Remington trigger out of Ilion. He immediately shipped it down to the gunsmith who was building his dream rifle. When the gunsmith received it, he disassembled and examined it, and the business of two-ounce conversions was off and running. Some gunsmith conversions were probably available before the Remington version was.

The strip-down photographs shown here compare the details of the con- struction of four gunsmith conver- sions with the original Remington two- ounce trigger. Each was also tested for consistency of let-off, using the same procedures applied to the factory triggers.

Saunders’ conversion copies the

MAY-JUNE 1982

Remington pattern most faithfully, retaining even the spring-loaded mounting for the trigger connector strap. The others affix the connector solidly to the trigger piece, on the theory that this arrangement reduces the possibilities of variations in engagement each time the trigger resets.

Tests showed the let-off consistencies of these conversions to be roughly comparable with that of the Reming- ton version, with the exception of the Burns trigger, which seems to function more at the level of the Hart (original Remington) trigger. The numbers also tend to reflect the operating range of each trigger. With my samples of the first three, it was difficult to adjust let- off much lower than four ounces. In contrast, the Burns trigger didn’t seem to want to go much above three ounces.

As with the write-ups that I’ve been

doing for several years now on the design of bolt actions, my reasons for publishing such unuSually detailed analyses of benchrest triggers involve much more than just a purely academic interest in these little mechanisms. It is also my hope that an in-depth and inclusive survey of existing designs may ultimately encourage some of the more inventive and mechanically minded Rifle readers to improve the state of the art. While I can make no claim as either a &signer or a maker of triggers, I believe that several useful design principles for light-pull single-stage triggers are illus- trated in this series.

Most obvious is the fact that it is the elimination of friction that makes such a light-pull trigger possible in the first place. Soft, delicate springs mean very

I consistency Shilen Williams Saunders Burns

of let-off (ounces)

3.5 6.3 4.9 6.0 4.0 6.1 1.7 2.8 3.3 5.5 4.2 5.9 3.7 5.7 1.7 2.8

4.1 5.6 4.2 5.5 4.3 6.0 1.8 2.8

3.8 5.9 4.4 5.9 4.4 7.0 2.0 2.6

3.7 5.6 4.4 5.4 4.6 5.9 1.7 2.9

3.5 6.0 4.2 5.9 4.6 6.4 1.7 2.7 4.2 6.1 4.6 5.8 4.3 6.6 1.7 2.7

4.2 5.9 4.3 5.6 4.4 7.0 1.8 2.7 4.5 6.5 4.4 5.8 4.3 6.6 1.7 2.7 3.6 6.4 4.1 5.8 4.5 7.1 1.8 2.9

average 3.8 6.0 4.4 5.8 4.3 6.4 1.7 2.8 variation 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.9 1.4 0.3 0.3

2 9

little unless frictional forces within the trigger are brought under contiol first.

Perhaps equally critical, the internals must be at least roughly based on a ninety-degree relationship, with forces directed into the pivot of the trigger piece. Too much positive rake requires doing some work against the main- spring during the pull through disen- gagement. A negative rake, on the other hand, diminishes the stability of the trigger, leaving it more susceptible to run-downs and similar problems in the handling of the rifle.

Consistency of let-off is to a large measure a matter of eliminating any variation in how the disengagement surfaces come together each time the rifle is cocked. Any variation, either in length or in the angle of engagement, can make a big difference in the let-off point. The best designs even take into account the slight but necessary play on the pivot pins, forcing the parts to the same sides of their tolerance ranges each time the trigger resets.

The laws of mechanics commonly applied establish that the resistance to the movement of two flat surfaces sliding against each other is simply a product of the load that they support times their coefficient of friction. Thus as we smooth the surfaces or rearrange their internal relationship to reduce the load that presses them together, the let-off forces are decreased. As the performance of these triggers demon- strates, however, we must also con- sider the area of contact between the surfaces.

In set triggers, the weight of pull is in fact regulated purely by changing the engagement. Instructions accompany- ing the original Remington two-ounce trigger called for the same thing, so as to always leave the poundage spring with enough tension to reset the parts between cycles. Some makers of light- pull triggers, however, do recommend changing the compression of the poundage spring, while others don’t recommend much adjustment at all. Mike Walker, for example, feels that the triggers that he designed are not all that adjustable. You find the best engagement length, then set the spring in far enough to reliably reset and position the parts, and that’s about it.

While I could have explored several engagement points, I chose a fixed engagement, corresponding in each trigger to a finger movement of 0.010 inch. This was largely a practical decision, giving me a uniform basis for comparing the designs. As noted on page 32, Rifle 76, 0.010 inch can be

Unlike the earlier Remington trigger (pre-1968), the later two-ounce trigger largely utilizes standard com- ponents, making it economically more feasible.

taken as a reasonable maximum, only beyond which does creep become perceptible in the firing process.

The water cup that I used to load each trigger, while very accurate, was also overly time-consuming, somewhat analogous - but perhaps even worse - to measuring-out powder charges. For any of my future testing of match triggers, I would consider making a special spring scale with really sensitive graduations. This scale could save enough time to allow me to examine more settings in each trigger.

This series of trigger evaluations, which began in Rifle 77, has included all the commercially available light-pull (two-ounce) single-stage benchrest triggers that I could locate. Recog- nizing the fact that the Remington Model 700-40X action forms the basis of the modern benchrest rifle, each trigger has the Remington mounting system -two 0.125-inch cross-pins.

Below, I have ranked these triggers by their performance, simply com- puting the average variation in let- off (in ounces) from the figures given in each trigger write-up. Except for the Hart and Remington triggers, I tested only a single specimen of each trigger. Thus there is always the possibility of some discrepancy as a result of varia- tions from one specimen to another, although none of the triggers that I

tested appeared to be in anything other than perfect working order.

leboff trigger variation Hart 2-02 0.2 Burns 0.3 Kenyon 0.3 Canjar 700-LP 0.5 Williams 0.7-* Shilen 1.1 Saunders 1.2 Remington 2-02 1.4

Finally, we have to consider a diffi- cult but important question: at what point does a variation in let-off really begin to make a practical difference on the firing line? I will have to leave that largely to the experiences of shooters, very many of whom do a lot more target shooting than I do these days. I do know that the answer depends upon the shooter. According to Wally Hart, many customers tell him that they can feel a definite difference with his triggers, helping their triggering techniques and their over-all concentration and confidence.

I must confess that for years I was blissfully happy with a couple of com- petition rifles that were fitted with triggers that I have since discovered had an almost l-1/2-ounce variation in let-off. The fact that I preferred to use them up in the range of five to six ounces probably had something to do with my lack of discontent.

RIFLE 8 1

0

30

Shilen’s conversion eliminates a potential source of variation by the epoxying of the connector strap directly onto the trigger piece.

Besides fixing the connector strap, Williams uses a special coil-spring assembly under the middle lever.

Saunders’ conversion follows Remington’s very closely, even to the extent of spring-loading the con- nector strap back against the trigger piece.

MAY-JUNE 1982

Burns, who probably has the most carefully arranged and built conversion, epoxies the connector strap permanently to the trigger piece.