Does anyone in the forum know if the 1895 Winchester lever action was used by our troops during the S.A.W.? I had read that some musket style rifles were tested by the U.S. government. This carbine, chambered in 30-40 was made in 1898 and has seen a lot of use. I think they are kind of neat handy rifles.

---

Check out this link from our Chit-Chat pages on the 1895 Winchester. Is the 1895 Winchester you have pictured yours?

  (You need to Login

Hey Culpeper... Chime in here!  Culpeper has a full military version of the 1895 Winchester, and it's beautiful!  Unfortunately, they didn't get their due.  The civilian models however were very popular.  Teddy Roosevelt had two of them that he used on his hunting trips to Africa.

Hello: Thanks for the great info. This carbine came in a trade with a 1899 krag carbine that has seen better days. The Winchester was painted with green and brown paint to make it look camoflaged. It took awhile to clean up. The bore is nice. I hope it's a good shooter.

Glad to see the old girl is in good hands. The 1895 lever action has to be the coolest rifle (aside from the Krag  ::) ). I passed up a chance to own a family 1895. But its in the next best place, with my brother, who will be passing it down to one of my sons.

Thank you. I got lucky with the caliber on this one. I have dies and brass because of the krags I own. When I was younger there were 1895's on the surplus market. They were from the Russian purchase in 7.92. Most had seen a lot of heavy use. I always kicked myself for not buying one. They must be pretty well designed and sturdy to work in the Russian winters. Once the weather breaks I hope to see what this old work horse can do.

Did someone call my name?

I am still having feed problems with this old girl.  It may have to go up to Turnbull's for a full rehab.

---

That is a great piece of history!  Is it in 30-40? It looks to be in nice shape.

Nice muskets there King Carp and Culpepper, thats on my gotta get me one list or else I’ll build my own.

Yep.  .30-40 Krag.  The original barrel was shot out with almost no rifling so I had turnbull spin a new barrel on it.

From what I have read you are the lucky owner of a rare U.S. musket. I hope you are able to resolve the feeding issues with it. My carbine was made after the government contract for your musket. It has some parts marked with KSM, a government inspector. I guess Winchester used up the leftover contract  parts on civilian rifles. These rifles seem to have been popular with revolutionaries, both russian and mexican. They were also favorites of the Texas rangers. I think they are cool pieces of history.

---

Thanks.  I bought it back in the day when money was flowing like water from a fire hose.  Back when I was ignorant and over paid for a lot of stuff.  You don't want to see my spreadsheet on the mil-spec antiques I have pruchased over the last twenty years.  Want to talk about a one of fifty-six bayonet?  It'll make your wallet cry.

Do me a favor.  Take a pic your carbine with the action open looking into the action.  Make it up close and a clear image.  I want to see something on your gun.

Hope this helps.

---

..... and Arizona Rangers ... "KING CARP".

---

Sgt. Schultz's buddies too!

---

You've confirmed what I knew.  One of the things on the feed lips is missing on my gun.  I can run three cartridges into the chamber without much effort but four and five get jummed up on the barrel face.  I think since one is missing it cants the cartridge out of alignement.

Thanks for the pics.

---

I was part of a group of guys who tested two original NRA muskets (in .30-40 cal) on the 100- and 200-yard ranges.  They were not at all competitive when shot alongside ordinary Krag long rifles.  When fitted with a sling and used in prone or sitting position, they would not hold zero.  Point of impact changed with sling tension.  That's why the old guys never bought many.  They sure look neat, though.

That makes sense. I hope you can engineer a fix and get her feeding properly. Do you have a bayonet for the musket? I hear they are hard to come by.

Do I have a bayonet for the musket?  Is Pelosi a hag?  HA!  Like you have to ask.  Of course!  It is sitting next to my Bolo bayonet, my bowie, and my Winchester Lee bayonet and the rest of the 1903 bayonets.  Geez.  I spent a bunch of money on stuff.  It makes me ill thinking about it sometimes.  Most times, not so much.

;)

I never thought it would be competitive at Camp Perry but it's going to be a hoot when I get her and her cousin the Win Lee on the line. :D

Collecting stuff is an interesting hobby. My mom and dad sold antiques. They always told their customers to collect something that they liked. That way if the value of what you were collecting came down you still had something that you liked.  Too many people bought stuff as investments and were ticked off when it lost value, (beany babies, ertl toys, collector plates, ) the list goes on. If you are happy with your collection it is priceless. It's great to find things that are less than going prices. But that is no guarantee the value will go up.

I suspect one of the reasons the Win 95 didn't get much interest as a military rifle is the lever.  When in the prone position, you'd be hitting that lever on the ground during cycling... while a bolt can be easily cycled in position.  I'd love to see it happen at Perry though... as well as a Win Lee!!!

Winchester's largest customer of the Model 1895 was the Russians during WWI. They bought like around 230,000 in 7.62x54R, the same caliber as their Mosin Nagant. They were set up for stripper clips. The Russians that received these rifles were happy with these rifles. Possibly because of the cowboy mystique. They weren't favored by the US Military due to the cocking issues when shooting from a trench, as Paul pointed out. Also, too much of the guts were exposed when cocking, which could lead to dirt getting in the action. This being John Browning's last lever action design was an improvement as it allowed for spitzer bullets. But it came out when bolt actions were coming into vogue and the lever action fans liked the old-styled cowboy guns. The 1895 was a just a bit too new-fangled.

I dived into the history of the musket after I bought it which was also around the time I became fully aware of the CMP and the Camp Perry matchs.  So I put together five dummy rounds and did some standing loading drills.  I found that I would need to up my game if I was going to have any chance beyond a sucky change to get through the rapids.  I even drew up a prototype ammo loader to help in the reload.  The Russians had the right idea using guides and clips for the russian round.

I am thinking I will bring it to the line anyway since I know I have a snowballs chance in hell of wining the match.  :D  I guess #71 can wait for the next go round.

Culp…  You make it to the match this year, and I'll buy you dinner at the Roosevelt Match Dinner the night before the TR Match!!!  Now, I must point out, that while the Winchester 95 would be a great addition to the Vintage Match, you still gotta bring a Krag to the TR Match (only Krags and 1903's allowed... and we don't want no more of those stinkin' 03s).

Shoot in two matchs?!   :o    Oh the horror!  Whatever shall I do?  :D


One thing is certain.  Ammo logistics will be easy having one cartridge for both guns.

King carp, in your initial post you mentioned the testing performed by the US military. Here is a report of testing from 1899, not too favorable. But it is still a cool rifle.

  (You need to Login

After reading that report I am surprised that the Russians purchased as many of those rifles as they did. I know they bought all kinds of weapons from lots of sources. In the early 70's you would see the 1895's that were reimported back here.  They all showed heavy use. I guess they were desperate and took what they could get. The 1895's are neat rifles and I guess part of the attraction was their ability to handle powerful rounds in a lever action. Thanks for the link to the tests.

I believe a lever action cycles faster then a bolt, though the report states otherwise. A stripper clip attachment was made for the rimmed Russian round, Browning would have been able to design one for the rimmed US round. (I am not sure Browning actually designed the 1895 for Military use, but Winchester certainly wanted to push it for a sale.) But the loading of ammunition as submitted without stripper clip capabilities was a drawback.

The lack of a magazine cut-off was not an issue for the Russians  as they didn't have it on their Mosin Nagant either. So two big issues of the US military had were not issues for the Russians. Plus, the US Ordnance had its rifle and General Miles was pushing against it. So some of the report had bias as the Krag Jorgensen design was being vehemently guarded against politics and an upset General of the Army for its selection (in my opinion).

While in Germany the Mauser is king...

I read through it a second time and have observed the emphasis on dismounting the gun.  The M16 platforms could be considered near perfection in that respect.

Culpeper wrote on Feb 6^th, 2020 at 4:44pm:

I never thought it would be competitive at Camp Perry but it's going to be a hoot when I get her and her cousin the Win Lee on the line. :D

Before you bang away with the Lee, please track down descriptions of the safety mods retrofitted to some of the rifles by USMC and make sure your rifle has them. 

The guy killed shooting a Win Lee 10 years ago made serious mistakes reproducing the cartridge case, but it was the rifle's design flaws that killed him.

Every thing points to modified .30-40 brass as the culprit in the failures.

  (You need to Login

I started down the rabbit hole just after the DeRitter incident and have no fear of the 1895's design.  I was shooting one of my win-lees, oh, five or six years ago using modified 25-06 brass from Buffalo Arms.  Didn't have any problems.  My thoughts on the matter at the time was the 25-06 was designed as a rimless case and should have a substantial web in the case head and minimal brass has to be removed to get it to chamber.  Besides that I don't believe BA would put their winkies in danger by building and selling dangerous ammunition.

Also, I have not read where the Navy had reports of the Winchester Lee having catasrophic failures like the army was having with the 1903s as reported by Julian Hatcher.  Perhaps Knute can run down the Navy reports.



.

Are you talking about the Winchester Lee Straight Pull? If so, here is an early report when the rifle was accepted by the Navy. I'll have to find later reports to see if the Navy actually dropped the rifle for other reasons than to standardize with the Army.

Make sure to click on the four tabs by the scroll bar for different places the rifle was written about in the report.

  (You need to Login

More recent info:

  (You need to Login

A 1910 article from "Hunter, Trader, Trapper"

  (You need to Login

BR likely has some insight on this subject.

Still not sure if this is the gun in question, but here is a 1900 article from American Machinist:

  (You need to Login

Yeah that the gun.  My research poor that it is tells me the War Department got rid of the W-L for ammo logistics.  I could not find any reports of receiver failures due to design flaws.  Perhaps they did occur but the reports are lost to time if they did exsist.

Whereas the flavor of the times and the thinking of the Ordnance Dept was becoming more scientific in their outlook regarding injuries to soldiers and sailors. 

Some of the W-L that saw USMC service have modifications to the rear of the bolt.  There us a U-shaped piece of sheet-metal thickness steel that would protect the shooter if the striker were to be blown free. IIRC, it is spring steel and snaps into grooves machined into the rear of the body of the bolt.

If the USMC armorers had not encountered problems, that mod would not exist. 

That must have been an authorized mod and must appear in writing somewhere.

I have not found any references to bolt assembly issues with this gun during military use. Not saying there weren't any. Ian from "Forgotten Weapons" has an informative video on this rifle, in case you haven't seen it. The only issue he brought up was with non-military reloaded ammunition. He also explains why it went out of vogue and without manufactured ammo soon after the Navy dropped this rifle.

  (You need to Login