Home Forums Hunting & Shooting BPCR 40-65 Choices

That's what I'm talkin' 'bout, very nice HTRedneck.

Kudos, and compliments on the craftsmanship !

GTC

I've been thinking about a .40-65 (or a .38-55) for deer & pigs. This one would make a neat companion to my .45-90:

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=547438397

but alas heavier than I really care to use for a mild caliber.

Wonder what a 1877 with a 26" std weight 1/2 Octagon would weigh?

Patrick, a stoked 40-65 is ANYTHING but a "Mild Caliber",...I'm willing to bet that handing a shooter identical rifles,....45-70 and 40-65 for a long string of shots, that by 5-6 each, he'll not be able to tell you which is which.

and if you want a REAL .38, ...go with the original, the 38-50 Rem Hep.
That one IS a pussycat.

GTC

Thanks for the compliments guys!
I would guess that Shiloh, with their heavy octagon barrel is pushing 11 pounds. If I remember correctly, both the '85 High Wall and '86 Win are in the 9 - 9.5 pound range.

A Shiloh is out of my range for now but I wanted another single shot rifle that I can carry hunting within reasonable distances. I have taken several deer with my 45-70s so I also wanted a different caliber. To me the 38-55 is a lever gun caliber. That led me to the range of 40s. Which then took me to the '85. A little different rifle in a little different caliber... because I am a little different kind of guy!

Thanks - yeah I can see that point. Though my interest is for a hunting rifle, which won't see a long string of shots.

You can do a C Sharps 75 for about 1500 or less in a very handy hunting configuration.

"Should be able to do..." Would be a more accurate statement.
With the emphasis on should!

Tell it brother. You are dang sure right about that. But most people will not listen and only after they find out for themselves do they remember what you said.

No I said can, meant what I said, said what I meant.
http://csharpsarms.com/catalog-detail/423/1875-TARGET-SPORTING-40-CAL-ANY-sn-3589.html