Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Single Shots Max Trailboss load in 1885 Highwall .32-40

Hello Folks,


I am considering buying an 1885 Highwall in really nice condition (Very Fine plus, with a pristine bore) in .32-40 made in the 1915 or so area, and want to use trailboss power. I know that the 1885 Highwall is a very strong action.

Has anybody developed a max or near-max load for this rifle in this caliber? I hate to start out with a 50% or so load for an action of this strength.


Thanks for all advice.

Mannyrock

Hodgdon published a pdf detailing how to find max loads of Trail Boss for any round.

How to find maximum loads for Trail Boss

Hey Jim,

Thanks for that load reference. Yet, since Marlin was making the relatively weak black powder Model 1893 lever action rifles in .32-40 as early as 1893, I have to think that the Max Load listed for trailboss for that caliber tops out at what that rifle can safely handle, and not what the much more robust 1885 highwall rifle can handle. The highwall can easily handle conversions to modern calibers which I'm guessing have pressures twice as high as the original black power .32-40 round.

Perhaps I am wrong?

Anybody with a high wall want to chime in?

Thanks again,

Mannyrock

Trail Boss is not the choice for top end loads. The max TB load will be markedly slower than a 5744 or 4198 load.

This. Trail Boss represents the worst bang for the buck. Those of us who shoot .32-40's in competition rely mostly on 4227, 5744, 4759, and AA9. I use 14 gr. 4227 in two original High Walls, breech seated 185 grain cast bullets - economical and accurate. One of my comrades made a concerted effort to make TB work in a .32-40 and finally gave up out of frustration, it just wouldn't cut the accuracy mustard at 100&200 yards.

Thanks for much for those replies.

I am not a long range target shooter. I am just a 50 yard can shooter. I am sorry I didn't mention this. I have never used trailboss, but thought it might just be easier to handload than weighing to the grain the regular smokeless powders. If I can get 1.5 inch groups at 50 yards, I am good to go. But maybe trailboss won't do that for me?

Mannyrock

Yeah, it'll work in that respect, but why set out a goal to limit yourself?

You still have to exercise the same protocols of safe & consistent dispensing of powder - measure, scales, etc. - as you would any other powder. Perhaps I don't understand your "weighing to the grain" remark?

A High Wall is very strong, yes, but do remember that they were built of low carbon steel and carburized (case hardened) for strength. As such they are not as "strong" as modern-made replicas - while able to safely hold any sane cartridge it's subjected to, the margin of safety isn't as great. When you talk about maxxing out loads beyond "book recommendations" with any relatively fast burning powder in an original High Wall I get a little nervous....

Trail Boss is pretty benign, and therein lies its utility. But it's so benign that it's almost a joke, until you stretch it to its limit, and beyond. Example, from consulting Hodgdon's data for .32-40: TB vs. 4227 = TB maxes out at less than 1000fps, 25% less than 4227 max, but generates almost 50% more pressure. That speaks to what I said in my first reply. Use it if you want, but don't go trying to make it into something it's not, especially in a 100+ year old rifle.

Gnoahhh, thanks very much for that excellent advice! It is what I needed to hear.

Based on all of the advice here, and everything else I have read, I have come to realize that an old .32-40 is not what I really need for the shooting I enjoy.

I think that I need to stray away from the original 1885s, and get a Uberti 1885 in .45 Colt. In regular factory loads, it is what I am looking for, and it can be maxed out fairly high in the Uberti and still be safe.

It will take a little looking to find brass, but in the past, I have seen new Starline come up for sale at a fairly reasonable price every three weeks or so (i.e., randomly).

I plan to just use the simple Lee Classic Loader, and a hand primer press.

As for weighing power, many years ago I used the Classic Loader to load shotgun shells, and used the proper sized plastic scoop for the power, carded off before loading. I weighed the first scoop, but none after that and had no problems.

I realized that rifle and pistol cartridges are different, but I wonder if anybody just uses the scoop method on something like a .45 Colt. After weighing and confirming the first scoop of power, I would load several, and then weigh every completed round to make sure they all weigh the same.

Thanks,
Mannyrock

Another thing you failed to mention in your original post is what bullet you plan on using. If you forge ahead with TB powder bear in mind that when playing at sub-1000fps levels in a long barreled rifle with jacketed bullets you run the very real risk of eventually sticking one in the bore. Ask me how I know....

I hope to have not discouraged you from dipping your toes in the world of Winchester HW's. They're very nifty rifles and represent the very best of American single shot rifles of the pre-WWI era. (Well, a case can be made for Ballards too, and of course Stevens 44 1/2's, and Sharps, but I digress.) New made internal parts are readily available if something breaks, and their triggers (especially set triggers) are wonderful being surpassed only by the Ballard double-set trigger. Be forewarned though: this stuff can be powerfully addictive!!

If 50 yard plinking is your only desire, then yes the .45 Colt may well be more to your liking.

The Lee scoops should serve you well, just confirm your charge weights with a scale. Weighing finished ammo to confirm powder contents is dodgy - too much variation in the weights of all the other components to reliably isolate aberrations of a grain or two.

For that kind of work with a .45 Colt I would lean toward something like Unique in burning rate. Better "bang for the buck" and I would bet the farm on better accuracy too. Another complaint from fellas in my circle has been mediocre accuracy with TB compared to, well, everything else.

Concur 100% with gnoahhh.

I've used, and still currently use Trail Boss a fair bit for cast plinking loads, but it is rarely, if ever, the most accurate powder in any cartridge I've used it in.

Unique, Accurate #2, 244 Win, and of late, CFE Pistol and BE86 have all produced mild, good shooting cast plinking loads out of carbines for me. 5744 is usually pretty easy to work with, too, but it can be really hard to find. Clays and Green Dot, and Nitro100NF have shot well for me in 45 Colt too, but they are super bloopers, even out of a rifle, with trajectories something akin to a flying freight train.

Not quite the same ballpark,but I picked up a Uberti 1873 last fall in 45 Colt, and it's very fond of CFE Pistol for both cast and jacketed/mono bullets. 244 Win shoots very well from it too, but it bulges case heads more than I like, which can be a bit of an issue in 45 Colt rifles in general. I've had a few, and they all bulged heads with anything much hotter than blooper loads. This 1873 just does it worse than the Winchester 94 and Rossi 92 carbines I owned before.

IME, the best use for TB is as a safe, bulky powder for use in straight-wall rounds by those of us with short attention spans. Works well in .37/.357, .45 Colt and .44 mag, and I shot some in my last .45/70. I’ve yet to achieve great accuracy in any bottleneck rounds, though trusted gunwriters have reported same. Just cracked off about a dozen within the hour from a .308, with accuracy good enough for offhand practice maybe, but with a POI pretty far off the hunting loads for that same rifle. I’ll use the rest up in my revolvers and maybe my Low Wall .44, but I’m not in a great hurry to find more. Next up for similar use will be some 5744, also somewhat spendy, but much more versatile and easier to find.

it maybe a bad choice but; I had a spare can of Trail Boss. I used 9 grains in 32/40 with 150 gr bullets. It is a light load and FWIW, I though Trail Boss was specifically for light loads in a weaker guns. If you are stuck with some this is a way to get ride of it.

Per the link, you can eyeball down the case and see where you are at with that charge.


I have repro 1885's and Sharps and they are very strong designs. I also have a original 44 1/2and if there was a weaker single shot, I like to know who made it. Mine is a rolling block of sorts that locks in place with a flimsy lever of steel attach to the trigger guard. That 44 1/2 is the gun I loaded with Trail Boss. Now, there is a falling block Stevens. That is not what I got. They look almost identical. I regret getting my Stevens.

Sounds like what you have is a 44, not 44 1/2. 44's aren't exactly called rolling blocks but their breech blocks do kind of "roll", or more properly, tilt, into position and are only supported by their pivot pins* and are best relegated to rimfire stuff and very very mild CF's. If it has a lugged hammer from the factory (fairly rare) it'll take a little bit more pressure but certainly nothing even close to a .22 Hornet. 44 1/2's on the other hand are true falling block designs and have been chambered for .32-40, .38-55, and a bunch of "modern" higher pressure CF's including scads of .22CF wildcats back in the day. The modern CPA action is a direct copy of it and is way capable of holding some pretty tough cartridges. (Limiting factor is case head diameter vs. barrel shank diameter, ie: hoop strength. Rearward movement of the breech block is halted firmly by the receiver walls.)

I regularly shoot a 44 chambered for .22WCF, but stay at around 2.5gr. Red Dot/45 gr. cast bullet out of respect even though the breech block is supported by fresh new hardened pins.

*Sounds wispy but it's not that bad. It's a good design for its intended use, and serious tinkerers have been known to re-configure things so the rear of the breech block also bears a bit against the receiver walls too, giving a tad more strength.

Yup, that is the gun. Call it a Pivot block, very descriptive. I was really a dumb A, because I got this in a total state of confusion off the fixer-upper rack. I thought 32/40 was what they called the 32/20. I had a senior moment. I am pretty sure what I have is considered the 44 1/2 but; given my track record of regrets with this gun, nothing would surprise me.

You are right:

https://www.cparifles.com/pages/stevens-model-44-vs-44-1-2

Ah, I just went back and re-read my notes and files. It was sold as a 44. The old squash is really getting old. And it is a 32/40 which is IMHO asking a lot of that action.

Sorry about the hi-jack. I expect the 44 1/2 is every bit as good as you suggested.

Semi-relatated, is that 22WCF .227-.228 bore?

I saw one for sale cheap way back when, but I knew nothing about it, and passed. This was back in the days before the internet became all the info you could ever desire easily available like it is now.

Nope they were .223-4.
That case was used to make the 22 Hornet.

Uh, no. The .22WCF was .227-.228. It came to life in the days before the .224" centerfire groove diameter existed. Back then in the late 19th/early 20th centuries all American factory .22 CF's had .227/.228 barrels, what few there were of them. (Blackpowder fouling in a .22CF bore was a holy b*tch to contend with, especially in a long match, so .22 centerfires never were what you would call extremely popular.)

The Hornet case is identical to the WCF. (I use Hornet dies to load for mine, they work fine. I do add a separate step of expanding the neck and belling the mouth with a home made button fitted to the RCBS neck expanding die body, to accommodate the larger bullets.) The Hornet was squeezed down to .223 initially because the gents who birthed it were using M1/M2 Springfield .22 LR barrels as the basis for their experiments.

Thanks. I had guessed it might be an oddball bore since it was an antique. That's why I passed on it at the time. I've never seen another for sale anywhere firsthand since.

At least now I know if I ever happen upon another one cheap and I'm feeling froggy I can use Hornet brass. I still have some of that squirreled away somewhere (I think 🤔) and the dies from back when I had a Hornet.

Thanks for all of the advice guys.

It seems as if a .38-40 would not be right for me.

I think that the best fit would be an 1885 in .45 Colt or .357 mag.

But, in having looked for one of those on every conceivable website and auction site for about a week, I am stunned at how many used and new .45-70s and .38-55s are for sale, and how near zero there are in .45 Colt and .357 for sale. (The only one was a Uberti Deluxe for $2,000). Really, the internet is absolutely choked with the number of .45-70s and .38-55s.

I called Taylors and they told me that they have no .45 Colts or .357s in stock, and that when a few arrive from Uberti, they are gone in a flash. Same with any.44 magnums they get.

From a business perspective, I simply don't understand this. Why in the world would manufacturers continually crank out the first two calibers, when the market is flooded with them, but not crank out lots of the other calibers, when those sell like hot cakes?

Mannyrock