Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Winchester Collectors 1895 accuracy expectations?

My Dad hunted with one in .30 Army for 40 yrs or more, wouldn't be separated from it, but he was no rifleman, it was just a hunters tool. I had a Russian contract model back in the early 70's but ammo was scarce and reloading stuff scarcer, so I really never gave it a chance. A '95 from a friend's estate has come up, a carbine in '06 with a Lyman 21 with a very good bore. I have little patience with inaccurate rifles...what can I expect with tailored handloads? (assuming the nut behind the trigger stays tight and focused)

Hey flintlocke. No one is answering your question. I'm wondering if it's because the carbine is pretty rare? I've been around the longer barreled (28") model 95. It was also chambered in 30-06. A buddy has it. Another buddy called me to tell me about it. I guess he was impressed with how well it shoots. When I saw the rifle, my friend was not shooting it too hot. Maybe he was having a bad day?? I never got to shoot it, so I don't know it's full potential. Too bad you could not shoot it before you paid the money for it. They are unique rifles, but I've only ever seen the full length rifles. Actually saw one a week ago, when I was in Reno.

BSA,
If you believe the experts, 2 piece stock, rear lock up are supposed to be an accuracy nemesis...but on the other hand, I had a Canuckian friend who had an SMLE with a Motty aperture rear sight that could dump ten shots prone, slinged, into the NRA ten ring at 600 yds in less time than it takes to tell the story. WTF?

I am dragging my feet a little on the '95 anyway, I more or less am obligated to treat my deceased friend's son ethically, and grading the '95 fairly, it will run me almost 4G's according to the Blue Book. Not sure I need this at my age, I could croak out at any minute.

Thanks for the comeback anyway, like you said, not a lot of them being used as intended anymore, so the experience/knowledge base is small.

I have 2 original 1895 rifles in 40-72 and 38-72. Both are capable of gophers and deer. With iron sights I can hit anything I’m aiming at to 150 yards, easily.

Shooting paper is only for neurosis that can’t be cured by shooting rocks…

Shrap, There is such a thing as too much truth. Paper frequently provides too much truth, when evaluating fine old classic rifles I prefer luck, legend and large rocks.
Those are some rare fine rifles you have there, glad you are using them.

While I thoroughly enjoy my original '95s, a .405 and a .30-40 carbine, they're not rifles I take to the range to shoot tiny groups. IMO, if that's what it takes for you to enjoy the rifle, you're better off walking away. The last time my .405 went to the range was to adjust sights after replacing the front bead with a Redfield Sourdough. Using the Lyman 21 with the large aperture at 100yds, the last 3 rounds of Hornady factory loads were centered on top of the post in maybe a 2 1/2" group....... as well as I can expect from my eyes shooting a 100+ year old rifle and it'll do anything I'll ever ask of it. The barrel mounted carbine sights on my .30-40 are not as user friendly to me as the "climbing Lyman", but deer are not safe within 100 yds

Good post. I've said the same thing many times. That is why a lot of guys prefer shooting rocks and big steel plates. They don't tell the whole story like a piece of paper does. Hitting big game critters is pretty easy for the most part. Cool pics shrap has shared with us though. Yet, it does not appear to be a carbine. Like I said, they are not easily found. I've seen a few standard length 95's in my time. The one most recently was very nice, but had been reblued, which brings the price point way down. 4g's on something you are not sure about is a pass for me... YMMV..