I also don't see the point of the "Winchester" (really Miroku) 1885 carbines in the calibers they offered them and with the Hi-Wall action. Winchester did offer a "standard carbine" with a short barrel (usually 15"!) in the nineteenth century but they were on Lo-Wall actions with appropriate chamberings for a saddle gun: mostly .44-40,some .38-40 and a few .32-20. Cheaper, lighter, and even handier than a '92 or '73 "Trapper".
But the Miroku-made recent carbines are to my mind just expensive toys. I can BARELY imagine shooting a full-power .30-40 in that format, and I can imagine a dedicated handloader coming up with appropriate .30-40 subloads that wouldn't break your shoulder (these guns had "rifle" style crescent buttplates, didn't they?). I would bet that the .45-70s got shot about six times each with full power loads and then sat in a safe or were reloaded with subloads in the .45 Colt range of power.
Why didn't Browning/Winchester/Miroku just reproduce the original "standard carbine" in the original calibers, maybe adding .45 Colt and .44 Magnum, and 1 1/2" to the barrel to make it legal?
BTW, if you want an actual Winchester 1885 in the Winchester design, you can get one from C. Sharps in Montana. All of the others on the market now are slightly different designs from the last "coil spring" variation of the 1885--good guns but not Winchesters.
I have both a C. Sharps Hi-Wall .30-40 and a Miroku "Traditional Hunter" Lo-Wall .22 WRM and love 'em both. Retired my gen-you-wine Winchester 1885s when they became "collector's items". Before that in the 1950s they were just obsolete old guns that nobody wanted....
