I inherited 7,62x54 Winchester 1895 from the first world war

>>33268697
Yes.

Post pics with timestamp you fucking liar. Those are rare as shit.

File: Winchester 1895 Russian Contract (1).jpg (4MB, 4032x3024px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 4032x3024px

>>33268713
Not really, just expensive.

>>33268713
I'm not from Americas, thousands if not tens of thousands were shipped here during the war.

>>33268742
Esti?

>>33269168
Finland.

File: 1482235869403.png (17KB, 180x196px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 180x196px

>>33269319
:DDD

>>33268697
7.62x54r was never a blackpowder cartridge, it was always smokeless. Pretty sure its safe, just stay away from hot loads just in case, and gravitate to military surplus stuff

>>33269385
>7.62x54r was never a blackpowder cartridge

really? wasn't it invented in the late 1800's though?

>>33269401
Smokeless was invented in 1884 and spread FAST because of the numerous advantages it had, 7.62x54r was invented in 1891. At the time 54r was some pretty futuristic shit, I think it's the first popular cartridge made just for smokeless powder

>>33268697
Yes it is safe, just don't use powerful hunting loads all the time, lever action isn't as strong as a bolt action.

>>33269411
it's impressive that it continues to see military use after all this time.

>>33269419
It's a pretty great cartridge desu, really good for long range rifles and machine guns. Only downside is the rim on it is kind of shitty but all the guns it's used in prevent rimlock pretty well

>>33269411
>first popular cartridge made just for smokeless powder
That would be 8mm Lebel

>>33269434
I meant popular as in still commonly used and memorable today

>>33269425
Rimlock is a non-issue on a belt-feed, and a big rim does help with extraction.

>>33269447
It's not what you wrote.

File: 300px-Win1895advert.jpg (40KB, 300x393px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 300x393px

Did they make any in 30-06 with a bayonet lug?

>>33269385
>>33269413
The 1895 is strong as fuck and will handle ANY factory loads you feed it. In fact, I'd say anything in loading manuals as well.
>>33270178
No, they did in 30 Army though (30-40 Krag).

These are fairly uncommon and cost about 2k and up. You might want to shoot Tula ammo through it so your not feeling with surplus corrosive ammo. Make sure you clean it if you use corrosive stuff

>>33268713
>rare as shit
Not really, you could easily find them in auctions online in the 1K-2K range

>>33270178
Later models features .30-06, but not for the military, so no bayont lug

oh shit I didn't know there was a lever gun in 54r. do want.

>>33269413
Guess that explains things like 45-70, .460sw, .500sw, .450 and .444 marlin lever actions huh. Browning figured this shit out in the 1880s. Sure opening up a lever gun to feed 325gr .44s can be tricky but they aren't made of bamboo

>>33269411
>>33269385
>>33269401
>>33268697
7.62x54R and 30-30 were smokeless from Day 1
38 Special was black powder for years

>>33271012
All of those are significantly lower pressure than x54r. The 1895 was made in a litany of high pressure smokeless cartridges though and is probably the strongest lever action ever made.

Wait... I thought it was unsafe to use spitzer-tipped bullets in tube-fed lever actions? Something about the potential for the bullet tip to ignite the primer of the next round if dropped hard enough.

How did they make this design safe or did they just not care? Or is this just a Fudd myth that ensures American lever action fans buy overpriced polymer tipped bullets from Hornady if they want modern performance?

>>33271135
It's a box magazine

File: 1489214974870.jpg (53KB, 1239x341px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 1239x341px

>>33271135
1895 isn't tube fed for exactly that reason.

>>33271144
>Looks at picture again

>Yup, I'm a tard

>>33270522

The famous Lever-nugget. They're great, but expensive as fuck.

I want a 1895 repro.