Recoil Comparisons for 348 WCF and 405 WCF

oscarflytyer

Well-Known Member
Ok, I know recoil is computed based on a lot of input variables. AND I know there is "felt/perceived" recoil. But not really what I am looking for here.

I love lever action rifles, especially older calibers and rifles. I shied away from a 45-70 after having my shoulder rebuilt. And then had knowledgeable shooters tell me that a 45-70 (Marlin) with a cast 405 @ 1350 fps is a cream puff. And it is - TO ME! One of my favorites to shoot! BUT I WON'T shoot the factory 300 J in it - that is a STOMPER - TO ME!

Having said that, I am looking at a Winchester Model 71 in 348 WCF and a Winchester 1895 in 30-40 Krag/35 Winchester/405 Winchester. I am curious how the recoil of these would compare to the 45-70 load above. I won't push any of these. The 348 prob 200-220 cast @ 1800-1900 max (expect this to have more recoil; might drop it to ~1550-1600 fps). I know the 30-40 should be like a 30-30-35 Rem - no issues. 35 Winchester I can't imagine would be any worse than my BLR in 358 Win. The 1895 in 405 Win, say a 420 grain at ~1325 - Shouldn't this felt recoil be nearly the same as the 45-70 load?

Looking for experience you may have in any of these combos. Thanx
 

Brad

Benevolent Overlord and site owner
Staff member
I personally find that a Marlin gives far more manageable recoil than a Winchester. Stock design is similar but the differences are there and they matter.

My Marlin 45-70 is far more pleasant to shoot than my Win 94 in 375 win. A 275 gr bullet at 1600 in the 375 Win is just plain not fun to shoot. A similar load in the Marlin would be a pussycat.

Just saying that there is more at play than just the physics of recoil.
 

fiver

Well-Known Member
stock design is definitely a player in perceived recoil, as is using a gentle shove on the ejecta.
[bullet]
the exact same loads in one gun of the same make and weight as another can be felt like one is thumping you, and the other? meh,,, it's a gentle nose bump with the thumb.
it isn't all about the recoil pad, it's more about how your face sits on the stock, and how the barrel lines up with the stock, where it sits.

like Brad says the 375 win with the same loads feels nothing the same when shooting a Winchester versus a marlin.
I can pretty much almost match the model 94 in 375 with a model 92 in another caliber [speed and bullet weight wise] and I get a totally different recoil impulse.
 

RicinYakima

High Steppes of Eastern Washington
Winchester stocks bang my cheek and drive my thumb into my nose. Having shot 95's in 30/40, 33 Win and 405 Win, the 30/40 is the one I would get. I am a smaller person and the rifle butt plate fits me just fine; big people need the shotgun butt no matter what.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ian

oscarflytyer

Well-Known Member
Ric - Looking at all the options, I am heavily leaning towards the 30-40 option. Saw one at the show today in 303 Brit. Tempting but to high for condition. Also had a beat up in 30-03 - but that is too much an odd-ball, even for ME (and I have some)!

While I would love to have one in 7.62x54R, my budget would choke, I am sure! The 30-40 sounds like the best all-around option!
 

smokeywolf

Well-Known Member
Don't know how you're going to solve this one Oscar. So many variables: weight of the rifle, stock configuration, buttplate configuration. I can say that the fellows at Winchester did a better than fair job of ameliorating felt recoil from the Model 71.

Can't comment on the Model '95 in 30-40, but do have some experience with that particular rifle (w/crescent buttplate) chambered in 30-06. I've shot 110 grain jacketed hollow points that make you say to yourself, 'I'm going to feel this tomorrow'. I've shot 169 grain IDEAL/Lyman 311413s that were pussy cats. Don't have any experience with the "Big Medicine for Lions" 405 Winchester chambering. I've heard that, if you're young it's great fun. If you're old like me, watch out for detached retinas.
I have a Russian Contract '95 that I've never shot. In fact, I have a 7.62x54 cartridge sitting in front of me on the laptop as I type this.

You have 3 different levels of loadings for 45-70. One is of course for Trapdoors, one for most levers and one for stouter actions like the Ruger No.1 or 3.
In the Model '86 SRC ("Nickel Steel" barrel) I've shot 405 grain cast propelled by 28 grns of 4198 and the same bullet pushed by 50 grns of 3031. The 4198 load is quite pleasant. With bruises still visible a week later, I now keep the 3031 well under 50 grains.

The Model 71 I think may be a little easier to carry and with bolt mounted peep better for me at least, beyond 75 yards. And, tucked up nice and tight against the shoulder, not the least bit unpleasant to shoot, especially from a standing position.
 

david s

Well-Known Member
If you look at bullet weights and velocities for the 348 Winchester it's basically a lever action 30-06 with similar recoil. The stock design leaves something to be desired for most people though. I have no experience with the 1895 rifles so no comparisons here.
 

RicinYakima

High Steppes of Eastern Washington
Ric - Looking at all the options, I am heavily leaning towards the 30-40 option. Saw one at the show today in 303 Brit. Tempting but to high for condition. Also had a beat up in 30-03 - but that is too much an odd-ball, even for ME (and I have some)!

While I would love to have one in 7.62x54R, my budget would choke, I am sure! The 30-40 sounds like the best all-around option!
30-03 is just fine as long as you are willing to shoot 200+ grain bullets. The few thousandths of neck length doesn't mean anything, but the "LONG" throat may be an issue. They were all made for a parallel sided 220 grain bullet, just like the 30/40 Army.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ian

Bret4207

At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
I haven't shot all of those, but I do ahve a tiny bit of experience with crescent buttplated 33 and 348 Wins. They were in the "Ouch!" and "OUCH!!! HOLY MOTHER!!!!!" category. Not a lot of fun with factory loads. OTOH, a shotgun buttplate made another 348 much nicer, but it was also a much longer barreled, heavier gun. I think there are a lot of variables in this. I've told the story before that the absolute worst kicking gun I ever shot was a custom stocked 308 Remington with factory 180's. BRUTAL. Same loads in a number of other rifles were fine. Stock shape and the load used is the key to all this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ian

RBHarter

West Central AR
I learned several years ago a little tidbit about the curved but plates . While it was aimed at semi-exotic ML target rifles , Kentucky , Tennessee , etc , it is that those are intended to be shot from the outside of the shoulder not in the pocket . Even the fairly modest ones like the TC Hawkens what a difference it makes to take it out of the pocket and out on to the shoulder mass off the collar bones and on the meat . It places the bottom and in your arm pit and the top out side of your actual joint and on your arm instead of the shoulder . No points digging in and the stock and your hand/thumb and ladder sights while recoiling straight back do so away from your face .

Shooting modern arms after , in most of our cases decades of muscle training to pocket the butt it ain't ever gonna happen on a rushed shot .
There's an added bonus in this if you teach the ladies to shoot a crescent stock it doesn't abuse the proximal structures in the pocket ........ unfortunately I learned this too late in life and the top heavy daughter had already adapted to not abusing the structures shooting full bore 308 , 06 ' and 3" 12 ga often with only hard plates .
 

smokeywolf

Well-Known Member
Bret, a rifle chambered in 348 Winchester with a crescent buttplate? Sounds like a custom job. Never thought about it and not that I would do it. I'm pretty happy with crescent buttplate, carbine buttplate or shotgun buttplate. You've got me curious now, I wonder if a crescent butt stock off a model '86 rifle will just mount straight onto a model 71. 71s were produced with two different tang lengths. Next time I have both out, I'm going to do some comparison.
 

Bret4207

At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
Bret, a rifle chambered in 348 Winchester with a crescent buttplate? Sounds like a custom job. Never thought about it and not that I would do it. I'm pretty happy with crescent buttplate, carbine buttplate or shotgun buttplate. You've got me curious now, I wonder if a crescent butt stock off a model '86 rifle will just mount straight onto a model 71. 71s were produced with two different tang lengths. Next time I have both out, I'm going to do some comparison.
Actually, yeah, it was. Birdeyes maple stock with "rabbit track" checkering. Same on the 33. I would imagine both were done by a local forest ranger who specialized in maple and rabbit track checkering on the side after getting home post WW2. Both were what I'd call carbine length-ish. Rabbit track checkering was coarse checkering with another line of finer checkering run over the top of the diamonds from the first run. Looked pretty nice but it was a local thing in the Adks as far as I know. He did a butt load of stocks. I don't know about the tang lengths at all.
 

Bret4207

At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
Smokey, you've got me doubting my memory now, after all it was 40 some years ago! I was doing hay and got thinking about those rifles. I could be mistaken about the 348 with the crescent buttplate. I know the later, heavier, longer one was a 348 because I sourced the ammo, the earlier ones I was working with my dad. The son of the guy whose rifle it was is on FB I think, I'll try to get him and see if he remembers the rifle, he may still have it.
 
Last edited:

david s

Well-Known Member
It's not exactly uncommon to see Winchester lever actions with barrels that weren't there when they left the factory. A 1886 with a 348 Winchester barrel wouldn't be the first. I use to own an 1897 vintage model 92 in 218 Bee.
 

oscarflytyer

Well-Known Member
All the input is great and I really appreciate it. As Smokey said about the 405 and retinas, etc, think I am gonna pass on a 405 (even tho I know I can download it). I do use only Trapdoor loads in my Marlin 45-70 - because they are PLENTY on deer and they are just fun to shoot. I don't need abuse anymore!

And I am lucky that a friend has a 348 and I can test shoot it. The 348 might still be in play. I figure any of the 95s in anything below 405 Win I can download to be fun and pleasant to shoot AND still take a deer with. Prob could with the 405 also, but another negative is the components. A 30-06 I already have everything for, and sounds like it is easy on recoil with cast (all I will ever shoot anyway).

Smokey - thanx for the load recommendation for the 45-70 too!
 

Missionary

Well-Known Member
We shoot all those calibers. So I will write this .... A 400 grainer at 1350 fps is going to recoil about the same in any two rifles that weigh close to the same. Put a slip on recoil pad on either one and you would think the other just got a 500 grain at 1350. That is your felt recoil playing tricks on you.
Learn to shoot off cross sticks and with a little practice your groups can get near as good as any bench will do. I shoot a 50 Alaskan loaded to 1850 fps with a 525 grain monster. I would not get near a bench with that load but cross sticks make it fun and very accurate.

Getting slapped in the face is because your face is not stuck on the stock. Could be you need to pull that rear plate into your shoulder tighter.
Or duct tape a pad to your face but the stock will work as well and get removed without any pain.
 

oscarflytyer

Well-Known Member
"A 400 grainer at 1350 fps is going to recoil about the same in any two rifles that weigh close to the same."

Kinda what I was thinking. So, a 405 in 405 Win and a 405 in 45-70 @ 1350 should be about the same. Makes sense. Only diff is, as stated above, stock shape. I do know that the lower off the bore axis the stock comb is, the more FELT recoil you will get.

SO I guess IF I found a good priced '95 in 405, I would prob spring for it!
 

Bill

Active Member
I have a model 71 and it kicks hard, I also have a big bore 94 in 375 and it hurts bad to shoot it, it's sharper and snappier than the 348

Bill
 

Bret4207

At the casting bench in the sky. RIP Bret.
Bret, a rifle chambered in 348 Winchester with a crescent buttplate? Sounds like a custom job. Never thought about it and not that I would do it. I'm pretty happy with crescent buttplate, carbine buttplate or shotgun buttplate. You've got me curious now, I wonder if a crescent butt stock off a model '86 rifle will just mount straight onto a model 71. 71s were produced with two different tang lengths. Next time I have both out, I'm going to do some comparison.

Smokey, I stand corrected. The "348" maple stocked job was actually a 35 Winchester in a 95 Wichester. My bad. FWIW, the great grandson of the original owner is still using that rifle. Apparently it still kills deer and bear just fine, but the kid is tougher than I am!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ian

Glaciers

Alaska Land of the Midnight Sun
Oscar I used to have a original 95 takedown in 405, nice rifle, but, it went away along with the rest of my Winchester levers. But, I have a 225 grain, a 275 grain 2 cavity mold and a 300 grain 4 cavity mold made by Walt at NEI for SSK Industries back in the early 80's. These are J. D's Sledge Hammer designed molds. I don't shoot 41's, but bought them for the 405 specifically. Never used them, still have them thinking I'd come up with another 405. The idea was the 225 and 275 were going to be light plinking loads and the 300's for full house loads. So you consider lighter bullets for less recoil. You probably have thought of that, I just usually think of the 405 for full house only.

Brett I was wondering, just as Smokey was that you were get Winchesters crossed up. Never seen a 71 with a crescent butt. Your explanation brings it into the light.

The weight of the 71's and the 95's helps with the felt recoil, along with the shotgun butt. Bill's Winchester BB 375 is almost 2 pounds lighter and the 375 is a higher intensity cartridge.