Cimmaron 1873 Indian Territory carbine on order.......throat size guess/expectations?

I have a carbine coming in on order. I have been wanting a .357 Miroku Winchester 1892 for three years but never could get a model I liked in my price range so I bought this because it’s already got a short LOP and a ladder sight. It going to be a range toy with mild loads for me. No wild bear hunting.

So anyone have any idea how these run for throat and groove width? It’s made by Uberti in case you didn’t know. The only Uberti I have is. .38-55 high wall with a rather large throat.

It’d be nice if one of my molds would work. I even have a 9mm 124 mold that I think is a truncated cone. I never used it, just bought in a bundle buy here iirc. I read that style of bullet is fairly common with the CAS folks.

I have all manner of SWC molds but they likely will cause hiccups and frustration.

Anyways, here’s to new guns and hot molds!

Ha! I can edit the title inside but not the outside viewable title apparently, I guess this thread will die a quick ignoble death.

I was rooting around my molds and think I got two candidates.

Two from NOE

360-160 WFN plain base and a 358-135 FN also a plain base.

I got the rifle yesterday. Love the sights, Ladder rear, no dumb buck horns and a nice solid thick front post. The rear notch is fairly generous too.

I have a bedding job to finish on another gun so anymore playing with this will wait.

Blue black bluing is quite nice, wood is very well fitted. Trigger is smooth but a little heavy. Eventually I will likely change a couple springs and polish things up. The lever safety spring isn’t as heavy as I expected so I may not change that.

Best of luck and have fun!

Good luck with her. Let us know if the moulds work.

I love that model of rifle and really want one in .44 Special.

Let us know how yours shoots.

35W

Will do!

I made 5 .38 special action proving dummies with NOE 358-135 flat nose at about 1.46” and some ..357 cases at 1.56” cases. I cast them of wheel weights and they dropped at .360 and I sized them to .359” and lubed with White Label 2500+

Both ran through the action fine. The .357 were looking long in the lifter.

Looking at clays for some mild cowboy loads.

I have Clays, Zip, WST, True Blue, International Clays, BE86, but all out of BE, Unique and only a dribble of W231 left.

Edit.

Oh I forgot I had two cans of Trailboss.
That lloading gate spring is quite firm. Loading is a bit of a nuisance as I bashed my thumbnail weeks ago and its thin from delaminating where it was damaged and not growing right. New growth is slowly fixing things. I am tempted to narrow the strap on the loading gate.

Dumb question.....Do you think a single lube groove is enough lube for an 18.5” barrel at a relatively sedate cowboy speed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lance Boyle

Dumb question.....Do you think a single lube groove is enough lube for an 18.5” barrel at a relatively sedate cowboy speed?

---

A good size single lube groove is plenty.

35W

Thank you! All my .357 has been through six guns. This is a new to me mold and a new rifle. BTW that NOE mold once up to temp cast and dropped nicely! a hot mold and 720F lead temp and she was singing.

You want a deep lube groove for low pressure loads. By deep I really actually mean weak. A deep lube groove on a .358 bullet might have a .26" wide shank that is getting squished by the base driving band and the skinny shank will rivet out to .3-.33", causing the lube groove to shrink and pump some lube. A shallow, strong lube groove might already be .3" wide and is much stronger and harder to deform than the .26" wide shank on the deep lube groove. The end result is that the shallower lube groove won't start deforming and shrinking and pumping lube until a higher pressure.

Likewise if you shoot high pressure with a weak deep lube groove, even with hard lead, the weak lube groove will collapse, pump its lube violently and the lube gasket around the bullet will act like a sizing die. Once the bullet is sized down and the pressure drops enough to where the lube groove stops pumping, the residual pressure will blow the lube forward of the bullet, leaving a naked undersized bullet. This is why people see leading at the muzzle as they incrementally increase the load - they are using too weak of a lube groove design for the pressure that they want to shoot. Leading at the muzzle does NOT mean lack of lube, it means your lube groove is too weak/deep for that alloy and pressure combo.

That’s some deep understanding of what is going on!

Well so far All loads that I tried are hitting well above the sights. I called Cimmaron to see what the options are as this model has the front sight machined as part of the front barrel band. I need a taller front sight.

I tried:
UMC 38 spl 130 FMJ, high and left
Federal 158 LRN high at 25,50 and 100
Federal .357 158 JSP were much higher and hitting the top edge of the paper but most were above the paper altogether.

Maybe some Lee cast 125s run slow might get to the aiming point.

It’s a shame as I like the sights but holding that low isn’t going to be conducive to hitting targets. These sights are about the only option that aren’t buck horns which I don’t care for. If it was a dovetailed front sight I’d buy a Marbles of the right height and drive on but it’s not.

Lance I have seen in my 357 rifles that point of impact changes dramatically when you change the load. I typically see with my 2 loads a 12-14 inch point of impact difference at 50 yards when switching between 158 at 2000 fps and 125 at 1300 fps. Lead hardness differences make the bullet move left or right. If the bullets are roughly the same hardness then they will have the same windage.

One time I did manage to have a mild magnum shoot sort of near my 38 special load, within a few inches at 50 yards. I was shooting a 158 at 1400 fps with Power Pistol and it hit reasonably close to the 125 at 1300 fps.

In your situation though, you didn't have a single load hit close to POA yet so you would definitely need a taller sight. You could get some thin steel shim from a hacksaw blade and silver solder it to the top f your front sight to gain height. Brass would be easier to work with if you don't mind the brass color and glare in bright light. Solder a chunk of brass on there and file it to shape, shoot some, and if you are now shooting low you can file some brass off the top.

There is a formula to figure out how much sight height you need on the skinner sights website. You need the length of your sight radius, height the bullets are hitting over POA, and yardage. Plug it in and it will tell you how much taller of a sight you need.

Before you file your sight down, make sure to take ammo that shoots the highest and ammo that shoots the lowest and make sure that you can zero for both loads. It would be a bummer to go through all the effort and now you can zero 38s but 357s are too high, or now you can zero 357s but 38s are too low.

Thank you for those thoughts.

I do want to test out some 125 grain bullets. Maybe they’ll be what it takes without mods.

+1 on hardness affecting windage. I have seen that before with revolvers switching between lead and jacketed.

The Federal .38 158 LRN load is about as slow as they come, about 750-770 iirc in their pistol mv.

I thought about having a welder friend Tig metal to the top of the front sight and I could dress it down and probably paint it due to heat. Not sure if they have a stick that would take bluing so paint or epoxy painting the tip would likely be the ticket.

Hopefully Cimarron just put the wrong part on my gun. Greg, the fellow I spoke with at Cimarron said the different calibers definitely have different front sight heights. He had to do some research on the integral front sight bands before getting back to me. Hopefully it’s just a parts swap. I have no idea if the barrel diameters are the same from caliber to caliber, if so swapping in one of the taller ones like from the .45 colt or a .44 may fix me up. Or like I said I had the wrong part version from the factory. I gave him my front sight height above the barrel surface for reference.

I’d rather have the right part supplied than modifying a part when it’s this new. If I had to file some off the original I’d be silent on the issue.

I did play with Brownell’s, Marble’s and Dawson’s calculators and charts yesterday. Depending on which one I need to replace my o.390” front sight height with something about 0.460-0.490”.

Edit, I remember back in my school days using Trigonometry to calculate a sight adjustment on my Ithaca slug gun. Ammo was expensive when you’re still in school. I was pretty darned close with my calculation.

Or should I call that gun math Triggernometry?

Second edit. Thinking about what you said about hardness......I had some .32 S&W Long loads hitting left at 15 yards with a fixed sight S&W model 31-1. IIRC I used 40-1. I should revisit that mold and try another alloy. Thanks for the mental nudge.

It’s a model 73, not a gun I really want to shoot magnum power loads in despite its chambering. I truly bought this for a fun centerfire plinker.

If you REALLY love the gun (and I would!!), you have a couple of options.

Send the band/sight to a gunsmith and he can either cut the front sight off and mill a dovetail in its place so you can install a dovetail front sight, or he can mill the front sight almost off and cut a groove in its place so you can use a pinned front sight, like you find on custom revolvers. This would be my choice.

I have my wife's grandfathers ancient (circa 1915) '94 Winchester 30-30 that shoots a full 16" high at 100 with any reasonable load. This rifle has the rear ladder but the front sight is pinned. So I got a piece of 14 ga. steel stock, thinned it until it fit in the front sight base then shot, filed, repeated until I had the POI I wanted.

On a side note, I have two '92 Rossi's, .357 and .44, and in both, the heavier the bullet, the higher they shoot. Just something to think about.

35W

I hadn’t even thought about that to mill in a dovetail for a marbles or other sight. I’d probably use something different than a Marbles, I like the thick square post on it now, I am sure there are dovetailed sights in that configuration too. Just not as famous.

Cutting a slot and pinning is just as good an idea.

That’s a good idea if Cimarron doesn’t come through.

I should order a couple boxes of 105 and 125 grain bullets to try them too. I would prefer the 125 I think as long as the gun does. There’s so little recoil with the .38 special 158 LRN that there is no need to game it down. I doubt I’d ever enter a cowboy competition although they hold them only about 45 minutes away in Saratoga.

My chief complaint with Cimarron/Uberti Saddle Ring Carbines & Trappers is the style of front sights which are incorperated into the front barrel bad. They have chosen to produce a front sight style which is not true to the originals - Which had a post that is integral to the barrel ( I think actually forged in to the barrel shape ) with a slot cut into the rectangular post which retains a blade that is pinned in. Multiple blade heights and styles could be used to accommodate caliber and point of impact, as well as shooters preference. I suspect the manufacturer made this choice to reduce manufacturing cost. I would pay extra to have the original style front sight feature. Just one guys beef

I reached out again to the folks at Cimarron, they’re still trying to get it figured out to resolve it.