Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: any thoughts on 405 winchester?

  1. #1
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    84

    Default any thoughts on 405 winchester?

    I saw a pretty good deal on a new Ruger #1 stainless in 405 Winchester. I was just wondering if anyone had any experience with this round. Would it make a good hunting rifle for black bear, moose, caribou? It looks like a standard load has a muzzle velocity of about 2200 fps and energy at 200 yds of 1545 ft lbs. It is the tropical version, so it has sights on it. Yes I am a Teddy Roosevelt fan, but that is not why I am looking at this caliber. :-)

    Thanks for any insight you can give,
    Andy

  2. #2
    Member Alangaq's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Hey! If I look thru this empty beer bottle, I think I can see Russia from here!!!
    Posts
    1,232

    Default

    Yep, I have a thought about the 405………… I wish I had bought one of those Winchester 95 when they were going for $1100

    The only other thing I know about this cartridge, except of course for my aforementioned self loathing for not buying when they were more realistically priced, is that the re-loading components seem to be limited and expensive, but with the single shot Ruger you will likely be able to load as you please with respect to bullets and COL. Should be a fun gun, and will no doubt have the poop for the critters mentioned.
    “You’ve gotten soft. You’re like one of those police dogs who’s released in to the wild and gets eaten by a deer or something.” Bill McNeal of News Radio

  3. #3
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    84

    Default Winchester 95

    I really like the Winchester 95s. It would be pretty neat to have one in the 405. My dad has an original 95 in 30-40 Krag. I have been trying to talk him out of it, but apparently he is pretty fond of it.

    Andy

  4. #4

    Default

    A friend has one in Ruger #1, and in spite of a whole bunch of other guns in his house, the Ruger 405 has become his favorite. It will just about stack cast bullets on top of each other at 100 yards. While you will have no reason to regret standard velocities with jacketed bullets on anything up to moose, he has also messed around with heating things up a bit. You can get some loads that will bring tears to your eyes in that Ruger, while pressures still seem reasonable. I'm not sure on all the details, but it seems like the more he shoots it, the more he wants to keep shooting it. He's never scoped it, so his hot loads come back with lots of "authority." Standard loads are comfortable. He uses cast bullets for general plinking and busting bunny heads, and it's hard to argue with his results.

  5. #5
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    84

    Default Thanks BrownBear

    This sounds good. I think I will try to get it bought and start playing around with it.
    Thanks for the info,
    Andy

  6. #6
    Member Matt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    3,410

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by snagbro1 View Post
    I really like the Winchester 95s. It would be pretty neat to have one in the 405. My dad has an original 95 in 30-40 Krag. I have been trying to talk him out of it, but apparently he is pretty fond of it.

    Andy
    Me too. I want to try and purchase one this year if I can find one reasonably priced.

  7. #7
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    4,431

    Default T.R. was right....

    I had one for about a year and a half here recently. A blued version of the No. 1 H. I loaded for it with every bullet I could find, everything except cast. Sold it last fall when I though there was a chance I could get an identical rifle in the 450/400 N.E., and I think now that will happen.

    The strong Ruger will handle the 300 grains in excess of 2400 fps and it was a very accurate rifle. Standard loads are 300 grains at 2200 and Hornady ammo is very good quality. There component brass is very good but annealed pretty soft. Care should be taken when expanding when reloading. Once fired it is really tough and I got some really heavy loads from it, 400 grain Woodleighs at 2050 fps. Hold on tight with this one.
    Hornady makes the 300 grain in a semi spitzer and a flat nose, the latter more accurate in my rifle. This is a very fine bullet made for this caliber and its coinstruction is about right for moose in a round of that velocity.

    I absolutely like the caliber and the rifle. I bought it because a friend of mine bought an original 1895 in pristine (new) condition. I wanted a strong modern rifle to work up loads in, safely, without a chance of damaging his $4000 rifle. I had not loaded for a 405 before. I loaded for his 1895 and he took a good moose up here with it last fall. It is a great caliber.

    The rifle is a little heavy for my tastes (except for the 400 grain bullets) but other wise it is really a well made rifle. I wish I could have kept it but I guess I'll replace it with another forum members' 450/400. It is also an H model but the added heft will be welcome with the N.E. round. I also want a No. 1S in 9.3x74. I think that would be a good moose getting pair. I think you'll like the caliber.
    Is there nothing so sacred on this earth that you aren't willing to kill or die for?



  8. #8

    Default The .405.

    When I was 15 my family gave me an original Win. '95 in ..30-40 Krag. Everybody else in the family had one. and my grandfather had used one for protection and meat hunting in Alaska during his sourdough days from about 1895 to 1903. They worked well for all family members, including me. We used the 180 gr. for deer and caribou the 220 gr. for Bear, elk and moose. No problems.

    I looked for an affordable .405 for years, being a Teddy Roosevelt fan and a '95 fan, but the ones I found were priced above what I was willing to pay. The affordable ones were worn out or abused and neglected beyond repair.

    In 2006 my best friend and hunting partener passed away and left me a Win. reproduction of the '95 in .405 Win. Since I have spent the last year and a half moving and haven't set up all my reloading equipment yet, I have only shot the factory rounds (Hornady) that I inherited. They are very accurate and recoil is not bad, though I may put a slip-on recoil pad over the sharp, factory, steel butt-plate. I hope to load the Hornady spire point 300 gr. bullets. The original rifles apparently do not shoot them well, and prefer the flat-points, probably because of excess leade for heavier bullets, but I am told the reproductions shoot well with the spire-points. That should extend effective range and 200 yd. evergy considerably. There may be other sources for spitzer bullets, though I haven't researched it yet. Eventually I will have cataract surgery and should be able to shoot with the iron sights better than I do now.

    I will test the bullets available, including the cast lead ones. The Hornady bullets may work very well at the modest velocities of the .405. It is possible to exceed the factory velocities in the very strong Ruger #1, but this may necessitate stronger bullets for hunting heavy game. After I have had a chance to wring out the .405, I will post the information. I will test the bullets.

    In it's original configuration, the .405 was a good lion stopper, and good reports came from it's use on brown bear and moose. We will see.
    Jack.

  9. #9

    Default Mdl. '95 aperture sight.

    Before we wear out this thread, I want to ask if anyone knows where I can obtain an aperture sight for the .405, Mdl. '95. My original '95 has a Redfield aperture sight, no model #, that was on it when the rifle was given to me in 1959, and the sight appeared to have been on the rifle a long time. It is rugged, capable of very fine adjustment, and has always worked well. I have been told that it is "not original" and that it has destroyed the "value of the rifle". This is not a museum piece and is not for sale. This and the .405 will be my last rifles to go, and when they go, they will be inherited by my son, who also doesn't care if the Redfield is "original." He will hunt with them and shoot them.

    I have seen a type of aperture sight that was an ungainly looking thing. It anchored at a single point on the forward end of the receiver, and was adjustable up and down by swinging in an arc. This is, I am told, the "correct" aperture sight, and was available from the factory. I am also told nobody makes one now (now there's an opportunity in a niche market). My buddy, who left me the rifle, also wanted to find one of those sights for it. They may be too expensive, if one could be found, in which case I would look for the old Redfield. Does anyone know of such sights being available anywhere? I have used the Redfield, and looked at it for 48 years, so it looks natural and attractive to me, but if I could reasonably put the "original" sight on, I would. I grew up using open sights and aperture sights with gold bead front sights. If the light is perfect, I can still see to shoot with the open sights. I can't hunt with them now. I can shoot pretty well, still, with the aperture sights, but that ability is deteriorating fast. After cataract surgery I am told I should be able to use both, but I know I will shoot better with the "peep" as we called them. Until my eyes got old, I actually preferred hunting with "peep sights." If a person has sharp eyes, fine, long-range shooting can be done with "peeps", certainly out to the limits of the .405. If I told you the ranges at which we cleanly shot deer with "peep" sights on the old .30-40s, you would call me a liar, or an "unethical hunter," but they worked fine. The only buck that "got away" from me we found 2 or 3 hours later, in the rain, and he ran quite a way because the bullet didn't open up on him. Remington 180 gr. Bronze Points were surprisingly accurate in my .30-40 for long range shooting and I probably overstretched the range on that one. It was a rather small buck, and the bullet went through the ribs, not the shoulder.

    Just for those of you who might want to hunt moose or elk with the '95 in .30-40, the 220 gr. Nosler Partition semi-spitzer, which came out a few years back, works like a charm, and is so accurate in my rifle that I had to shoot a number of expensive groups to believe it. I use a heavy charge of H4350. It opens great at .30-40 velocities and leaves a big exit wound. Thank you, Nosler! By the way, if you guessed that my favorite rifle is the Win. '95, you are right. I have some pretty fancy, fast, accurate and powerful rifles; some are "state of the art". But I love the '95. The others are just good tools. My 1895 Marlin in .45-70 tugs at my heart strings a little bit, but the range is so limited.
    Jack.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    porcupine creek
    Posts
    225

    Default 95 Winchester receiver sights

    Jack -The swinging receiver sight you're talking about is being made again . I was cruising firearm websites a few weeks ago and found a company offering these . I had looked for one a long time 10 years ago and gave up . I'll try to find it again and post the address .

  11. #11

    Default .405 Win., Mdl '95 receiver sight!

    Logman! You have brightened my day considerably, even considering it is dark out!!! I hope you can find it again!
    Jack.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    porcupine creek
    Posts
    225

    Default www.leverguns.com

    Jack- that company was found somewhere here

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    porcupine creek
    Posts
    225

    Default Jack - Winchester 95 receiver sight

    Buffalo Arms Co. (www.buffaloarms.com) makes the #38 receiver sight you're looking for . Tel. # 208-263-6953

  14. #14
    New member George's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    286

    Default Win 95 receiver sight

    Buffalo Arms sells the imported version that will work on the 95. Not too long ago they were back ordered so you'll have to call. The "ungainly thing" your talking about is the Lyman 21 or 38. The 38 has the windage adjustment wheel on the right side of the aperture bar. Either model including the current imported clone work very, very well on the 95. They were added to 95s as a factory special order and commonly added as aftermarket sights so are considered OK and original to the 95 if they are the right model Lyman. The Lyman 21 and 38 sights were also made for other Win lever length actions and are shorter. You see quite a few of the 95s with the wrong.... shorter Lymans on them. That also hurts the value of the originals because the rear mount screw was drilled/tapped into part of the patent date/Winchester stamping line on the side of the receiver.

  15. #15

    Default Buffalo Arms Co.

    Wow! Thanks for the information on Buffalo Arms Co. Logman and George. I will order that 'ungaily thing' today. My friend who left the rifle to me would have been pleased if I kept it sort of original, but I don't think he would have haunted me for putting on a Redfield or something. I'm sure I can get used to the look of the Mdl. 38 sight in time, and since I am kind of a 'form follows function' guy, I might learn to love it.

    I haven't located all my loading equipment yet after my move. Most of it is still in boxes, including all my reference books and loading journals, but I will be working up loads for the .405. Along with the rifle I received a good quantity of Hornady factory loads. I took those to the local range and fired a few under perfect light conditions. Although the rear sight was blurry, the blur was consistent, and I got a couple of very small groups at 100 yds. I know the aperture sight will improve my shooting, as will cataract surgery, so this rifle has a bright future. I love the rifle and the way it handles. It has a shorter barrel than my .30-40, which has a 38" tube, if I recall correctly. The .30-40, too, is capable of very fine accuracy, in spite of the ultra long barrel. The bore of the .30-40, after all these years, is like new, except probably smoother.

    I read a couple of articles that indicated some of the original .405s were not very accurate due to variations in bore diameter, and that this problem is well corrected in the clone. So it would seem to be. Thanks again guys! I have stumbled onto some pretty good people here!
    Jack.

  16. #16
    New member George's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    286

    Default more 405 :)

    There are two threads on the 405 going on at the same time!

    JM, you might slug the bore in your 95 to see what the groove diameter is. For jacketed bullets not so much of a problem. But, if you plan on shooting any cast.... the variations of bores along with the number of cast bullet diameters available can cause some iffy accuracy. My original Win 95 in 405 slugs at .4145" groove diameter. So with cast bullets I have to use gas checked, hard cast at 414" minimum to get the best accuracy. The .411" Hornady Jacketed Flat Points do fine.

  17. #17
    New member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by logman View Post
    Jack -The swinging receiver sight you're talking about is being made again . I was cruising firearm websites a few weeks ago and found a company offering these . I had looked for one a long time 10 years ago and gave up . I'll try to find it again and post the address .

    Look here,

    http://www.providencetoolcompanyllc.com/products/

    they provide a link to Buffalo Arms. I have one of the sights on my 1895 repro. It is well made and much better than the factory leaf rear.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •