40 sbn

[Caprock]

Radical neck sizing for mine! Am seriosly thinking about having some thicker necked lathe turned brass made by RMC to play with.

[Don McDowell]

Try trimming back some 2 7/8 brass then forming,that may give you thick enogh necks to shoot patched without sizing

[Caprock]

Possibility but i'd rather have the right thickness and the correct headstamp. Aybe people would stop telling me I have the wrong ammo

[Mike]

Perhaps I should say a little more about the .40/70 BN I had. After all, my previous comment is completely negative and I'm really not that kind of guy, am I? Okay, my .40/70 BN was my 3rd Sharps and I wanted the .40/70 because (I thought) it should fire bullets that were lighter than what a .45/70 generally uses, at higher velocities, and do all that with less recoil. Two paper patch bullet molds were ordered for it, 330 and 370 grainers, but I could not find accurate loads for either of them. Perhaps if I knew then what I know now... Also, the rifle seemed to have a more savage recoil than my .45/70 (which I still have) even though those lighter bullets were chronographed at slower speeds than the heavier bulleted .45/70 loads. There was nothing comfortable about that rifle. Performance was lacking in every respect. So, I sold it to a friend. This friend, and we're still friends, had the same troubles with this gun right up until the day he had it re-barreled to .45/70. After that it shot pretty well. Since that time I have been tempted more than once to get another .40/70 BN (I still enjoy such temptations) because I really want to like that little cartridge. My experiences with the .44 Sharps bottlenecks, both .44/77 and .44/90, have been pretty good, and I don't see the bottleneck as any particular problem. Also, the .40/70 BN is a Hartford Sharps cartridge and that makes it more inviting to me. I do have two of the .40/70 SS rifles and seeing Jamison come out with properly headstamped brass was a delight. If Jamison or Star Line should make .40/70 BN brass available I'd probably fall to that temptation... Now, please continue with positive comments about the .40/70 BN and you might trigger my memory about something I was doing wrong with my rifle. Actually, I hope you do. Shoot sharp, Mike

[Don McDowell]

Even the ODG's had a rub with the recoil of the bottle necks. I was seriously considering a 40-70, until we started messing with the 40-90 bn. And that's why after a bit of fun with the 40-70ss the canoe paddle was ordered in the ss version

[Don McDowell]

Possibility but i'd rather have the right thickness and the correct headstamp. Aybe people would stop telling me I have the wrong ammo

Use the Norma stuff with no head stamp,that'll shut the head stamp whiners up

[Caprock]

Perhaps I should say a little more about the .40/70 BN I had. After all, my previous comment is completely negative and I'm really not that kind of guy, am I? Okay, my .40/70 BN was my 3rd Sharps and I wanted the .40/70 because (I thought) it should fire bullets that were lighter than what a .45/70 generally uses, at higher velocities, and do all that with less recoil. Two paper patch bullet molds were ordered for it, 330 and 370 grainers, but I could not find accurate loads for either of them. Perhaps if I knew then what I know now... Also, the rifle seemed to have a more savage recoil than my .45/70 (which I still have) even though those lighter bullets were chronographed at slower speeds than the heavier bulleted .45/70 loads. There was nothing comfortable about that rifle. Performance was lacking in every respect. So, I sold it to a friend. This friend, and we're still friends, had the same troubles with this gun right up until the day he had it re-barreled to .45/70. After that it shot pretty well. Since that time I have been tempted more than once to get another .40/70 BN (I still enjoy such temptations) because I really want to like that little cartridge. My experiences with the .44 Sharps bottlenecks, both .44/77 and .44/90, have been pretty good, and I don't see the bottleneck as any particular problem. Also, the .40/70 BN is a Hartford Sharps cartridge and that makes it more inviting to me. I do have two of the .40/70 SS rifles and seeing Jamison come out with properly headstamped brass was a delight. If Jamison or Star Line should make .40/70 BN brass available I'd probably fall to that temptation... Now, please continue with positive comments about the .40/70 BN and you might trigger my memory about something I was doing wrong with my rifle. Actually, I hope you do. Shoot sharp, Mike

What powder & granulation did you use?

[bobw]

I learned from being there and doing that and from others who BTDT. The one size fits all approach to loading BN's based on straight wall experience DOESN'T work. Save your FFg, mag primers and greasers for straight wall carts. LR primers, Fg powder, card wad, grease wad,card wad ,and patch to bore dia ppb's is the way to success. A tight chamber with the right leade angle will also enhance that. Repeatable shots with minimal and manageable fouling just by blowing down the breech. MLV set SBN resurgence back many years with his approach to them. bobw

[Caprock]

Edit, edit, edit! I mentioned above that my current load was a 400 gr. My mistake....that was a RCBS greaser mold that really didn't work out. My Brooks PP mold is set at 370 gr!!!!!


I'd love to see some Jamison brass made and have contacted them several time to that effect. Surely there are just as many 40 SBN shooters as there are 25-20 SS!

[Mike]

Perhaps I should say a little more about the .40/70 BN I had. After all, my previous comment is completely negative and I'm really not that kind of guy, am I? Okay, my .40/70 BN was my 3rd Sharps and I wanted the .40/70 because (I thought) it should fire bullets that were lighter than what a .45/70 generally uses, at higher velocities, and do all that with less recoil. Two paper patch bullet molds were ordered for it, 330 and 370 grainers, but I could not find accurate loads for either of them. Perhaps if I knew then what I know now... Also, the rifle seemed to have a more savage recoil than my .45/70 (which I still have) even though those lighter bullets were chronographed at slower speeds than the heavier bulleted .45/70 loads. There was nothing comfortable about that rifle. Performance was lacking in every respect. So, I sold it to a friend. This friend, and we're still friends, had the same troubles with this gun right up until the day he had it re-barreled to .45/70. After that it shot pretty well. Since that time I have been tempted more than once to get another .40/70 BN (I still enjoy such temptations) because I really want to like that little cartridge. My experiences with the .44 Sharps bottlenecks, both .44/77 and .44/90, have been pretty good, and I don't see the bottleneck as any particular problem. Also, the .40/70 BN is a Hartford Sharps cartridge and that makes it more inviting to me. I do have two of the .40/70 SS rifles and seeing Jamison come out with properly headstamped brass was a delight. If Jamison or Star Line should make .40/70 BN brass available I'd probably fall to that temptation... Now, please continue with positive comments about the .40/70 BN and you might trigger my memory about something I was doing wrong with my rifle. Actually, I hope you do. Shoot sharp, Mike

What powder & granulation did you use?

Hey Cap, Back then it was Fg or FFg, probably along with 10% or less of #4227 or #4198. That was a long time ago. Shoot sharp, Mike