What do you think of the Winchester (Miroku) 1885 Trapper with a 16" barrel?

Personally I prefer an 18" barrel as a minimum on a single shot, and 20" is more ideal for me, and still a very short gun. And, "most ideal" for me, is the 22" barrel on my Springfield carbine. I think "they" got it right when they decided on that length for the Trapdoor carbine. But, there is kind of a "cool factor" with that gun. "Cool and novel looking rifle".

Do you not reload? A 300 grain bullet not loaded as hot as one could get it, which seems to be the trend in .45-70 these days, would have little recoil, and still be very powerful.

Gordon said:

I had a .44/40 Rolling block carbine like that short one pictured. I sold it 5 or 10 years ago for a good profit to some SASS guy who had to have it.

Click to expand...

I would guess that rifle has a 20 or 22" barrel.

eastbank said:

i like 45-70,s, short-long-light-heavy. the target was shot by a ruger # 3 from a rest with a 300 gr hornady bullet with 50 grs H-4198 for a honest 1900 fps(croney) at 100 yards. as for recoil, when shooting at game i never feel it and sight in off a lead sled. one thing for sure i have never lost a deer that i shot thru the lungs with the 45-70 and they are easy to find.

Click to expand...

400 grain Speer JSP, 80 grains 3f Swiss.

Reminds me of the late Dan Theodore who would buy odd combination Mirokus on sale and rebarrel them to a BP round. The one I saw him with had started as a Low Wall .243 but ended up with a 30" barrel in whatever .35 or .38 he was interested in at the time.

Steve Milbocker said:

I personally don’t have any use for a “short barreled” rifle.

Click to expand...

It's interesting... when I was younger, I wanted everything BIG. 32" 12GA, Long-slide .45's (with or without a laser sight... ) big 6 and 8" revolvers... As I've gotten older, however, I trend toward shorter barrels. All of my 1911's are 4", now. I prefer short-barreled revolvers (4-5".) I bought an M1a some years ago... a 16" barreled one. I regularly leave the 20" AR in the safe and tote the 16" carbine when I'm out and about. But they all have a specific purpose... and some people find them useful, some don't. But I have longer barreled arms... a 24" Savage bolt gun, and my Pedersoli 1885 .45-70 with a .32" barrel. Those serve a purpose as well... and it's a good thing, I find them quite cumbersome.

I don't know if I could warm up to a .45-70 with a 16" barrel, as I mentioned previously, I would rather have a repeater in .45 Colt if I was going there. Then again, I don't get things like AR pistols, BFR's in rifle cartridges, or something like a Shockwave 12ga pistol. But... to each his own.

Miroku is a great company. My concern using such a small rifle in 45/70 is the shoulder. Will kick like a mule. If it is anything like my 450 marlin guide gun it requires a visit to the dentist to replace my fillings that were knocked loose every time I fired it.

I think you could use it to show the versatility and power of the cartridge. It will kill no matter the velocity. But load up some 405g cast bullets over unique or trailboss. And then load the same bullet with a full charge of 3031. Just don’t do that with kids or women. I hate when I see those videos on YT.

I think it would be a fun gun to own. And while somewhat awkward looking, I do like it.

Solomonson said:

Yeah, I don't agree.

IF there is truly a historic basis for the "trapper" -- if they were actually produced by Winchester back in the day, then they are initially justified by that -- form follows historic function. Going a bit deeper the forearm looks quite nice actually, the sights are modern/adjustable but still fine -- including the front and the short barrel is what makes it a trapper.

This guy gives one a real workout here. Looks like a lot of fun to me, and it looks good doing it:

Click to expand...

He seemed to be having fun, but I have to wonder about all of those extra motions while reloading. I reckon that the extra time to switch hands, while reloading, is OK at the range, but is wasted consumption of time if one were hunting, or shooting for another serious purpose. Quigley would never have survived being Down Under, had he reloaded like that.

Rexster said:

He seemed to be having fun, but I have to wonder about all of those extra motions while reloading. I reckon that the extra time to switch hands, while reloading, is OK at the range, but is wasted consumption of time if one were hunting, or shooting for another serious purpose. Quigley would never have survived being Down Under, had he reloaded like that.

Click to expand...

Well Quigley wasn’t pulling cartridges from his short sleeve poplin shirt pocket either. Plus he could have started shooting at whatever the target, at 782 yards (how far he shot the bucket). Not the 15-20 yards the guy in the video was so aptly taking on. 782 yards gives you a pretty good amount of time to chamber a few rounds without too much pressure.

I think that it will carry well but balance poorly, making it hard to shoot offhand and even harder to shoot of a rest.

if you don,t want one, don,t get one. i know they are handy on a 4x wheeler-snow mobile and as a truck rifle.

Methinks the recoil of the .45-70 has been/is being greatly over-rated. I realize we all have different levels of recoil tolerance, and I'm pretty much recoil intolerant, but still, the regular "rifle load" of 70 grains behind a 405 grain bullet is quite tolerable in my Trapdoor carbine. The standard rifle load, is my "carbine load". I can shoot that all day. I shoot 80 grains of Swiss for my Rifle load, in my Marlin and my Trapdoor Rifle. Now my Trapdoor rifle is almost a ten pound rifle, so she's not going to kick, but the Marlin is a lightweight, around seven pounds. Even so, the recoil will NOT shake your teeth loose.

If one does not reload, and I'm not sure why anyone wouldn't, then perhaps one is going to have to shoot all the modern .45-70 hot fad-loads. Are there anymore .45-70 Trapdoor equivalent loads on the market anymore? Or has the guide-gun crowd restricted the market to over-loads? If so, one would not have to shoot Buffalo Bores in such a small light "trapper".

Does anyone make and market a black powder load? If so, that would be the way to go, if one is that recoil shy. ?? Just a thought.

300 GR. CAST LFP
Hodgdon Trail Boss
C.O.L. 2.465"

Starting Load
Grs. 14.0
Vel. (ft/s) 1,199
Pressure 19,400 CUP

Maximum Load
Grs. 16.5
Vel. (ft/s) 1,285
Pressure 20,900 CUP

Seems like it would kick easy.

rbernie said:

I think that it will carry well but balance poorly, making it hard to shoot offhand and even harder to shoot of a rest.

Click to expand...

I used have a Browning-branded Miroku 1885, with a much longer barrel, 26” or 28”, and, yes, the longer rifle “balances” better. I could say the same thing, regarding revolvers, as a 7.5” SA revolver balances so nicely, but the 3” to 4.75” carries well. Easy solution: Have both long and short versions.

I have the several lengths of revolving pistols covered, so, it is a matter of gettin’ that Long Rifle. That was, indeed, a wink, but I am not kidding. I sold or traded that 26” or 28” 1885, with plans to eventually replace it with a rifle with one having a heavier, and, perhaps longer barrel. It is just a matter of finally getting around to it. And, of course, if I just hate using the short-barreled 1885, it can be re-barreled.

I have shot the Marlin Trapper which has a similar length barrel, about two inches shorter than my Guide Gun. I found it tolerable and no worse than my Guide Gun. Enough so as soon as Marlin is back on line I plan to acquire one. We were shooting HSM Cowboy which is 405 grain hard cast at about 1300 FPS (not sure what length HSM uses) but the 45-70 does not drop as much velocity with shorter barrels and is still potent. The recoil of standard loads "safe for all rifles" stuff is pretty mild and that is the same basic ballistics as was used to hunt buffalo. I like 13.0 grains of Tail Boss, 405 grains Missouri Bullet Company hard cast bullets, very mild shooting and fun.

This rifle has a 24” barrel and is still a short light weight nice handling rifle.

That's nice. I wish my 94's had that butt plate on them. Too bad the flat butt plate became standard.

Could be a fun rifle.

Regarding the recoil, long vs short barrel as to which one kicks more, I'd say "it depends". One example comes to mind, I have a couple of the surplus M95 straight-pull carbines and one of the rarer full length rifles. So the only difference is the barrel length and the weight, which isn't a lot -- these have pretty light barrels. At one time I picked up a pile of the 1938, german loaded surplus ammo. Yeah, it kicks hard out of the carbine, but it always seemed that it kicked harder out of my rifle. I've not chrono'd either but the longer barreled gun is better at getting the bullet up to speed and I'm getting more recoil due to greater velocity, this time overcoming the weight differential in this pairing. Most likely also using a slower powder than you'd use in a 45/70 adding to the effect.