I would be interested to know what "minor alterations" Miroku made to the 1873 design. I know they made the rear of the bolt different as they installed a safety mechanism that the originals (as well as Ubertis) do not have.
This is going to be long, but here goes.
They introduced the round barreled short rifle first, which I bought in early 2014. Since this was a less common version of the 1873, I had nothing to compare it to. I had an original and 2 Uberti's at the time, but all had the longer octagon sporting rifle barrels.
The first thing that bothered me though--was the type font that they used for all the barrel and receiver stampings. Instead of the period correct 18th century style they use a blocky sans serif modern style which just didn't look right. Uberti chose to use a period correct font style for their rifles and it simply looks more authentic--even if it doesn't say Winchester and made in Italy instead of Japan.
Next was the Rube Goldberg lawyer safety built into the receiver and the firing pin extension. What they did was to replace what was a single piece of steel with nine components including a ugly lug drilled through the top of the receiver. Of course an original and the Uberti's have none of this.
Here's what it looks like. You can barely see part of the lug peeking out from under the rear of the dust cover. The extension is now hollow with an internal pin, cam lever, and coil spring all held in by two press fit pins.
It didn't bother me at first, but then it caused an issue that I thought was going to require me to have to return it for repair.
While cleaning it after a shooting session, my rag caught the little cam tab sticking up out of the longitudinal slot in the firing pin extension. It levered the cam up to an unnatural vertical position, which unseated the internal coil
spring. This in effect jammed the entire action. I could not close the bolt. Before sending it back to the service center, I decided to see if I could fix the issue myself. It took me the better part of a frustrating evening to figure
out. Re-seating the internal coil spring required using micro tools and a hobby magnifying lamp which fortunately I had. I have since replaced the firing pin extensions on both rifles with an after market drop in solid steel replacement that returns the part to the original configuration. The lug and its retaining screw are still in the receiver, but removing them would leave a gaping hole. The rifles still have a half cock and the lever trigger block safeties which have been good enough for 140 years now.
Lastly was an issue I have with the sporting rifle, which I got at the end of 2014. It is a beautiful rifle, but of course it also came with the two issues mentioned above with the short rifle. I could do nothing about the modern font stamping, but like the short rifle I also replaced the overly complex firing pin extension.
However, now I had a rifle that was the exact same model as my 1891 original and two of my Uberti's for a better comparison. I spotted the 3rd non authentic problem when I removed it from the box. It was the octagon barrel. For some unknown reason, Miroku chose to give it an extreme taper from breech to muzzle that no original nor any of the Uberti's have ever had.
Here's a shot of my original next to the Miroku sporting rifle. You can see that the Miroku barrel is so tapered that there is an observable gap between it and the magazine at the muzzle. Because of this they had to put a much taller front sight and a much longer magazine hanger. Why they chose to do this, I have no clue.
Putting the three rifles on a scale revealed that the original and the Uberti weighed within a half ounce of each other at about 8 lbs. while the Miroku was a full 1/2 pound lighter. Besides minor internal geometric changes, I have to believe that most of that reduction in weight is due the over tapered barrel.
You may think that I am being overly picky, but when I pay over $1500 for what is supposed to be an accurate reproduction of one of the most famous guns in history stamped with the name of the original maker, I don't want useless alterations that affect both function and looks.
As I mentioned, there are enough minor internal geometric variations that it would be impossible to fake one of Japanese rifles as an original, so the listed external alterations were simply unnecessary IMHO.
I stewed on this for a while and then finally called the US office asking for the correct email address to voice my concerns. The lady I talked to gave me one and assured me that somebody would respond. I wrote a polite but firm letter detailing my disappointments. I didn't think I was going to accomplish much, but still wanted a reply of some sort.
All I ever got back was a catalog.
In their ad copy, the company that now makes Winchesters states. "Why have a copy of a copy when you can own the real thing?" What does that even mean other than total marketing B.S.
.
The Uberti and the Miroku are both fine rifles and the Miroku will still edge out the Uberti in fit and finish, but not by that much. However, other than being marked as made in Italy and using European Walnut rather than American, the Uberti is a reasonable and mostly authentic copy of an original Winchester while the Miroku having been pointlessly altered and modernized is much less so.
Sorry to go on so long, but I wanted thoroughly to back up my statement that in my opinion---pound for pound the Uberti is a more accurate reproduction of a 19th century 1873 Winchester than the Miroku is.
Cheers
P.S. I have already have a beautiful mint Uberti 1866 sporting rifle that I acquired locally for only $800, so based on my past experience, I'm pretty sure I will pass on the new Miroku offering.
