Generally for precision work, again generally, you will find that the Browning designed Winchester 1885 rifles we refer to a Hi-walls have a much quicker locktime as well as less pre-ignition action torque due to having a lighter centerhung hammer than the Sharps rifles you are used to.  The 'wall's centerhung hammer permits a much more direct and reliable firing pin arrangement.  If you are shooting for a group size or a score on a paper target those advantages really weigh in.

After all the original 'wall was at least a generation of tech-development beyond the civil war era percussion rifles the Sharps was derived from.  the '77 Sharps was their way of upgrading the basic Sharps action to produce a more target worthy rifle; and of course the later Sharps-Borchardt was the final evolution in their line.

As I understand it; The Sharps of course was one of the most desired rifles by the soldiers of the Civil War.  While it was not as rapid fire as the Henry it had a much more powerful cartridge.  I suspect that the attraction of the Sharps in the post-civil war buffalo hunting era was stimulated by the fact that so many of the men who were on the frontier in that era were CW veterans. Sharps also targeted their postwar production and marketing to the western market.  By the time the 1885 Winchester came along the Sharps had a decade of head start, the buffalo hunt era was almost over.  Repeating rifles were more popular for most hunting use other than for really big game.  The single shot pretty well evolved into a niche arm most commonly found on the target range where the Sharps was supplanted by more modern actions. 

There are a number of 'walls being currently produced, both here in the USA and abroad.  My belief is that most of them are better-made in terms of metallurgy and QC production methods than the originals.
Ballard Rifles of Cody WY makes a supurlative version with quality and construction that equals or exceeds anyhting you will find with the modern American-made '74 Sharps.  The various versions made under the aegis of Browning while being a reinterpretation in terms of internal lockwork are faithful in exterior appearance and basic function to the originals and many are seen on the lines of the BPCR and similar venus where the '74 Sharps are most commonly found. I have no experience wiht the Italian-made versions so I cannot speak to them.

MIke I don't disagree with you in principal.  "it's the shooter, not the gun" within logical reason.  however I would suggest that given identical 45-70 loads out of rifles with equal spec barrels the High wall will have an advantage over the sidehammer 74 in offhand shooting and in any type of paper target match where group size or score is measured.  Obviously in a metallic sillhouette match when all that counts is a knockdown and you have a spotter to call your shots the 74's work perfectly well. 
I've used both my 45-70 browning'wall (with a rather stiff trigger) with the 457676 lyman matthews 500 gr bullet and my cousin's Shilo Sharps with a nice DST and the same loads off the bench at 200 yards and the wall will group better and score higher even though it has a shorter and lighter barrel---and kicks me around a fair amount more too boot.  Now trying to knockdown the rams off cross-stix might be a different story.

DWS8130:

Your statement about the side hammer and Civil War veterans is undoubtably true. However, I believe the main reason the Sharps was used more extensivly than the rolling block was that the side hammer was what people were used to. Guns for centuries had the hammer hung on the side. The human animal is mighty resistant to change.

Bill

Two questions here: are other actions (like, specifically the high wall) theoretically better than the Sharps? and are they actually better in real-life competition results?

Answer, IMO, yes to both questions.

For a mighty convincing argument, just check the equipment lists of the winners for competitions like Schuetzen, Mid-range and Long Range. Lotta walls, Ballards and Borchardts, very few sidehammers. Lots more sidehammer winners in BPCR Silhouette, but IMO Silhouette is a game that's always a lot more fun but also is generally a much less demanding game that's generally played by more traditional-minded (and less-demanding) shooters.
JMOFWIW, good luck, Joe

Let me say right now, thank you to all of you that have responded to this post. It’s given me, and I’m sure to others that are just reading the replies, a better understanding and feel between the high wall and the non high walls. I’d also would like to invite all of you that have just been reading the post to participate with it. don’t be afraid, we don’t bite, and yes we are civil in our opinions and thoughts on this and any topic.   

           I’d like to respond out of order of the replies to this posting. 

leadball:

                   You asked if my question dealt with lead bullet shooting as in Schuetzen, BPCR etc. I was just wondering about high walls as a whole. Yet I’m more interested in rifles more like my single shot rifle. Since I cast my own lead bullets, your assumption would be more correct then not. You mentioned that the high walls are harder to load and unload compare to I would assume the rifles with the external hammers. Am I correct in my understanding from your reply? 


DWS8130:

                 I do have a few questions that are geared more for the many other members on this forum, that just read the post and will not ask any questions. These questions are meant to help simplify a previous answer that was given. 

                 You spoke about how the high wall has “a much quicker lock time as well as less pre-ignition action torque due to having a lighter center hung hammer than the Sharps rifles you are used to.” Am I correct that you are stating that the hammer comes down faster and more direct on the primer then a side hammer does? And if sounded like that alone makes for a better group size and score on paper targets. I don’t have the expertise that you have in that area, yet it does not seem practical to me that the speed of the fall of a hammer and the center hung hammer can make that much of a difference. Then again this is why I made the post, you and others know more about this then I do, for now. I time I will be much more educated in this area. 

         Yes, I very much agree with you on why the Sharps were so much in demand in its time. Yes, history has shown that something new, no matter how much better it is…is not always quickly accepted. The history of guns has shown us this, especially during times of war. We, that is the government likes to stay with what has been proven to work in the past. They are slow to change. The Sharps had a hard and long battle to get into the Civil War. Enough on the history of the Sharps. That is not what this posting was intended for. Not a battle of the rifles, or rifle companies. Just some education and understanding on high walls. 

              You mentioned that there are a number of 'walls being currently produced, both here in the USA and abroad. Are they basically the same design, or are there variations in the design of a high wall? 





               You also stated in a reply that a “High wall will have an advantage over the sidehammer 74 in offhand shooting and in any type of paper target match where group size or score is measured.” Would that be the same if they were done on a shooting bench with bench rest front and back to keep it the same and fair? It’s just my opinion and observation that any shooting comparison that is not done from a controlled test, is susceptible to shooter error and not the guns fault. Even shooting from a shooting bench, has some error in it, yes that would be the shooter. 


Tommy
 
                I’m currently using IMR 4198 in mine. I loaded some test loads of IMR 3031 and shot them last week. They did well, yet I need to go back another day a see if they repeat their previous results. They ranged in the upper 1200 fps, compare to the mid to low 1000’s with my light loads of IMR 4198. Just try a few loads out and see for yourself. I used the 36-gr load for my test loads of IMR 3031.


     Now just so you all know, even if I wanted a high wall, I’m not selling my Shiloh Sharps, and I’m not wealthy enough to go out buying these rifles. Not all of us out here are that rich. Perhaps some of the guys that I shoot with have high walls, I’ll have to check this out at our next monthly shoot. 

Hope you all are having a great 4th of July.

Browning highwall 45 cal clones had 2 different barrels,  the limited production Creedmoor and BPCR editions were fitted with fast twist 1/18 Badger barrels at the Miroku factory.  Miroku made 45 barrels are 1/20.  A very few (couple dozen or less according to my source at Browning) late model B-78 tangless action were fitted with the badger barrels as part of the run-up to the special editions and sold out mixed in with the general production.  They were shortened and tapered to a sporter configuration and the only way to tell them from the run-of-the-mill '78 traditional rifles and traditional hunters is by measuring the barrel twist.
I do not know if Badger provided premium barrels for the 40-65 versions.

Sharps, Drew, and DWS--thanks for commemts/responses.  Changing gears from Hi-walls, in two days, I pick up my CPA Silhouette in .38-55; the suspense is almost unbearable!

Tommy (uteeqtee)