marlinguy wrote on Oct 26
th, 2018 at 6:23pm:
Just what nomenclature would you suggest Marlin would use on the .45-70 with small primers? I personally don't think Marlin was trying to take the .45-70 as their own, but rather just ensuring the .45-70 ammo used in their guns was small primer.
So tell us what they should have done? Not chamber their guns in this caliber at all?
And since we're talking cartridges Win. stole. Don't forget the .40-60 Marlin that Winchester did nothing to change except call theirs the .40-65 WCF. Did it really have 5 more grains of powder? Maybe Marlin should have put a few more or less grains in the .45-70 and called it a .45-65 or .45-75?
What was it about Marlin's rifle that required the use of small primers for the 45-70, when WRA's Model 1885 and 1886 didn't?
Was the 40-60 one of the cartridges used in the large frame Colt Lightning rifle, and if so, did Marlin ever mention Colt's name in association with the cartridge?
WRA did so.
There's even a notation on page 101 of Hoyem's Volume IV book that "The 40-60 is found with Colt headstamp made for them by Winchester."
As far as changing a load by 5 grains of powder and renaming it, isn't that what UMC did when they offered their 40-65 (2 1/2" Straight) cartridge? Was Sharps given any honorable mention or credit for their pre-existing 40-70 Straight case when this occurred?
Something I've noticed when going through the Cartridge Sections of the old WRA catalogs is that WRA didn't append the WCF onto the end of the standard load 32-40 or 38-55 cartridges.
I could have missed it, but have you seen a "32-40WCF" or a "38-55WCF" factory caliber stamp rolled onto an original WRA barrel?
Or were they simply stamped either "32-40" or "38-55" ?