I need ID for Winchester and date of Remington 45.70 rds


#1

Hello
I have some Remington and Winchester rds that have 500 grain bullets
Remington: UMC S H 45.70 OAL 2.740" weight 700 gr cannelured case
I think the case was made in 1898 (smokeless powder)
UMC S H 45.70 OAL 2.90" weight 740 gr Non cannelured case
I ask your help for the date of manufacture (black powder)

I also have some Winchester: W R 2 83, W R 1 83,and W R 9 45
OAL 2.550" weight 640 gr
And unmarked case: OAL 2.550" weight 640 gr.bullet has a hollow base
Both are black powder
.





Frank


#2

Sorry
I didn’t crop the pictures because I’m having a terrible time with my computer.
I cut away the case of a probable Winchester to reveal the base of the bullet.It is hollow based.I believe that it was made prior to 1882;for the Military.These cases appear to be copper;not brass
Frank


#3

UPON FURTHER REVIEW:
I had misgivings about the weight of the “Winchester” bullet,so I pulled the one in the cut case.It is actually 405 grains.
All the Winchester cases illustrated,are 405 grains,also.
sorry,once again.
Frank


#4

Frank…The cartridges with U.M.C. S H .45-70. were made by Union Metallic Cartridge Company, not Remington. UMC and Remington were merged in 1911, but your cartridges were made by UMC, one of the largest makers of ammunition in the world at the time…1867 - 1911


#5

Randy
Thanks,but I know that UMC is Union Metalic Company;I consider it under the "umbrella"Remington.
What I want to know is when they were made.
Fraank


#6

Frank-- UMC first listed Smokeless .45-70’s in the 1896 catalog, but only with soft point and full metal patched 405 gr. bullets. According to WHS, Vol.1, pg. 211, the U.S. Government first experimented with smokeless .45-70’s with 500 gr. lead bullets in the first half of 1897. Contracts were let to all the major ammunition producers, including UMC, in 1898 using commercial headstamps. So, most likely your cartridges dates from about 1898-1899, but they were made up to 1911.

The one with the copper primer is a military contract loading, most likely dating from 1888 to 1898. UMC used ONLY brass primers in their commercial production. Your black powder loads with brass primers could date between 1888 and 1911.


#7

Ron
Thanks for the help.
I’m surprised that the UMC black powder cartridges are 1888 and newer.They have the"look" of old cartridges.Maybe they are just cheaper items.
Frank


#8

Frank…UMC is NOT under any “umbrella” with Remington…Please understand…UMC was THE largest producer of ammunition in the US from 1867-1911…and was merged with Remington in 1911…because, since 1888, the two companies had been under the same ownership…soooooo…your cartridges were made by UNION METALLIC CARTRIDGE COMPANY, circa 1898…


#9

Randy
Thank you,Sir.
Frank


#10

Hello,again
My copy of "History of Modern U.S.Military Small Arms Ammunition Vol 1"says on pg 205, that “Winchester contract ammunition was either left unmarked,or later,bore the letters R W and date(4 81)”.
"Only brass cased cartridges have been observed on Winchester contract ammunition in this period."
My unmarked cases are clones of the ones dated 1881-85(my collection).
That leads me to believe that they were made prior to 1881.Does anyyone agree?
Does anyone know how late the 405 grain bullet rifle cartridge was still being manufactured by Winchester?
Frank


#11

Winchester contract cartridges can be found with headstamps ranging from 1878 to 1892. Beginning in 1893 and thereafter, cases had the commercial headstamp. Only a very few of the earliest cartridges were not headstamped.

The 500 grain bullet for rifle cartridges was adopted in 1882. Any contract 405 grain cartridges after that would be Carbine cartridges loaded with 55 grains of powder.

Ray


#12

Thanks,Ray
However,I have three Winchester cartridges with headstamps for rifle cartridges after 1882. W R 1 83, W R 2 83, and W R 9 85.
Winchester did make rifle cartridges with 405 grain bullets way beyond 1882.
The information that I get seems to indicate that any un marked cases were made prior to them.
These cartridges do resemble a carbine cartridge,though.
Frank


#13

Frank

Winchester used the “R W” headstamp throughout the series. (The same with RB for U.M.C. and RL for U.S.C.Co.) How can you be positive that the cartridges are Rifle and not Carbine? Unless you had the box they came from.

Since the Cal 45 Rifle and Carbine sights were graduated for the appropriate ammuntion it would seem to me that a contract calling for 405 grain Rifle ammunition after 1882 would be odd.

I wish now that I still had my martial arms and ammo collection. I seem to recall that I had three Winchester boxes, the first an early one with no headstamp and the other two Carbine ammunition with the 405 grain bullet. (Note the emphasis on “seem to recall”. Old age is taking its toll)

As a FWIW, my brain tells me that neither RB nor RL made Carbine ammunition and there were no smokeless military Carbine cartridges.

I’m not saying that you are wrong. I’m just trying to find out if I am.

Ray


#14

Ray
I have 3 of those “odd” cartridges; W R 1 83, W R 2 83, and W R 9 85.
All have 450 grain bullets,as do the unmarked ones,from Winchester.
The average weight og these,both marked and unmarked,is 640 grains.The last picture tat I included in this thread,shows two of them. One with a 500 grain bullet would weigh almost 700 grains.Weighing cartridges will determine the weight of the bullet inside.
I believe that the Army placed an order with Winchester for a quantity of cartridges with 450 grain bullets,and continued to accept them after year 1882,even though they were missmarked.They simply used them for carbines;not rifles.
I also believe that,sometime after Sept,1885,they stopped marking the cartridges in this order.The "R"was an error,and substuting a “C”,would be unnecessary.Do you agree,or disagree?
It would be beneficial if we could find out the weights of the cartridges in Al Frasca’s book#1,on page 238:R W 1 83, and R W 9 85.These are the same ones that I have.
Frank


#15

frank

Yes, you can differentiate between the 500 grain and the 405 grain cartridges by weight. The 500’s will weigh approximately 730 grains while the 405’s (including the early unheadstamped ones) will weigh approximately 630 grains. But a better way to tell them apart is by overall length. It’s not possible to load 70 grains of powder and a 500 grain bullet to the shorter length of the Carbine cartridges.

You could e-mail Al Frasca about the cartridges listed in his book but I doubt if he could tell you much. As I remember, Bob Hill was the cartridge collector and he is now dead.

If you can get your hands on a copy of PITMAN NOTES 3 there is a wealth of information on the cartridges.

Ray


#16

In this story the part I find unsettling is why Winchester continued to mark its headstamps for government contracts RW into the early 1890s if in fact they were loading the cartridges as carbine rounds. I’d have thought army ordnance would have been sticklers about headstamping practices. JG


#17

JG

I think that most of the Carbine cartridges had the WRA Co. commercial type headstamp and, of course, they came in their own marked boxes. And I’m still not certain that the R W wasn’t simply a generic headstamp for all Winchester made cartridges. I have some 50-70 contract cartridges with that same R W headstamp. I’d find it more unsettling if they loaded 405 grain rifle cartridges after 1882. The rifle sights were all graduated for the 500 grain load and the average infantryman was hard pressed to hit anything farther away than 100 or 200 yards, much less so if his ammo did not conform to the sight settings.

But, my military experience tells me that our Ordnance Dept was capable of things a lot scarier than that.

Ray


#18

Thanks.Ray,for your knowledgable input.
Although I’ve been involved with the military 45/70 ammunition for a long time,it was only for shooting.Around 1960,I bought a Trapdoor Carbine,in origional condition,from a Sporting goods Dealer,for $7,45,with a half box of modern ammo.I bought a LOT of ammo,by mail,from Bannerman and Medicus,in NYC.It was cheap,and better suited for my old Springfield.
I wish that I saved more of that “cheap” ammo.
You mentioned a report that wiould be useful to me.Tell me more about it.There is a fine Library,here in Newburgh.
Frank


#19

Thanks.Ray,for your knowledgable input.
Although I’ve been involved with the military 45/70 ammunition for a long time,it was only for shooting.Around 1960,I bought a Trapdoor Carbine,in origional condition,from a Sporting goods Dealer,for $7,45,with a half box of modern ammo.I bought a LOT of ammo,by mail,from Bannerman and Medicus,in NYC.It was cheap,and better suited for my old Springfield.
I wish that I saved more of that “cheap” ammo.
You mentioned a report that wiould be useful to me.Tell me more about it.There is a fine Library,here in Newburgh.
Frank


#20

Frank

[i][b]The Pitman Notes
on
U.S. Martial Small Arms and Ammunition
1776 - 1933

Volume Three
U. S. Breech-loading Rifles and Carbines, Cal. .45[/b][/i]

Thomas Publications
Gettysburg PA
1991

ISBN -0-939631-33-4