Any suggestions appreciated

[Archer]

I can't say for sure what the guns are or are not built for from an engineering standpoint.

I doubt that even warm to hot .44 Mag or .357 Mag rounds should put enough stress on the guns that they should be damaged by it. Winchester produced a very warm/hot .44-40 round back in the day that was intended for use in early the 1892 rifles. When they started producing the Japanese 1892s I know a fellow who said he was part of a group buy purchasing modern factory produced high pressure .44-40 ammo that required the buyers sign off that they were going to use it ONLY in the 1892 and not in any other original or replica arm chambered in .44-40.

I would also be careful about the thought that modern metallurgy automatically means the product is superior. I recall an article where a 1870-1880 Colt single action was metallurgical analyzed and compared to modern produced single actions. The results were that the period Colt was produced of higher strength and more durable metal than the modern weapons. I WILL state that modern metallurgy is capable of higher strength alloys and more consistent production of metals and that modern heat treatment processes are much better understood than they were earlier, especially prior to about 1920. For evidence of that you only have to look at the early 1903 Springfield production. Given that modern metals are more consistent and have minimum standards the material selection AND that we can analyze and determine stresses better you can minimize production costs by matching the material to the requirements. I'm not saying that is what ANYONE building reproductions of any kind has done. It is probably easier to get the blueprints or reverse engineer the components and pick a material that you think exceeds the original material used and go with it. I think I'd have more faith in the metal choices for the Japanese production Winchester than the Braztech but that is more a case of trusting the reputation of the cultures and the factories in question than anything else. Either should be as good or better than the original IF the bean counters haven't overruled the engineers.

[MuckyPup]

Glad you are back up and running. I remember doing the flush with break fluid when I got the gun. Thought I'd cycle things a few times while it was dry to wear any high spots. After about 15 throws of the lever, the gun threatened to sieze up. Hosed it down with clp lube and the gun cycled l like a dream. I remember Steve's Gunz video saying these rifles like to be wet with lube. Hose it down, let it drip dry and you are good to go.

[pricedo]

These rifle are not Winchester 92s,they are modern firearms made with modern processes and metals for cartridges that meet SAAMI specifications.

I would also be careful about the thought that modern metallurgy automatically means the product is superior. Given that modern metals are more consistent and have minimum standards the material selection AND that we can analyze and determine stresses better you can minimize production costs by matching the material to the requirements. I'm not saying that is what ANYONE building reproductions of any kind has done. I think I'd have more faith in the metal choices for the Japanese production Winchester than the Braztech but that is more a case of trusting the reputation of the cultures and the factories in question than anything else. Either should be as good or better than the original IF the bean counters haven't overruled the engineers.

Likewise.

I too would make no assumption of superiority without a report based on solid industry accepted testing and analysis methodologies from a qualified, reputable engineering testing firm in front of me stating that is the case. If such a report exists I haven't seen it and would invite anyone who is aware of it to provide a URL to its source.