Avatar

Please consider registering
guest

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —






— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters




sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_Print sp_TopicIcon
Blank tang
August 28, 2019
12:14 am
Avatar
South Texas
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 865
Member Since:
March 20, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I cant see on any of the photos that the upper tang was welded (if replaced with an upper tang), nor can I see any lettering on its surface.  If the lettering was removed you would have to take off enough to remove the deeper dashes to each side of the "Winchester" that appear to be pressed deeper than the lettering on the Type 1 address.  Any type of metal removal would alter the pitch of the upper tang if not make it flat or concave in appearance.  If so, it would be most noticeable at the countersunk profile for the stock screw.  From the side profile pics there doesnt appear to be any metal loss, edge wear, or rounding of edges. Not having a first model, I pulled one in the 10K range to mic the thickness at the following locations for comparison if interested in comparing to SN 714 or any other first model. 

.294" directly ahead of the tang screw

.280" directly behind the tang screw

.255" at the midpoint between the tang screw and stock screw

.2" ahead of the stock screw

Lots of crud on the underside of the upper tang that looks like its been there a while as well as at the end of the top of the upper tang.

Seeing the gun in person might change my mind but I cant see anything in the pics that leads me to question its originality at this point.   

DSC_0245-Copy-3.JPG1892takedown @sbcglobal.net ......NRA Endowment Life Member.....WACA Member

"God is great.....beer is good.....and people are crazy"... Billy Currington

August 28, 2019
3:15 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 846
Member Since:
May 24, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

clarence said

Was this supposed to apply to all models?  The reason assembly numbers (in most cases, the last 2 or 3 digits of the ser. no.) were used by many other makers was because some hand fitting was required--so that these parts were not fully interchangeable on other guns of the same model.  But in my experience, Winchester parts, even barrels, usually ARE fully interchangeable, due to more carefully controlled machine work, I presume.  So why would assembly numbers be needed?  Or are some Winchester parts on some models less interchangeable than I've been assuming?  

Good question, Clarence.  Maybe 1892takedown will respond.

Speaking about assembly numbers in general and other manufacturers, it has been my experience that they were used not only because of hand fitted parts, but, for one, to match the caliber of the rifle, where another part might have needed hand fitting or not.  More specifically, where assembly numbers are stamped on the left and right side of the tangs on Winchesters, they "appear" to me to either designate something special about the wood or something special about the metal, respectively.  

Also, I would not be surprised for AG to find that there is "not" an assembly number on the upper tang inlet, since at this point in time, I believe the butt stock and the receiver are standard parts, aside from the blank-tang issue - just a guess on my part.

James

August 28, 2019
3:22 pm
Avatar
WACA member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 415
Member Since:
March 6, 2019
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
August 28, 2019
3:34 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 846
Member Since:
May 24, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

AG,

 

Where did you get the idea that you disappointed me.  You need to read what I wrote, again, and then change your note to me.

Good pictures.  One thing regarding the assembly numbers on the left and right side of the tang that appears to be fairly solid at this point in time, is that when there is something special about just the wood or just the metal that corresponding numbers, or portions thereof, will most likely be found on both parts instead of just one.

James

August 28, 2019
3:41 pm
Avatar
WACA member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 415
Member Since:
March 6, 2019
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I was hoping when I travelled to see the rifle again this morning there were matching numbers on the wood & yes there was. Once again I see no altering or repair etc to the tang & the patina is consistent through the gun. Each to their own opinion. It’s an original blank tang for me. 

AG

WACA Member 11237
CFM Member
89210710
NSSA Member 673103

August 28, 2019
3:51 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 846
Member Since:
May 24, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

AG said
I was hoping when I travelled to see the rifle again this morning there were matching numbers on the wood. Once again I see no altering or repair etc to the tang & the patina is consistent through the gun. Each to their own opinion. It’s an original blank tang for me. 

AG  

Where did you get the idea that you disappointed me. You need to read what I wrote, again, and then change your note to me.

 

Matching numbers on the wood were to be expected, but I would not have been surprised to find it otherwise as previously referred to.

 

James

August 28, 2019
4:05 pm
Avatar
WACA member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 415
Member Since:
March 6, 2019
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

jwm94 said

AG said
I was hoping when I travelled to see the rifle again this morning there were matching numbers on the wood. Once again I see no altering or repair etc to the tang & the patina is consistent through the gun. Each to their own opinion. It’s an original blank tang for me. 

AG  

Where did you get the idea that you disappointed me. You need to read what I wrote, again, and then change your note to me.

 

Matching numbers on the wood were to be expected, but I would not have been surprised to find it otherwise as previously referred to.

 

James  

Was only kidding about disappointing James. Appreciate your interest and replies.

AG. 

WACA Member 11237
CFM Member
89210710
NSSA Member 673103

August 28, 2019
4:58 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 986
Member Since:
March 31, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

You need to remove the butt plate.  If this gun has assembly numbers on the tang and stock it is likely they are also on the butt plate.  The assembly numbers on Winchesters usually have no correlation to the serial number. Colts will use all or part of the serial number.  I still say I don't see anything wrong with this gun.  Getting more interesting though.

August 28, 2019
5:15 pm
Avatar
WACA member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 415
Member Since:
March 6, 2019
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Chuck said
You need to remove the butt plate.  If this gun has assembly numbers on the tang and stock it is likely they are also on the butt plate.  The assembly numbers on Winchesters usually have no correlation to the serial number. Colts will use all or part of the serial number.  I still say I don't see anything wrong with this gun.  Getting more interesting though.  

Ok Chuck I will see if I can get a pic with the butt plate off. I agree, at the very least this is interesting. 

AG

WACA Member 11237
CFM Member
89210710
NSSA Member 673103

August 28, 2019
6:18 pm
Avatar
South Texas
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 865
Member Since:
March 20, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

clarence said

Was this supposed to apply to all models?  The reason assembly numbers (in most cases, the last 2 or 3 digits of the ser. no.) were used by many other makers was because some hand fitting was required--so that these parts were not fully interchangeable on other guns of the same model.  But in my experience, Winchester parts, even barrels, usually ARE fully interchangeable, due to more carefully controlled machine work, I presume.  So why would assembly numbers be needed?  Or are some Winchester parts on some models less interchangeable than I've been assuming?  

Clarence & jwm94. 

The article in the WACA publication from Winter 1995 was on First Model 1894's.  I couldnt answer the question of whether other early Win model examples have assembly numbers like the 1894 First Models (standard guns with assembly numbers on the upper tang and buttstock wood).  Just going off what Ive read about for the first models from others researchers. 

In the absence of an early first model to take apart to look for other similar assembly numbers on other parts to I dont have an answer to your question Clarence, but would guess you wont find the same assembly number anywhere else except maybe on the buttplate.  In my opinion the assembly numbers you see on the 1894 first models has more to do with fitting the wood to the receiver for which it was fitted.  Much the same as you see assembly numbers and markings on special order guns, normally found on the lower tang, buttstock, and sometimes the buttplate leading me to believe they wanted to make sure the wood that is fitted and configured (PG, SB, etc, or special wood) to a particular receiver is matched back to the receiver for which the wood was fitted. 

Cant offer any definitive answers.  Whatever the reason, there are examples out there to illustrate their occurrence.    

DSC_0245-Copy-3.JPG1892takedown @sbcglobal.net ......NRA Endowment Life Member.....WACA Member

"God is great.....beer is good.....and people are crazy"... Billy Currington

August 28, 2019
9:33 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 431
Member Since:
June 4, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

 AG, I have sold a few antique guns with undocumented discrepancies that I believed to be original. In all cases it took a lot of (explaining) at the time of sale and did not add value to the gun. In the Colt world a Kopec letter is that documentation, in the Winchester world you currently have no one to document the undocumented discrepancy. In this case the factory making a mistake is not something I would pay a premium for. T/R

August 28, 2019
10:24 pm
Avatar
WACA member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 415
Member Since:
March 6, 2019
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

TR said
 AG, I have sold a few antique guns with undocumented discrepancies that I believed to be original. In all cases it took a lot of (explaining) at the time of sale and did not add value to the gun. In the Colt world a Kopec letter is that documentation, in the Winchester world you currently have no one to document the undocumented discrepancy. In this case the factory making a mistake is not something I would pay a premium for. T/R  

I would agree T/R on not paying a premium for a blank tang, or less value for those who think it isn’t. It’s a rarity (if you’re on the side of it being original) & I guess it’s up to how much the buyer would pay if it was for sale. 

Either way it’s been an interesting debate and investigation to determine if it’s original with ser 714 getting some notoriety in the 1894 world, just with all the attention it’s gotten, no matter what way you side.

AG 

WACA Member 11237
CFM Member
89210710
NSSA Member 673103

August 28, 2019
11:36 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 846
Member Since:
May 24, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

1892takedown said

Clarence & jwm94. 

The article in the WACA publication from Winter 1995 was on First Model 1894's.  I couldnt answer the question of whether other early Win model examples have assembly numbers like the 1894 First Models (standard guns with assembly numbers on the upper tang and buttstock wood).  Just going off what Ive read about for the first models from others researchers. 

In the absence of an early first model to take apart to look for other similar assembly numbers on other parts to I dont have an answer to your question Clarence, but would guess you wont find the same assembly number anywhere else except maybe on the buttplate.  In my opinion the assembly numbers you see on the 1894 first models has more to do with fitting the wood to the receiver for which it was fitted.  Much the same as you see assembly numbers and markings on special order guns, normally found on the lower tang, buttstock, and sometimes the buttplate leading me to believe they wanted to make sure the wood that is fitted and configured (PG, SB, etc, or special wood) to a particular receiver is matched back to the receiver for which the wood was fitted. 

Cant offer any definitive answers.  Whatever the reason, there are examples out there to illustrate their occurrence.      

1892takedown,

Thank you for the WACA article.  Notes that I consider most important in it as pertains to this subject has to do with:  1) The numbers showing up on both standard and deluxe guns, which coincides to some extent with what has already been stated in this thread about them pertaining to both sides of the tang, and being associated with either the wood or the metal, respectively, and; 2) The mention of other reported instances of blank-tangs back to Serial No. 8 (and it being the only authenticated one at the time the article was written).  Couple this information with your notes and those of some other members, and I see no need to mention what appears to me to be obvious, at this point in time, with emphasis on "appears."  

James

August 28, 2019
11:37 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 846
Member Since:
May 24, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

AG said

Was only kidding about disappointing James. Appreciate your interest and replies.

AG.   

Thank you, AG.

James

August 28, 2019
11:41 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 846
Member Since:
May 24, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

AG said

TR said
 AG, I have sold a few antique guns with undocumented discrepancies that I believed to be original. In all cases it took a lot of (explaining) at the time of sale and did not add value to the gun. In the Colt world a Kopec letter is that documentation, in the Winchester world you currently have no one to document the undocumented discrepancy. In this case the factory making a mistake is not something I would pay a premium for. T/R  

I would agree T/R on not paying a premium for a blank tang, or less value for those who think it isn’t. It’s a rarity (if you’re on the side of it being original) & I guess it’s up to how much the buyer would pay if it was for sale. 

Either way it’s been an interesting debate and investigation to determine if it’s original with ser 714 getting some notoriety in the 1894 world, just with all the attention it’s gotten, no matter what way you side.

AG   

TR offers up some very sage advice...then there's the wild side of things!  Don't you just love it!  Smile

James

August 29, 2019
4:28 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 986
Member Since:
March 31, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

TR said
 AG, I have sold a few antique guns with undocumented discrepancies that I believed to be original. In all cases it took a lot of (explaining) at the time of sale and did not add value to the gun. In the Colt world a Kopec letter is that documentation, in the Winchester world you currently have no one to document the undocumented discrepancy. In this case the factory making a mistake is not something I would pay a premium for. T/R  

I totally agree with Tom.  If you like the gun and it is not over priced you should buy it.  Just remember that it will be hard to sell it.  Since I am a collector I buy what I like and don't worry about the rest. 

August 29, 2019
4:41 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 261
Member Since:
January 19, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Chuck said

Since I am a collector I buy what I like and don't worry about the rest.   

Agree.  I never once thought about resale or recovering my investment.  It's nice if you, or your heirs can get it, or more back, but that's not why I buy anything except stocks, and I don't mean the wooden or black plastic kind. 

August 29, 2019
5:26 pm
Avatar
WACA member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 415
Member Since:
March 6, 2019
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Anyone care to say what they would pay for this rifle not detracting any value for the blank tang.

It’s a m1894 3 digit ser(714) brown gun in 38-55 cal. Still has a good bore & rifling, wood has some marks & dents as you can see from the photos and it still shoots well. 

AG

WACA Member 11237
CFM Member
89210710
NSSA Member 673103

August 29, 2019
6:12 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 846
Member Since:
May 24, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

AG said
Anyone care to say what they would pay for this rifle not detracting any value for the blank tang.

It’s a m1894 3 digit ser(714) brown gun in 38-55 cal. Still has a good bore & rifling, wood has some marks & dents as you can see from the photos and it still shoots well. 

AG  

When you say Good bore & rifling, what exactly do you mean?

James

August 29, 2019
6:27 pm
Avatar
WACA member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 415
Member Since:
March 6, 2019
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

jwm94 said

AG said
Anyone care to say what they would pay for this rifle not detracting any value for the blank tang.

It’s a m1894 3 digit ser(714) brown gun in 38-55 cal. Still has a good bore & rifling, wood has some marks & dents as you can see from the photos and it still shoots well. 

AG  

When you say Good bore & rifling, what exactly do you mean?

James  

The bore is shiny with no deposits or marks. The rifling is good with very little wear. 

AG

WACA Member 11237
CFM Member
89210710
NSSA Member 673103

Forum Timezone: UTC 0

Most Users Ever Online: 628

Currently Online: pdog72
43 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)


Forum Stats:

Groups: 1

Forums: 16

Topics: 6604

Posts: 53161


Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 886

Members: 8719

Moderators: 4

Admins: 3


Top Posters:

1873man: 3982

twobit: 2465

TXGunNut: 2151

Maverick: 1452

Big Larry: 1373

JWA: 1237

Wincacher: 1180

clarence: 1107

Brad Dunbar: 1068

Chuck: 986

Navigation