Al

Bert H. said

Anthony said
Bert,
I feel better now that I got my rest! LOL!
I'll have to try to see where it is and possibly find out some more information, or at least if anything might be under the fore arm wood. 
In my own poor defense, I was a buyer/accumulator of many Winchesters, and Never disassembled or took apart any of the pieces I wound up. I was too busy raising and taking care of my family along with the many other things we choose to do in life. Always figuring that retirement would allow me the time to do some of the extra things that I never had time for, which involved a lot of collecting Winchesters. Now with all the extra and added information available, I do find it enjoyable learning more about many of the specimens and they're accoutrements. 
Tony 
  

I am the opposite... I collect them only, and i have carefully disassembled nearly all of them for a detailed inspection and light cleaning.  Yesterday afternoon I discovered that the Model 61 is very much different than a Model 1890/1906.  With very little effort, I had the entire breech block and firing pin assembly in my hands after taking it down.  The good news is that I managed to get it cleaned and reassembled without too much head scratching.
Bert
  

Bert,

That is enlightening news on the M-61. I have slowly come into the collecting world of disassembling, and a light cleaning in the past two years of retirement, and really am enjoying it. A lot of good information on these and verifying some of the stamps and identifying marks have come to light.

This way when I pass them along, I can have a lot of documentation on them, and up to date information from the survey work, etc........

Tony

Anthony said
Bert,
I feel better now that I got my rest! LOL!
I'll have to try to see where it is and possibly find out some more information, or at least if anything might be under the fore arm wood. 
In my own poor defense, I was a buyer/accumulator of many Winchesters, and Never disassembled or took apart any of the pieces I wound up. I was too busy raising and taking care of my family along with the many other things we choose to do in life. Always figuring that retirement would allow me the time to do some of the extra things that I never had time for, which involved a lot of collecting Winchesters. Now with all the extra and added information available, I do find it enjoyable learning more about many of the specimens and they're accoutrements. 
Tony 
  

I am the opposite... I collect them only, and i have carefully disassembled nearly all of them for a detailed inspection and light cleaning.  Yesterday afternoon I discovered that the Model 61 is very much different than a Model 1890/1906.  With very little effort, I had the entire breech block and firing pin assembly in my hands after taking it down.  The good news is that I managed to get it cleaned and reassembled without too much head scratching.

Bert

Sure wish the picture didn't turn!I tried to turn it, as I was instructed awhile back, and even in a smaller size, but it still turned!

Tony

I feel better now that I got my rest! LOL!

I'll have to try to see where it is and possibly find out some more information, or at least if anything might be under the fore arm wood. 

In my own poor defense, I was a buyer/accumulator of many Winchesters, and Never disassembled or took apart any of the pieces I wound up. I was too busy raising and taking care of my family along with the many other things we choose to do in life. Always figuring that retirement would allow me the time to do some of the extra things that I never had time for, which involved a lot of collecting Winchesters. Now with all the extra and added information available, I do find it enjoyable learning more about many of the specimens and they're accoutrements. 

Tony 

The spring in question is shaped like a muzzle loading lock spring in as on the end under the sight it is doubled back on itself thus suppling the pressure to the sight. The other long end lays flat on the barrel  It could then slide to the rear and dislodge itself if not for its attachment to the frame. Is it unique? Yes. Is it factory? I don’t know. But there is no indication of any other spring set up and is done very well. not a cobble job. The gun is early with a Henry marked barrel   So I don’t know 

Chuck said
I've seen these before but without the rear spring. It is not a normal Henry or 1866 sight?  It doesn't even look like some of the Repo sights.
  

Chuck,

I thought the sight looked right! As far as the sight itself. The spring steel metal under the sight that's cut into the receiver is something that I wasn't familiar with.

TR said
   That style of sight was called a musket rear sight, that does not mean it only went on muskets. It was found on rifles and carbines. What is disturbing to me is the cut in the receiver for the spring, would that not weaken the area that the barrel is threaded in. I have never seen that before and would doubt that's factory work. T/R
  

TR,

You bring up some interesting points. I know that I have never seen it before, as I stated. It would have to be examined further, to determine it's originality, and even then, I'm not so sure it can be determined any further. 

Tony

Bert H. said

Anthony said

Bert H. said

Anthony said

Bert H. said
Tony,
Did you ever take the forend stock off to see what (if anything) might have been stamped on the underneath (non-exposed) section of the barrel?
Does Leroy still have this rifle?
Bert
  

Bert,
No I did not!
I'm not sure if He still has it or not.
Tony
  

Hmmm... 
  

Bert,
Crazy darn hobby we're involved in here. This dog gone thing woke me up in the middle of the night, thinking about this. I had the Merz booklet, #116,(2012), out that the Browning rifle was listed in, and it states that #196 had a 32 inch barrel on it, which I had wrong. For some reason I remember a 50 stamp, indicating the caliber, but I don't seem to have that picture, as I sure thought that I did. I do remember it was just a plain "50", by itself on the barrel flat. Gotta keep looking. I'm not sure why I didn't remove that for end wood, and look for anything more. 
Tony
  

It would be great to hunt this rifle down and get some additional information for it, but try not to lose anymore sleep!
Bert
  

HAHA!

I see you couldn't sleep either! LOL!

We we're typing at the same time as I found the "50", (caliber designation), in the picture on the top barrel flat, between the silver inlay and the top of the receiver.

Tony

Anthony said

Bert H. said

Anthony said

Bert H. said
Tony,
Did you ever take the forend stock off to see what (if anything) might have been stamped on the underneath (non-exposed) section of the barrel?
Does Leroy still have this rifle?
Bert
  

Bert,
No I did not!
I'm not sure if He still has it or not.
Tony
  

Hmmm... 
  

Bert,
Crazy darn hobby we're involved in here. This dog gone thing woke me up in the middle of the night, thinking about this. I had the Merz booklet, #116,(2012), out that the Browning rifle was listed in, and it states that #196 had a 32 inch barrel on it, which I had wrong. For some reason I remember a 50 stamp, indicating the caliber, but I don't seem to have that picture, as I sure thought that I did. I do remember it was just a plain "50", by itself on the barrel flat. Gotta keep looking. I'm not sure why I didn't remove that for end wood, and look for anything more. 
Tony
  

It would be great to hunt this rifle down and get some additional information for it, but try not to lose anymore sleep!

Bert

Bert H. said

Anthony said

Bert H. said
Tony,
Did you ever take the forend stock off to see what (if anything) might have been stamped on the underneath (non-exposed) section of the barrel?
Does Leroy still have this rifle?
Bert
  

Bert,
No I did not!
I'm not sure if He still has it or not.
Tony
  

Hmmm... 
  

Bert,

Crazy darn hobby we're involved in here. This dog gone thing woke me up in the middle of the night, thinking about this. I had the Merz booklet, #116,(2012), out that the Browning rifle was listed in, and it states that #196 had a 32 inch barrel on it, which I had wrong. For some reason I remember a 50 stamp, indicating the caliber, but I don't seem to have that picture, as I sure thought that I did. I do remember it was just a plain "50", by itself on the barrel flat. Gotta keep looking. I'm not sure why I didn't remove that for end wood, and look for anything more. 

Edited; Going back and looking, I can see the "50", on a slight angle between the silver inlay piece and the receiver, on thee top flat, of the barrel. That's the best and only picture I have of that, as I just looked.

Tony

Anthony said

Bert H. said
Tony,
Did you ever take the forend stock off to see what (if anything) might have been stamped on the underneath (non-exposed) section of the barrel?
Does Leroy still have this rifle?
Bert
  

Bert,
No I did not!
I'm not sure if He still has it or not.
Tony
  

Hmmm... 

Bert H. said
Tony,
Did you ever take the forend stock off to see what (if anything) might have been stamped on the underneath (non-exposed) section of the barrel?
Does Leroy still have this rifle?
Bert
  

Bert,

No I did not!

I'm not sure if He still has it or not.

Tony

This is a Dwg of an 1885 that Pope modified so it could fire rim fire or center fire.  Just turn the slot.