Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Tony. R said
Bert H. said
I just noticed something else that is setting off the red flag… the barrel marking is “WINCHESTER‘S“, and I have never seen that on any authentic Winchester barrel. In all cases that I am aware, it should simply be just “WINCHESTER”.
Bert
You may need stronger glasses Bert, picture of the address on my 73 short rifle sn 518185
This topic gets more interesting by the post’s! IMO!
Bert, you sure got me thinking, with you’re post, and I’ll show why I got curious, and could understand you’re thoughts!
Tony R. also proved an interesting point, which got me thinking and searching! I didn’t want to even think, that you possibly, had a fake and incorrect rifle, which, I don’t think that at all now, but the thought entered my mind, and that’s what got my wheels turning!
Here it goes;
This model 1885 S.S. rifle on Merz, site, can help explain, Bert’s thoughts!
https://www.merzantiques.com/product/w3326-winchester-h-w-schuetzen-rifle-cal-32-40-m/
Several other model 1885, Winchester address show, the same!
https://www.merzantiques.com/product/w331-winchester-third-model-1873-src/
This short 73 src, shows the Caliber, but no address pic. for reference.
This 73 src, show’s the address, and caliber.
These are a couple that I chose to go find, and view for reference, as there are other’s and more to verify these, findings by our members, to try to learn more, about this.
Never before have I seen, or even noticed, as many of us claim here, these differences.
Naturally the, “Winchester”, address and Logo changed over time, with different models, as I wasn’t even trying to go there! We also understand, the different Fonts, that we’re used and the different changes that have evolved, over time also.
Anthony
steve004 said
oldcrankyyankee said
Not that I’m even close to interested, So general consensus is they are fake?
Tom –
I’m not ready to join that consensus yet. Both rifles letter as they sit, so it begs the question why would the barrels have been changed? I doubt the originals would have cut down! Maybe shot out?
As evidenced by the factory ledger, the rifles were made up to be special. And what was special about them is the barrels. Hence, these rifles weren’t just pulled off the standard production line. They received special attention – possibly assigned to an employee who didn’t work on the standard production line and perhaps some different stampings were used? Yet, I can’t get my head around the use of a later barrel stamping. I have feelings in both directions.
With some faked Winchesters, we see examples where the project starts with a serial number and the rifle is built to the specifications outlined in the factory ledger. Sometimes Winchester parts are used and sometimes manufactured parts are used. If that’s the case, as Bert suggested, I too, would like to meet the person who faked these rifles and learn just how how they did it.
Steve,
I think you bring up some very valid points here!
I also found it interesting that these two rifles are in a very near same condition, with the earlier one, showing a little better care, possibly. They both show, a heavy presence of oil soaked wood stocks on them, as this was a vary common practice over time, and especially, back in the day!
I’m assuming these we’re found separately, and put together, as trying to keep a pair like this together through history is pretty hard to do! IMO!
My earlier statement, of not needing to handle these, as Henry suggested, may be wrong, and Henry’s opinion of handling them, just might be not only needed, but to further verify these as to what they really are with the knowledge presented here, and all that’s come to light.
Anthony
Bert H. said
I just noticed something else that is setting off the red flag… the barrel marking is “WINCHESTER‘S“, and I have never seen that on any authentic Winchester barrel. In all cases that I am aware, it should simply be just “WINCHESTER”.Bert
Edit;
As pointed out to me by Bob, the “WINCHESTER’S” marking is standard for the Model 1873 (and I would have known that if I had taken the time to look at the barrel on my own Model 1873 rifle
). Interestingly, all of the other Models (those that I actively survey) do not have the ” ‘S “, just “WINCHESTER”.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bob, Bert, and others. I have a short RIFLE with 20 inch octagonal barrel. SN: 646054 B, with 44 W.C.F on the left flat just ahead of the receiver. Barrel address is WINCHESTER’S REPEATING ARMS. NEW HAVEN. CONN. U.S.A. Below that is -KING’S IMPROVEMENT PATENTED MARCH 29 1886. OCTOBER 16. 1860.- Its new enough to have the WP in oval proof marks on the top flat and top of rreceiver. Tim
tim tomlinson said
Bob, Bert, and others. I have a short RIFLE with 20 inch octagonal barrel. SN: 646054 B, with 44 W.C.F on the left flat just ahead of the receiver. Barrel address is WINCHESTER’S REPEATING ARMS. NEW HAVEN. CONN. U.S.A. Below that is -KING’S IMPROVEMENT PATENTED MARCH 29 1886. OCTOBER 16. 1860.- Its new enough to have the WP in oval proof marks on the top flat and top of rreceiver. Tim
Pictures ??
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
November 7, 2015
Offline
Bert H. said
Bert H. said
I just noticed something else that is setting off the red flag… the barrel marking is “WINCHESTER‘S“, and I have never seen that on any authentic Winchester barrel. In all cases that I am aware, it should simply be just “WINCHESTER”.
Bert
Edit;
As pointed out to me by Bob, the “WINCHESTER’S” marking is standard for the Model 1873 (and I would have known that if I had taken the time to look at the barrel on my own Model 1873 rifle
Bert
Never noticed it until your earlier post. Saw Bob’s pics and thought I had missed something. We see “Colt’s” quite often in early writing’s, I suppose “Winchester’s” makes sense.
Mike
Bert! You’ve been smoking something? Remember who you are referring to! Pictures are painful. Tim
Online
For all, let me cogitate and see if I can take some good photos tonight and then get them posted. It will cost Bert a scotch, tho. Any particular views desired? Tim
tim tomlinson said
Bert! You’ve been smoking something? Remember who you are referring to! Pictures are painful. Tim
Tim,
In my recent retirement years I have taken up Dinosaur training… you are on my list!
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
tim tomlinson said
For all, let me cogitate and see if I can take some good photos tonight and then get them posted. It will cost Bert a scotch, tho. Any particular views desired? Tim
Scotch?? How about some 10-year old Bourbon 
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
tim tomlinson said Bob, Bert, and others. I have a short RIFLE with 20 inch octagonal barrel. SN: 646054 B, with 44 W.C.F on the left flat just ahead of the receiver. Barrel address is WINCHESTER’S REPEATING ARMS. NEW HAVEN. CONN. U.S.A. Below that is -KING’S IMPROVEMENT PATENTED MARCH 29 1886. OCTOBER 16. 1860.- Its new enough to have the WP in oval proof marks on the top flat and top of rreceiver. Tim
Tim,
Your should look like this without the dashes on the ends of the bottom line by about 600,000 but I suspect barrels could of sat in binds for a long time. With it being a octagon barrel having the USA address would be correct.
Bob
WACA Life Member--- NRA Life Member---- Cody Firearms member since 1991 Researching the Winchester 1873's
Email: [email protected]
Bert H. said
1873man said
Bert,
I also noticed the barrel caliber stamp is not correct. It should have a dash between 32 and Cal
Bob
Did the caliber marking ever change to “32 CAL.“? The reason I ask, is because the early Single Shot rifles manufactured in 1885 & 1886 were marked without a dash just like the barrels on that pair of 1873 Short rifles.
Bert
Bert,
I haven’t seen 32 Cal. As far as I have seen it went from 32-Cal to 32 WCF at about 200,000 but I keep a eye out for it.
Bob
WACA Life Member--- NRA Life Member---- Cody Firearms member since 1991 Researching the Winchester 1873's
Email: [email protected]
Bert, Mike, Chuck, et al. Bert gets off cheap this time. I tried setting up a photo shop in my gun room and taking photos with my digital camera. It was a strong ‘no go!” Insufficient light, and too much tremor even with the tripod. Tried my new cell phone and it was even worse (naturally). Tried using the tripod to brace my hands but its into my right hand as well. I don’t care to bring it to Cody either as I will be handling enough as is. Trust me when I say its in a healthy 90% original condition tho. Nice piece, one I do not shoot. Tim P.S. I so looked forward to drinking a scotch on Bert’s dime!!
tim tomlinson said
P.S. I so looked forward to drinking a scotch on Bert’s dime!!
That would be some really CHEAP Scotch!
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
1873man said
From looking at the serial numbers, it looks like they were refinished. On higher condition guns you usually see the serial number with raised edges.Bob
Bob brings up a very big flag with this picture. This pictures shows a well used gun with finish worn off around the lower tang. And the number stamps still show raised edges. Neither of the short rifles in the guns international listing exhibit this. Easy pass for me.
Rare but mucked around with. I’d rather spend $43,000 USD on something a lot better and not now flagged online in this post!
Chris
A man can never have too many WINCHESTERS...
November 7, 2015
Offline
My biggest issue is the price. Seller is looking for a buyer who feels the twin aspect adds significant value. Even if I were a buyer in this price range I don’t feel that circumstance adds that much value. If these are not legit someone did a great job making them look good.
Mike
Chris D said
1873man said
From looking at the serial numbers, it looks like they were refinished. On higher condition guns you usually see the serial number with raised edges.
Bob
Bob brings up a very big flag with this picture. This pictures shows a well used gun with finish worn off around the lower tang. And the number stamps still show raised edges. Neither of the short rifles in the guns international listing exhibit this. Easy pass for me.
Rare but mucked around with. I’d rather spend $43,000 USD on something a lot better and not now flagged online in this post!
Chris
Note that he does state, “price reduced” in his ad
I did some digging into the barrel caliber on the 32’s and did find they started out with the dash between the 32 and Cal and somewhere between 148,429 and 173,870 they eliminated the dash which would line up with the caliber marks on the 1885 that Bert stated. From what I see the 32 and Cal where two separate stamps since I’m seeing the distance between them vary. They could of been stamped by the same stamps they used on the elevators which were separate dies. At 222245 I found the first WCF but I assume there will be intermixing of the stamps to some degree like I saw in the 38’s. I found 38-Cal and a 38 Cal after the 38 WCF showed up. I would think that is from old barrels left in the wood barrel crates on the bottom of the stack.
On these short rifles they have “32 Cal” but they are not correct. The Winchester “32 Cal” is in italics were as these rifles the 32 is not italicized.
Here are some of the original caliber stamps which were made by J. Ulrich
Bob
WACA Life Member--- NRA Life Member---- Cody Firearms member since 1991 Researching the Winchester 1873's
Email: [email protected]
Bob,
Did you check Gordon’s book?
WACA #8783 - Checkout my Reloading Tool Survey!
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-research-surveys/winchester-reloading-tool-survey/
1 Guest(s)
