twobit said
Hello Al,

In my survey I am trying to determine when the change from CC to blued for the hammer and levers.  The problem is that these parts are typical so worn that it is hard (read impossible) to tell what they were without hands on inspection and I am only working with peoples poor photos most of the time.  It is my belief (no documented proof) that the change happened at the same time for both parts.  The best I have determined is it was around 1915.  I will eventually be going back into the photos I have of each rifle in the survey and try to take a second look to narrow it down.  Can you send me a photo of the hammer on that wonderful carbine of yours please?

Michael  

Michael,

I sent you two emails with photos.

Thanks,

Al

Maverick said

1892takedown said
In looking through some of my dads old parts, there appears to be a wide variation between hammers prior to the “Third Type” with the serrated lines. 

If you had the time and enough examples, maybe you could narrow down a date range for each variation.   

Well not keep stirring the pot on this topic but here it goes anyway.

I’ve been collecting Winchester Reloading Tools for a number of years, and especially the Model 1894 Reloading Tool. I have no doubt in my mind that the loading die on the bottom portion of the Tool was knurled by the Winchester Factory. They produced the 1894 Tool from 1893 to the 1920s, so for some 30 odd years. Now I don’t know how many Model 1894 Tools were produced, but imagine it was a lot. If it was 10% of the Model 1894 Rifle’s production for the same years, it would be over 90,000 Tools. As such, the knurling pattern seen on the die of the tools can vary greatly as well. In fact I’d be hard pressed to find a set of dies that looked exactly the same. So I don’t see why its no surprise that there would be a wide variation with the pattern on the hammers as well.

Here are four dies I picked off the top of my display case that are fairly minty in condition. They’re recently acquired as I hadn’t found time to add them to the display cabinet yet. 

Sincerely,

Maverick  

I know what you mean, its turned into a bit of a rabbit hole.  Of the 12 hammers in the photo, each knurling pattern is different.  Whether its hammer stamping or loading tool knurling the more examples you have within specific serial number or date ranges, the potential exists to develop a seriation for the multitude of type/varieties of stamping or knurling used through time, if one is so inclined to test if its possible.     

In archaeology we used a similar means to identify and seriate ceramics at archaeological sites or deposits based on a type/variety system, to identify the appearance, decline, or coexistence of certain manufacturing processes, materials, combinations features or traits possessed during specific periods of time.  The key is having a large enough data set tied to a timeline to establish a baseline and seriation that can be modified or updated as the sample population becomes larger.  The end result, in theory as well as in practice, is the ability to identify the period or horizon for the occurrence of certain features or traits from original contexts and test the validity of contexts for which outliers occur.  If it can be done with millions of pots and pottery shards, it can likely be done to some degree with hammers and loading tools.   As for the hammers, the types have already been defined, its a matter of determining the multitude of varieties  that may exist for each type over a specified time frame.  It would likely be a fairly dull endeavor unless your a special kind of person looking for a good challenge or dissertation project. 

Chuck said  Both said that the early hammers were hand cut but later they were knurled with a machine while the hammers were hot.

Ask them this:  If the hammers were shaped on a milling machine, why would they be hot?  If they were drop forged they’d be hot, but why make the checkering a separate operation, when the pattern could be created by the forging dies?

jwm94 said
…after 100,000 was passed, (about 1872), the hammers have a finely knurled pattern which was forged into the hammer.

clarence said
If the hammers were forged, rather than milled, that would certainly be the fastest & cheapest method of producing a checkering pattern, especially a complicated one like the Widow’s Peak.  But if so, the pattern thus produced shouldn’t be called knurling, which is a machine tool operation. 

Anyone, by the way, who’s seen one of those step-by-step displays of a forging operation, such as the one on exhibit at Springfield Armory Museum, should not be surprised that it could be done this way.  Starting with a lump of steel, the most complicated shapes can be produced merely by repeated hammering of the hot metal in a succession of slightly different dies.  

jwm94 said

Maverick,

I like the respectful way that you refer to these two men, books and errors in general terms.  The loss and/or disappearance of the records, to include, the knowledge they represented is definitely a shame.  The good part is that researchers that deal with historical subjects have a way of turning up long buried evidence.

James 

Well James it only took a few months to find what I was looking for! Below is the factory drawing for the forging of the Model 1895 Hammer. If you look at the inner red line portions of the drawing. The red lines appear to me to indicate the final finished part and the outer black lines are the tolerances for the forged part. So obviously a worker would have to then mill the forged part quite a few thousands to get the forged piece down to the finished part tolerances. In my opinion this drawing demonstrates that the checkered pattern on the hammer had to be knurled after milling and could not have been forged into the hammer during the forging process. I hope this is enough un-buried evidence to align with what I believe to be true.

Here is the link to Cody Website where you can find this drawing and other forging drawings for the models 73, 85, 90, 92, 97, 1905-’07-’10, but oddly the Model 94 isn’t in the set.  http://cdm17097.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/singleitem/collection/p17097coll30/id/5863/rec/1

Clarence

Also some of these drawings note on them made from “Soft Steel” or “Spring Steel” depending on the part in question. So the hammers would have been easy to knurl and at the end of the manufacturing process annealed / hardened. I don’t see there being a need to knurl them HOT! Also would imagine it would be more dangerous to do such a thing.  

But I will also admit, I still don’t know exactly how the manufacturing process took place. Just my thoughts on the matter.

Sincerely,

Maverick