Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
Clarence and 1873man Thank you both , sorry for all your trouble . If I would have known TR didn’t receive the photos I would have re sent them , may have tried to send too many at once . Thanks again for your trouble fellas .
Online
Dusty,
On your mold the marking looks correct, it is a fifth model mold. Does it have a hollow point hole on the other side?
Your reloading tool is a Model 1880-1st issue. Does it have any markings on it?
T/R
Clarence and 1873man Thank you both , sorry for all your trouble .dusty texian said
No trouble & I learned something new about posting photos thanks to Bob’s help. Still reloading .32 Colt? You provided me a lot of info about this cartridge some yrs ago on the SAS site.
TR said
Dusty,On your mold the marking looks correct, it is a fifth model mold. Does it have a hollow point hole on the other side?
Your reloading tool is a Model 1880-1st issue. Does it have any markings on it?
T/R
No hollow point , solid head . Markings on reloading tool reads patent dated and Winchester Express . Markings on mold look like two different 5’s ? And Express on the tong tool is uneven crude compared to Winchester marking .
clarence said
Clarence and 1873man Thank you both , sorry for all your trouble .dusty texian said
No trouble & I learned something new about posting photos thanks to Bob’s help. Still reloading .32 Colt? You provided me a lot of info about this cartridge some yrs ago on the SAS site.
I appreciate it and yes still loading and shooting the .32 Colt .
dusty texian said
TR said
Dusty,
On your mold the marking looks correct, it is a fifth model mold. Does it have a hollow point hole on the other side?
Your reloading tool is a Model 1880-1st issue. Does it have any markings on it?
T/R
No hollow point , solid head . Markings on reloading tool reads patent dated and Winchester Express . Markings on mold look like two different 5’s ? And Express on the tong tool is uneven crude compared to Winchester marking .
I would need better pictures including the mold cavity and markings on both tools to tell. T/R
Dusty,
Now that I see the photos, that is the mold you bought from me several years ago. I’ve always regreted selling it, so if you want your money back just say the word. I would be glad to buy it back.
The tools are not for sale . It would be nice to see pictures of any 50-95 market tools you are anyone else has . I would like to compare the markings to the mold I have . The markings on this mold are rough and deep compared to the 12 other Winchester marked molds that I have . They all look sharper , cleaner and evenly spaced .
What’s the consensus?
“If you can’t convince them, confuse them”
President Harry S. Truman
dusty texian said
The tools are not for sale . It would be nice to see pictures of any 50-95 market tools you are anyone else has . I would like to compare the markings to the mold I have . The markings on this mold are rough and deep compared to the 12 other Winchester marked molds that I have . They all look sharper , cleaner and evenly spaced .
Dusty,
These are the Express tools I have. The mold is the 1889 variation with the wood handles. Markings for caliber say: 50 WIN. EXP. It is a hollow point mold. I didn’t include the plug in the photo.
The reloading tool is the second variation of the 1880 pliers tool. It is marked: WINCHESTER EXPRESS and the patent date is on the bottom line.
Both these have the standard Winchester patent and company markings as well.
Maverick and Win4575 correct me if I’m wrong but I believe that until the Model 1886 became available in the 50-110 Express Winchester only had one Express cartridge. That’s why the earlier tools were only marked Express, it was understood it was for the Model 1876 Express rifle. After the Model 1886 Express rifle and its .50-110 cartridge were introduced (possibly also some of the Express cartridges intended for Single Shot rifles) these tools started getting more complete markings that helped make sure they were being used for the correct rifle.
I call myself a collector as it sounds better than hoarder
Dusty,
The Winchester Express changed it’s name over time because of new models using the name express. The fifth model mold was the last style sold and was eventually marked 50-95. The dimensions of the cartridge and bullet was changed over time. According to Daniel Shuey’s book “W.R.A. Co. Headstamped Cartridges And Their Variations” page 336 C.I.M. #851 changes bullet diameter from .5125-.513 to .5055-.506 dated 6/20/1911. This same CIM authorizes use of 50-95 Ex bullets in 50-110 Ex. CIM 202 in 6/17/08 changes head diameter from .603 to .628. CIM 850 changes length of shell. CIM 851 changes bullet profile.
Long and short of what I’m saying is the dimensions changed, so did markings and do we even know who made the tools at that time.T/R
dusty texian said
The tools are not for sale . It would be nice to see pictures of any 50-95 market tools you are anyone else has . I would like to compare the markings to the mold I have . The markings on this mold are rough and deep compared to the 12 other Winchester marked molds that I have . They all look sharper , cleaner and evenly spaced .
Sorry for the delayed response, been busy with the kids doing Halloween and deer hunting. I’ll start with prefacing that in general I have yet to find anyone Faking Winchester Reloading Tools. That is a highly prefaced “YET”. Only seen one or two molds stamped Winchester that were obvious fakes / fabrications that no one with any knowledge would believer they weren’t fake. That said, I’m sure some day someone will start faking these, just like they do everything else.
The 1880 Tool 1st Model Spoon Handle tool looks great near perfect nothing out of the ordinary with it. The markings are great. I’ve determined that through careful observation that the patent date, the word Winchester and the word Express were all stamped separately on these tools. As I’ve seen a couple stamped in error with the word Express above the word Winchester. So them being slightly misaligned or being swallow or deeper to be expected.
The mold is an interesting one and a little bit of a head scratcher. That said I believe it is all original and factory made as such. I’ve looked and will keep looking through my files but it may be the first one I’ve come across marked “50 95”. That doesn’t necessarily mean anything particular though, as all of these 50 caliber tools and mold are in high demand, hard to come by and considered somewhat rare.
It being merely marked 50 95 makes sense to me due to it only being able to cast the solid head bullet. Had it also had the word(s) Express and/or Winchester Express, that to me would be odd as it wouldn’t make an Express bullet with the hollow head. All of the Winchester Express molds I’ve come across will have a hollowed base for the hollow point pin. Of which they sold / provided both a hollow point and a solid point attachments for these molds.
The reason this mold marked 50 95 is that is simply cast the sold head. Winchester also sold boxed solid head bullets, but they also sold the copper express cups that went on the ends of the bullets. Which I have yet to ever come across, but they’re are other such items that I have the same problem with finding.
Your 5th Model Mold is a nice piece, a dandy to have in any collection in my opinion.
The only other thought I have towards the set, is that likely someone paired them up. As the spoon hand tool was made 1879-1883 and the 5th Model Mold 1889-End of Production.
Sincerely,
Maverick
P.S. If you guys ever come across anything you suspect is Faked, let me know as I would find it most interesting.
WACA #8783 - Checkout my Reloading Tool Survey!
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-research-surveys/winchester-reloading-tool-survey/
How difficult is it to fake a Winchester loading tool and how common are faked tools?
“If you can’t convince them, confuse them”
President Harry S. Truman
Tedk said
How difficult is it to fake a Winchester loading tool and how common are faked tools?
I don’t know what you call a fake? If you mean make a new one, I have never seen one. If you mean clean it up and cold blue or blacken one, yes. If you mean repair one, yes. If you mean swap parts to enhance condition, yes. Re-mark to rare caliber doesn’t make sense because you have to re-cut the mold cavity or cartridge cavity, not worth the time in most cases. In all cases the experienced collector can tell.
I should add people are making replacement parts like de-priming pins and hollow point lever pins. T/R
TR said
Tedk said
How difficult is it to fake a Winchester loading tool and how common are faked tools?
I don’t know what you call a fake? If you mean make a new one, I have never seen one. If you mean clean it up and cold blue or blacken one, yes. If you mean repair one, yes. If you mean swap parts to enhance condition, yes. Re-mark to rare caliber doesn’t make sense because you have to re-cut the mold cavity or cartridge cavity, not worth the time in most cases. In all cases the experienced collector can tell.
I should add people are making replacement parts like de-priming pins and hollow point lever pins. T/R
Thanks for your detailed explanation, was referring to re-marking to a rare caliber. Been following this thread to see if there was an issue with the tools in question.
“If you can’t convince them, confuse them”
President Harry S. Truman
I have never seen one with the caliber re-marked. If you did that the cartridge or bullet would not fit. Some of the really early cast types tools would be worth enough to make it tempting but the tool collectors at that level are knowledgeable. I have seen the boxes faked but that’s paper. T/R
Bill Hockett said
dusty texian said
The tools are not for sale . It would be nice to see pictures of any 50-95 market tools you are anyone else has . I would like to compare the markings to the mold I have . The markings on this mold are rough and deep compared to the 12 other Winchester marked molds that I have . They all look sharper , cleaner and evenly spaced .
Dusty,
These are the Express tools I have. The mold is the 1889 variation with the wood handles. Markings for caliber say: 50 WIN. EXP. It is a hollow point mold. I didn’t include the plug in the photo.
The reloading tool is the second variation of the 1880 pliers tool. It is marked: WINCHESTER EXPRESS and the patent date is on the bottom line.
Both these have the standard Winchester patent and company markings as well.
Maverick and Win4575 correct me if I’m wrong but I believe that until the Model 1886 became available in the 50-110 Express Winchester only had one Express cartridge. That’s why the earlier tools were only marked Express, it was understood it was for the Model 1876 Express rifle. After the Model 1886 Express rifle and its .50-110 cartridge were introduced (possibly also some of the Express cartridges intended for Single Shot rifles) these tools started getting more complete markings that helped make sure they were being used for the correct rifle.
Thanks Bill Hockett for the pictures . The straight line evenness of the stampings on your mold is what I would expect to see from a factory stamping .
TR said
Dusty,The Winchester Express changed it’s name over time because of new models using the name express. The fifth model mold was the last style sold and was eventually marked 50-95. The dimensions of the cartridge and bullet was changed over time. According to Daniel Shuey’s book “W.R.A. Co. Headstamped Cartridges And Their Variations” page 336 C.I.M. #851 changes bullet diameter from .5125-.513 to .5055-.506 dated 6/20/1911. This same CIM authorizes use of 50-95 Ex bullets in 50-110 Ex. CIM 202 in 6/17/08 changes head diameter from .603 to .628. CIM 850 changes length of shell. CIM 851 changes bullet profile.
Long and short of what I’m saying is the dimensions changed, so did markings and do we even know who made the tools at that time.T/R
TR thanks for sharing the information stating the bullet changes in diameter . I have yet to hear from anyone actually casting a bullet with original 50cal. Express molds and listing the size and weights . This one cast @ .513 and 331gr. with Wheel Weights . With 16 -1 or 20-1 of course it varies a few tenths in diameter and a few grains in weight , and also how hot the mold and alloy is at casting .
Maverick said
dusty texian said
The tools are not for sale . It would be nice to see pictures of any 50-95 market tools you are anyone else has . I would like to compare the markings to the mold I have . The markings on this mold are rough and deep compared to the 12 other Winchester marked molds that I have . They all look sharper , cleaner and evenly spaced .
Sorry for the delayed response, been busy with the kids doing Halloween and deer hunting. I’ll start with prefacing that in general I have yet to find anyone Faking Winchester Reloading Tools. That is a highly prefaced “YET”. Only seen one or two molds stamped Winchester that were obvious fakes / fabrications that no one with any knowledge would believer they weren’t fake. That said, I’m sure some day someone will start faking these, just like they do everything else.
The 1880 Tool 1st Model Spoon Handle tool looks great near perfect nothing out of the ordinary with it. The markings are great. I’ve determined that through careful observation that the patent date, the word Winchester and the word Express were all stamped separately on these tools. As I’ve seen a couple stamped in error with the word Express above the word Winchester. So them being slightly misaligned or being swallow or deeper to be expected.
The mold is an interesting one and a little bit of a head scratcher. That said I believe it is all original and factory made as such. I’ve looked and will keep looking through my files but it may be the first one I’ve come across marked “50 95”. That doesn’t necessarily mean anything particular though, as all of these 50 caliber tools and mold are in high demand, hard to come by and considered somewhat rare.
It being merely marked 50 95 makes sense to me due to it only being able to cast the solid head bullet. Had it also had the word(s) Express and/or Winchester Express, that to me would be odd as it wouldn’t make an Express bullet with the hollow head. All of the Winchester Express molds I’ve come across will have a hollowed base for the hollow point pin. Of which they sold / provided both a hollow point and a solid point attachments for these molds.
The reason this mold marked 50 95 is that is simply cast the sold head. Winchester also sold boxed solid head bullets, but they also sold the copper express cups that went on the ends of the bullets. Which I have yet to ever come across, but they’re are other such items that I have the same problem with finding.
The only other thought I have towards the set, is that likely someone paired them up. As the spoon hand tool was made 1879-1883 and the 5th Model Mold 1889-End of Production.
Sincerely,
Maverick
P.S. If you guys ever come across anything you suspect is Faked, let me know as I would find it most interesting.
Maverick Many Thanks for the input and information . About the mold markings I agree that the markings could be original and stamped by the heavy handed guy . One thing about stampings you only get one shot at it . On the reloading tool it does appear to be really nice in the pictures , but if I handed it to you I think you would immediately notice that it has been re- polished and colored ( looks like heat blue ) over the pin prick’s and small dings that were left . No edge ware , all edges blue . When I first tried to use it the case neck was damaged at the throat area . A look with the bore scope revealed a very small burr with corrosion in the crimping area of the die . I chucked up a piece of Butterfield drill stock and used the tool post grinder to make a neck reamer that was short enough to insert into the chamber and be turned by hand . The tool cleaned that up and left no trace of any damage . The burr the refinishing and the uneven stamping made me suspicious . But with that said the machine marks in the die chamber appears to be consistent with the other tools . Well either way it is a tool I am using it as such . Even with the small issues it has I am still very happy to have it . If this thread has done anything it has for me been a learning experience and maybe others have been enlightened also . Thanks again .
dusty texian said
TR said
Dusty,
The Winchester Express changed it’s name over time because of new models using the name express. The fifth model mold was the last style sold and was eventually marked 50-95. The dimensions of the cartridge and bullet was changed over time. According to Daniel Shuey’s book “W.R.A. Co. Headstamped Cartridges And Their Variations” page 336 C.I.M. #851 changes bullet diameter from .5125-.513 to .5055-.506 dated 6/20/1911. This same CIM authorizes use of 50-95 Ex bullets in 50-110 Ex. CIM 202 in 6/17/08 changes head diameter from .603 to .628. CIM 850 changes length of shell. CIM 851 changes bullet profile.
Long and short of what I’m saying is the dimensions changed, so did markings and do we even know who made the tools at that time.T/R
TR thanks for sharing the information stating the bullet changes in diameter . I have yet to hear from anyone actually casting a bullet with original 50cal. Express molds and listing the size and weights . This one cast @ .513 and 331gr. with Wheel Weights . With 16 -1 or 20-1 of course it varies a few tenths in diameter and a few grains in weight , and also how hot the mold and alloy is at casting .
I used my express molds for their intended purpose and shot them unsizrd in several guns. I wasn’t happy with accuracy and ended up using a friends RCBS mold. The RCBS mold cast 290grs sized at .509 worked well. I also had issues with hand loading with original tools, that’s when I came unto the size changes of the cartridges. My older guns were able to accept the bigger cartridge but a restored gun with the newer smaller size chamber didn’t work. I bought a RCBS three die set and it made nice cartridges that fit anything. My tools were nice enough I didn’t have the issues you describe, but the .513 and 331gr. sounds right without the hollow point. Mine cast 335gr. without hollow point. All my loads were IMR 4198 at 33grs 1430fps. I used a filler of toilet paper. This is not a recommendation just what I did. I have no experience with black powder.
T/R
1 Guest(s)
