Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
Bryan,
It was my understanding that part of or mainly for the most part, the failure caused by the Milbank primer, was based on the tapered design of the primer itself, as we understand, here today.
The few Milbank primer cases that we’re found at the site of the Custer Massacre in 1876, with possible failure regarding cartridge use, I thought we’re due to the tapered design, in the Milbank primer cartridges.
Anthony
Anthony said
Bryan,It was my understanding that part of or mainly for the most part, the failure caused by the Milbank primer, was based on the tapered design of the primer itself, as we understand, here today.
The few Milbank primer cases that we’re found at the site of the Custer Massacre in 1876, with possible failure regarding cartridge use, I thought we’re due to the tapered design, in the Milbank primer cartridges.
Anthony
That is my understanding as well. However, just looking at the patents and descriptions, the early primers were described as looking exactly like a miniature .22 caliber cartridge….while the later ones could/should be tapered.
I can’t help but think of those collectors that do know (not me), that are sitting back and laughing at us and this nine page topic… If the answers are not on the collectors forum, they probably can’t be found! We see a few cartridge examples, but not the primers by themselves.
Process of elimination and 100% guessing, tells me that the straight walled primers (maybe a slight taper?) were probably used in the folded head cases and the tapered primers in the solid head cases.
Milbank’s 1870 Primer Patent. Figure 1 is the actual Milbank primer, while figure 2 is the cartridge.
.
.
.
In this 1870 Milbank Patent, figure 1 is the primer itself, looking exactly like a straight wall cartridge.
Milbank’s 1872 Improved Cartridge patent.
.
.
.
In this plate, by 1873, the primer is still represented under the 1870 patent. However, the cartridge case appears to be of an advanced folded head type….with what also appears to be a “punched” out type primer pocket.
It could also be an early sold-head case, categorized as a Class 4 case by the Ordinance department. The drawing pencil marks indicate a solid piece, but also shows shadowing as it a seam is in the rim…confusing.
Here are the 44 WCF Milbank Primed examples: Duplicates unknown…
1. Ex-rayed photo
.
.
.
2. Anthony’s photo
.
.
The only two confirmed different examples I have seen.
and here is the Primer photo….no taper is seen, unless ever so slight. I can not tell if the case head is drawn or folded
Oh bulldog!!!!
The taper portion they may be referring to is the taper just under the head of the primer….duh!
Bryan Austin said
Looking again at Chucks Milbank Primer photo, there is no way this is a Milbank primed case…and from the looks of the black inside the case, it is nothing more than a spent Winchester type primer.
Anthony said
Dan told me he got to look at the Paper patched 44wcf while it was still in the Bill Wooden collection in the 1980s. While it is believed to be the only remaining one in existence. I do wonder how many were possibly made or sold by WRACo.Sincerely,
Maverick
Here is the Milbank primed cartridge, that Dan Shuey, told us about! Pictured with a couple Winchester 73’s.
This is the ONLY, .44 WCF, paper patched, Milbank cartridge known, as of today. Many prominent cartridge Collectors have owned this in their personal collection.
Anthony
I could not help myself….even used a cut down 44 WCF cartridge I made to replicate the Milbank primed case. They shot horribly, and I trashed all but three that I made.
Bryan Austin said
Bryan Austin said
Looking again at Chucks Milbank Primer photo, there is no way this is a Milbank primed case…and from the looks of the black inside the case, it is nothing more than a spent Winchester type primer.
I don’t know, I think you’d need a better view of the top side of the primer into the cavity to see what it looks like to properly rule it out. Just my opinion, anyways without it in hand its a moot point.
WACA #8783 - Checkout my Reloading Tool Survey!
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-research-surveys/winchester-reloading-tool-survey/
I don’t know, I think you’d need a better view of the top side of the primer into the cavity to see what it looks like to properly rule it out. Just my opinion, anyways without it in hand its a moot point.
You can see in the photo (red outline) that the primer is of the Winchester type. The primer pocket wall can be seen surrounding the primer sides.
.
.
.
.
.
It is definitely not this guy!
.
.
.
In the x-ray, the vertical protrusion of the primer shaft is obvious, regardless of the size of the primer pocket dome.
Bryan Austin said
Here are the 44 WCF Milbank Primed examples: Duplicates unknown…
1. Ex-rayed photo
.
.
.
2. Anthony’s photo
.
.
The only two confirmed different examples I have seen.
and here is the Primer photo….no taper is seen, unless ever so slight. I can not tell if the case head is drawn or folded
It is my belief, as a thought or even a hunch, that in most cases, that the paper patched cartridge, came before the standard cartridge, as we know today, in most cases. Not trying to play on words here, but is it possible, the paper patched cartridge that I have in my possession, that came from, many well known collectors, personal collection, as Winchester employee, Paul Foster, Bill Wooden, Jim Tillinghast, Berk Lewis, Phill Medicus, to name the ones that I know verified this, along with Dan Shuey, who claimed it could possibly be one of the first mfg. and only paper patched cartridge to survive!
I’m not sure of the where a bouts, of the X-Rayed cartridge, but would be interested in knowing, or the fine example of the Milbank Primer example, in the coin holder also. Where did that picture come from and where is that example today?
Anthony
Anthony said
Bryan Austin said
Here are the 44 WCF Milbank Primed examples: Duplicates unknown…
1. Ex-rayed photo
.
.
.
2. Anthony’s photo
.
.
The only two confirmed different examples I have seen.
and here is the Primer photo….no taper is seen, unless ever so slight. I can not tell if the case head is drawn or folded
It is my belief, as a thought or even a hunch, that in most cases, that the paper patched cartridge, came before the standard cartridge, as we know today, in most cases. Not trying to play on words here, but is it possible, the paper patched cartridge that I have in my possession, that came from, many well known collectors, personal collection, as Winchester employee, Paul Foster, Bill Wooden, Jim Tillinghast, Berk Lewis, Phill Medicus, to name the ones that I know verified this, along with Dan Shuey, who claimed it could possibly be one of the first mfg. and only paper patched cartridge to survive!
I’m not sure of the where a bouts, of the X-Rayed cartridge, but would be interested in knowing, or the fine example of the Milbank Primer example, in the coin holder also. Where did that picture come from and where is that example today?
Anthony
I am not familiar with the dates of paper patched cartridges in general, but feel very confident that your paper patched cartridge was probably a production cartridge, while the x-rayed cartridge was reported to be on official experimental cartridge. However, if it was not an official experimental cartridge, maybe it was just a bit abused in storage and the paper rotted off.
This still does not explain why one has a bullet base cannelure and one does not. If it was the later production variant, then the cannelure must have been added for bullet stability inside the neck of the very short seating area of the case. Why the x-rayed photo was offered when auctioned off, rather than a color photo, is beyond me!
Maybe on the regular production 44 WCF cases sent out in 1874, the extended case length negated the need for the cannelure.
.
.
The x-ray cartridge was said to have sold during that auction for $3,000. I will see if I can dig up auction item number photo I saved when I get home.
Chuck suggested, a while back, on this thread post, that Lou Behling’s new Rim fire Cartridge book, that some of us now have, on pages 254, and 255 talk about the .44 WCF, and being displayed, on the 1874 Winchester Cartridge board, as there’s a lot more very interesting information, that Lou brought to light in this new book, that he got from several, previously documented sources, that he does a great job at giving credit to!
With that being said, he talks about the employment of John Gardner, in 1868, at Winchester, and became Superintendent of the Cartridge shop, until he retired in 1908. It also talks about the number of patents by him, covering the ammunition design, under the Winchester name. (George Stetson, was shop Superintendent, in 1867)
It’s pretty obvious, to many Winchester collectors that, ” The Winchester Repeating Arms Co.”, was incorporated on April 1, 1867, with mfg. continuing at Bridgeport Conn. until April, 1871, when mfg. was moved to New Haven, Conn. as we know it today. With the move to New Haven, George Stetson, remained as shop foreman.
Cartridge production began in 1872, in New Haven, with a half of a million cartridges being produced in a day! (of various calibers)
My point being that the Millbank primer patent, May, 31 st. 1870, and Oliver Winchester needing a cartridge primer for the development of his much anticipated model 1873 rifle and an improved cartridge, being the Center Fired .44WCF, over the Henry, .44 Flat rim fire cartridge, and used in his model 1866, was an improvement in cartridge development ballistics as being discovered and known at the time.
It’s a well known fact that the Millbank primer and the .44WCF cartridge that contained these primers, we’re a failure, and caused the well documented delay in the development of the Winchester model 1873 rifle, in the later part of 1873, as Oliver Winchester himself applied for primer patents, in cartridge development, in the .44WCF. and as many as ten times. O.W. , July 14 th, 1874 patent, known as the, “Anvil type primer”, patent, helped to improve cartridge development of the .44 WCF, as hence the production of the model 1873 rifle, assumed manufacturing and shipping to jobbers and the gun dealers house suppliers, through out the Country, and beyond.
As stated many times, that we may never know the answer to some of these questions that we seek, but we will keep trying as through various researches, more seems to come to light!
Anthony
Anthony, I agree. But am somewhat confused. I believe that the 1874 O. F. Winchester Patent primers where probably designed by Gardner? But the 3rd primer that actually worked is a Gardner Patent primer? Since he worked for Winchester during this time why is one in his name and not both in Winchesters name?
Not sure if I posted this before? I don’t own these, wish I did.
Anthony, just want to be clear that my cannelure comment being used in the 1890’s smokeless powder cartridges, should not be misunderstood by anyone that I am insinuating that any Milbank primed cartridge was manufactured any time past Dec. 1873.
It certainly should be clear that ANY of the 44 WCF Milbank primed cartridges should only have been manufactured in extremely few quantities, and PRIOR to December 1873 if not earlier.
Thus, paper patched/cannelured or not…the 44 WCF Milbank primed cartridge manufacture dates should range only sometime between October thru December 1873. Meaning ANY Milbank primed 44 WCF cartridge will solely be an 1873 year of manufacture.
If there is any official factory data that can confirm otherwise, I’d love to see it. The last thing Oliver wanted to do was ship such outstanding new, state of the art. rifles out with piss poor ammunition. At least, or only, 16 of the Model Of 1873 rifles were shipped prior to December 31st, 1873.
Did you know George Stetson had a very important patent?
Chuck said
Anthony, I agree. But am somewhat confused. I believe that the 1874 O. F. Winchester Patent primers where probably designed by Gardner? But the 3rd primer that actually worked is a Gardner Patent primer? Since he worked for Winchester during this time why is one in his name and not both in Winchesters name?Not sure if I posted this before? I don’t own these, wish I did.
I think that is very possible. I feel confident, my opinion of course, that Gardner had the influence, but all three were great “thinkers” and worked as a team. George Stetson was the same way. How the legalities worked back then compared to today….I have no idea.
Primer Wars – https://docs.google.com/document/d/1U-313e6xkMrETKwvO9SmH_QhIhlIFjrKvDPo99d0AlE/edit?tab=t.0
Both of you gentlemen bring up some very good points, and clarification!
Chuck said
Anthony, I agree. But am somewhat confused. I believe that the 1874 O. F. Winchester Patent primers where probably designed by Gardner? But the 3rd primer that actually worked is a Gardner Patent primer? Since he worked for Winchester during this time why is one in his name and not both in Winchesters name?Not sure if I posted this before? I don’t own these, wish I did.
Anthony said,
Chuck,
I can understand you’re confusion, as that’s why I stated at the end of my comments, “We may never know!!! A lot of great information about O.W. and what was going on in the building of his company, as explained in Harold Williamson’s book, “Winchester the Gun that Won the West”! I’m sure that you’ve read it!
It can get very confusing, as O.W. 1874 patent, shows him as the designer! His Patent of 1867, shows a center fire cartridge, but I saw no where the cartridge caliber or clarification, as I speculate, he was leaving himself open to various calibers. I’m only speculating here. He does talk about a primer cup, etc……………….
In the demanding times and I’m sure that Oliver was feeling the financial pressure, besides some of the political undermining, behind his back, from some other well known names, as discussed in the Winchester book, by Williamson, and repeated in several other accounts. With his attempts to get the 73 off the ground, the cartridge development was everything, as we understand, and as far as who was getting credit for the patents, and development, I think we can agree on what Bryan states, that some great minds we’re involved as many we’re vying for position, in the Winchester Company.
Bryan Austin said
Anthony, just want to be clear that my cannelure comment being used in the 1890’s smokeless powder cartridges, should not be misunderstood by anyone that I am insinuating that any Milbank primed cartridge was manufactured any time past Dec. 1873.It certainly should be clear that ANY of the 44 WCF Milbank primed cartridges should only have been manufactured in extremely few quantities, and PRIOR to December 1873 if not earlier.
Thus, paper patched/cannelured or not…the 44 WCF Milbank primed cartridge manufacture dates should range only sometime between October thru December 1873. Meaning ANY Milbank primed 44 WCF cartridge will solely be an 1873 year of manufacture.
Anthony said,
I can certainly understand that! I am pleased to read this !
If there is any official factory data that can confirm otherwise, I’d love to see it. The last thing Oliver wanted to do was ship such outstanding new, state of the art. rifles out with piss poor ammunition. At least, or only, 16 of the Model Of 1873 rifles were shipped prior to December 31st, 1873.
Anthony said,
I can also understand and agree with you on this! O.W. wasn’t in business for laughs and giggles, as a shrewd business man he certainly was proud to put his name on his accomplishments, and possibly employees, or sub contractor’s who worked for him!
Did you know George Stetson had a very important patent?
Anthony said,
Yes I did! That’s why I mentioned his name, earlier! I didn’t go into details with his accomplishments, and his many patents that he is known for, as you covered it very well in you’re Primer Wars article!
I think as collectors we all have something with Stetson’s name on it! 
Anthony
tim tomlinson said
Folks, I am way out of my depth in this discussion but I do have a silly idea that may bear some fruit. A few years back, Dave “Rip” Thorne (IF I have it correctly) was the presenter at the awards banquet at the Cody show. He was directly involved in the recovery of cartridges and cases at the Battle of the Little Bighorn field. He is detail oriented. I don’t know of him being on the forum nor how to get hold of him. I think he lives in Montana but so do a few other folks! Maybe, just maybe, one of you could go through the WACA office and call him with a question of any .44-100 cartridge cases with Milbank priming being recovered? If not, were any in another caliber with Milbank primers recovered? Ought to be someone with more knowledge than I have for sure! Also there is a likelihood he will be set up behind me again at the Cody show in July….. Tim
Tim,
If you could kindly talk with Mr. Thorne, and maybe get him to chime in here, we would appreciate it. If nothing else maybe at least get his contact info and we can reach out to him, and maybe keep this informative thread going, in regards to all of the information we have been able to bring to light, and possibly, further timeline this thread.
Thanks in advance!
Anthony
1 Guest(s)
