JWA said
if you mean several of the .303 British I agree with you. 😉 but US Cartridge Company purchased WAY more than several single shots for testing purposes, I have "several" of them myself (but mine are all .22 rimfire).
I can add some to the upcoming Winchester Single Shot Musket "show and tell" at Cody (NOT a judged display) if you want to completely fill my sales table if there is interest?  That is the beauty of my old Dodge Cummins,, to paraphrase the Field of Dreams movie, "if you ask, it will haul" 🙂
Best Regards,
  

Please send me digital photos of your U.S.C.Co. marked singles shots with the serial numbers.  No need to pack your old Dodge Cummins with too many old Single Shots.

I can add some to the upcoming Winchester Single Shot Musket "show and tell" at Cody (NOT a judged display) if you want to completely fill my sales table if there is interest?  That is the beauty of my old Dodge Cummins,, to paraphrase the Field of Dreams movie, "if you ask, it will haul" 🙂

Best Regards,

Anthony said
Bert,
Is this from you're Survey pics, you've taken from Cody?
Very interesting!
 
Tony
  

I copied & saved the pictures from RIA's digital catalog when those rifles were sold in past auctions.  The rifles with the red tags on them were in the Peter & Patty Murray collection.  I had the opportunity to personally handle them back in the Fall of 2002. In the past 30-years years I have had my hands on at least a dozen of the Single Shot Test cartridge rifles.

In addition to the Single Shot rifles that Winchester used for their own inhouse testing and cartridge development, the U.S. Cartridge Company and Dupont purchased Single Shot rifles for testing purposes. The attached picture below is just one of several that was purchased and used by the U.S. Cartridge Company for testing cartridges.

Bert

Is this from you're Survey pics, you've taken from Cody?

Very interesting!

Tony

Bert

That would make sense, as the .25 Creedmoor seems to be pretty close in comparison. Not that I have experience with either, but it just stands to reason to me.

Tony

Bill, what would be the closest other caliber, that you would compare the 250-3000 caliber to?

I killed my first, and several other Deer at our PA, hunt camp, with a Savage 99, in the .300 Savage caliber, that worked very well for me, as a rifle loaned me from me future Father in Law, at the time, 50 years ago. Then my Wife bought me a .375 Winchester, and using the 200 gr. factory ammo, we lost count as several made it to the freezer with that tremendous brush gun, on our heavily wooded , and loaded with under brush property.

Tony

kevindpm61 said
Somebody can correct me if I'm wrong but, I think the 250-3000 was the first American cartridge to go over 3000 ft./s.  I believe it was the 280 Ross that went over 3000 ft./s first
  

Well Kevin... Absolutely!  The .280 Ross was a very impressive development.  I am very familiar with this cartridge.  Ballistics, case capacity and bullet is very similar to the 7mm Remington Magnum.  The big difference is the .280 Ross came out 55 years earlier than the 7 Rem mag.

By the way, I've enjoyed the Savage photos and I could post a few myself, but I see there's a scarcity of .280 Ross photos so I can fix that.  Here's an M-10:

View post on imgur.com

The post Ross M1905 actions (i.e. the M1907 Scotch Deerstalker and the M-10 sporter) started in 1907 and very closely resembled the Weatherby Mk V multi-lug action that Roy came out in 1958.  The Ross action had no comparison as far as strength (as was proven by E.C. Crossman in his destruction testing of various rifle actions).  I recall Crossman took a .280 Ross case, filled it with a pistol powder (of the day of course). He filled it to the top of the case mouth and then used a bullet to keep compressing deeper in the case.  He then greased the case and fired it.  And he could not blow the action!  The rifle was damaged but the action didn't blow.  

I would not put any $$$ into this, as they stated. Some wood glue, applied carefully, can repair the crack, and like was said you can tone down the look of the non professional job that was done to this piece to make it at least look presentable, and not trying to hide anything, or fool anyone. I'm pretty sure on the left top of the receiver, some pitting, under the distasteful re blue finish, is evident on the receiver. Zebulon is spot on with his recommendation, on how to save you're pocketbook from chasing this one down that infamous rabbit hole that will never please you. Bert's 3 times the cost is spot on. Spend the saved $$ on a real masterpiece, and just keep going as a lesson learned! IMHO!

Anthony

If the gun has no sentimental value - an inheritance,  for example,  I would not throw good money after bad. There is a market for shiny old Winchesters and cashing out of it makes the most sense, to me anyway.

If it IS an inheritance and the bore and mechanicals are good enough to hunt with, there are some things you could do yourself or might have done at modest cost to make the gun less painful.to the eye, although It will never be collectible:

With the rifle disassembled, taking care not to round any edges, knock the gloss off the wood with 0000 steel wool. Don't remove any wood, just flatten the top layer of finish. If 4-0 isn't enough, drop back to 000 or 00 but use a very light touch. With care, the finish can be made to approximate oil. It would help if you have seen the various Winchesters on display at Cody. 

The other step is more drastic and that is to age the steel, which requires flattening the existing blue and removing it realistically in places - sharp edges and at the carry point. This is at best fooling the eye because the real problem was overpolishing the bare steel. But it can create an imperfect illusion of an older finish. 

None of the foregoing will fool a knowledgeable collector but it would make the gun more appealing in appearance. More to a knowledgeable person's taste, I expect including you. 

I can say these things with a clear conscience because I've been down this road myself. Like the man trying to carry his tomcat home by its tail, I learned some lessons that will never grow dim or doubtful. 

bStrongTO said

bStrongTO said
I know this thread is older, but it’s a great title.
Unfortunately the lack of experience may have contributed to this disaster. When trying to confirm any markings on who or where the refurbishment, based on notes past down done in 1970, a little splitting of the wood.
SN shows 1911, I’m waiting for the letters.
I’m hoping to get this done by Turnbull case coloring. Any ideas? The blueing and finish on the wood is a little wrong dates?
Luckily we have a few other models, but in 1894 1 94’ 25-35 (1911)1 30 (1901). 
  

As you can see this one stands out and seems like it needs a little change?
  

The damage that was done to it when it was non-professionally refinished is too extensive to recover from.  The cost to have it properly restored will be approximately 3X what the gun would be worth.  Case color finishing it would only make worse as it is not the correct finish type for a 1911 production Model 1894.  Winchester ceased case color finishing in August of the year 1901.  All receiver frames were machine blued, and the barrels and magazine tubes were rust blued.

Bert

bStrongTO said
I know this thread is older, but it’s a great title.
Unfortunately the lack of experience may have contributed to this disaster. When trying to confirm any markings on who or where the refurbishment, based on notes past down done in 1970, a little splitting of the wood.
SN shows 1911, I’m waiting for the letters.
I’m hoping to get this done by Turnbull case coloring. Any ideas? The blueing and finish on the wood is a little wrong dates?
Luckily we have a few other models, but in 1894 1 94’ 25-35 (1911)1 30 (1901). 

As you can see this one stands out and seems like it needs a little change?