Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Louis Luttrell said
For Clarence-What Ted posted was a screenshot of a wyomingpublicmedia.org web page, so the link to the recording is not active. Try going here and clicking the play arrow. Works for me…
Thanks, Lou. Was hoping for an account of her connection to this gun; if there was no presentation plaque, perhaps she bought it herself. Any idea why the photo was doctored?
November 5, 2014
Offline
Hi Clarence-
I do not think it is whited out. I think its light reflection off the top of a nickel plated receiver. Try this link:
http://library.centerofthewest.org/digital/collection/p17097coll43/id/415/rec/2
What Tedk posted was a screen shot of the image, which captures at 72 dpi (screen resolution). You can enlarge that all you want and it won’t get sharper. The link above is to the McCracken Library scan of the photograph. You can view it at full resolution by enlarging it there. I think (???) that I can make out some detail of the top of the receiver on her Remington Model 24, which suggests that the negative was not “painted over” before it was enlarged/printed.
I presume that the photo is a BB Wild West Show publicity shot, and can’t think why they would alter an image. Certainly Winchester (as in the Winchester Herald article) would not be keen on showing a competitor’s rifle, but Winchester’s Advertising Department is not the source of the photo.
What would be the best would be if the original photo shown in the Winchester Herald could be found (I didn’t see it in the CFM Collection). The library scan of the Herald article is showing something printed in a single column on paper. The original photo (if it still exists) might let Ben tell whether his Friend’s gun is the one in her left or right hand… 
Ain’t technology Grand???
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Louis Luttrell said
Hi Clarence-I do not think it is whited out. I think its light reflection off the top of a nickel plated receiver. Try this link:
http://library.centerofthewest.org/digital/collection/p17097coll43/id/415/rec/2
What Tedk posted was a screen shot of the image, which captures at 72 dpi (screen resolution). You can enlarge that all you want and it won’t get sharper. The link above is to the McCracken Library scan of the photograph. You can view it at full resolution by enlarging it there. I think (???) that I can make out some detail of the top of the receiver on her Remington Model 24, which suggests that the negative was not “painted over” before it was enlarged/printed.
I did, but it still looks unnatural. Can’t you make out a sharp line at the top of the “mark,” with square corners on either side? That’s what I think I’m seeing, which seems strange if it’s only a reflection. The bottom end of the mark is not so distinct, but still seems too squared off to be natural light reflection.
I tried browsing several of the McCracken collections, & in each case “no results found.” ???
As promised…. here are the pictures of the “unicorn” (JWA’s term 😉 ) I wasn’t dreaming! After spending about an hour gently cleaning off the gooey residue from about 1/4″ of black tape wrapped around the wrist & tang sight. I used a citrus base cleaner for wood and rubbed in some Snake Oil… the wood really soaked it up. There’s still some tape residue, but I didn’t want to be too aggressive. The Lyman tang sight had the standard 1906 rear screw, it was too short so it didn’t tighten properly, thus the black tape. The top screw on the tang sight is a wood screw too. Sheesh! Unfortunately, there is also a crack in the wrist on the right side (see pic), it’s not fatal and should easily stabilize. Interestingly, the serial number on the front half has a “B” after it. The rear and buttstock serial numbers don’t have the “B”. My thought is that since she was presented with two guns, they might have had the same serial number?!?.. One with a “A” and “B” on the other?!? That’s my speculation and I may be totally wrong… Anyway. it’s missing both barrel sights, but I have exactly what it needs in my stash. After cleaning, it really doesn’t look too bad for a 104 year old gun! Unfortunately, my magazine tubes were the wrong size… I will need to locate the proper tube and will be happy to trade. I’m going back next week with the right tang screw and proper sights…I’ll add more pics then. If you right click the pics and then “open in new tab” they will enlarge to fill the screen better.
Ben said After cleaning, it really doesn’t look too bad for a 104 year old gun!
Flaking nickel is always more unsightly than a blued finish with comparable wear. Does the plaque appear to be silver?
Ben said
clarence said
Ben said After cleaning, it really doesn’t look too bad for a 104 year old gun!
Flaking nickel is always more unsightly than a blued finish with comparable wear. Does the plaque appear to be silver?
Plaque does appear to be silver… I’m waiting to talk with a few more knowledgeable people before attempting to use any type of polish/dip product to remove the tarnish. BTW… I’m 65+, have silver hair and I’m flaking too…goes with the territory 🙂
Ben,
After comparing the location of the Monogram Oval on your friends gun to the pic of the two guns that Lou posted it appears that you have the gun she is holding in her left hand.
If you can’t convince them, confuse them
Ben said Plaque does appear to be silver… I’m waiting to talk with a few more knowledgeable people before attempting to use any type of polish/dip product to remove the tarnish.
Ben, ordinary silver polish is too mild an abrasive to do any harm. Or try something like Flitz. Of course, you don’t want it to shine like a new minted coin! (I mean, back before all our coins were made out of pot metal.)
Louis Luttrell said
Hi Clarence-I do not think it is whited out. I think its light reflection off the top of a nickel plated receiver. Try this link:
http://library.centerofthewest.org/digital/collection/p17097coll43/id/415/rec/2
What Tedk posted was a screen shot of the image, which captures at 72 dpi (screen resolution). You can enlarge that all you want and it won’t get sharper. The link above is to the McCracken Library scan of the photograph. You can view it at full resolution by enlarging it there. I think (???) that I can make out some detail of the top of the receiver on her Remington Model 24, which suggests that the negative was not “painted over” before it was enlarged/printed.
I presume that the photo is a BB Wild West Show publicity shot, and can’t think why they would alter an image. Certainly Winchester (as in the Winchester Herald article) would not be keen on showing a competitor’s rifle, but Winchester’s Advertising Department is not the source of the photo.
What would be the best would be if the original photo shown in the Winchester Herald could be found (I didn’t see it in the CFM Collection). The library scan of the Herald article is showing something printed in a single column on paper. The original photo (if it still exists) might let Ben tell whether his Friend’s gun is the one in her left or right hand…
Ain’t technology Grand???
Lou
Lou… from what I’ve read, she was with Buffalo Bill early on, she and her husband left BB’s show around 1913 and had their own show where she was the star. Her appearance in the pic shows a woman of middle age… I’m thinking late 1920’s… maybe after her “relationship” with Winchester was over. Her husband passed away in 1929. She married another gentleman sometime in the 30’s and didn’t continue her shooting career. The rifle in the pic sure looks like a Remington to me as well… just my 2 cents… YMMV
I’m fairy sure the “B” after the serial number is to indicate that this rifle was a 1906, and not a Model 1890. The 1890’s (or 90’s in this time frame) had an “A” after the serial number. Since the 1906 and the 1890 used the same receiver, Winchester decided, for a time, to distinguish between the models with the letters A or B. Later, the letter was deleted on Model 90’s and Model 06’s.
BRP
Blue Ridge Parson said
I’m fairy sure the “B” after the serial number is to indicate that this rifle was a 1906, and not a Model 1890. The 1890’s (or 90’s in this time frame) had an “A” after the serial number. Since the 1906 and the 1890 used the same receiver, Winchester decided, for a time, to distinguish between the models with the letters A or B. Later, the letter was deleted on Model 90’s and Model 06’s.BRP
Thanks for the info…. I’m sure you’re right, but I still like my “wishful thinking”. 🙂 Curious if anyone on the forum has been to the Cody Museum lately and seen the new display featuring the women of Wild West show?
Ben said Lou… from what I’ve read, she was with Buffalo Bill early on, she and her husband left BB’s show around 1913 and had their own show where she was the star. Her appearance in the pic shows a woman of middle age… I’m thinking late 1920’s… maybe after her “relationship” with Winchester was over. Her husband passed away in 1929. She married another gentleman sometime in the 30’s and didn’t continue her shooting career. The rifle in the pic sure looks like a Remington to me as well… just my 2 cents… YMMV
Annie Oakley left the show in 1902, but continued her stage & shooting career; had Nan joined it before that date? Annie continued giving exhibitions until 1924, the yr before she died at 66 from a blood disease.
Blue Ridge Parson said
I’m fairy sure the “B” after the serial number is to indicate that this rifle was a 1906, and not a Model 1890. The 1890’s (or 90’s in this time frame) had an “A” after the serial number. Since the 1906 and the 1890 used the same receiver, Winchester decided, for a time, to distinguish between the models with the letters A or B. Later, the letter was deleted on Model 90’s and Model 06’s.BRP
The “A” marked M1906’s were all 22 short only and had the 3rd type receivers. Mine is from 1908. The “A”s are very difficult to find. The “B” was the first model to chamber all three rimfires. Big Larry
Interesting.
I have three “A” marked 3rd Model 1890’s; a 22 Short, av 22 Long Rifle, and a 22 WRF.
The only 1906 I ever owned was an early one, a 2nd Model, with a 4 digit serial number, chambered in 22 Short only. It had no letter after the serial number.
If I stumbled upon a 1906 with an “A” after the serial number, I would be a bit suspicious that it was an 1890 receiver that had been rebuilt with a 1906 barrel and stock assembly.
BRP
EDIT: I looked up the variation Big Larry describes, with a 3rd Model receiver and the “A” marked serial number. This is a legitimate variation, and fairly scarce variant. Such 1906 rifles so marked will be early 3rd Models without the Winchester Proof Mark on barrel or receiver. Thanks to BL for helping me to learn something new today!
BRP
Blue Ridge Parson said
Interesting.I have three “A” marked 3rd Model 1890’s; a 22 Short, av 22 Long Rifle, and a 22 WRF.
The only 1906 I ever owned was an early one, a 2nd Model, with a 4 digit serial number, chambered in 22 Short only. It had no letter after the serial number.
If I stumbled upon a 1906 with an “A” after the serial number, I would be a bit suspicious that it was an 1890 receiver that had been rebuilt with a 1906 barrel and stock assembly.
BRP
For a relatively short period of time, Winchester did indeed stamp an “A” below the serial numbers on early 22 Short only Model 1906 rifles.
This is one of them – Winchester model 1906 22 Short (gunsinternational.com)
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert H. said
Blue Ridge Parson said
Interesting.
I have three “A” marked 3rd Model 1890’s; a 22 Short, av 22 Long Rifle, and a 22 WRF.
The only 1906 I ever owned was an early one, a 2nd Model, with a 4 digit serial number, chambered in 22 Short only. It had no letter after the serial number.
If I stumbled upon a 1906 with an “A” after the serial number, I would be a bit suspicious that it was an 1890 receiver that had been rebuilt with a 1906 barrel and stock assembly.
BRP
For a relatively short period of time, Winchester did indeed stamp an “A” below the serial numbers on early 22 Short only Model 1906 rifles.
This is one of them – Winchester model 1906 22 Short (gunsinternational.com)
Bert
Yes Bert. This is one of them, and a beater as well. I wonder what the buyer paid for it? For reference, my 2nd Model 22 short only is # 21675, shipped 4-23-1906, first year. As with most 22 short M1906’s, it has a less than perfect bore, but is still very accurate for a 22 short. Fortunately, it is over 95% externally. BRP, we all strive to learn a little every day. Thanks, Big Larry FWIW, my one and only M1890 has the “A” on the receiver.
Big Larry said This is one of them, and a beater as well. I wonder what the buyer paid for it?
Larry, what do you mean a “beater”? The “Platinum” seller declares it has “89% original blue.” I would just hate to believe a Platinum seller could be untruthful–would destroy my faith in humanity.
clarence said
Big Larry said This is one of them, and a beater as well. I wonder what the buyer paid for it?
Larry, what do you mean a “beater”? The “Platinum” seller declares it has “89% original blue.” I would just hate to believe a Platinum seller could be untruthful–would destroy my faith in humanity.
Would you like to buy a bridge? 89%? That guy is dumber than you look. The bbl. is void of blue as is the underneath of the receiver. 89% rusty patina. No mention of the bore which is probably all ate up. BUT, it is 100% correct and scarce. Your pal. Big Larry
Nan Jeanne ‘Two-Gun Nan’ Lambell died 24 Oct 1964 and is buried at Green Acres Memorial Park and Mortuary in Bloomington, Ca.
44
1 Guest(s)
