Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
The later B’s assembled after WWII (starting in the later 6XXXX s/n range)did not have sandblasted receivers, nor were the barrels on Bull Guns sandblasted. I have found no documentation that I can recall mentioning this change or the reason behind it. I have always assumed it was a cost cutting measure.
Steve
November 7, 2015
Offline
I suppose a sandblasted finish could accomplish the same result as the matted barrels we see on some special order rifles. I used to smoke the sights on my PPC Open gun but the sight rib was matted. The tops of many S&W revolvers have a matte finish. Maybe it wasn’t necessary on the 52, I’ve only shot mine under cover so I don’t know.
Mike
I find it interesting that Winchester reinstituted the matte finish again on the 1970’s model 70 Target rifles and the later model 52 International Match rifles. The finish was much darker the 2nd time around.
Steve
Online
seewin said
The later B’s assembled after WWII (starting in the later 6XXXX s/n range)did not have sandblasted receivers, nor were the barrels on Bull Guns sandblasted. I have found no documentation that I can recall mentioning this change or the reason behind it. I have always assumed it was a cost cutting measure.Steve
Steve,
My point exactly, VERY INTERESTING, as I couldn’t agree more. According to Houze 52 book I don’t see a so called cut off and start date per serial number.
Pge 123 Houze 52 book.
Interesting enough 20 in total model 52 rifles we’re ordered by the U.S. Government. These weren’t ordered until 1/31/1942,3/30/1942,AND 6/4/1943.
Anthony
I don’t believe that the Government ordered only 20 B models over their production. I have probably seen that many myself. I have talked with the former team captain of the U.S. Navy team back in the very early 1960’s. According to him, his entire team used 52B’s, and they all had “U.S. Property” stamped on them. I actually have one of those rifles that belonged to one of his team members. He told me when he ordered them from the depot, that is what showed up. I have no idea how many B’s were used by the Government in total, but am sure it was over 20. I have at 4 myself.
Steve
Steve,
I believe you. Besides Herbert G. Houze’s book I wouldn’t know where to look for model 52 information. The knowledge that you bring to the table on this is wonderful for the collecting community. Many of us, I’m sure appreciate it. I’m wondering in your conversation with the former team captain if the 52B well documented trigger problem came up?
Anthony
seewin said
I have at 4 myself.Steve
Hoarder! 
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Antonio said
Besides Herbert G. Houze’s book I wouldn’t know where to look for model 52 information.
You’re at the right place!
Bert H. said
seewin said
I have at 4 myself.
Steve
Hoarder!
Bert,
HAHAHA!
Aren’t we all hoarders of some sort?
Steve, are you at 4 model 52B’s? Or 4 model 52’s? Just wondering and curious. I sold my couple model 52B’s because of the trigger issues as The improved micro motion trigger I found is much better and as a family we enjoy shooting much more. The “B” trigger would snap forward and as I read up more on it Winchester was spending a lot of time and resources correcting the problem so much as customers we’re writing in at the time,(pre. war), complaining and raving about a Remington rifle in comparison. Instead of changing the trigger out I moved the “B’s” out into other model 52’s that I like. I’m curious if the ones you have and have seen have the a military stamp or designation on them? I’d love to see pics. as I wouldn’t consider that hijacking this thread as your educating us further on your model 52 knowledge.
clarence said
Antonio said
Besides Herbert G. Houze’s book I wouldn’t know where to look for model 52 information.
You’re at the right place!
Clarence, How do you know where I am?
That statement reminds me of the movie “plains trains and automobiles” when John Candy and Steve Martin we’re driving the wrong way on a freeway and the guy next to them was mouthing the words, “Your going the wrong way”, and their response was “How does he know where we’re going”!
Sorry Clarence I couldn’t help myself!
Anthony
Antonio said
Bert H. said
seewin said
I have at 4 myself.
Steve
Hoarder!
Bert,
HAHAHA!
Aren’t we all hoarders of some sort?
Steve, are you at 4 model 52B’s? Or 4 model 52’s? Just wondering and curious. I sold my couple model 52B’s because of the trigger issues as The improved micro motion trigger I found is much better and as a family we enjoy shooting much more. The “B” trigger would snap forward and as I read up more on it Winchester was spending a lot of time and resources correcting the problem so much as customers we’re writing in at the time,(pre. war), complaining and raving about a Remington rifle in comparison. Instead of changing the trigger out I moved the “B’s” out into other model 52’s that I like. I’m curious if the ones you have and have seen have the a military stamp or designation on them? I’d love to see pics. as I wouldn’t consider that hijacking this thread as your educating us further on your model 52 knowledge.
Antonio, I actually have 5 model 52B U.S. Property rifles. Below is the U.S. Property stamp on them. Most times you see the stamp just above the stock line on RH side of barrel. Occasionally it will be above s/n, and in some cases above the rollstamping on LH side and above s/n.
As far as 52B trigger problems, I have never had a problem with one. They were designed for a 3# pull, and if I get them down to 2#, I’m happy. There were a lot of fantastic scores shot with them in the day, and with guys not shooting off the bench. In my opinion, it’s much ado about nothing. It is just a case of adapting to what you are shooting.
Steve
Steve,
That’s great information. Interesting how the stamp evolved from “US prop”and changed to a full stamp with the wording to “U.S.property”. This also solidifies Clarence comment “Your at the Right Place” because in Herbert Houze 52 book he mentions that there wasn’t much documentation regarding these rifles mentioned here. I also find it interesting on the trigger bit. I didn’t care for mine as did my 30 year Marine Corps brother in law who had plenty of trigger time in his day. The Remington model 37 is what I was referring to earlier as it’s closest competitor according to Houze and also a few more we’re mentioned, not to discount the 52 at all.
Anthony
As far as 52B trigger problems, I have never had a problem with one. They were designed for a 3# pull, and if I get them down to 2#, I’m happy. There were a lot of fantastic scores shot with them in the day, and with guys not shooting off the bench. In my opinion, it’s much ado about nothing. It is just a case of adapting to what you are shooting. seewin said
It’s quite possible to adapt to an annoyance if there’s no other choice (like I’ve adapted to my numerous physical limitations), but the Rem 37 gave shooters an excellent alternative choice. I didn’t find the trigger objectionable on the B model I shot for about a yr, but I’m not by any means a high-level shooter. What I DID find very objectionable was the extra force required to close the bolt due to that coil spring inside the sear, which made it feel almost like the Slowlock’s cock-on-closing action. That was supposed to be an improvement over the pre-A design? The As & pre-As are much more pleasant to shoot, & are the only 52s I have or want.
Antonio, I actually have 5 model 52B U.S. Property rifles. Below is the U.S. Property stamp on them. Most times you see the stamp just above the stock line on RH side of barrel. Occasionally it will be above s/n, and in some cases above the rollstamping on LH side and above s/n.
Steve
Antonio said
Steve,That’s great information. Interesting how the stamp evolved from “US prop” and changed to a full stamp with the wording to “U.S.property”.
A little while back I purchased from a fellow collector a large lot of WRACo Factory stamps. Stamps that were used from early on in production and some used very late. Some of the neater ones are marked with John Ulrich’s stamp. I’m glad to figure out and know that the U.S.Prop. stamp I own was used on the Model 52. . Thanks for posting this information. As not a lot of information is known of some of there more obscure stamps.
Sincerely,
Maverick
WACA #8783 - Checkout my Reloading Tool Survey!
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-research-surveys/winchester-reloading-tool-survey/
That’s interesting. I always assumed that the B’s were stamped by the receiving depot and not the manufacturer.
Thanks for posting.
Steve
FWIW dept. Pauline told me that the US Property from later years, that was burned on with an electric pencil, was done at the factory. Big Larry
Big Larry said
FWIW dept. Pauline told me that the US Property from later years, that was burned on with an electric pencil, was done at the factory. Big Larry
BL,
Yes, it was, both the 52’s and 70’s. Winchester had a separate symbol number for the Government contract 52’s. The bill of materials for that symbol number lists the marking as one of the last steps prior to packing.
Steve
Those US Property rifles marked with the electro-engraving tool just make me cringe. A 2 year old playing with a greasy crayon could do work that looks better.
I once owned a 52-C that was so marked — for about 15 minutes. I bought it as I entered a gun show. It came with a Lyman Super Targetspot, Redfield Olympic sights, and five or six factory magazines, plus the factory single shot adaptor. I kept the sights, the magazines and the scope, and sold the rifle before I left that show. I had less than $100 in all the plunder that I kept. I just can’t stand the way the electro-graved marking looked.
BRP
Blue Ridge Parson said
Those US Property rifles marked with the electro-engraving tool just make me cringe. A 2 year old playing with a greasy crayon could do work that looks better.
That’s why it’s shocking it was done at the factory! Such sht-work done by an 8th-grade drop-out who joined the service because he couldn’t find a better job wouldn’t be hard to understand (which was what I previously assumed), but sad to think Win let an employee get away with it!
I take offense regarding an 8th grade drop out joining the service because he couldn’t find a better job. I’ve seen “educated” people in my time oversees just as useless. But I’ll let it go.
Another interesting tidbit is that the all stamps I have, bear in mind even specifically the one shown previously, were still at the factory until the 1980s. I even have some documentation were in the early 1970s they were sent off to a local New Haven engraving firm to be re-cut / freshened up for the factory. Which makes you wonder, why did they send them out to be freshened up and not have their own engravers do the work? Unless all the factory engravers were to busy to do such work? Or was it more cost effective to do so? When speaking with Pauline, she stated it wasn’t unusual for her to engrave all sorts of dies, stamps, etc. other than just the firearms, basically anything the factory needed done.
So it also makes me wonder if all these stamps were still at the factory until the 1980s. Why didn’t they just go get the hand stamp and keep using it? Rather than using the electro-engraving tool to make such crappy looking markings. I guess it goes to show how the change in management affected things over the years.
Sincerely,
Maverick
WACA #8783 - Checkout my Reloading Tool Survey!
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-research-surveys/winchester-reloading-tool-survey/
1 Guest(s)
