Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
I just finished reading the post Anthony brought up on the 52C Sporter at the RIA auction over the weekend and the mention about the die chipped letters. I’ve seen other posts where the chipped die issue has been brought up leading to uncertainty if the barrel in question has been altered. Mainly weak stamping leading one to believe buffed out and re- blued. My question on this particular rifle and the chipped die is this. Most all of us like Winchester’s because of the high level of quality and workmanship that went into them and rightfully so. How aggresive was quality control and final inspection to allow chipped letters to be passed through? Where did Winchester draw the line that a blemish was bad enough to send the product back for repair or replacement. Did they let chipped dies go through because of the expense to engrave new ones? How many letters had to be damaged and to what point before dies were replaced?
A lot of the guys on this web site are what I consider experts. (I’m not even in the same league, but I do enjoy the questions and answers) You guys study records at the Cody Museum, take notes and concentrate on the DETAILS. Sometimes very small details that turn out to be a big deal in recognizing a fake. So maybe a chipped die is a sign of an original barrel? Any of you experts ever come across any information on the replacing of worn tooling? Did they replace after a given number of parts or like in the case of stamping dies run them until they break. Anyway, I was just curious as to how long Winchester would use a defective die before replacing it or maybe this one just slipped through the cracks. Maybe Pauline could answer this question. RRM
November 5, 2014
Offline
Hi Scott-
Regarding chipped or flawed roll mark dies and stamps, my experience (combined with hearsay) is something like this… Limited to pre-64 Model 70s and 1930s-1960s production, of course… 
After being engraved, the roll marking dies were hardened so as to be able to impress letters/numbers into barrel steel under hydraulic pressure. This made them brittle and prone to chip, especially on corners and on parts of very small letters. Like the middle horizontal stroke of the “Es” in “WINCHESTER PROOF STEEL”, for example. I was once told by a Member that (barring being dropped on the floor, which might cause it to shatter) the roll dies were good for about 1,000 or so applications before they wore out.
So a “new” die was “perfect”, with the caveat that early on they were engraved by hand so “perfect” does not mean “identical”. Over time each die developed small flaws here and there but remained in use. To some extent, at least on M70s, I find the presence of these minor flaws to be somewhat reassuring.
Here’s something to illustrate. Below are (4) barrel roll marks on 257 ROBERTS Target barrels. These are the 24″ medium heavy straight taper barrels with integral forged front sight ramps found on 1st variation (usually first year) M70 target rifles. The barrel dates are all ’36… None have been refinished and they are not fakes. The rifles are S/Ns 3339, 3386, 3726 and 14520. Look very carefully at the “chips” in the “W” of the staggered “WINCHESTER” logo and the “O” in “ROBERTS”.
Keep in mind that the barrel Address/Model part was applied with a ROLL DIE and the Caliber with a separate STAMP, so the spacing between the two markings varies from one barrel to the next. Since they were applied in separate operations using different presses, the two die impressions may not be of equal depth. Also keep in mind that the final polishing of barrels was done AFTER roll marking, and mainly to remove the “cratering” caused by the die application.
What do you think??? My posit is that all four barrels were marked with the same two dies, and probably on the same day… Ramped 257 ROBERTS Target rifles are pretty rare (comparatively few manufactured) and I suspect that there were only a small number of “batches” of barrels done, mostly in ’35 or ’36.
Finally, I am unaware of any surviving factory standards dictating to the barrel shop when to replace a worn/chipped die. I certainly think there were such standards, I just have never seem them…
Best,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Thanks Lou. Good explanation. Check out the crooked “P” in proof. I believe you’re right, same die for all four. RRM
Good Stuff Lou
“If you can’t convince them, confuse them”
President Harry S. Truman
Online
Lou,
Like the others have said. You did a very good explanation, and the illustrations you provided didn’t hurt either.
This can be referenced for a long time. IMO!
Anthony
November 5, 2014
Offline
Anthony-
For reference, here is what Roger Rule had to say about the finishing/polishing of Model 70 barrels. I cannot independently verify this (no documents regarding factory polishing procedures are known to me)… But Rule had the chance to speak with factory employees who are no longer with us, so presumably his information is accurate.
Externally unpolished (lathe turned) and still unchambered barrels were inspected and if accepted got the under chamber stamps (caliber designation and date). Then they were polished with 80-grit. Next they were chambered. Then they were polished again with 120-grit. Next the exposed roll marks were applied. This, of course, causes “cratering” where metal was displaced by the die. “Final” polishing, done AFTER the roll marks were applied, consisted of successive 150-, 180-, and 220-grit abrasives. After all that they were blued. Pre-war was Rust blue, later barrels got Du-Lite blue…
All these polishing steps were done on a sanding belt, not a polishing wheel, hence the polishing marks are circumferential and edges are sharp, not “soft” like you’d get from careless use of a buffing wheel… Since the under barrel stamps were applied before any polishing, they are commonly very “washed out” and often partially removed. Exposed barrel marks only got the “final” polishes, so they’re generally cleaner/clearer. But with three “final” polishes between stamping and bluing, it might not be surprising that there’s variation in the depth of impression, even on factory original barrels.
Having already driven myself to the brink of insanity looking at high resolution photos of barrel markings, I need to remind myself that what we see as flaws under high magnification are barely noticeable on the barrel itself… These letters/numbers are actually really TINY…
The tallest are only about 0.10″ high, and the Barrel Address and Proof Steel parts of the stamp are under 0.05″ tall. Imagine engraving an “E” or an “S” that small and getting every letter perfectly proportioned, spaced, and aligned. Back when these dies were cut or cleaned up by hand it didn’t happen that way… Personally, I’m more suspicious of barrel markings that are “perfect” in every way… Smacks of precision CNC machining…
Best,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Lou,
I can appreciate you’re explanation, as Dad was a die maker and worked for a company that did a lot of work for the, “Big Three”. He shared a lot of stories, and I remember being a kid, in the 60’s, and the shop had a family day on a Sunday, with a tour of the plant, and Dad’s bench, and machinist tool box, which I now have and will hand down to my sons. I found it interesting to see the different set ups and the explanations of a lot of the processes that we’re done by hand, and no such thing as CNC machines back then, even though they did have several pieces of machinery, to do a lot of the machine work needed. So I can relate and understand what your saying, and describing, even though the two finished products are apples and oranges, so to speak.
Once again Thank You!
Anthony
Good discussion. Me looking at the stamping as Lou explained would make me think that on caliber Stamping on number 14520 was replaced somewhere after 3726; but the Address/Model part was applied with a Roll Die may have stayed the same. To me, the caliber stamping on 14520 looks cleaner than the other three.
Dan
November 5, 2014
Offline
Hi Dan-
I have no way of knowing, of course… Even on the s/n 14520 barrel, the small defect in the left side of the “O” in “ROBERTS” appears to be there… It’s a 1938 receiver, but all four barrels are dated ’36.
FWIW… S/N 14520 is in a Standard stock. The other (3) are regular Target rifles with Marksman stocks. The option of getting an NRA style stock on a M70 Target rifle was specifically stated in the pre-war catalogs (on special order at same price as the Marksman stock), but other than the fact that the stock looks OK to me, I do not know if the gun left the factory that way or not. For full disclosure, I added the Wittek-Vaver receiver sight pictured below as the stock is not inlet for a Lyman 48WJS.
I have a THEORY (ZERO proof) about how Winchester used up 1st variation (ramped) target barrels… The ramped barrels were of the pattern used on the M54 Target rifles in 1935-36. Winchester made the change to 2nd variation barrels, with a muzzle dovetail rather than a front ramp, in 1937. In the M70 survey so far, the (2) latest (highest serial number) 1st variation Target rifles in Marksman stocks are also in the mid-14,000s (early 1938). Both also 257 ROBERTS… But I’ve recorded a fair number of 1st variation Target rifles in Standard stocks up into the mid-20,000s (mostly 220 SWIFT and 257 ROBERTS). My THEORY is that after Winchester went to the 2nd variation barrel, which also involved changing the receiver sight from a Lyman 48WJS to a 48WH, they held onto any remaining ramped target barrels for use whenever someone ordered a “heavy barrel Standard rifle”. Winchester cataloged such rifles as a Target rifle with optional NRA style stock, but same difference…
One more caliber stamp for comparison… This is a later 2nd variation (muzzle dovetail) Target rifle in 257 ROBERTS (s/n 56203). Still has a Style 1 barrel marking, but it’s a later barrel than those in my previous post. I do not know the barrel date as I’ve not yet taken this one apart, but it’s got to be ’40 or earlier based on when Winchester changed to the Style 3A markings. This one is clearly stamped using different dies from the ramped ’36 date barrels…
Best,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
1 Guest(s)
