They look correct to me. There were several variations. I am at the Cody show but will check my notes tonight to give you all the variations and dates of change.
Regards,
WACA Life Member #6284 - Specializing in Pre-64 Winchester .22 Rimfire
Not to upstage JWA, who is the man when it comes to this sort of information.
Houze gives three variations of the inscription.
Standard
In 1905 the date Feb 15 1905 was included when Bennett’s patent for the extractor was granted.
In 1914 the chamber was changed so .22 ex long could be chambered and so marked.
So your rifle looks the goods to me, very hard to find one with a good barrel and only about 18,000 were made in your age group
ray said
Not to upstage JWA, who is the man when it comes to this sort of information.Houze gives three variations of the inscription.
Standard
In 1905 the date Feb 15 1905 was included when Bennett’s patent for the extractor was granted.
In 1914 the chamber was changed so .22 ex long could be chambered and so marked.
So your rifle looks the goods to me, very hard to find one with a good barrel and only about 18,000 were made in your age group
Hi Ray,
Thanks for jumping in and providing the info to Vince. Sorry for the delay, I was having too much fun at the Cody Winchester show to sneak away and boot up my computer. All of your information is correct except I have the patent date as February 14 (not 15). There is one additional variation (if you want to call it that) that I have listed in my notes. It was a reduced cost finish and looks a bit different than the variation 3 although the barrel marking is the same.
Variation 1 (July 1904 – March 1905) Barrel Patent Date Aug. 29, 1899. Pat. Pend., Barrel Caliber Marking – 22 Short and Long
Variation 2 (March 1905 – 1914) Barrel Patent Date Aug. 29, 1899 & Feb. 14, 1905, Barrel Caliber Marking – 22 Short and Long
Variation 3 (1914 – September 1918) Barrel Date Aug. 29, 1899 & Feb. 14, 1905, Barrel Caliber Marking – 22 Short, Long or Ex. Long
Variation 4 (September 1918 – May 1923) Reduced cost finish, Barrel Caliber Marking – 22 Short, Long or Ex. Long
Best Regards,
WACA Life Member #6284 - Specializing in Pre-64 Winchester .22 Rimfire
Ray,
I guess that would be the stock finish which appears different , rather than a difference in the bluing, correct?
Vince
Southern Oregon
NRA member
Fraternal Order of Eagles
“There is but one answer to be made to the dynamite bomb and that can best be made by the Winchester rifle.”
Teddy Roosevelt
Yes that date was the 14 Feb and the stock was not given it’s final polish as a cost saving device.
Well that is what Houze says, interestingly on the M.02 to cut prices after WW1 they dropped the final polish in both the stock and the steel finish.
Thing is after 99 years it would need a very good eye and a perfectly preserved rifle to be able to pick up any difference.
1 Guest(s)
