Log In
April 15, 2005
Offline
Win61 said
Bert,Do you have Model 71 S/N 29306 in your survey? It is a special rifle, short tang, NO peep.
Dick
Yes, I do have it documented in the survey (when it was in the April 2018 RIA auction).
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
January 7, 2014
Offline
Bert,
Do you have the month that Model 71 S/N 29306 was Manufactured?
Thanks
Dick
April 15, 2005
Offline
Win61 said
Bert,Do you have the month that Model 71 S/N 29306 was Manufactured?
Thanks
Dick
I do not. That stated, my estimate is June/July 1949. You can get the exact date by contacting Pauline Muerrle.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
January 7, 2014
Offline
Bert,
Thank you for the information. The Rule book shows December 1948 – the Winchester Forum shows 1949. This led me to believe that the month would be Jan or Feb 49. I will contact Pauline for more information.
Thank you.
Dick
April 12, 2024
Offline
Bert,
Just got a new to me .450 Alaskan conversion SN 3381. Are you interested in those too?
April 15, 2005
Offline
Flash said
Just got a new to me .450 Alaskan conversion SN 3381. Are you interested in those too?
Yes I am.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
April 12, 2024
Offline
Bert,
Well then, I have no idea who did the .450 Alaskan conversion as there is no stamping or ID other than the chambering stamp on the barrel. The internals and feed system appear unmodified and identical (other than the tang) to my other, newer, regular .348 model 71. The only structural difference I can see is the fore end retaining ring added to the magazine tube. The other modifications, like the Marbles semi buckhorn replacing the missing bolt peep sight, the plugged scope mount holes, the added saddle ring stud, and the ‘not quite antique’ Limb saver recoil pad, all give clues to the rifles history. The person I got it from said it had just sat in a safe since their father passed about 10 years ago and the recoil pad can’t be much older than that, so he must have used it to at least some extent his whole life. While the gun does show external wear and a few dings, the bore and internals are pristine, which makes sense for a gun that was carried a lot and shot a little. It feeds and ejects my .348 cartridges reliably, but haven’t tried .450’s yet as I am still trying to locate ammo/ reloading assets. I realize the modifications nullify the collector value on one hand, but the .450 Alaskan mod launches it’s COOL factor, for me at least, way up there. The nearly 90 year history of this rifle is almost palpable. If only it could talk. If there’s any more information you could use about this rifle let me know. Thanks for all you do here.
Mark
April 15, 2005
Offline
Flash said
Bert,Well then, I have no idea who did the .450 Alaskan conversion as there is no stamping or ID other than the chambering stamp on the barrel. The internals and feed system appear unmodified and identical (other than the tang) to my other, newer, regular .348 model 71. The only structural difference I can see is the fore end retaining ring added to the magazine tube. The other modifications, like the Marbles semi buckhorn replacing the missing bolt peep sight, the plugged scope mount holes, the added saddle ring stud, and the ‘not quite antique’ Limb saver recoil pad, all give clues to the rifles history. The person I got it from said it had just sat in a safe since their father passed about 10 years ago and the recoil pad can’t be much older than that, so he must have used it to at least some extent his whole life. While the gun does show external wear and a few dings, the bore and internals are pristine, which makes sense for a gun that was carried a lot and shot a little. It feeds and ejects my .348 cartridges reliably, but haven’t tried .450’s yet as I am still trying to locate ammo/ reloading assets. I realize the modifications nullify the collector value on one hand, but the .450 Alaskan mod launches it’s COOL factor, for me at least, way up there. The nearly 90 year history of this rifle is almost palpable. If only it could talk. If there’s any more information you could use about this rifle let me know. Thanks for all you do here.
Mark
Mark,
Per the factory records your Model 71 was manufactured 8/15/1936.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
November 2, 2009
Offline
Bert,
Sending this along, in case you don’t have it. Picked it up in Cody. Near new condition.
#8630
Deluxe
long tang
24″ barrel
factory sling and swivels
bolt peep
April 15, 2005
Offline
win4575 said
Bert,Sending this along, in case you don’t have it. Picked it up in Cody. Near new condition.
#8630
Deluxe
long tang
24″ barrel
factory sling and swivels
bolt peep
Thanks, it is now in the survey.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
April 3, 2018
Offline
Bert:
Winchester Model 71-Special (Deluxe) SN 3755-(348 WCF)
Special original sling adaptions
Long tang-checkered forend and stock.
Modified machined bolt for 98a sight-NO 98a sight present-ft sight and Win hood present
Please advise if rifle is in your survey. Manufacture year estimate: late 1935 or early 1936.
Thanks-
Ridge Marriott
WACA
April 15, 2005
Offline
450 Fuller said
Bert:
Winchester Model 71-Special (Deluxe) SN 3755-(348 WCF)
Special original sling adaptions
Long tang-checkered forend and stock.
Modified machined bolt for 98a sight-NO 98a sight present-ft sight and Win hood present
Please advise if rifle is in your survey. Manufacture year estimate: late 1935 or early 1936.
Thanks-
Ridge Marriott
WACA
I did not have it in the survey. The date of manufacture for it is August 1936.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
April 26, 2019
Offline
This is for BK.
Bruce, you can tame that kick with light loads. I use an RCBS 200-grain GC mould with 35.0 grains of IMR 3031 for practice. Velocity in my 24-inch barrel is 1,717 f.p.s. In my rifle, it shoots a five-shot 2½-inch group at 100 yards. You can’t get a .348 Winchester to do any better. (At least, I can’t.)
With this load, case expansion is light and case stretch is nil. Your brass will last forever.
But I don’t recommend it for deer. Expansion is the problem. I shot one deer with it – a big doe at 18 yards. Here’s a pic. The bullet exited with no apparent expansion and the doe went 200 yards. It was a good lung shot but no blood trail for a long way. I use my little Jack Russell terrier for deer. (It’s legal here in Ontario.) Gaston went straight to her.
(No, we don’t hunt without blaze orange. I took my jacket off to start the dressing.)
The problem you may find is sight setting. You may not have enough room on your bolt sight to accommodate the extra height you’re going to need for light loads.
Nice looking carbine.
Pete Hynard
