Avatar
Search
Forum Scope




Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
Lost password?
sp_Feed sp_PrintTopic sp_TopicIcon
1 of 1000, Is It For Real or Not?
sp_NewTopic Add Topic
Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 235
Member Since:
February 8, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
1
May 17, 2015 - 1:56 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

Is there a “for sure” way to tell if a Winchester Model of 1873 “1 of 1000” is the real genuine article? When George Madis was alive he told me about certain things that only the 1 of 1000 would have. This was also described in his book on Winchester firearms. Things that most folks out there wouldn’t know about. It wasn’t the style, nor quality of the engraving, nor a letter from Cody saying that the serial number indicated a “1 of 1000”. Jim Gorden both on the telephone and in his 2 volume set of books on the 1873 also described markings that the 1 of 1000 would have that a standard 1873’s would not. However I’ve also heard that there is no diffinative way to tell the real item from the made up article if its done well enough. That in fact there were no special markings, numbers, etc. on the 1 of 1000 that would actually say “yes it is or no it isn’t”. Is there anyone out there that has, or has seen a 100% guarenteed in writing “1 of 1000” and opened it up looking for markings that normally wouldn’t be found on a standard 1873? The Cody Letter, the 1 of 1000 style of engraving, the “Sworn” oral testimony from the so called “Experts” as to it being “The Real Thing”, with or without special markings, numbers etc. isn’t what I’m talking about. I’m interested in a “for sure 95%” way of telling if it’s real or counterfit. When it comes to “Big Buck Guns” almost anything can be faked, hense only 95%. I always thought G.M. gave me sound advise when it came to Winchester 1873’s. He probably handled more of them than most. J.G. also gave me very good information when it came to the ’73. Now however a number of “knowledgeable Experts” are infuring that they were probably wrong in the information given. I’m kind of confused, and I, and I’m sure all Winchester Collectors would like if at all possible to know, if not 100%, than even 95% whether or not a 1 of 1000 is or isn’t. Don’t you agree? ConfusedConfusedConfusedConfusedConfusedConfusedConfusedConfused

Apache.

Avatar
Wisconsin
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 4281
Member Since:
May 2, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
2
May 17, 2015 - 3:35 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Larry,

When I’m looking at a 73 and want to know if its right and you know what the gun should be since 73’s letter. I start at the serial number, is the number original to the tang? Next I look if the tang fits the receiver. A tang is buffed while in the receiver so it should fit perfectly and the finish should match. If any of these things don’t look right, the gun is not right. Now there is a problem with 1 of 1000’s in that some my not letter. If I recall correctly there was a case where a guy that was responding to the universal studios “Wanted” poster with his  1 of 1000 and its didn’t letter but Winchester accepted it after it was examined.

The problem with 1 of 1000’s is not that they made many fakes from scratch, I’m sure there are fakes out there but that 1 of 1000’s have been restored. In the restoration they may have made a new barrel but the old barrel never gets destroyed. It eventually shows up on a table and gets reused. 10 years ago or so I saw a real 1 of 1000 barrel sell for $5000 off a table and I would assume it got screwed on a gun. Now you have a real 1 of 1000 barrel on a gun that does not letter unless the person takes the next step and remarks the tang. That is how you get duplicate serial numbered 1 of 1000’s. I’ve heard of two with the same number showing up at the same gun show.

Bob

WACA Life Member---
NRA Life Member----
Cody Firearms member since 1991
Researching the Winchester 1873's

73_86cutaway.jpg

Email: [email protected]

Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 356
Member Since:
April 14, 2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
3
May 17, 2015 - 3:54 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Bob,

You are correct. Any thing can be faked today. What is the issue that Larry has? Has he contacted Mr. Ed Lewis about this?

Walter Blake

Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 356
Member Since:
April 14, 2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
4
May 17, 2015 - 4:37 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Larry,

Do you have a 1 of a thousand 73? I am doing a study on deluxe 73 engraved short rifles. Half of the searches have come back with a cut barrel. This seems normal for that era.

Walter Blake

Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 235
Member Since:
February 8, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
5
May 17, 2015 - 8:30 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

WallyB and Bob(1873 man);

      This is the exact reason why I posed the question “Is it real or not?” I’ve also been told of the 2 One of One Thousand rifles with the same serial number showing up at a gun show, however I also was told that when one of the Dealers was questioned about it, the rifle quickly vanished under his table. Food for thought!

     A few years ago it was recommended that I speak to one of the “New Experts” about the possible markings on a “Genuine” 1 of 1000. He, in my humble opinion, is one of the new bunch of Experts that disagrees with the old, former and now passed away Expert that gave me the information on the 1 of 1000 originally. I realize that what I’m asking for is most difficult, but these days when an Expert’s opinion is involved it seems to come down to “he said, she said”. When G.M. told me what to look for in order to determine the 1 of 1000 from the Standard ’73 he said “look inside, and not what is written on the barrel”. To the best of my knowledge, he didn’t have, nor was he trying to sell me one. He seemed to have no agenda, and this I took into account. I asked him, and he told me what to look for, period. He, up until his passing was considered the “Man to go to” when it came to Winchester ’73’s. Now all I hear is he was wrong. I was told by 2 New Experts, both will remain un-named, however both in the business of selling these “High End” firearms, that no special markings or numbers need be present for the Winchester 1 of 1000 to be the real thing. Okay I said to myself, then why would Winchester waste both the time and money to mark some of these “Special Rifles” and not others? The Winchester company was in business to make money, not waste it by putting in unessessary time and effort by stamping some, but not others. This to me didn’t make any sense. I guess I will have to remain confused and it will come down to whom does one want to believe in, the Old Experts, some now gone or the New. The people in the business of selling these firearms, or those without the agenda of making a profit.

ApacheConfusedConfusedConfusedConfusedConfusedConfusedConfusedConfusedConfusedConfusedConfusedConfusedConfusedConfusedConfusedConfusedConfusedConfusedConfusedConfused

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 10723
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
6
May 17, 2015 - 10:00 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

Apache,

Are you referring to the assembly numbers that Winchester used (stamped) on the vast number of the Fancy or special order high grade guns?  I would expect that all of the “1 of 100” and “1 of 1000” rifles were marked with assembly numbers on the various major parts and locations.  The standard (plain Jane) Winchesters did not (for the most part) ever get marked with assembly numbers.

Bert

WACA 6571L, Historian & Board of Director Member
High-walls-1-002-C-reduced2.jpg

Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 356
Member Since:
April 14, 2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
7
May 17, 2015 - 10:40 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Hi,

I just thought I would add another layer of confusion for fakes. Years ago I remember a wealthy European buying a shipwreck for period metal. He was going to  fake a period $10 mill Mercedes. The plans are available. He did this to fool x-ray. I have heard of Colt Walkers x-rayed for period metal. This is nuts!

Walter Blake

Avatar
Wisconsin
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 4281
Member Since:
May 2, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
8
May 17, 2015 - 10:59 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

X-rays can only detect flaws in the metal, they can’t date the metal. I would think the guy that bought the old ship so he could get the steel made in the right era otherwise metallurgic analysis will show its modern steel.

Bob

WACA Life Member---
NRA Life Member----
Cody Firearms member since 1991
Researching the Winchester 1873's

73_86cutaway.jpg

Email: [email protected]

Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 235
Member Since:
February 8, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
9
May 17, 2015 - 11:01 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Bert H.;

    Assembly Numbers can be found on most higher grade “Special Order” ’73’s and on, to the best of my knowledge all 1 of 100’s and 1 of 1000’s. I was told, and it’s mentioned in the Winchester Book that there are in fact other stamped numbers that don’t coinside with any other numbers one would normally find on a Winchester 1873 or 1876, ie. serial number, assembly numbers, barrel weight numbers, inspector numbers. In J. Gorden’s 2 volume set on the 1873, he aludes to numbers or markings only found on 1 of 1000’s. He didn’t go into much detail though. If the WACA collectors that have 1 of 1000 or 1 of 100 rifles would remove the side plates, butt stock and the butt plate, letting us all know what if anything they find that’s different than what would normally be found on a “Standard or even a Special Order” 1873, this perhap would settle the question once and for all as I believe that these differences do exist on these special firearms that Winchester produced. This of coarse taking into account, as Bob (1873 man) pointed out, the very few “Good Repros” (FAKES) that might just be out there. 

Apache (Larry)Smile

Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 356
Member Since:
April 14, 2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
10
May 17, 2015 - 11:10 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Bob,

Thanks. You just taught me something. I guess this is a way to prove  if  valuable Winchesters are right or not.

Walter

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 10723
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
11
May 17, 2015 - 11:17 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Interesting!  I have not (yet) had the opportunity to very closely examine a “1 of 1000” rifle other than externally.  Most owners do not want to take any chances by disassembling them.  In regards to what the markings are, and exactly where they are located, I frankly believe that it should not be common knowledge, as it will prevent the illicit production of fakes that can not be readily identified.  The information needs to be known, but not published.

Bert

WACA 6571L, Historian & Board of Director Member
High-walls-1-002-C-reduced2.jpg

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1554
Member Since:
May 23, 2009
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online
12
May 18, 2015 - 5:21 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Bert H. said

Interesting!  I have not (yet) had the opportunity to very closely examine a “1 of 1000” rifle other than externally.  Most owners do not want to take any chances by disassembling them.  In regards to what the markings are, and exactly where they are located, I frankly believe that it should not be common knowledge, as it will prevent the illicit production of fakes that can not be readily identified.  The information needs to be known, but not published.

Bert

Those who know, know and those who don’t, don’t. If there is ever a “Tell all Book” on 1 of 1000s then there will be fakes coming out of the wood work. I agree with Bert, certain details shouldn’t be common knowledge. Would would agree with the statement of “looking on the inside” matters, but most of the time there won’t be a need for it. As the outside on a fake will generally have all the tale tail signs. As far as there being duplicate serial numbered 1of1000s. One of the two duplicates is a fake. And almost everyone that is trying to sell you something is always an expert about whatever they’re trying to sell you. 

What is interesting to me is how a known fake can still sell for 5 figures.

Sincerely,

Maverick

Avatar
Wisconsin
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 4281
Member Since:
May 2, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
13
May 18, 2015 - 6:03 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Here is the problem with a restored 1 of 1000. The gun sent in is badly rusted to where the barrel, receiver and tang is pitted to the point its not usable. Its a good candidate for restoration. The restorer uses a donor gun for the receiver and tang, remarks the serial number and makes a new barrel, tube and wood. The old parts are either kept by the restorer or sent back to the owner but are never destroyed since its a 1 of 1000 barrel and receiver. Eventually the parts are sold and the gun gets put back together. Who has the fake? The guy that put the original parts back together or the guy that paid to have his gun restored?

Bob

WACA Life Member---
NRA Life Member----
Cody Firearms member since 1991
Researching the Winchester 1873's

73_86cutaway.jpg

Email: [email protected]

Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 235
Member Since:
February 8, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
14
May 18, 2015 - 7:24 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

Bob;

    That’s simple to answer. The person sent to a Restorer an Original, badly pitted, rusted (PATINA), with cracked and banged up wood, but still an Original 1 of 1000. This to be restored by let’s say an “EXPERT” restorer, one of perhaps six men in the world truly capable of doing the job. This at a cost of BIG BUCKS. He expertly makes a duplicate for his customer, ie. new barrel, engraved and expertly aged, New wood made to look 100+ years old, and of coarse being an “up and up” guy, he returns the original parts to the party that hired him. Which is the fake? Without a doubt, the newly made up 1 of 1000. An “Original”, reguardless of condition is still the real thing. Even if the new 1 of 1000 is completely undetectable, it’s NOT the ORIGINAL. I’ve seen GREAT RESTORATIONS of several different Antique firearms over the years. Several of these going into “High End” collections. They, no matter how expertly done weren’t original. Restored and beautiful, yes. Original, NO. Now this is where the problems come into the equasion. If this newly “Restored” 1 of 1000, along with the old parts are truely going back to a real “Collector”, this to be cherished and admired by him, the old parts going into his vault, that’s one thing. If however it ends up with a “Collector/Dealer”, temptation being what it is, you figure out the rest. Caviate Emptor!!

Apache,WinkWinkWinkWink

Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 235
Member Since:
February 8, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
15
May 19, 2015 - 11:10 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Maverick;

      You just haven’t seen a “Best Quality” fake or if you did, you didn’t know it. There are I grant you but a few out there that have the ability to duplicate a 125 year old firearm, a firearm that even the best of experts can not detect by just looking at it. Even in the bright sunlight. However these firearms are out there. That’s why when it comes to our Winchester’s we’ve all got to get our heads together and if at all possible find a better way than “My Expert says this, Your Expert says that”. Don’t you agree?

ApacheFrownFrown

     

Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 356
Member Since:
April 14, 2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
16
May 19, 2015 - 11:55 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Larry,

This has been going on for years with expensive European sports cars. There are 2 Jaguar C-types that claim the same serial number. I reminder a story about a (Master machinist colt restorer) that had one colt pistol on his table at a Colt only show. A Colt Walker. All the “Colt Experts” said it was the finest they had ever seen. At the end of the show, he told everyone that he finished the pistol two weeks ago. Where is it now?

Walter Blake

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 348
Member Since:
January 24, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
17
May 20, 2015 - 1:00 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

I’ve had a couple of 73 1/1000 in the shop; I agree that any special markings should be kept close hold.

On assembly numbers, I have had standard 73 here in the shop where just about everything had assembly numbers: barrel, side plates, buttplate, FE cap even the FE cap tennon had an assembly number.

Remember, anything made by man can be made again.

 

V/R

 

Mike

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1554
Member Since:
May 23, 2009
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online
18
May 20, 2015 - 5:38 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

apache said

Maverick;

      You just haven’t seen a “Best Quality” fake or if you did, you didn’t know it. There are I grant you but a few out there that have the ability to duplicate a 125 year old firearm, a firearm that even the best of experts can not detect by just looking at it. Even in the bright sunlight. However these firearms are out there. That’s why when it comes to our Winchester’s we’ve all got to get our heads together and if at all possible find a better way than “My Expert says this, Your Expert says that”. Don’t you agree?

ApacheFrownFrown

     

Apache,

Well I won’t argue What I Have or Haven’t seen as that would be pointless. I would agree that, Yes there are people with fine abilities out there to duplicate anything. And that just by looking at something from the outside alone won’t always tell you everything. That is why I agreed with your statement of “looking on the inside”. I don’t know how putting our heads together will put the “nail in the coffin” sort of speak. And there is always going to be a “he said, she said” factor to everything. No matter who the expert, their opinion will be just that, their opinion. No matter how you slice it. Plus I don’t carry enough E & O Insurance to consider myself “an expert” on anything. 

I think the proper approach would be rather than have everyone agree or discern a method on how a gun is genuine. The question should be, How was the deceiver, grand replica or fake or whatever you want to call it, made or produced to look indiscernible from a original? But one assumes that none of these few with the ability to duplicate would ever tell, as they would be cutting there own throat, and there is always honor among thieves. Maybe we will all get lucky and someone will have a deathbed confession! Any Takers? 

Sincerely,

Maverick

P.S. I would add that if George revealed to you the secrets of the veil of detecting 1of1000s. I’d hold to those sound principals. Some may want to discredit him, as he would of said, he was right 100% on about 90% of everything (paraphrasing here). And if you look at his book, I’d say that would be pretty sound. I’d say this a wild ass guess, but if at the end of every chapter where that one page is with all those bunches of numbers that everyone likes to discuss so much. Say that 1 page at the end of every chapter is completely wrong. And as I don’t have my copy in front of me I’m guessing there is 700 pages in the last edition with about I don’t know say 14 chapters or so.

14 divided by 700 pages = 0.02% would be wrong, that makes 98% correct. I’d think those are pretty good odds. Wink

Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 235
Member Since:
February 8, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
19
May 20, 2015 - 6:40 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

Maverick;

      At last a ray of sunshine in a mostly cloudy sky! Someone that makes some sense. Needless to say I have a “Lettered” 2nd Model Winchester 1 of 1000, at least George Madis told me it was. this was the 2nd Winchester I ever owned, purchased by me in 1989. My first being a 38-40, button magazine 1873, rusty (PATINA, excuse me for using the word “RUSTY”), rifle. I wouldn’t at that time have known what a 1 of 1000 was if it came up and bit me. I did however have an aquaintance that did, and he suggested I speak to someone named George Madis in Texas. I did, and while speaking to him over the phone he had me take this rifle apart and describe what if anything I found. He told me based on what I described to him, “it sounds as if you have a 1 of 1000”. He then told me what a 1 of 1000 was, and then explained about the markings on the inside. He finally got to see the rifle at an Eastern WACA gun show in Maine. Once again he pointed out the different stampings on the inside, according to him, common only to the 1 of 100 and 1 of 1000 Winchester firearms. This rifle has been in my collection since ’89. Like the sometimes “Town Marshall/Outlaw” Hendry Brown told his wife after his arrest, and I repeated to my wife, “Upon my passing, Sell everything, but keep that Winchester”!!

ApacheSmileSmileSmile

Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 235
Member Since:
February 8, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
20
May 20, 2015 - 10:36 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Wally B.;

   I don’t know where it, the Walker is, but if it’s who I think it is, the last time I heard, he was still in Vermont. I understand he once bragged that he’d made more Colt Walker pistols than Colt. Of coarse this is only “hearsay” you understand.

   Wally, are you into rare sports cars? My favorite Jaguar is the D type. Way out of my price range. However there’s an English firm (Protieous, I sure my spelling’s wrong) that makes an exact duplicate for around 65,000 pounds. (English Bucks) They also make a 1955 model of the Mercedes Benz 300SLR. Just like the one Sterling Moss drove. Wish I could afford one of those. Oh well, dream on.

Apache.CryCryCryCryCryCryCryCryCry

Forum Timezone: UTC 0
Most Users Ever Online: 778
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
clarence: 6280
TXGunNut: 4969
Chuck: 4571
1873man: 4281
steve004: 4160
Big Larry: 2323
twobit: 2291
TR: 1710
mrcvs: 1706
Forum Stats:
Groups: 1
Forums: 17
Topics: 12648
Posts: 109979

 

Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 1745
Members: 8791
Moderators: 4
Admins: 3
Navigation