Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
With all due respect Bert the old saying is
Damn the torpedoes full speed ahead…….
The horse soldiers yelled Charge.
Measuring the barrel diameter at the muzzle is a very poor way to determine the original length of a barrel.
Winchester’s standard taper for the 73, 76, 86, 92, and 94 barrels was between .005-.006 per inch regardless of barrel length; both round and octagon. And as Chris Hartman noted, there is enough variation in breech/muzzle sizes that a 26 inch barrel chopped down to 20 inches will still fall into the normal range.
The only barrels that I measure the muzzle diameter to determine originality are carbine barrels, 1892/1894 carbine barrels ranging from 12-20 inches maintain the same muzzle size .598 – .605 anything outside that range and the front band will not fit correctly.
V/R
Mike
Bob, I am not sure of the meaning of your statement: "Forensic matchup on the proofmarks – give me a break!!!! You guys are killin’ me."
If you are unfamiliar with examining Winchester Proof marks to prove the barrel and receiver were struck with the same die….. Well, all I can say is that at your very advanced level of knowledge, and as an important author, you should really look into that technique before knocking it.
If you meant that technique was beyond the needs of this particular low end sort of gun, that is another thing entirely, and thanks for your comment.
BOBR94 said
Forensic matchup on the proofmarks – give me a break!!!! You guys are killin’ me.
I agree with Bob on this one.
I found this comment a little odd myself. As to think Winchester only used one single solitary proof mark stamp in the entire proof house. Not to mention the person(s) applying the stamp could use less force when proofing from one stamping to the next.
I have seen plenty of guns that have one proof marking very heavy on the receiver and very light on the barrel or vice versa.
Sincerely,
Maverick
WACA #8783 - Checkout my Reloading Tool Survey!
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-research-surveys/winchester-reloading-tool-survey/
You do not look for heavy vs. light strikes, that is common and doesn’t tell you anything. What you look for is details of the font and size and micro details of the P and the W and the Oval. The size of the P’s rounded stick out, skinny or plump. The size and shape of the serifs. Long or short, that sort of thing. You must have really good eyes and use 10x or greater maginification. You will see the differences if you actually give it a try.
Then get down into the trough formed that looks like a "trench" at that magnification. Look for little breaks or divits or flaws that transferred from the die to the metal. Those flaws must be on both proofs. In this way you will learn to spot a well done replaced barrel that was added from one gun to another. I see it all the time, maybe one of a 100 guns, more on "rare" barrel replacements to make the gun more valuable.
Look we all believe in fingerprint forensics. It is real, it exists. This is the same sort of thing and it works. Just another tool to spot fakes. Apparently not everyone is familiar with it.
CJ
I agree with you in theory, but reality is a little different. I have three original Winchester proof stamps, and all three are slightly different. The early stamps were hand cut by Winchester’s engravers, in fact I suspect that they spent a good amount of time recutting stamps and roll dies. With the stamps being hand cut, they will have variations. Latter Winchester had the stamps and roll dies made by Industrial Markings, those were machine cut. Of the three originals, one is radiused concave; I presume for round barrels and receiver frames.
"being hand cut, they will have variations"
Mike, That is it!
That is what to look for, the variations in the dies (and the impressions they leave on the gun). A very good verification tool for the advanced collector to sort out the replaced barrel guns.
The "torpedos" remark is an inside joke that few probably understand.
Yes, I meant the effort vs the value on the proofmark statement. I am very aware of differences through the years of die changes (some being mentioned in the book – particularly with serial numbers and barrel markings), manufacturing methodology, etc., as well as the strike pressure, wear patterns and all those other little variations that come with ageing of a specimen. Each and every one of those would come into play in a very high end, high condition, high value gun – as does micrometer checking for a refinish on minty old SAAs.
And again yes, Mike, the muzzle diameter differences are much less reliable as a shortening indicator on rifles than carbines – the quality of the measuring tool, the overall condition of the barrel itself and the skill of the user are very important as well. But when you see large variances in a one inch section bordering on some specimens showing literally NO taper………??
I do take exception to the 26" back to 20" statement though – there are other combinations of things that would likely expose that much change.
The value again becomes the dictator of effort.
Thanks,
B
CJ
Ok, now Im lost….. are you saying that the way to determine originality is to look for different die strikes?
First of all, you would need a 10-50 power loop to see the variations in the marking… then we have rust, dirt grime etc inside the markings.
I have approx 5 WP stamps, 4 of these stamps are hand cut, one machine cut by Industrial markings (yes that one came out of the Winchester factory). The one that I had made was hand cut by an engraver…
Most of my roll markings are hand cut by an engraver…
Think you’re going down the wrong path.
V/R
Mike
Online
BOBR94 said
The "torpedos" remark is an inside joke that few probably understand.
B
Bob,
That may be true, but Admiral Farragut understood it, and apparently you did too
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
quantrez said
With all due respect Bert the old saying is
Damn the torpedoes full speed ahead…….
The horse soldiers yelled Charge.
As a retired U.S. Navy Submariner, I am quite familiar with what Admiral James Farragut’s historical quip was word-for-word. If you understand simple punctuation, the second part of my sentence was not in quotation marks. I simply abbreviated the first part of the passage, and then added my own expression to it.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
CJS57,
You’re assuming, of course, that the barrel and receiver were proof stamped at the same time, with the same die. But was that always the case? If not, there could be minute differences in the stamps used on the barrel and receiver, with the barrel still being original to the rifle.
Mike,
I’m not saying that, but someone thinks it’s important enough to go to the trouble of checking the marks to see if the dies match???? I don’t really get it either. I know that dies break and wear and are replaced but I didn’t think it would be an issue in the building of a particular gun. I think what the reader is implying is that if different dies were used in, say, the proofmarks, it would show that the barrel and the receiver were manufactured/assembled at a different time from each other and therefore we could determine a barrel change – I dunno – seems mighty extreme to me on anything other than a gun worth a fortune that is suspected of being faked.
B
Again
I have at least one factory WP stamp that is radiused concave, and as stated earlier I believe that it was used for the recievers and round barrels.
Thus, if the rifle had an octagon barrel the workman would stamp the octagon flat with a flat stamp and stamp the reciever with the radiused stamp, so naturally there would be two different stamps used on one gun.
V/R
mike
I think Bob’s point is that there almost always are way more signs like the condition and finish that would determine whether or not a re-barrel or mis-matched parts are in play with a gun.
Not only do you have the different radiused concave stamps and flat stamps. You could throw in shift change, lunch break, smoke break theories into the mix. I have seen in a few instances were a proof mark was double stamped for whatever reason. Stamp broken or was lightly stamped and required re-stamping. I’m also sure there are many other reasons out there why on a regular occurance proof stamps wouldn’t match up on genuine guns.
Sincerely,
Maverick
WACA #8783 - Checkout my Reloading Tool Survey!
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-research-surveys/winchester-reloading-tool-survey/
Maverick
I fully understand Bob’s point; there are a whole slew of indicators that would suggest that a barrel is not correct. My point is that relying on muzzle diameter to determine the originality of a short rifle barrel is a false indicator and pointless.
As I stated earlier, Winchester’s standard barrel taper is .005 – .006 per inch, Winchester did not deviate from the standard taper for shorter than standard length barrels. So no matter how short the barrel is cut it will still maintain the standard taper of .005 – .006 per inch.
On a side note, I suspect that Winchester cut these barrels at a .006 per inch taper, but due to polishing we have variances. I’ve also noticed that 92s and 94 seem to keep closer to the .006 standard than earlier 73/76 barrels where I have measured tapers ranging from .004 – .006.
With the exception of rapid taper barrels, I have not measured tapers greater than .006 (1885 excluded), which leads me to believe that the barrel blanks were milled at .006 per inch.
V/R
Mike
Mike Hunter
I totally agree with your observations and think them sound.
My comments were mainly directed at CJS57’s past posts regarding the topic. I may should have made this more clearer but left it as a more open ended statement as I do not want anyone on the forum to fell singled out or that I maybe picking on them or anything of that nature.
Sincerely,
Maverick
WACA #8783 - Checkout my Reloading Tool Survey!
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-research-surveys/winchester-reloading-tool-survey/
This is to address the issue of the taper on the rifles I mentioned. I went back and measured the muzzle and then 6" back from the muzzle to give better numbers. The results are below.
20" RB 0.007" per inch taper
20" OB 0.004" per inch taper
20" RB 0.006" per inch taper
20" 1/2 OB 0.004" per inch taper
22" 1/2 OB 0.004" per inch taper
24" OB 0.006" per inch taper
26" RB std. rifle 0.004" per inch taper
Paul
1 Guest(s)
