Avatar
Search
Forum Scope




Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
Lost password?
Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 81
Member Since:
March 1, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
41
August 19, 2013 - 9:38 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Pauline,

It was obvious that the Dates of manufacture for the rifles in question didn’t come from the polishing room records,they look like they came from George Madis Dates of Manufacture. i don,t see where Bert was trying to discredit all your records he was merely telling you that the dates of manufacture you provided for those rifles were inaccurate.Yes you posses all those polishing records you stated but not for the models in question.

John k.

Avatar
Guest
Guest
WACA Guest
42
August 19, 2013 - 9:58 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

I’ve been reading these exchanges between the two of you with interest but couldn’t really see what value the exchanges had to do with Winchester collectability information until Bert posted that link.
Let me see if I’m reading it correctly. Pauline, you’re saying that the Cody records are not complete because the records were not destroyed in a fire and you would be able to provide the warehouse record, not only the SNA date, on Model 1894, serial # 525919 since the records exist past serial # 353999 but they are in your safe. Bert, you’re saying she can’t because those records were destroyed in a fire and all remaining records are at CFM.
😕
Gene

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 10725
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
43
August 19, 2013 - 10:16 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Gene,

What I stated in that topic post back in 2010, was that Pauline does not have the Model 1892 Polishing Room records for the three serial numbers that were in question, nor does she have any of the original factory warehouse ledger records. While that exchange was going on, I was sitting in the research office at the CFM, looking at the actual records. Just so that it is perfectly clear, Pauline does not have the original PR records for the Model 1892 serial numbers 1 – 917240, as they are in the vault at the Cody museum. Additionally, she does not have any of the surviving warehouse ledger books for the Model 1892. The dates of manufacture that she posted were not accurate, and I just happened to be sitting there at the museum to look them up and provide the original querent with the correct (accurate) answer to his question. Hopefully that clears up any confusion on this topic.

Bert

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

Avatar
Guest
Guest
WACA Guest
44
August 19, 2013 - 10:22 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

*winchester1886* said
Pauline,

It was obvious that the Dates of manufacture for the rifles in question didn’t come from the polishing room records,they look like they came from George Madis Dates of Manufacture. i don,t see where Bert was trying to discredit all your records he was merely telling you that the dates of manufacture you provided for those rifle were inaccurate.Yes you posses all those polishing records you stated [color=red:5368652bd3]but not for the models in question.[/color:5368652bd3]
John k.

And you know this for a fact?

If she used the Madis numbers, then s/n 7580 would be 1892 (which she did use) and s/n 51802 would be 1894 which she did not use.

Joe

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 10725
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
45
August 19, 2013 - 10:36 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

gene61 said
Let me see if I’m reading it correctly. Pauline, you’re saying that the Cody records are not complete because the records were not destroyed in a fire and you would be able to provide the warehouse record, not only the SNA date, on Model 1894, serial # 525919 since the records exist past serial # 353999 but they are in your safe. [color=blue:a3c9b44035]Bert, you’re saying she can’t because those records were destroyed in a fire and all remaining records are at CFM.[/color:a3c9b44035]
😕
Gene

Gene,

I fail to see where I ever made that [color=blue:a3c9b44035]statement[/color:a3c9b44035] in the subject topic post?

Undoubtedly Pauline rescued some of the records for several different Models, but she most certainly does not have the bulk of the original records. As I have repeatedly stated, and it can be verified by contacting the CFM, the records were sent from Winchester to the Buffalo Bill Historical Center in the latter part of the 1970s. The complete list of what the CFM has is listed on their website. Over the many years, I have personally seen most of those original ledger books and PR record books.

In regards to the Model 1894, what I can tell you is that the CFM has the original factory warehouse ledger books (records) for Model 1894 serial numbers 1 -353999, and that they also have the factory original Polishing Room records for serial numbers 1 – 1352066. In the year 1907, Winchester stopped using full size ledger books in favor of printed 3×5 cards. It is unknown what happened to the 1907 – 1963 ledger cards, but the most popular theory is that they were burned (intentionally) by Winchester. If Pauline states that she has any of the "original" records for the specified serial numbers I mentioned, then you can draw your own conclusion.

Bert

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

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 77
Member Since:
August 1, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
46
August 19, 2013 - 10:43 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost
Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 10725
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
47
August 19, 2013 - 10:57 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

P.Muerrle said
Interestingly enough, the numbers I have in these books differ quite dramatically from the estimated dates in Bert’s values book.

Pauline,

I very much suspected that would be the case for the Model 94, which is why the numbers for the later years are listed as estimates. I based those estimates in many cases on the verified barrel dates attached to the serial numbered gun, and to a much lesser degree, actual retail receipt records still with the guns.

Hopefully you will someday publish some of the records information that you have in your possession. I am quite certain that there are a lot of collectors out there that would greatly appreciate it, myself included.

Bert

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

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 77
Member Since:
August 1, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
48
August 19, 2013 - 11:01 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Well let’s see what I do have. I have engraving ledgers from the Custom Shop. I have personal ledgers from several of the engravers. As far as the M94 I have the polishing records from Dec. 1946 through 1955. On the M92 I have from Dec. 1920 to Oct. 1945. I used a different document in that posting. I have thousands of factory work orders, repair and upgrade orders for the Model 21, I have reams of paperwork that I have yet to go through dealing with product changes on many models. These run from the late 1800s on up. I also have access to the collection which was housed in the vaults next to the President’s office. A good friend was able to purchase it all and I am helping him to go through it. It has been 2 yrs. and we aren’t halfway done. Many original gun drawings on original linens, factory blueprints, etc. Too bad none of it is "verifiable" according to Bert.
By the way, in regards to Madis’ numbers being off, the numbers in the Polishing record books that I have show a dramatic difference from the estimates in Bert’s book Many by over 10,000 or more.

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 10725
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
49
August 19, 2013 - 11:31 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

P.Muerrle said
[color=red:f2bae68ccb]Too bad none of it is "verifiable" according to Bert[/color:f2bae68ccb].
By the way, in regards to Madis’ numbers being off, the numbers in the Polishing record books that I have show a dramatic difference from the estimates in Bert’s book Many by over 10,000 or more.

And there you go once again… It is perfectly acceptable for you to continue taking cheap shots at me, but not the other way around. Oh well, I will be polite and not retort.

In regards to my estimates being off by as much as 10,000 serial numbers, that is good news to me. During those years (1946 – 1955) I suspect that several of the years saw production numbers near or slightly above 100,000. Being close to the 90% mark on an estimate is good news to me. With time, I will eventually get it a bit closer.

Bert

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

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 77
Member Since:
August 1, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
50
August 19, 2013 - 4:45 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

You call them cheap shots but they are your words:
The only verifiable (accepted) records are at Cody.
The serial no. records you retain are not original factory documents.

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 10725
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
51
August 19, 2013 - 7:14 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

P.Muerrle said
You call them cheap shots but they are your words:
The only verifiable (accepted) records are at Cody.
The serial no. records you retain are not original factory documents.

Pauline,

You really do seem to have miscomprehended what transpired. Almost the entire topic on the GB forum was in regards to the misinformation that you posted about a pair of Model 1892s. When I wrote that comment to you "The only verifiable (accepted) records are at Cody", it was in direct response to the Model 1892 records for the serial numbers that were posted by the gentleman that asked the question about when his Model 1892s were manufactured. Why can you not see or understand that? You have finally admitted that you do not have the PR records, or the warehouse ledger records for the Model 1892 serial numbers that were in question. Are you still arguing that the dates of manufacture that you gave to the gentleman were correct, and that the information that I looked up and provided to him while sitting in the research office at the CFM was erroneous?

Because you seem to have an aberrant desire to continue this effort to discredit me and make yourself out to be the "poor picked on female", let me now point out to you what your first faux pas was in that topic post on the GB forum back in June of 2010. Start by very carefully reading the title of the post… it very simply reads "Bert H.". The gentleman who posted the question was seeking information directly from myself, not you. You then decided on your own volition to butt in, and then to top it off, you then provided an erroneous answer (which you still have not admitted to doing). When it was all said and done, you made it publically known that you would no longer participate on the GB forums because of my involvement on that forum. That was (in my opinion, and several other persons) an immature decision on your part (and I heard from dozens of people afterwards to that effect). With zero doubt in my mind, you have carried a grudge from that moment in time forward.

At this point, I am really tired of this entire dialogue between the two of us, and I would truly like for it to peacefully end. However, I have some trepidation that it will not because you will not let it die. Hopefully I am wrong… please prove me wrong.

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_UserOfflineSmall Offline
52
August 19, 2013 - 7:31 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

This is what I like about this forum. I am glad two individuals can grace us with there knowledge even though they may not always agree with each other. It is most certainly a great example of free speech. It also makes good food for thought. It always helps me take a second look at things and from different angles.

Sincerely,
Maverick

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 77
Member Since:
August 1, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
53
August 20, 2013 - 5:35 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Bert, "poor, picked on female?" You have really sunk to a new low. You really have a problem with me it seems. Again, no clue why.

Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 81
Member Since:
March 1, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
54
August 20, 2013 - 7:04 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

It must be opposite day Laugh

JK

Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 32
Member Since:
April 28, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
55
August 20, 2013 - 7:28 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

P. Muerrle: Noticed you said that you had some records on the model 52! Are these polishing room records or do the records include some guns that document their special order features. The polishing room records are published in Herb Houze’s 52 book(not complete) but I was hoping that maybe you had some other records on certain serial numbers that would verify that they were special order guns from the factory and listed their spcial features! Thanks!

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 77
Member Since:
August 1, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
56
August 20, 2013 - 7:35 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

The only other records I have at this time would be records of engraved M52s. Some are in the personal engravers records other are in the Custom Shop ledgers that I have. I did get all of Bill Smiths, (gunsmith for the Custom Shop), personal logs this last winter but have not had time to go through them yet.

Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 32
Member Since:
April 28, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
57
August 20, 2013 - 11:08 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Thanks Pauline for the information!

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 10725
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
58
August 20, 2013 - 8:28 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

P.Muerrle said
Bert, "poor, picked on female?" You have really sunk to a new low. You really have a problem with me it seems. Again, no clue why.

Alas… my trepidation has been proven to be true. Try looking in the mirror real hard.

Bert

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

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 77
Member Since:
August 1, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
59
August 21, 2013 - 5:08 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Keep going. You are looking smaller by the minute.

Avatar
New Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 2
Member Since:
January 13, 2007
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
60
October 28, 2013 - 12:54 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Well, I’m "insulted" Wink that y’all had a 4 page thread going about ’66s, and nary a picture of one.

So here’s mine – serial #127xxx:

MoreWinchesters001.jpgImage Enlarger

Forum Timezone: UTC 0
Most Users Ever Online: 778
Currently Online: deerhunter, Tony. R, DEEREHART, Bill Yadlosky, TG, Cilrah
Guest(s) 122
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
clarence: 6281
TXGunNut: 4970
Chuck: 4571
1873man: 4282
steve004: 4160
Big Larry: 2324
twobit: 2291
TR: 1710
mrcvs: 1706
Forum Stats:
Groups: 1
Forums: 17
Topics: 12650
Posts: 109995

 

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