Log In
January 27, 1992
Offline
I have some questions concerning my 94 take-down rifle. Any insight from members will be appreciated. I can’t make out a Proof Mark on the barrel and hope the paint on the barrel covers it. The barrel date is ’27, and the serial number is 947696 which puts receiver date at 1922. I still haven’t purchased a better camera but the pictures blow up pretty well. Thanks for your input. RDB
November 1, 2013
Offline
rogertherelic said The barrel date is ’27, and the serial number is 947696 which puts receiver date at 1922.
Brl dates & rcvr dates often don’t match, because of the way parts were stockpiled, then used as needed.
September 22, 2011
Offline
Can you take photographs in natural lighting? I’m a little concerned of the contrast between the receiver and the takedown part of it, both with regards to the tint of the bluing and the dullness of the receiver relative to the rest of the gun. Maybe the receiver was reblued (unlikely as the proof appears correct), or, more probably, this barrel was not originally on this takedown rifle, especially with the 1922 receiver date and 1927 barrel date. I would be less concerned if the dates of each were reversed. Also, the lack of a proofmark on the barrel suggests it is not original to this rifle and potentially reblued.
Having said that, the barrel doesn’t appear to be reblued based on the clarity of markings on it.
January 27, 1992
Offline
Thanks for the replies. I see the color difference in frame bluing and barrel extension, which almost appears to be a blue-black color under a bright light. I have been unable to get the right light to work with the camera. Good chance that the extension and possibly the barrel have been redone. I’ll dig out my 53 stainless and compare the barrel finishes. I appreciate your help. If the barrel has been repainted who ever did it was an artist. More later. RDB
April 15, 2005
Offline
Roger,
The proof mark stamp on the barrel should be clearly visible based on what I have observed on other stainless steel barreled Winchesters. The proof marks were applied after the barrel was painted and assembled on the rifle. I suspect that the barrel assembly on your rifle has been repainted after the fact, and that would account for the proof mark being very difficult to see.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
January 27, 1992
Offline
Yup, I have to agree with you. The barrel has been repainted (excellent application however) and the receiver extension re-blued (50’s hot tank blue-black?). I had hopes of getting a different outcome, but truth and fact have prevailed again. Thanks for helping me to accept what I wouldn’t accept on my own. 
You guys are sharp! 
RDB
1 Guest(s)
