Log In
July 9, 2011
Offline
Can anyone explain the serial numbers on this gun? Sure looks like a case of fraudulent serial numbers, The serial numbers match on this gun but are so wrong for the second model tang inscription and third model receiver, I just can’t understand why someone would go to the trouble for such a low end gun. Any opinions why someone would bother to do this?
This has got to be the worst "frankenchester" I’ve seen in awhile.
Bid is over $400 and not from a newbie bidder. What am I missing?
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=356316697
March 20, 2009
Offline
Rustyjack,
I don’t think you are missing too much.
1. The SN dates to 1903 and should be a blued 2nd Model. But it is obviously a 3rd Model receiver.
2. The barrel has a 1911 patent date on it so that sure does not fit with the SN date.
3. The barrel is marked with MODEL 90 which is post 1919. So that again does not fit with the SN date.
4. The tang stamp is from the range of 190000 to 262000, according to Schwing, so it is a bit late for the SN range. But it could fall into the earliest 3rd Model receivers.
What is so GLARING to me is the mismatch between the wear on the bottom of the rifle. The lower tang SN is on metal that has dark patina. The receiver "serial number" is a different style (look at the first digit!!!!!) and surrounding metal surface is bright compared to the lower tang surface right next to it. Either that is the most selective wear pattern ever seen on a rifle or the receiver serial number is a fake. The lower tang has been fit into a later rifle and the receiver SN has been altered.
Quite the fakery for sure!
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
July 9, 2011
Offline
I just can’t understand faking serial numbers that are so obviously period incorrect! And I don’t understand how such a fake can be bid so high by an experienced buyer. I don’t see the value even in parts.
Maybe it’s the two rear magazine rings that’s driving it up….LOL
March 6, 2011
Offline
The numbers look good. You would have to remove a lot of metal to stamp new numbers, and that has not been done. The contour of the metal around the numbers looks normal.
July 9, 2011
Offline
But that’s the whole point of my question. According to all written references, those numbers should not be found on these period parts. Third model receivers did not appear until late in the 200,000 serial number range. And a second model tang with that upper inscription would not be seen until serial number 190,000 or so.
The numbers look good, obviously some skill and effort was needed to make them look decent, but by historical records, cannot be right. So, how foolish to fake numbers that should not exist. Or is this some sort of timeline anomaly (I doubt it)? Serial number 170658 should be found on a second model with the 90-B tang marking, and no number on the receiver.
May 2, 2009
Offline
Have you guys noticed the serial numbers are stamped with different number styles.
Bob
WACA Life Member--- NRA Life Member---- Cody Firearms member since 1991 Researching the Winchester 1873's
Email: [email protected]
Head scratcher for sure.
In the 80’s I bought a "Mexican SAA Cavalry Colt" that was an excellent copy except for the weight… much lighter; you could feel the obvious difference when holding the real deal in the other hand. Shot just fine…
No doubt it was copied years back based on the wear but the entire pistol was a fake.
Could be a Mexican Model 1890? Ha.
IMHO the bidders need to buy Schwing’s book. Way in over their heads.
There are too many inconsistencies as two-bit has pointed out.
In any event, a Rossi 62 would be a better buy than this one. Maybe this 90 is from a parallel universe…
