Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
I would greatly appreciate expert opinions on the rifle in this auction:
It is a late-model 90 barrel in .22 Long Rifle showing significant wear. The receiver is in much better condition and appears to be to a Model 62 based on lack of tang markings. I realize there was intermixing of the parts at this point and time; however, I cannot tell if this rifle is as manufactured with just a reblued receiver or if it is a fabrication.
Online
What a stupid place to put your SS number. This guy must have been dumber than a rail post. Big Larry
Offline
Big Larry said
What a stupid place to put your SS number. This guy must have been dumber than a rail post. Big Larry
I inherited a Beretta AL-1 Semi auto 12ga from my grandfather who had put his drivers license number on the gun in 17 places. He even had it on the freckin gas piston!
I guess he wanted it to stay in the family LOL
Back in the 60’s the police encouraged people to put personal numbers on expensive items to discourage theft and to aid in the return of your items if stolen. There was no identity theft back then so they didn’t see any harm in it.
Bob
WACA Life Member--- NRA Life Member---- Cody Firearms member since 1991 Researching the Winchester 1873's
Email: [email protected]
Hello,
Was the Model 90 ever produced with ta blank upper tang so that the a persons social security number cold be engraved there? The receiver looks WAY to good of condition compared to the barrel, which the opposite occurrence of the relative wear on most rifles.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
Hi, twobit,
The impression I would have is that there was some specific ‘salvage’ crew at the Winchester works, who were given the task of going through the parts stock, and assembling salable rifles, in this case, using such mixture of models 06, 90, and 62 parts as could be assembled into rifles which could pass inspection as ‘acceptable quality’ completed rifles.
According to a previous comment by Bert H., the very last of the ‘parts clean up’ model 90’s were assembled in 1949, with serials in the 854xxx range.
That one, 852xxx, would, presumably, have been one of those ‘put it together from any usable model 90 or model 62 parts’ rifles, or, possibly, an existing used model 90 fitted with a new receiver assembly, sometime in the early/mid ’40’s. The appearance of the wood would make the latter seem ‘plausible’.
It was only the relatively earliest of the model 62 rifles which still had the upper tang marking of the model 90, after which the upper tang was simply left blank.
I suppose it could be said that leaving the upper tang blank was a way to provide a nice area on a model 62 to have the owner’s name engraved, if a presentation rifle, or otherwise owner-marked, but I’d strongly suspect it was simply a cost saving in omitting an operation. (and, Lyman or Marbles tang sights were popular then……my early model 62 has the model 90 tang address, but its hidden by the Marbles tang sight, so the upper tang marking operation was, in practice, ‘useless’.)
I’ll be the first to agree that a rifle with what appears to be an ‘as new’ condition receiver and noticeably used barrel and wood just seems ‘fishy’……..but, I suppose its possible.
One hypothetical might involve a rather inept ‘gunsmith’ who attempted to drill/tap the receiver for a scope mount and bodged the job…….resulting in the rifle being sent back to Winchester for a new receiver assembly.
If, as could possibly be the case, this was done, does this suggest that the repair dept. at the Winchester works was kept active in doing repair work for the public during the war, when general production of civilian rifles was suspended?
I think that would be an ‘ask Pauline M.’ question, she would know, I don’t.
cheers
Carla
1 Guest(s)
