Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
I question the described antique status according to serial. I wonder too about the hammer style being of post 1903 production? Anyone have an explanation?
https://www.gunauction.com/buy/17338723
Nice gun however.
Darrin
Yup , probably goinby the dates in the Madis book, mfg. 1900 by the factory records. However there is lots of that goes on, R.I.A. is advertising a couple in their next sale as antique with a picture of the Cody letter stating 1901 mfg. date. Antique just sounds better , I guess.
W.A.C.A. life member, Marlin Collectors Assn. charter and life member, C,S.S.A. member and general gun nut.
Online
August 1900 is the correct date of manufacture for that rifle. I sent the seller a message with the correct information.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
steve004 said
I’m surprised – this is a very experienced and knowledgeable seller.
I just finished chatting with him via email, and he admitted to using the Madis booklet… which he claims is going to be the feature item in his next book burning endeavor. He also stated that he is updating the auction listing to the information I provided him.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert H. said
steve004 said
I’m surprised – this is a very experienced and knowledgeable seller.
I just finished chatting with him via email, and he admitted to using the Madis booklet… which he claims is going to be the feature item in his next book burning endeavor. He also stated that he is updating the auction listing to the information I provided him.
Bert
Bert –
You are performing a laudable service and my hat is off to you. Helping a dealer avoid an illegal interstate shipment of a modern firearm is a sizable favor. I’ve talked to Mark on several occasions. He’s a stand-up guy. I’m sure he was appreciative of the information. Too bad everyone you contact is not as receptive. I know it’s no small number of sellers in that category.
Darrin Smith said
I question the described antique status according to serial. I wonder too about the hammer style being of post 1903 production? Anyone have an explanation?https://www.gunauction.com/buy/17338723
Nice gun however.
Darrin
The hammer is absolutely correct for the correct production date of the rifle.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
clarence said
Is ATF now using the Cody records, rather than Madis?
The BATF never “officially” used the published Madis information. They have known for a long time that the CFM records office has the original (official) date of manufacture records. After I published the first edition of the Red Book (back in 2010) the BATF contacted me (via a phone call) to ask what my source of information was, and after a pleasant conversation with the lead agent in their Pheonix AZ office, they requested an e-copy of the published table and I provided it to them.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Some dealers know what they are doing. They just don’t care about the law more than money.
Bert H. said
steve004 said
I’m surprised – this is a very experienced and knowledgeable seller.
I just finished chatting with him via email, and he admitted to using the Madis booklet… which he claims is going to be the feature item in his next book burning endeavor. He also stated that he is updating the auction listing to the information I provided him.
Bert
GREAT! Now can you convince Rock Island Auction to do the same and do what is legally correct and not what is to THEIR financial advantage?
mrcvs said
Bert H. said
steve004 said
I’m surprised – this is a very experienced and knowledgeable seller.
I just finished chatting with him via email, and he admitted to using the Madis booklet… which he claims is going to be the feature item in his next book burning endeavor. He also stated that he is updating the auction listing to the information I provided him.
Bert
GREAT! Now can you convince Rock Island Auction to do the same and do what is legally correct and not what is to THEIR financial advantage?
No… and I have tried on several occasions in the past. I suspect that until they get burned (prosecuted) for shipping a “modern” firearm across state lines, that they will continue to do business as usual.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
I have bought guns from this seller, one of the better dealers! A stand up Gent
The hammer is absolutely correct for the correct production date of the rifle.
Michael
Thank you Michael for the clarification. I had the 1903 date in my mind and I read it again recently on a previous forum here. What is the actual serial range for the knurling style change?
Thank you as well Bert, I too have made purchases from Mark and had no reason to think he had referenced Madis’s d.o.m.’s
Darrin
“In fact… The widow’s peak hammer style starts being replaced in late 1895, is mixed in 1986, and is last seen in very early 1897. That is a full 6 years prior to the change in the Model 1894!
Michael”
Okay Michael I found this in a post you made dated 9/12/ 2019. It was the 67th post in 5 pages of information debating the methods of hammer knurling. I hadn’t taken the time to read it in it’s entirety.
Thank you in advance!
Darrin
Darrin Smith said
“In fact… The widow’s peak hammer style starts being replaced in late 1895, is mixed in 1986, and is last seen in very early 1897. That is a full 6 years prior to the change in the Model 1894!Michael”
Okay Michael I found this in a post you made dated 9/12/ 2019. It was the 67th post in 5 pages of information debating the methods of hammer knurling. I hadn’t taken the time to read it in it’s entirety.
Thank you in advance!
Darrin
I am glad that you found that Darrin. Now all I need to do is go back and edit the mistyped 1986 to 1896!! The changes in the style of hammers is fairly easy for the first four iterations on the Model 1892. After about SN 500000 it gets a bit fuzzier. But, I am working on it. It would be a much simpler task if I had consistent and good photos of the hammers on more guns in my survey.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
Chuck said
Some dealers know what they are doing. They just don’t care about the law more than money.
Not greatly dissimilar to some of the guys here who were explaining/bragging about how they don’t report gun show sales so they don’t have to pay state sales tax! Oh, it’s just the laws they agree with that count I guess!
Throwing stones while residing in glass houses is bad business.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
twobit said
Not greatly dissimilar to some of the guys here who were explaining/bragging about how they don’t report gun show sales so they don’t have to pay state sales tax! Oh, it’s just the laws they agree with that count I guess!
What you bring up leaves me deeply troubled–all the gun-show purchases I’ve made without paying sales tax! I’m going to investigate whether it’s possible to pay them retroactively. Others, I’m sure, may wish to do the same. Think of it, Chuck–you may (inadvertently, of course) have cheated the great state of California!
Bert H. said
mrcvs said
Bert H. said
steve004 said
I’m surprised – this is a very experienced and knowledgeable seller.
I just finished chatting with him via email, and he admitted to using the Madis booklet… which he claims is going to be the feature item in his next book burning endeavor. He also stated that he is updating the auction listing to the information I provided him.
Bert
GREAT! Now can you convince Rock Island Auction to do the same and do what is legally correct and not what is to THEIR financial advantage?
No… and I have tried on several occasions in the past. I suspect that until they get burned (prosecuted) for shipping a “modern” firearm across state lines, that they will continue to do business as usual.
I just don’t understand how an auction house this large can skirt the rules, or even laws, so blatantly, and no one seems to care? My guess is if they were a much smaller player, things might be a little different.
1 Guest(s)
