Log In
July 8, 2016
Offline
I have heard of double struck proofs, but have not seen one quite like this. Would you say all is correct here and that this is a factory struck proof?
Thanks, Eagle
May 2, 2009
Offline
I haven’t seen one that bad and have never seen one canted like that on both barrel and receiver. You would think if someone was putting fake proofs on they would do them right as to not raise suspicion.
Bob
WACA Life Member--- NRA Life Member---- Cody Firearms member since 1991 Researching the Winchester 1873's
Email: [email protected]
July 8, 2016
Offline
I agree Bob. Serial # is 462033, so it should be proofed, but I am a bit suspicious. Eagle
November 17, 2011
Offline
Try to see if the barrel proof and receiver proof are forensically matching like fingerprints. Also see if the lightly struck proof on the receiver matches the other 2 deep ones. At least you will know they were all done at the same time with the same die punch. That would point to factory if all 3 match.
March 21, 2016
Offline
Eagle said
I agree Bob. Serial # is 462033, so it should be proofed, but I am a bit suspicious. Eagle
Which models/serial # Winchesters are proofed?
Winchester Model 1873 44-40 circa 1886
January 24, 2013
Offline
I suspect that it’s factory. Possibly sent back for rebarreling.
March 20, 2009
Offline
Mike Hunter said
I suspect that it’s factory. Possibly sent back for rebarreling.
I would say Mike’s assessment does make the most sense for the following reasons: 1. The barrel is mush better blued than the receiver. and 2. The take down ring would be double proofed after the new barrel put on but the barrel would only have it’s “original” proof stamp. I have seen a few quite crooked proofs on Model 1892 rifles though are not the norm.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
1 Guest(s)
