Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
I know that more rare than an engraved 1866 is an unengraved 1866, but that still doesn’t nullify the art of engraving on an old rifle.
Speculation is all over the place with this gun. People say that it isn’t factory engraved, yet my understanding is that neither Ulrich or Nimschke did any engraving at the Winchester factory. I had one guy state that the engraving was that of Nimschke, yet someone else said no.
Here are some close ups of the top of the receiver and the engraving. I showed this to an engraver at the show and he said that the engraving was most likely when the gun was new or nearly new, as the wear on the engraving matched the age of the gun and it wasn’t engraved in the past 50-60 years as many claim they were. I certainly don’t know for sure, but it does look old and original.
I also took pictures of the bolt and you can see that it is of the later type where it is a centerfire and not a rimfire conversion…
Online
The firing pin modification looks old but does not match any of the three styles in the picture. With the bolt bushing missing you would think the case would rupture. With the recent talk on the Forum of shooting 66’s with center fire ammo, that configuration scares me. T/R
TR said
The firing pin modification looks old but does not match any of the three styles in the picture. With the bolt bushing missing you would think the case would rupture. With the recent talk on the Forum of shooting 66’s with center fire ammo, that configuration scares me. T/R
Not much to be scared of…
I used to not worry about it until 6 months ago. I bought a nice first model 73 and decided to shoot it, took it apart, everything looked good. I did not remove and examined the firing pin, the pin had been repaired by soldering in a pin where the old one broke, the solder joint was cold letting the pin come out and jam. As I levered in the 44/40 it went off send part of the brass into my cheek, now I look closer. It appears the cartridge head is strong enough. I like the picture, the smokes still in the air. T/R
Shrapnel said
I know that more rare than an engraved 1866 is an unengraved 1866, but that still doesn’t nullify the art of engraving on an old rifle.Speculation is all over the place with this gun. People say that it isn’t factory engraved, yet my understanding is that neither Ulrich or Nimschke did any engraving at the Winchester factory. I had one guy state that the engraving was that of Nimschke, yet someone else said no.
Who told you this in regards to Ulrich? And by Ulrich, which one are you referring to? As there was three Ulrich brothers that worked at the factory Pre-1900.
I would be inclined to agree that the work does not look like the work of the Ulrichs. But I am no engraving expert.
I recommend you ask Pauline Murelle what her thoughts are on it.
Sincerely,
Maverick
WACA #8783 - Checkout my Reloading Tool Survey!
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-research-surveys/winchester-reloading-tool-survey/
First, all the token caveats: I am not an expert on Winchesters, Winchester engraving, or engraving in general.
I am, however, getting a rifle engraved and preparatory to that, I did some research. I spent a lot of time reading, and re-reading, cover to cover, “Advanced Drawing of Scrolls For Engravers, Artists, Designers, Craftsmen” by Ron Smith. I think I developed a decent eye for quality. And, after looking at lots of engraved period Colts and Winchesters, the gun in question appears to me to be relatively crude. I don’t feel like going back to the book for all terms of art which would make me sound smarter than I am, so the following is lay-terminology.
It is way better than a lot of crap I have seen. However, the transitions (distance between tapering lines) along curves are not uniform and there are other issues, like apparent changes in depth, inconsistent shading and leaf terminals, choppy arcs, groove variability, and things I’d have to go back to the book for better explanation.
I could be totally wrong, but I would bet it’s “after market” engraving by a decent but not master engraver, and not of the quality I see in guns commissioned by or done by the factory.
As to the age, it could very well be old. Don’t know. In fact, some of the imperfections I noticed *could* be attributed to dings and wear. But not all.
I also would like to see better photos perpendicular to the sides. If I recall, the animal on the right side was a dead give-away on the non-master nature of the work.
One thing I do find interesting is the stippling on the top. It could be my imagination, but it almost seems like there is a hidden pattern in there which, if so, is pretty damn cool.
I’d love to own that gun and wouldn’t care much about who engraved it or when, unless I was insuring it or trying to sell it.
There’s my opinion, take it for what you paid for it.
Yes, definitely not factory work and the quality of engraving is not at the same level of that which would come from the factory to begin with.
Huck Riley said
First, all the token caveats: I am not an expert on Winchesters, Winchester engraving, or engraving in general.I am, however, getting a rifle engraved and preparatory to that, I did some research. I spent a lot of time reading, and re-reading, cover to cover, “Advanced Drawing of Scrolls For Engravers, Artists, Designers, Craftsmen” by Ron Smith. I think I developed a decent eye for quality. And, after looking at lots of engraved period Colts and Winchesters, the gun in question appears to me to be relatively crude. I don’t feel like going back to the book for all terms of art which would make me sound smarter than I am, so the following is lay-terminology.
It is way better than a lot of crap I have seen. However, the transitions (distance between tapering lines) along curves are not uniform and there are other issues, like apparent changes in depth, inconsistent shading and leaf terminals, choppy arcs, groove variability, and things I’d have to go back to the book for better explanation.
I could be totally wrong, but I would bet it’s “after market” engraving by a decent but not master engraver, and not of the quality I see in guns commissioned by or done by the factory.
As to the age, it could very well be old. Don’t know. In fact, some of the imperfections I noticed *could* be attributed to dings and wear. But not all.
I also would like to see better photos perpendicular to the sides. If I recall, the animal on the right side was a dead give-away on the non-master nature of the work.
One thing I do find interesting is the stippling on the top. It could be my imagination, but it almost seems like there is a hidden pattern in there which, if so, is pretty damn cool.
I’d love to own that gun and wouldn’t care much about who engraved it or when, unless I was insuring it or trying to sell it.
There’s my opinion, take it for what you paid for it.
That all sounds quite plausible. I believe it is older engraving and not factory. It is still not bad and appears to be vintage, but not one of the masters. I do like the gun, and realize it is an old 1866. It is a tight gun and does function and shoot, I will get satisfaction from that…
November 7, 2015
Offline
A beautiful engraved 1866 that you can actually shoot! What’s not to like? Very nice, congrats!
Mike
Looking at the pictures of the firing pin, how is the firing pin held in the gun? What keeps it from coming out the back of the receiver if a case would rupture? On every 66 I’ve owned the firing pin is threaded into the striker keeping it from coming back, the 73 & 76 have a firing pin extractor instead. Does this gun have that or some other method of keeping the firing pin from backing out? The 66 firing pin has a milled groove in the top for the extractor claw so maybe that would limit rearward movement. Just curious. T/R
1 Guest(s)
