Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
BTW everyone, I forgot to mention one theory about the numbers, I firmly believe that the first and third number that everyone thinks are ‘9’s, is not, at least one of them. It is clear that the numbers are not the same, the shape that is visible will not overlay exactly. And, believing that the fourth number is a ‘5’, I also think that the last number may not be a ‘1’. It is just strange shape, and slightly off position. I think all five numbers are not definitive! thanks again, Elliot
If the first digit is not a 9 and like twobit said, its not a carbine so the only other number the first digit would be is a 8. So it would be 86951.
Bob
WACA Life Member--- NRA Life Member---- Cody Firearms member since 1991 Researching the Winchester 1873's
Email: [email protected]
1873man said
I can see a old 4 under the new 44.Bob
Bob,
At first I thought the same thing but when I go back and look it looks as if the second 4 is stamped in mirror image underneath the heavy 44 stamp. I am under the impression that the caliber has been changed.
Elliot,
Can you please post a detail photo of the muzzle face and the breech end of the barrel?
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
Maybe it was a 38-40 (or?) and someone had it bored out to a 44. Is it normal for the 44 to be so deeply stamped and the WCF to be so light in comparison?
Huck Riley said
Maybe it was a 38-40 (or?) and someone had it bored out to a 44. Is it normal for the 44 to be so deeply stamped and the WCF to be so light in comparison?
Huck,
The caliber stamp has DEFINITELY been tampered with. They are never that different.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
ok, I’ll add what my blind eyes see…939(4,5,8)1. Is there any money in this?
JWA, I agree with you after looking at it again. It’s a 6 not an 8. This is getting interesting.
Since a consensus has not been arrived at, as to the serial number I will throw out a couple thought about backing up a step and trying to get another look at the stampings. Berts thoughts on using a Camera are spot on, but can have varying results depending on original photo resolution and more importantly varying light source angles..I will sugest some possible things to try, the last of which I believe will give your best chance at getting a better look.
The tried and true method used in the past to examine proof marks etc. on old double guns was to smoke the marking with the soot from a candle. let the smoke rise verticly across the stamping then press clear scotch tape across the stamping and press firmly. Remove the tape gently and press it onto the cleanest brightest white paper you can find. Not magical by any means, but in some instances due to the contrast it can show you something unseen before..might be worth a try.
Occasionally you can get better results by applying a high contrast substance such as talk or a white paste to the marking ,then gently wiping off of top surface. rephotograph.. again might be worth a try just to see..
Last but FAR from least.Some years back our family came into a very large quantity of old coins, and I was tasked with the job of going through everything and researching what we had. My brother, who is an electronic engineer, in R.&D. sent me a digitol microscope that plugs into your usb port and is shown on your screen..You capture screen shots at any time you want..and can manipulate them from there. let me add that this is not an expensive tool. I believe he paid around $25 dollars at the time on the internet.This thing is an incredible tool..unbelievable. it has a light source in it but can be moved around the marking from oblique angles and more importantly. an additional light source can be added at low angles 360′ around the marking..This thing blows the doors off of any magnifying Glass you have ever used.I HIGHLY recommend it to anyone interested in just the kind of use we are talking about here. At my work in Alaska, we have a large mechanic shop, and I can’t tell you how many times our mechanics have spent a half hour with magnifying glass arguing over a worn marking on an old bearing or race…They call me to settle it with this thing….I will not guarantee that you will read the marking definitely, but I will guarantee that you will see much more than you have seen so far..Again, I highly recomend this tool.. Use low light sources from all angles and you will be amazed what you can see…The one I have is called a TK viewer, but I am sure there are other good ones as well..Hope this helps..Brian
1873man said
If the first digit is not a 9 and like twobit said, its not a carbine so the only other number the first digit would be is a 8. So it would be 86951.Bob
From what seems to known at this point in time, I agree on all points.
James
twobit said
Huck,
The caliber stamp has DEFINITELY been tampered with. They are never that different.
Michael
Huck,
i had the same identification problem on an 1894 14″ short rifle that bugged me on serial number reading and numbers and spacing. I used my iPhone 5S and the Olloclip 3-in-One photo lens attachment. The macro lens was a 13 mm with a focal distance of 1/2″ and got a 10x macro shot. That was an incredible and revealing picture.
The rifle had been restamped. I doubt it was the original number and believe it was made up to match a Cody letter ( antique ).
i did not want to own that gun given Federal law and ATF regulations.
it’s not your situation but the identification process worked.
Bill
I think the cal. marking is a bigger mystery than the serial # So here is my W.A.G. on that..Because of the spacing of the marking, the ghost number can only be the last number in the sequence,, in which case can only be a 2, 8, 4 or zero and since I can only relate it to a four I would guess that the barrel has not been changed internally, but that the original marking had worn to a point that it was not visible or legible and someone [with possibly more than one model 92] did not want any mistakes and decided to re stamp it in the original caliber. it could have been a too helpfull gunsmith while working on another issue on the gun. who knows, but I cant visualize that ghost number as being part of one of the smaller calibers.
briango: At first that was my thinking too, but that ghost “4” almost looks reversed so that makes no sense, *unless* the reverse angle is just a scratch and not part of a reverse 4. When looked at like that, the ghost 4 looks like a regular 4. It’s that reverse angle that is bugging me. Also, inside of the second new 4 is a faint line that looks like the correct angle of an old 4, but it’s not spaced right to be part of the first or second 4 of an old 4, relative to the ghost 4 behind it.
In any event, I have an 86 that was 38-56 from the factory, then a 40-65 bbl was put on it so I had it bored out to 45-70 and the guy stamped it accordingly. He did an excellent job of removing the 40-65 before re-stamping and I was surprised I couldn’t see where the old number had been buffed out relative to the surrounding metal. I thought I’d see somewhat of a flat there but I’m not seeing it.
I think others have asked for a good shot of the muzzle and that might tell if it’s been bored out.
The way this gun is, I would not hesitate to do the polishing referenced in the beginning of this thread. I think that would settle it.
Try rubbing with welders chalk and the lightly blowing it off. Maybe to worn for that even
Huck, I know exactly what your saying, and had seen that extra slash or reverse 4, but I guess my point was that for me I guess I cant turn it into any of the other possible numbers it would be for a model 92..The only other thing that I thought after looking at it, and this makes little sense, but. I have a model 92 that was rebored to .357 and before they remarked the barrel they had tried to obscure the original by using a single slash stamping at 45 degree angles to make the feint original stamping look more like hieroglyphics.. who knows?
To lift a stamped number they would have to polish the area around the number so it has contrast. This is what it would look like.
Bob question Bob, in that photo is the serial number merely been polished, or has it been subjected to the process of chemical etching?
That has been polished and then the acid applied. You have to sand and polish the area so there is contrast when the acid reacts. Otherwise you can not see the numbers. That is the question you have to ask yourself, if you are going to hurt the value of the gun by removing the patina or is knowing the serial number more important.
Bob
WACA Life Member--- NRA Life Member---- Cody Firearms member since 1991 Researching the Winchester 1873's
Email: [email protected]
Bob, exactly…is the cost too prohibitive or the amount of invasiveness worth it. Which brings me to my next question for you. Was this something you were able to do yourself? or did you use an outside source..and if so was it expensive. I know the fish and wildlife service does this exact process to read numbers on duck bands that are too worn to read. I have had two bands over the years that this was the case and they sent me a letter stating that it would take some time before I could get a reply since they had to be chemical etched like this. I would guess the same process is used by law inforcement to retrieve serial numbers that have been altered or ground off.. its at least my understanding that this works by bringing out, or making visible the stress left in the metal from the original stamping.brian
I have the acid.
Bob
WACA Life Member--- NRA Life Member---- Cody Firearms member since 1991 Researching the Winchester 1873's
Email: [email protected]
1 Guest(s)
