Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
“Decided it is a Model 1894.” Would the Cody Firearms Museum seriously put this in a factory letter? Never seen a factory letter attempt to justify a Frankenchester before. Pretty disappointing if the letter is truly legit. I’m hoping not.
https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1025094906
Don
Don,
The letter is legitimate, and the “Decided it is a Model 1894.” notation on the letter is in No way an attempt by anyone at the CFM to justify anything. It is simply exactly what is in the factory ledger record. It is just purely coincidental that the rifle in question is now somewhat of a Frankenchester.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert H. said
Don,The letter is legitimate, and the “Decided it is a Model 1894.” notation on the letter is in No way an attempt by anyone at the CFM to justify anything. It is simply exactly what is in the factory ledger record. It is just purely coincidental that the rifle in question is now somewhat of a Frankenchester.
Bert
So, do you think it left the factory with “Model 1886” on the upper tang? Just trying to think of why such a notation would be in the ledger.
Don
I posted my high bid of $12.21…. guess I’m not going add this one to the safe.
deerhunter said
So, do you think it left the factory with “Model 1886” on the upper tang?
THAT is the $64,000 Question! Fantastic, but somehow, as a result of some idiot’s careless (or drunken) mistake, the tang MUST originally have been marked that way, and then even more fantastically, either no one else in the factory noticed the mistake, or if they did, didn’t consider it a good enough reason for sending the rcvr back to be re-stamped correctly! “Quality control”–where was that??? The ambiguous terminology in the letter compounds the confusion; SHOULD have said something like “OBVIOUSLY a mis-marked 1894.”
Then, on top of this bizarre mishap in the factory, the gun is later subjected to another idiot’s crude reshaping of the brl! If the gun had not been the victim of this butchering, it might be regarded as a rare factory error, like the “upside down” Jenny airmail stamp.
Love seller’s description: “DECENT example of older ’94.” Wonder what an INdecent example would look like?
Don,
It is very likely that it did get mis-marked, and that is what lead up to the odd notation on the warehouse ledger record book. Unfortunately, Bubba and his Redneck brothers & cousins decided to “customize” the gun multiple times over the past many decades.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
If you blow up tang photo, you can see weld porosity on both sides of upper tang showing repair
Bert H. said
Don,It is very likely that it did get mis-marked, and that is what lead up to the odd notation on the warehouse ledger record book. Unfortunately, Bubba and his Redneck brothers & cousins decided to “customize” the gun multiple times over the past many decades.
That is pretty amazing! Unbelievable it made it out of the warehouse. Unless, perhaps, the error was discovered (and ledger updated) after it had already shipped/sold. Might be interesting to do a Cody search for a Model 1886 with the same serial #114668…
Don
November 7, 2015
Online
Poor thing never had a chance, was a train wreck before it left the factory and it just kept getting worse from that point. An image of the ledger entry could prove interesting. Amusing description by the seller, should probably add it would work just fine for clubbing baby seals.
Mike
cj57 said
If you blow up tang photo, you can see weld porosity on both sides of upper tang showing repair
cj57,
I agree and right in front of where the tang sight was located where the tang itself offsets at where the side panels meet the tang itself. I don’t know how else to explain and describe the location. If there’s a better terminology or not. Being the Frankenchester work was done after it left the Factory explains to my understanding why the tang was incorrect and after the Factory Ledger stated the original Facts. 
Antonio
Antonio said
cj57 said
If you blow up tang photo, you can see weld porosity on both sides of upper tang showing repair
cj57,
I agree and right in front of where the tang sight was located where the tang itself offsets at where the side panels meet the tang itself. I don’t know how else to explain and describe the location. If there’s a better terminology or not. Being the Frankenchester work was done after it left the Factory explains to my understanding why the tang was incorrect and after the Factory Ledger stated the original Facts.
Antonio
I’m thinking it still left the factory with the mismarked tang. Why else would the “Decided it is a Model 1894” notation be in the ledger?
Don
deerhunter said
I’m thinking it still left the factory with the mismarked tang. Why else would the “Decided it is a Model 1894” notation be in the ledger?
I make out the different surface appearance of the tang where it was once covered by the tang sight, but not evidence of being grafted on by welding. Would have taken an excellent welder to make the work look this “good,” & it appears only the lowest order of gun butcher was involved in creating this “trans-freak.” So I too believe (incredible as it seems!) it left the factory mis-marked. And why in the world TWO oversized holes for the tang sight screw?
Sold for $656. The rifle was indeed horrendous. Given his description of the bore, I can’t imagine what use it would be to anyone. However, it certainly is an oddity, apparently being shipped out from the factory with the wrong tang marking. I’ve never seen an example like this before. I would have enjoyed owning that rifle had it been in unaltered condition.
steve004 said
Sold for $656. The rifle was indeed horrendous. Given his description of the bore, I can’t imagine what use it would be to anyone. However, it certainly is an oddity, apparently being shipped out from the factory with the wrong tang marking. I’ve never seen an example like this before. I would have enjoyed owning that rifle had it been in unaltered condition.
Edit:
It would be fun to have a gunshow display table of a dozen or so M1886’s – just 86’s on the table, but include this one (if it wasn’t in the condition it is in). People stopping by would comment how the 1894 seemed out of place in the display. You could respond, “no – it’s a Model 1886 – here look.”
Sold for $656. steve004 said
Steve, look again–$870! When you see such abominations sell for such prices–and by no means is this case a unique example–I always think it would be fascinating to hear the “lucky winner’s” explanation of why he bought the gun, what he thought he was getting, etc. Would be noble of him to donate it to Cody as the beginning of a “factory screw-up” collection.
If you are a beginner collector, rather uneducated, etc, and in the situation where $1000 is A LOT of money, I could see where you might buy this. There forever will be a market for under $1000 guns because of this. Where else can you get an early functional firearm for under $500. Fee and far between these days. Scrimp and save and desirous of one without further waiting, a bit under $1000 when it’s all said and done.
Not something I would want, nor most others on this forum, but there’s forever a demand for cheaper firearms for those of more limited means. And I’m not bashing them. Better they own a well abused Winchester than none at all and end up rabidly anti 2A instead.
mrcvs said
If you are a beginner collector, rather uneducated, etc, and in the situation where $1000 is A LOT of money, I could see where you might buy this.
$1000 is a lot of money for me. Given not only the multitude of gun books available now that hadn’t been written 50 yrs ago, but the vast & expanding sources of info available free on the internet (such as this forum), what good excuse is there to remain “uneducated”? I would think that the more precious a dollar was to a beginner, the greater the care he would exercise in spending it; unless of course, he was just plumb stupid. Not sure what the remedy for that would be.
clarence said
mrcvs said
If you are a beginner collector, rather uneducated, etc, and in the situation where $1000 is A LOT of money, I could see where you might buy this.
$1000 is a lot of money for me. Given not only the multitude of gun books available now that hadn’t been written 50 yrs ago, but the vast & expanding sources of info available free on the internet (such as this forum), what good excuse is there to remain “uneducated”? I would think that the more precious a dollar was to a beginner, the greater the care he would exercise in spending it; unless of course, he was just plumb stupid. Not sure what the remedy for that would be.
There was stuff early in my gun collecting years I surely wouldn’t buy today and I’ve sold it long ago. Sometimes the impatience of wanting to own something makes one buy something just to have it, instead of waiting a year, spending twice the amount of money and getting ten times the amount of firearm. Emotions sometimes trump rationality.
November 7, 2015
Online
Agreed, Ian. I’ve made some questionable decisions during exciting situations, it was fun and I usually learned something. Nowadays that little voice speaks up and says “wait for the next one” and I’m getting better at listening. As Steve pointed out it would be interesting to put this gun on the table at a show as a conversation starter. I’m guilty of this, will probably do it again someday as I have little in my collection that needs re-homing at this time.
Mike
Agreed, Ian. I’ve made some questionable decisions during exciting situations, it was fun and I usually learned something. TXGunNut said
As “questionable” as this case? I suspect not. And this wasn’t the situation you can find yourself in at a gun show, with one or more guys breathing down your neck while you’ve got the gun in your hands, & you KNOW if you lay it back down, you probably won’t have a second chance. Bidders on this gun had a week or more to ask questions, search the internet, seek advice from more knowledgeable collectors, etc, so it was FAR from an “exciting situation.”
1 Guest(s)
