Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
November 5, 2014
Offline
Hi All-
While I am asking this as a Model 70 question, it’s really a general question about Winchester barrel manufacturing processes. My understanding is that up until 1946 or 1950 (depending on caliber) the caliber designation on M70 barrels, as well as the barrel inspection caliber stamp under the chamber, were applied using hand stamped dies that were separate from the barrel address roll mark.
First the pre-war first style roll mark followed by hand stamp:
Starting about 1940 the barrel address roll mark changed but the caliber designation stamp was still applied by hand:
While (according to Rule’s book) caliber designations for some chamberings were applied using a separate roll marking die beginning in ’46, it wasn’t until 1950 that one-piece roll marking dies that included the exposed caliber designation were put into general use:
My question is how were the individual hand stamps made? Rule’s book shows a factory drawing of one with the words “engrave here” indicating the surface where the caliber was engraved. From looking at other threads on this site, it is clear that at some point these dies were hand engraved (which I presume accounts for some of the variability one sees in the shape of letters on early barrels). But how long were these stamps “made by hand”? Did the practice persist all the way up to 1946/1950 when the calibers were incorporated into the roll marks? Or was the factory/supplier making these hand stamps with machine cut lettering even before they began making M70s (1936)? Or M54s (1925)?
Any insights would be appreciated.
Best,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Lou, I cannot tell you exactly how they were made, but I do know Winchester made many of their own, and that the factory engravers would actually do the work when they had time available from engraving rifles. I am relatively certain as time progressed, Winchester used pantographs for roughing out the dies and characters, and much later, probably farmed them out to specialty shops with CNC and EDM machines.
Steve
November 5, 2014
Offline
Thank you Steve
One positive thing I’ll say about RIA (source of the “examples” above) is that by keeping their old catalogues available on-line it is possible to look over hundreds of barrel markings in a single sitting. Many ‘real’, some not so much!!! It is the sort of thing that OCD people like me will do at times!!!
Such a time wasting exercise is what triggered my question. There seems to be a good bit of variation in the caliber designation stamps before they went to using roll dies to imprint them. Like the shape of the ‘7’ in ‘7 M/M’ versus ‘.270 W.C.F.’ above. It seems even worse when looking (in books) at the early M70 barrels in oddball chamberings, e.g. ‘7.65 M/M’ or ‘9 M/M’, that were probably marked using dies dating back to M54 production.
I personally don’t see anything wrong with either of the stamps I pasted above, that was not my point. But they are different style numbers, and it got me wondering about how those dies were made.
Best,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
November 5, 2014
Offline
Related question… I suspect Big Larry or seewin (and others with machinist experience that I totally lack) would know…
Does anyone have an approximate idea of how long a given roll marking die and/or caliber hand stamp lasted before it had to be replaced? How many rifle barrels could be marked with the same die before it wore out? Even though they were hardened, I presume that there were a limited number of times an individual die could be used.
Are we talking hundreds, thousands?
Thanks,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Lou, I really have no idea as to the life of a roll stamp at Winchester. I can tell you that the one’s that I have made up for my business have lasted many thousands of impressions. They are not roll stamps, but machine stamps that we use in one of our presses. Life expectancy would depend on many variables, such as hardness of steel being stamped (stainless work hardens and is much more difficult to maintain a deep impression), dept of impression( this varied by machine operator), quality of roll die/ associated heat treatment, intricacy of characters, and general handling. These dies are very hard, consequently a casual drop on concrete could easily damage the characters. If I was guessing, I would estimate at least a thousand impressions in heat treated 4140 series steel used on Winchester model 70 barrels.
Steve
November 5, 2014
Offline
Thanks again, Steve.
Metallurgy in general, and mid-20th century metallurgy in particular, is something I know nothing about. I spend too much time looking at roll marks/caliber stamps on old M70s and wonder where the variation one sees comes from.
For example, just looking on-line over the past couple years, I’ve see three different (possibly believable) caliber stamps for the .300 SAVAGE (two variations pictured in Rule’s book alone). If they made less than 400 total, one wonders why they’d need more than one roll marking die (total)!!! 
Best always,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Lou,
Have you considered that some of the variation you see results from fake M70 barrels stamped with fake roll stamps and fake caliber stamps??
Your point about 300 Savage barrels is well taken (35 Rem too). I think they made one run of barrels for these calibers–why would they need more than one stamp?
Don’t assume Rule’s book pictures only factory original rifles. I know for a fact it does not.
I know–I see “fake” hiding behind every bush. It’s one of many character flaws.
John Madl when he was doing research on the 1886, estimated that roll dies lasted approximately 2000 barrels. Keep in mind that was with the 1886, where the barrels were made out of very soft steel. From the onset, the Model 70 barrel was (and still is) made out of SAE 4140 steel, very tough stuff.
I sincerely doubt that even with today’s metallurgy, roll dies last much longer; again, 41xx series steels are tough, as anyone who machines it can attest.
So, my guess is that modern roll dies last 1000 – 1500 cycles when used on CM steels. Steve E. can correct me if I’m wrong.
Early dies/stamps were hand cut by the in-house engravers. I suspect somewhere around the late 30s to WWII timeframe, Winchester began utilizing machine cut dies, most likely cut with a pantograph, the dies were then cleaned up by an engraver or tool & die maker.
Later (50s) Winchester began outsourcing die production; a company by the name of Industrial Markings comes to mind (I can look on some of the original roll dies that I have in the shop, if anybody needs specifics). I believe Winchester utilized the same company for dies until they closed.
Unless Winchester had a specific order for an “oddball’ chambering, my guess is that Winchester used these short production runs to “test the waters”, to see what would sell and what would not. There can be a considerable investment by a manufacturing company when introducing a new chambering beyond just the roll dies: Chamber reamers, ballistic research (determining the best rate of twist), maximum chamber pressures, barrel life etc. And, if Winchester didn’t produce ammunition in that caliber, what would be the costs associated with tooling up.
Keep in mind that in a production environment, you don’t just order one roll die, stuff happens, die may break, get dropped etc., you really rather not stop production for 6-8 weeks waiting for another die to come in.
Also, caliber designations change 30 WCF to 30-30, 30 Gov’t ’06 to 30-06, is it 7 M/M, 7×57 or 7MM Mauser, or a variation of; depending on time period.
Lots of variables.
November 5, 2014
Offline
Hi Vic-
Good to hear from you. Hope all is well!!!
YES. My interest stems from just that. Fake barrels with fake roll marks and fake caliber stamps mixed in with the occasional “real thing”.
Something that I’ve found hard(ish) to explain are M70s with style 1 through style 3A barrel markings where the roll mark looks perfect but the hand stamped caliber shows significant variability between rifles. Not just in terms of depth and evenness of the imprint, which is to be expected, but with minor variation in the way certain letters were shaped (particularly the letters ‘M/M’). I would think that anybody good enough to replicate and apply a perfect roll mark die would also be good enough to copy an original caliber designation stamp rather than introduce any variation?
But if the early caliber designation stamps were either hand engraved or hand finished by engravers then their might be some modest degree of variability from one individual die to the next? In which case the stamp, alone, might not be a immediate ‘red flag’? After all, how many of us have ever actually seen a genuine 9M/M, 7.65M/M, or even .300 SAVAGE, barrel and known for sure that’s what we were looking at? I know you have, I’m talking about me, for example!!!
A couple of WACA friends have been helping me by sending a few photos of “rare” caliber designation stamps on rifles of very good to outstanding provenance. I thank them immensely!!! It’s been interesting, for example, seeing that the exact same caliber designation die (that on the face of it I would have considered sketchy) was used to mark an unquestionably genuine M54 and an early M70.
Somewhat unrelated, I know that Rule’s book states that “most if not all” .300 SAV barrels were made in late ’46 (and I’ve no reason to disagree). I have, however, seen one seemingly legit (only meaning that I couldn’t see anything wrong with it) .300 SAVAGE Standard rifle with a ’48 barrel date. Unless the barrel was a fake made before Rule’s book was published (1982) or the faker couldn’t read (both possible I suppose), why on Earth would they make a barrel with all correct looking marks and then put the wrong date on it? Has anybody else seen a believable .300 SAVAGE M70 with a barrel date other than ’46?
I guess, like you, I see conspiracy everywhere!!!
Cheers,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
November 5, 2014
Offline
Mike-
Thank you for the insights!!! Very helpful… Like you say, many variables.
Those ‘M/M’ containing stamps particularly vex me. Some have very ‘square’ ends to the strokes, while others appear to have rounded tips or little ‘balls’ on the ends. Likewise the ‘V’ that forms the center of the ‘M’ is often slightly offset to the right or left slightly. I’m getting the idea that perhaps these little variations, in and of themselves, are not compelling arguments one way or the other when it comes to originality???
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
1 Guest(s)
