Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search
Forum Scope




Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

Please confirm you want to mark all posts read

Mark all topics read

sp_MobileMenu Actions
Avatar
Guest
Not logged in

New/Updated Topics

Select Forum

sp_TopicIcon
Interesting Model 1885 Highwall.
Avatar
Posts: 1375
August 8, 2023 - 12:38 pm

1sp_QuotePost

I don’t collect the Model 1885’s but I thought Bert may be interested in commenting about this one.

https://auctions.thegunrunner.com/lots/view/1-7UVHQC/winchester-1885-high-wall-30-06-cal-single-shot-match-rifle-30-barrel-1899

Al

Avatar
NY
Posts: 6150
August 8, 2023 - 1:26 pm

2sp_QuotePost

That gun, or another in the same configuration, was listed on a different site within the last yr., one of a very small no. (about a doz, I think) made to the same specs.  There was a fixed priced on the other gun in the 10 G range, which didn’t seem excessive to me, considering the extreme rarity.  Gary Quinlan had one for sale about 30 yrs ago, only one I ever saw “in person.”  Some records of the custom shop included name of customer, but appears this one did not. 

Avatar
Posts: 4097
August 8, 2023 - 4:52 pm

3sp_QuotePost

Weren’t some of these made in .30-06 rimless and .30-06 rimmed?  I have the vague recollection there is a WACA article on these.

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Posts: 10609
August 8, 2023 - 5:23 pm

4sp_QuotePost

The ad for that rifle is full of errors.

To start with, there were (27) identical “International Match” rifles that were manufactured for the 1913 Palma Match. The rifle in question is one of the (27).

All (27) were chambered for a 30-06 Rimmed cartridge (the rim was required because of the Single Shot’s action & function). In addition to the Rimmed cartridge, Winchester had to engineer a hammer block safety (as required by the Palma match rules), and that is the large headed slotted screw seen on the upper left side of the receiver frame.

These were not “Custom” shop rifles, nor are there separate records for them. Instead, they are all documented in the regular Factory warehouse ledger records, and there are no “customer” names documented in the records. The warehouse ledger records simply state that they were all built to the specifications as provided by Capt. Laudensack.

Bert

WACA 6571L, Historian & Board of Director Member
High-walls-1-002-C-reduced2.jpg

Avatar
Northern edge of the D/FW Metromess
Posts: 4864
August 8, 2023 - 11:30 pm

5sp_QuotePost

Must admit the Gunrunner version of that story is a bit more entertaining than what actually happened. I was hoping to catch a glimpse of that factory rimless extractor but they apparently neglected to post that pic.

 

Mike

Life Member TSRA, Endowment Member NRA
BBHC Member, TGCA Member
Smokeless powder is a passing fad! -Steve Garbe
I hate rude behavior in a man. I won't tolerate it. -Woodrow F. Call, Lonesome Dove
Some of my favorite recipes start out with a handful of depleted counterbalance devices.-TXGunNut
Presbyopia be damned, I'm going to shoot this thing! -TXGunNut
Avatar
Kingston, WA
Posts: 10609
August 9, 2023 - 4:12 am

6sp_QuotePost

TXGunNut said
Must admit the Gunrunner version of that story is a bit more entertaining than what actually happened. I was hoping to catch a glimpse of that factory rimless extractor but they apparently neglected to post that pic.

Mike  

It would be a real trick to post a picture of something that does not exist!

WACA 6571L, Historian & Board of Director Member
High-walls-1-002-C-reduced2.jpg

Avatar
Northern edge of the D/FW Metromess
Posts: 4864
August 9, 2023 - 1:02 pm

7sp_QuotePost

Bert H. said

TXGunNut said

Must admit the Gunrunner version of that story is a bit more entertaining than what actually happened. I was hoping to catch a glimpse of that factory rimless extractor but they apparently neglected to post that pic.

Mike  

It would be a real trick to post a picture of something that does not exist!

  

That’s what I believe but was still curious. Just because I can’t figure it out doesn’t mean someone else didn’t. Lots of people smarter than me.

 

Mike

Life Member TSRA, Endowment Member NRA
BBHC Member, TGCA Member
Smokeless powder is a passing fad! -Steve Garbe
I hate rude behavior in a man. I won't tolerate it. -Woodrow F. Call, Lonesome Dove
Some of my favorite recipes start out with a handful of depleted counterbalance devices.-TXGunNut
Presbyopia be damned, I'm going to shoot this thing! -TXGunNut
Avatar
NY
Posts: 6150
August 9, 2023 - 9:10 pm

8sp_QuotePost

Bert H. said
To start with, there were (27) identical “International Match” rifles that were manufactured for the 1913 Palma Match.

Rules for the Palma Match changed over time, but by 1912 if not earlier, rifles allowed in team competition were supposed to be each nation’s standard service rifle, with slight modifications allowed, such as receiver sights replacing brl sights.  In the 1913 match, the US team shot 1903s, Canadians shot the Ross, English shot Enfields, & so on.  There was also a new match for free-rifles, which could be of any design, & a few High Walls were specially made for that competition; they look like Schuetzen rifles, not military rifles. (Photos in Trefethan’s Americans & Their Guns.)

As for the Gunrunner rifle, I can’t find any way on the website to ask a question about this gun.  Why does the factory letter say “.30 rimless,” if it’s built for the rimmed case?

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Posts: 10609
August 10, 2023 - 5:07 am

9sp_QuotePost

clarence said

Bert H. said

To start with, there were (27) identical “International Match” rifles that were manufactured for the 1913 Palma Match.

Rules for the Palma Match changed over time, but by 1912 if not earlier, rifles allowed in team competition were supposed to be each nation’s standard service rifle, with slight modifications allowed, such as receiver sights replacing brl sights.  In the 1913 match, the US team shot 1903s, Canadians shot the Ross, English shot Enfields, & so on.  There was also a new match for free-rifles, which could be of any design, & a few High Walls were specially made for that competition; they look like Schuetzen rifles, not military rifles. (Photos in Trefethan’s Americans & Their Guns.)

As for the Gunrunner rifle, I can’t find any way on the website to ask a question about this gun.  Why does the factory letter say “.30 rimless,” if it’s built for the rimmed case?

  

Wherever it is you are getting your information from, you need to recheck it for accuracy.

As I stated, there were (27) identical high-wall rifles made for the 1913 Palma match, not just “a few High Halls” as you state.  They most definitely do not look like or evenly closely resemble a “Schuetzen rifle”.  They were very distinctly unique in many features.

The factory records for that rifle do not say “.30 rimless”.  Instead, it very says clearly states “30 Rim in 1906” which in plain English is 30-06 Rimmed.  Having personally examined (7) of the (27) Internatinal Match rifles, all of them are indeed chambered for a rimmed 30-06 cartridge, including the specific rifle in question.

For your edification;

Schuetzen Rifle

Schuetzen-Rifle-81656.jpgImage EnlargerFFU1453-Z-F2-L.jpgImage Enlarger

 

International Match Rifle

Full-view-LS.jpegImage EnlargerFull-view-RS.jpegImage Enlarger

WACA 6571L, Historian & Board of Director Member
High-walls-1-002-C-reduced2.jpg

Avatar
NY
Posts: 6150
August 10, 2023 - 1:30 pm

10sp_QuotePost

Bert H. said

Wherever it is you are getting your information from, you need to recheck it for accuracy.

As I stated, there were (27) identical high-wall rifles made for the 1913 Palma match, not just “a few High Halls” as you state.  They most definitely do not look like or evenly closely resemble a “Schuetzen rifle”.  They were very distinctly unique in many features.

The factory records for that rifle do not say “.30 rimless”.  Instead, it very says clearly states “30 Rim in 1906” which in plain English is 30-06 Rimmed.  Having personally examined (7) of the (27) Internatinal Match rifles, all of them are indeed chambered for a rimmed 30-06 cartridge, including the specific rifle in question.

You misquoted my post:  I did NOT say the International Match resembled a Schuetzen, I said the Winchester FREE RIFLE resembled a Schuetzen.  Did you look at the source I provided?  The factory letter posted on the Gunrunner site clearly says “RIMLESS.”  (Did you read it?)  If that’s incorrect, then the Museum recorded the error, not I.

And I say again, the Palma Match was restricted to standard service rifles in 1913, according to everything I’ve read about this match, such as Crossman’s Military & Sporting Rifles; he was one of the competitors in the 1912 match.  In what source do you find the International Match listed as having been used in the Palma Match?

Avatar
Posts: 1375
August 10, 2023 - 1:43 pm

11sp_QuotePost

clarence said

Bert H. said

To start with, there were (27) identical “International Match” rifles that were manufactured for the 1913 Palma Match.

Rules for the Palma Match changed over time, but by 1912 if not earlier, rifles allowed in team competition were supposed to be each nation’s standard service rifle, with slight modifications allowed, such as receiver sights replacing brl sights.  In the 1913 match, the US team shot 1903s, Canadians shot the Ross, English shot Enfields, & so on.  There was also a new match for free-rifles, which could be of any design, & a few High Walls were specially made for that competition; they look like Schuetzen rifles, not military rifles. (Photos in Trefethan’s Americans & Their Guns.)

As for the Gunrunner rifle, I can’t find any way on the website to ask a question about this gun.  Why does the factory letter say “.30 rimless,” if it’s built for the rimmed case?

  

As for the Gunrunner rifle, I can’t find any way on the website to ask a question about this gun. 

You need to go to their home page and click on contact us.

https://www.gunrunnerauctions.com/contact/

Avatar
NY
Posts: 6150
August 10, 2023 - 1:51 pm

12sp_QuotePost

tionesta1 said

As for the Gunrunner rifle, I can’t find any way on the website to ask a question about this gun. 

You need to go to their home page and click on contact us.

https://www.gunrunnerauctions.com/contact/

  

Thanks.  I’ll try that, but suspect I’ll just be told “we have no other info except factory letter.”

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Posts: 10609
August 10, 2023 - 4:24 pm

13sp_QuotePost

clarence said

Bert H. said

Wherever it is you are getting your information from, you need to recheck it for accuracy.

As I stated, there were (27) identical high-wall rifles made for the 1913 Palma match, not just “a few High Halls” as you state.  They most definitely do not look like or evenly closely resemble a “Schuetzen rifle”.  They were very distinctly unique in many features.

The factory records for that rifle do not say “.30 rimless”.  Instead, it very says clearly states “30 Rim in 1906” which in plain English is 30-06 Rimmed.  Having personally examined (7) of the (27) Internatinal Match rifles, all of them are indeed chambered for a rimmed 30-06 cartridge, including the specific rifle in question.

You misquoted my post:  I did NOT say the International Match resembled a Schuetzen, I said the Winchester FREE RIFLE resembled a Schuetzen.  Did you look at the source I provided?  The factory letter posted on the Gunrunner site clearly says “RIMLESS.”  (Did you read it?)  If that’s incorrect, then the Museum recorded the error, not I.

And I say again, the Palma Match was restricted to standard service rifles in 1913, according to everything I’ve read about this match, such as Crossman’s Military & Sporting Rifles; he was one of the competitors in the 1912 match.  In what source do you find the International Match listed as having been used in the Palma Match?

  

Clarence,

It is obvious to even a casual observer that you only read (view) what you want to read. You did not bother to read the CFM research sheet that is clearly provided on the Gunrunner site – Winchester 1885 High Wall, .30-06 cal. single shot match rifle, 30” barrel, 1899 | Gunrunner Online Auctions (thegunrunner.com) dated August 1, 2023 searched by Jesi Bennett (jb) and Angela (ab).  It very clearly states exactly what I previously posted.  And Yes, the original letter by William Porter is in error, which is why it was rechecked and a new CFM research letter provided.  Next time try reading everything that is available to you.

Bert

WACA 6571L, Historian & Board of Director Member
High-walls-1-002-C-reduced2.jpg

Avatar
NY
Posts: 6150
August 10, 2023 - 5:50 pm

14sp_QuotePost

Bert H. said Next time try reading everything that is available to you.
Bert

  

As carefully as you read my statement about the Winchester free-rifle?  Still waiting on some evidence that the International Match was intended for Palma competition–that’s shooting at from 800 to 1000 yds, at which range the sights on it would have been a severe disadvantage.  But even with better sights, how could it qualify as a service rifle?  (Palma Match today, by the way, is shot under different rules than in 1913, when it was still competition between national teams.)

Avatar
Posts: 541
August 14, 2023 - 11:58 pm

15sp_QuotePost

Well even tho this got a little heated , As Quasimodo said ” this was good conversation”. 

Avatar
Posts: 112
August 16, 2023 - 10:21 pm

16sp_QuotePost

I have been questioning the history of these rifles over time and what is certain, is that there is not much agreement on anything.  Here are a few things that I found but who knows?  The rifle was intended to be shot in the new “International Match” at 300 meters offhand, not the Palma match. Makes sense as no palm rest would be needed for a prone match. As far as rimmed vs. rimless, the argument may never end but in Campbell’s book Vol 1 on page 165, he describes the screw on the left side of the receiver as containing the spring for the rimless cartridge extractor.  Was this designed by Burton and that is why his name is mentioned in the letter?  If Campbell is correct, why doesn’t the screw line up with the front of the breach block or is the spring of some length? As far as the safety interlock, I believe that it is the piece that runs through the top of the hammer not having anything to do with the screw..  It would not be practical for a shooter to have a screwdriver in his pocket and turn that screw a 1/4 or 1/2 turn to make the rifle ready for firing. I handled two of these rifles some years back but at that time I was not aware of the rimmed vs rimless argument or it would have been easy for me to check the chamber for a rim cut.

I’ve included a link to a previous RIA auction that shows the screw and the interlock on the hammer quite clearly.

https://www.rockislandauction.com/detail/57/1007/winchester-1885-rifle

Avatar
Northern edge of the D/FW Metromess
Posts: 4864
August 17, 2023 - 12:14 am

17sp_QuotePost

I feel pretty sure a barrel mounted rimless extractor is possible and I’m also pretty sure it would involve a spring. I’m no engineer but I suspect durability would be an issue. I’d like to see a working sample, or at least a sample that worked at one time. The rimless extractor, in my mind anyway, would have to retreat back into a slotted recess in the barrel to slide over the body of the case and then move in to engage the extractor groove when the case was completely loaded into the chamber.That would involve a spring and maybe a jointed extractor. I don’t think a jointed extractor would be up to many sticky extractions and I can imagine a spring loaded extractor jumping over the case rim with a sticky case. I think there’s good reason SS’s use rimmed cases!

 

Mike

Life Member TSRA, Endowment Member NRA
BBHC Member, TGCA Member
Smokeless powder is a passing fad! -Steve Garbe
I hate rude behavior in a man. I won't tolerate it. -Woodrow F. Call, Lonesome Dove
Some of my favorite recipes start out with a handful of depleted counterbalance devices.-TXGunNut
Presbyopia be damned, I'm going to shoot this thing! -TXGunNut
Avatar
NY
Posts: 6150
August 17, 2023 - 12:21 am

18sp_QuotePost

Old-Win said
I have been questioning the history of these rifles over time and what is certain, is that there is not much agreement on anything.  Here are a few things that I found but who knows?  The rifle was intended to be shot in the new “International Match” at 300 meters, not the Palma match. Makes sense as no palm rest would be needed for a prone match. As far as rimmed vs. rimless, the argument may never end but in Campbell’s book Vol 1 on page 165, he describes the screw on the left side of the receiver as containing the spring for the rimless cartridge extractor.  Was this designed by Burton and that is why his name is mentioned in the letter?  If Campbell is correct, why doesn’t the screw line up with the front of the breach block or is the spring of some length? As far as the safety interlock, I believe that it is the piece that runs through the top of the hammer not having anything to do with the screw..  It would not be practical for a shooter to have a screwdriver in his pocket and turn that screw a 1/4 or 1/2 turn to make the rifle ready for firing. I handled two of these rifles some years back but at that time I was not aware of the rimmed vs rimless argument or it would have been easy for me to check the chamber for a rim cut.

I found a description of the guns & the special match they were built for in the 7-17-1913 ed of Arms & the Man.  It was to be called the International Union Match & fired at Camp Perry that yr; purpose of this article was to notify those who might be interested in tryouts for the US team, for it (like Palma) was a team competition against teams from Europe.  Was to be a 3-position match at 300 meters, because it was supposed to be “international.”

The most interesting aspect of the design of the rifles was that they were to be furnished with TWO interchangeable stocks, one for prone & kneeling which matches the description of the “International Match,” & another Schuetzen-style stock with palm-rest for the off-hand part of the match.  Who knows whether this ambitious plan was actually carried out, but at least two of the Schuetzen or Free Rifle stocks were built, because Campbell described one, & another is shown in the book I mentioned above. 

You’re right–hammer interlock required by match rules, has nothing to do with rimless extractor.  If all these rifles were built for the rimmed case, that extractor must have been found to be undesirable for some reason, though you’d think it would have been thoroughly tested before the rcvrs were modified for it.

I’ll say it again for the hard of hearing: the Palma match was at this time restricted to the SERVICE RIFLES of each country that participated.

Avatar
NY
Posts: 6150
August 17, 2023 - 12:32 am

19sp_QuotePost

TXGunNut said
I feel pretty sure a barrel mounted rimless extractor is possible and I’m also pretty sure it would involve a spring. I’m no engineer but I suspect durability would be an issue. I’d like to see a working sample, or at least a sample that worked at one time. The rimless extractor, in my mind anyway, would have to retreat back into a slotted recess in the barrel to slide over the body of the case and then move in to engage the extractor groove when the case was completely loaded into the chamber.That would involve a spring and maybe a jointed extractor. I don’t think a jointed extractor would be up to many sticky extractions and I can imagine a spring loaded extractor jumping over the case rim with a sticky case. I think there’s good reason SS’s use rimmed cases! 

Though Campbell credits Burton with a patent for that extractor, he evidently found no illustration of it, as he never omitted any patent drawing that he could find to include in the book.  The extractor may have been a failure, but building a gun for such a specialized case was not the very best idea either. 

Forum Timezone:
UTC 0
Most Users Ever Online: 778
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Devices in use: Desktop (71), Phone (77), Tablet (1)

Forum Stats:
Groups: 1
Forums: 17
Topics: 12498
Posts: 108504
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 1727
Members: 8715
Moderators: 4
Admins: 3
Navigation