Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Just another example of the very well known fakery that frequently occurs with the Model 70 rifles.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
November 7, 2015
Offline
This Model 70 has indeed improved with age, last I heard that worked best with good wines and whiskey.
Mike
I’m not a M70 guy. Are the front receiver ring tap holes correct for that serial number range?
Another oddity – I’ve never seen the serial number “1” look like these (there’s two in this rifle’s serial number). Anyone else seen a 1 struck like that before?
If the serial number is faked, I can’t understand why as it’s not like it’s made to match a M70 in this chambering that, “letters.” However, I suppose perhaps in the restoration process the serial number was restruck? Would these be the biggest clue to detecting the rifle is faked – or are others seeing other clues as well?
It is a very nice looking rifle.
November 7, 2015
Offline
Very nice indeed, that’s why I have no interest in collecting Model 70’s. If I hadn’t seen pics of the rifle before the restoration I would not have known any better, other than my normal suspicion of very high condition guns. My goal is to someday add a pre-64 M70 to my collection, partly as a complement to the post-64 M70’s I’ve hunted with for decades. But first, I’ll have to read Lou’s book and review Rule’s book.
Mike
November 5, 2014
Offline
Happy Thanksgiving!!!
Model 70 S/N 213219 was in the survey from its prior incarnation as a MC comb 30-06 Standard rifle in RIA Auction 1028, before it acquired a new barrel, new stock, and total finish restoration. Since RIA does not picture the serial number, it is “possible” that there was a “typo” in their catalog. But it’s doubtful… 
Although the Model 70 in 7 M/M was last cataloged in 1949, a 1952 serial number is plausible through barrel clean-up. The last “batch” of 7 M/M rifles are in the 295,000 to 300,000 range (1954) corresponding to the last big barrel clean-up effort. I have S/N 297054, which I believe is genuine.
But even without the prior record, I believe that the barrel markings on S/N 213219 are enough to conclude that the current barrel is a forgery. If one looks closely, ALL of the letters/numbers/dashes are rounded on the ends.
I’ve encountered dozens of similarly marked Model 70 barrels, all in “rare” calibers or configurations. I do not know if they’re done by laser engraving (my guess) or replica roll dies, but they are all very uniform in depth (not a characteristic of a roll die) with rounded strokes. Lasers can’t make square corners. Neither can rotary bit pantograph gravers. Roll dies can, and Winchester’s pre-64 roll dies did.
FWIW… Here are four 7 M/M barrel markings that I think are correct. Two are Style 1 (1936-1941 barrel dates), S/Ns 25488 and 66220, and two are Style 3A (1941-1950 barrel dates), S/Ns 81568 and 297054. You can’t see the difference looking at the pics on a cell phone, but I think it’s clear when enlarged on a computer screen. Roll dies make (at least some) square corners and are often “chip” as they wear (missing bits of letters).
I personally don’t see much “wrong” with the serial number stamp on 213219. The whole serial number is more deeply imprinted at the top than the bottom, not just the “1”s. Sloppy, yes, but not that unusual IMHO… 
BTW… The $17,500 asking price for S/N 213219 is only about 3X what the rifle would be worth if it were genuine… 😀
Be careful out there!!!
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Lou, I am not a model 70 enthusiast, but that set of pictures is an excellent moment in the class room. I am sure the rounded vs square corner would apply to lever guns also. Always something to learn here. Thanks for posting that.
Also it looks like the dashes ( carrots?) seem to have a different look to them.
November 7, 2015
Offline
Lou-
Thanks for the stamp vs engraving tip, I generally study the bottom of the impression but your method makes more sense and is easier to spot. Also, thanks for confirming my suspicion about the price.
Mike
Online
Thanks, Lou!
Without the expertise you and others bring here, there would be SO many more collectors getting fleeced. And while it makes my blood boil to see these frauds perpetrated on the market, I have to admit the professional fakers are getting awfully good at their craft. Which also makes my blood boil. Thank goodness for the database that you, Steve, and others have compiled!
BRP
November 5, 2014
Offline
Hi Steve-
No… They look like CRAP!!! What’s interesting to me is that they look like each other. Deeply impressed at the top and very shallow at the bottom.
It’s doubtful that anyone would have (or would make) a “1” numeral die intended to strike that funky impression. You could generate such a mark with a proper numeral die if you struck it at an angle to the work piece, causing the uneven depth of impression. But IMHO it would be an unlucky/unlikely coincidence for someone over stamping an existing “1” with a single number die to hit it in the exact same wrong way twice. Possible??? Sure…
My guess would be that the die holder in the auto-indexing machine (whereby all the numbers were impressed at the same time) was a bit “off” that day. Misalignments (numerals not being in a line – shifted a little up/down) are common, but that one, where die is out of alignment with the surface to be stamped, is plain UGLY… All the other numbers are similarly deeper at the top than the bottom, it’s just more obvious on the “1”s.
Just my opinion….
Hi Mike-
I’m sure you know there are many things to look at if you suspect a barrel is a replica/forgery/fake… What I was pointing to is IMHO the most obvious (not the only) red flag on this barrel.
That said, lately there have been some highly suspect (IMHO) Model 70s turning up with roll marks that look REALLY GOOD… Definitely made with roll dies, either genuine factory dies or VERY accurate copies. Even down to the characteristic wonkiness of some of the tiny letters, like the crooked “O”s in “PROOF”…
Best,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Louis Luttrell said
Happy Thanksgiving!!!Model 70 S/N 213219 was in the survey from its prior incarnation as a MC comb 30-06 Standard rifle in RIA Auction 1028, before it acquired a new barrel, new stock, and total finish restoration. Since RIA does not picture the serial number, it is “possible” that there was a “typo” in their catalog. But it’s doubtful…
Although the Model 70 in 7 M/M was last cataloged in 1949, a 1952 serial number is plausible through barrel clean-up. The last “batch” of 7 M/M rifles are in the 295,000 to 300,000 range (1954) corresponding to the last big barrel clean-up effort. I have S/N 297054, which I believe is genuine.
But even without the prior record, I believe that the barrel markings on S/N 213219 are enough to conclude that the current barrel is a forgery. If one looks closely, ALL of the letters/numbers/dashes are rounded on the ends.
I’ve encountered dozens of similarly marked Model 70 barrels, all in “rare” calibers or configurations. I do not know if they’re done by laser engraving (my guess) or replica roll dies, but they are all very uniform in depth (not a characteristic of a roll die) with rounded strokes. Lasers can’t make square corners. Neither can rotary bit pantograph gravers. Roll dies can, and Winchester’s pre-64 roll dies did.
FWIW… Here are four 7 M/M barrel markings that I think are correct. Two are Style 1 (1936-1941 barrel dates), S/Ns 25488 and 66220, and two are Style 3A (1941-1950 barrel dates), S/Ns 81568 and 297054. You can’t see the difference looking at the pics on a cell phone, but I think it’s clear when enlarged on a computer screen. Roll dies make (at least some) square corners and are often “chip” as they wear (missing bits of letters).
I personally don’t see much “wrong” with the serial number stamp on 213219. The whole serial number is more deeply imprinted at the top than the bottom, not just the “1”s. Sloppy, yes, but not that unusual IMHO…
BTW… The $17,500 asking price for S/N 213219 is only about 3X what the rifle would be worth if it were genuine… 😀
Be careful out there!!!
Lou
Louis Luttrell said
Happy Thanksgiving!!!Model 70 S/N 213219 was in the survey from its prior incarnation as a MC comb 30-06 Standard rifle in RIA Auction 1028, before it acquired a new barrel, new stock, and total finish restoration. Since RIA does not picture the serial number, it is “possible” that there was a “typo” in their catalog. But it’s doubtful…
Although the Model 70 in 7 M/M was last cataloged in 1949, a 1952 serial number is plausible through barrel clean-up. The last “batch” of 7 M/M rifles are in the 295,000 to 300,000 range (1954) corresponding to the last big barrel clean-up effort. I have S/N 297054, which I believe is genuine.
But even without the prior record, I believe that the barrel markings on S/N 213219 are enough to conclude that the current barrel is a forgery. If one looks closely, ALL of the letters/numbers/dashes are rounded on the ends.
I’ve encountered dozens of similarly marked Model 70 barrels, all in “rare” calibers or configurations. I do not know if they’re done by laser engraving (my guess) or replica roll dies, but they are all very uniform in depth (not a characteristic of a roll die) with rounded strokes. Lasers can’t make square corners. Neither can rotary bit pantograph gravers. Roll dies can, and Winchester’s pre-64 roll dies did.
FWIW… Here are four 7 M/M barrel markings that I think are correct. Two are Style 1 (1936-1941 barrel dates), S/Ns 25488 and 66220, and two are Style 3A (1941-1950 barrel dates), S/Ns 81568 and 297054. You can’t see the difference looking at the pics on a cell phone, but I think it’s clear when enlarged on a computer screen. Roll dies make (at least some) square corners and are often “chip” as they wear (missing bits of letters).
I personally don’t see much “wrong” with the serial number stamp on 213219. The whole serial number is more deeply imprinted at the top than the bottom, not just the “1”s. Sloppy, yes, but not that unusual IMHO…
BTW… The $17,500 asking price for S/N 213219 is only about 3X what the rifle would be worth if it were genuine… 😀
Be careful out there!!!
Lou
Excellent post Lou regarding the square vs. round corners on the lettering. If this is the only thing I learn regarding how to spot a fake/fraudulent model 70 barrel, you eliminated a huge amount of risk with this single post. I feel like I need to study forensics before collecting model 70’s now. That is why I have avoided them until I took a gamble on that RCS monogrammed African I recently acquired. I imagine the Africans would be difficult to fake since they have some unique features only to that model, plus the added “RCS” provenance. Anyway, thanks again for your excellent service and expertise to the collector community. I plan on acquiring and studying Roger Rule’s book as well.
Don
Good Stuff Lou
If I could only own one M70 it would be an honest (a little wear would actually be a plus) pre-war .30GOV’T’06 Standard Rifle
November 5, 2014
Offline
Hi Don-
Those two are genuine. They both have pretty good provenance.
S/N 1 was a Texas “truck gun” for many years before anyone realized that the serial number made it “special”. There’s an article on it in the June 1990 issue of American Rifleman. S/N 2 was acquired by Roger Rule from a Mrs. Ethel Lied, widow of the original owner. Here’s some of the S/N 1 story:
I do not know who consigned them to Dwight Van Brunt, but IMHO they are a little overpriced…
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Louis Luttrell said
I do not know who consigned them to Dwight Van Brunt, but IMHO they are a little overpriced…
Lou
Just a “little” overpriced 
?? More like a LOT overpriced !! The seller is going to have them for a very long time at the current (ridiculous) asking price.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
November 7, 2015
Offline
Lou-
I’m surprised they aren’t consigned to a big auction house willing to spend a few bucks marketing these rifles. I’ll always wonder why these rifles weren’t snatched up by a company employee or dolled up as a special gun. I suppose it’s nice they got to spend their early years doing what they were built to do.
Mike
November 5, 2014
Offline
My couple dozen “Turkey Guests” are about to show up. But Bert, I was being ironic…
Those two pieces have been listed “for sale” on-line for quite a while with no takers. IMHO they are MORE than 10X overpriced (for the PAIR)… I suspect they’re up there for “bragging rights” rather than an actual interest in selling… Hence no RIA consignment…
If Mike had found S/N 1 down in TX where it “lived” for many years, I’d have gladly given him $10K for it despite the fact that it’s beat to crap and has two non-factory holes in the barrel. Since he’d probably not have paid more than $500 for it, I’d be offering 20X his “investment”…
The one I regret is S/N 9, which showed up a few years ago. It had one added hole in the bridge and was priced at $7,500. The hole kept me from buying it… But it turned up again a couple years later with a “miraculously healed” bridge and a $20K price tag… Didn’t buy it then either…
Wonder how THAT happened ???
Best,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
November 7, 2015
Offline
Quite honestly IF I owned those two rifles after having paid what the current owner likely paid for them I’d let out some line and troll for awhile. I’m not going anywhere soon, and they’re not going to make another #1 or #2 M70. Unless you’re a numbers guy these rifles are not a big deal. But I’m a numbers guy and I know some folks are nuts about numbers. A serious collector will not buy these rifles, the buyer will probably never have taken a rifle afield. Sad.
Mike
1 Guest(s)
