Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
Original or restored? What do you think? I’m not interested in it but I’m just curious.
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=370252931
I have looked at very few Model 1876 rifles compared to others in the Winchester line up. But I have never seen a barrel address where the upper and lower line of type are diagonally offset as on this rifle. If the are of unequal length the two lines of type are centered relative to each other. In addition I know that there is a dash between WINCHESTER and REPEATING but usually not following REPEATING. Correct me if I am wrong.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
No way is that rifle original. And, I agree with Michael, that barrel address isn’t right.
Good points, Michael. Also, the stamping is quite deep compared to the few Model 76 barrel addresses I have seen, which tend to be a little on the shallow side (although my sampling is quite limited, especially of supposedly pristine mint Model 1876’s).
I believe it to be refinished. The extra screw hole in the butt of the wood points to it was used as a template in a stock duplicator. I have seen the barrel address misaligned like that on 73’s before so I wouldn’t count that against it. I compared several 73 barrel addresses on guns with the same address and found small differences in alignment of the upper and lower lines. I have come to the conclusion that the two lines are made separately. I have one that is off like that one, I will post a picture of it.
Bob
WACA Life Member--- NRA Life Member---- Cody Firearms member since 1991 Researching the Winchester 1873's
Email: [email protected]
I am 99.9% sure that it has been totally redone.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
1873man wrote:
I have seen the barrel address misaligned like that on 73’s before so I wouldn’t count that against it. I compared several 73 barrel addresses on guns with the same address and found small differences in alignment of the upper and lower lines.
Bob,
I have looked at more than 6000 Model 1892 barrel address stamps and have never seen any which are misaligned to the extent as this one is. At most on the "Type 3" address the period after 1884 may or may not appear giving the appearance od uneven lengths. I look forward to seeing your 1873 example(s). I was under the impression that both lines of type were cut on the same stamp.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
Kirk,
It does look very similar right down to the extra dash after REPEATING. I do agree that on the GB rifle the lettering does look much too deep.
Thanks
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
It’s been redone, lots of indicators starting with the barrel addy, hole in the butt as Bob pointed out, a few parts that should be CCH are not.
Here is the barrel address on a 73 deluxe
Bob
http://s1291.photobucket.com/user/1873man/media/IMG_1507_zps082e8c2e.jpg.html
[Image Can Not Be Found]
WACA Life Member--- NRA Life Member---- Cody Firearms member since 1991 Researching the Winchester 1873's
Email: [email protected]
Here is a photo of the nicer one of the two Model 1876 Winchesters I have owned, showing the barrel address. It looks similar, but the imprinted letters and periods don’t seem to go anywhere near as deep as the GG rifle.
http://smg.photobucket.com/user/3855Win/media/Barrel-address-1.jpg.html
[Image Can Not Be Found]
Why would the case colors be more faded and worn on the internal parts, but new looking on the surface? Would that be the case on a rifle with original finish?
bioprofsd said
Why would the case colors be more faded and worn on the internal parts, but new looking on the surface? Would that be the case on a rifle with original finish?
The only internal parts I see are the edges of the tangs. These are not polished as finely in first place, unlike the external parts and would thus not *show* case colors as well as the visible portions. As to the visible portions, all seem much better than the tangs. This could be attributed to the fact that the tangs get more handling and sweat, but the difference here is pretty extreme. I agree it looks redone, but it does not look like Turnbull colors, at least to my eye.
I am NOT and expert. Just an arm chair observer.
Shouldn’t that 340 be stamped on the stock in the tang inlet or under the buttplate and on the butt plate? I haven’t been privileged to inspect many deluxe models but the few I have all had the assembler marks on the three pieces. I thought that I read that somewhere to. I believe it was in the Madis book. ❓
Gene
Look, bottom line is that it’s a restored gun, heck, if you look close enough at the buttstock you can still see the pencil notation of folks that supplied the wood.
So what exactly is gained here by nitpicking all it’s faults
Less knowledgeable collectors learn what to look for when they are trying to decide if a rifle is original or an old restoration.
Mark W. said
Less knowledgeable collectors learn what to look for when they are trying to decide if a rifle is original or an old restoration.
Indeed, we are practicing until we can’t get it wrong.
I agree with Mike Hunter.
No one is misrepresenting the rifle.
Quit nitpicking!
In my opinion, if the rife was not restored it would sell for 40,000+ . Until one sees that rifle with their naked eyes its hard to speculate.
Sure looks like a nice piece to me. Beautiful case colors
Personally I feel that rifle will sell for 15,000+(if its restored) and its worth evey dime. Find another 50-95 deluxe cheaper!
Ok, here’s my take:
1. The barrel addy is a bit funky, there seems to be a halo around a couple of letters, Winchester generally polished these off.
2. The addy is badly off set, first line and second line. I’m going to disagree with Bob a little, I believe that the roll dies had both lines on them, and rolled them at the same time. I have a couple of original roll dies, and have seen numerous factory drawings for roll dies, from what I have seen both lines are on the die and rolled at the same time.
3. The magazine plug on button mag should be case hardened not blued. Winchester used a different wood to bone ratio on these parts, they had a thinner color pattern which tended to silver out quicker.
4. Hammer screws were made out of “screw stock” which is very soft steel, and tended to wear quickly. They were generally case hardened, as well as the butt plate screws. Again Winchester used a different wood/bone ratio which tends to give thinner colors, and I don’t believe they were lacquered like the frame parts, so they silvered or browned out very quickly.
5. As I noted earlier, the stock still has the wood supplier’s marking written on it, also the screw hole that Bob brought up earlier.
6. You can also see remnants of inletting black, where the stock fitter fitted the butt plate.
7. Upper tang us pitted at the wood line, so did Winchester really case hardened a pitted receiver?
I can keep going…but why. Bottom line is that it’s a decent restoration; someone did a good job of bringing a gun back. It is what it is.
1 Guest(s)
