Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
Bob, Yes, I got that. And thank you, as it brought back things to mind that had gone bye bye. Bottom line my memory of abrasive removal of plating inside was needed apparently to be able to re assemble the carbine. For the others not privy to the old discussion, the carbine was plated after leaving the factory but was “of the period”. I’ve been told by one who is more knowledgeable than I that it appears done by Nimschke so that gives an idea of the time period of the plating as well. I am guessing the 1866 in question may have had plating removed in critical dimensions to facilitate its re assembly and functionality. Tim
Tim:
Your comments regarding machined metallic internal surfaces are of great interest. Yes, some post plating interactive surfaces probably needed re-machining for proper action. The more precision machined internal INTERACTIVE surfaces of an standard brass sixty-six would be of interest, maybe a good place to look. Perhaps with minimal dis-assembly. Please note, At this point no DIS-assembly by me has occurred, much more thinking needed. However , the attached close-up photos of the hinging brass cleaning rod hatch, this is an internal component. Look it over, meanwhile lots of photos of the rest of the Carbine. Forgive, my delay on reposting, you all have been terriffic. I encourage more questions and will do my best.
John M
John,
After seeing these photos I believe the guns been replated. What catches my eye is the scratching through the barrel address in particular the angled one through “ARMS”. Winchester would not of had scratching on a new gun and plate it. A scratch that deep in steel should not have plating in it if scratched after plating. I see that on the receiver but you could say its a dent in soft metal. The other thing that didn’t look right is the way the nickel has worn. Its too thick for Winchester nickel and is primarily wearing on the corners which I don’t normally see.
Bob
WACA Life Member--- NRA Life Member---- Cody Firearms member since 1991 Researching the Winchester 1873's
Email: [email protected]
Online
I tend to agree with Bob. The plating looks to shiny and silver looking to me. I’m used to more of a grey appearance.
Maverick
WACA #8783 - Checkout my Reloading Tool Survey!
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-research-surveys/winchester-reloading-tool-survey/
Bob and Maverick:
Forensically, your comments make a lot sense. A diagonal scratch in “ARMS” to your point would not be present from the factory prior to Ni plating. I will go to more magnification and look closely at this location and any other similar surfaces to consider scratch vs den, they are different. The grey vs shiny surfaces as noted by Maverick are yet another consideration. I personally can not comment on Ni plating process and ageing on 66’s vs “less scarce” 73’s etc. I am doing a show north of Richmond this weekend and will have the carbine with me. Send me message if any are in attendance and want to look things over personally. JM
1 Guest(s)
