Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Have we got a Frankenchester or a back to the factory one of a kinder?? Circle P barrel and definatley some blueing alteration around the caliber. Maybe a 22 Hornet barrel rechambered and the bolt face opened up?? What are your thoughts?
https://www.gunbroker.com/item/793268669
Erin
It certainly is not Winchester factory work. Caliber has been hand engraved or done on a pantograph. Most likely started out as a larger caliber with large boltface. with Hornet barrel screwed on and rechambered. I have seen a couple of intentionally faked 219 Zipper model 70’s, and both of those had roll stamped barrels. I believe the last one I saw was at a Rock Island Auction 4 or 5 years ago.
Steve
November 5, 2014
Offline
Hi Erin-
Steve’s right of course that it is not factory work, but to me it does look like it MIGHT be a period rifle (and not the all-to-common deliberate attempt at fraud). The 219 Zipper was developed by Winchester in 1937, and maybe somebody around that time wanted to build a M70 chambered for it? 
The rifle has a 1936 M70 action (S/N 1419) with unmolested bridge and blind G&H side mount. While I see the discoloration in the barrel blue around the Model 70 roll stamp, that’s above the area on the bottom of the fore end that shows heavy handling marks, so maybe that’s just finish wear and not touch-up? It’s not obvious to me that the caliber designation stamp was removed (more like it was never there). The barrel has the mail order proof stamped on top and the engraved “219 Zipper” back where the old M54 Nickel Steel barrels were marked (but clearly not an attempt to replicate Winchester’s “219 ZIPPER” die). The front sight is a Lyman 31W (only used until about 1941) and the slot blank might be a correct Lyman 12S. Is it possible somebody mail ordered an unchambered .22 cal barrel (or .22 HORNET barrel) unmarked as to caliber (???) and then converted a standard action to handle the .30 WCF case head? It would be interesting to see what the barrel is dated. It’s certainly possible to convert a standard M70 action (with #5 magazine box and #4 ejector) to handle the rimmed case. Winchester even (allegedly) did it once or twice. 
My only real knocks on the gun (arguing against my speculation that it is a legit period conversion) are that the bottom metal (at least) has certainly been reblued, the opened up bolt face looks too clean (unfired) given the considerable handling wear on the stock, and I’m not sure why the barrel would be D&T for a scope block if the plan was to use a side mount scope. So maybe it was indeed cobbled together recently, i.e. Frankenchester
While I would not want to buy the gun, I wouldn’t mind having the chance to take it apart and see if I could figure out what was done when.
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Good info guys, thanks for the input. One has to wonder why not just buy a 70 chambered in 220 Swift……… Reminds me of a 70 I came across several years ago. It was a super grade 22 Hornet that someone paid a lot of money to turn into a 243. 
They had the original hornet barrel opened up and rifling recut to 24 caliber and then took a hand letter X punch and proceeded to XXXXXXX over the 22 Hornet. Not to mention opening the bolt face, changing the mag box etc, etc.
Best regards,
Erin
I’ve seen the gun .the place selling it and the owner are idiots.
Not technically qualified to participate meaningfully here. Just that for the life of me, never to understand any photos in sincere effort to sell a pricey gun looking like they came out of a Brownie box camera! The two lead in pix in just that category. Leaving me speculating the seller(s) needed to sober up before posting those pix. Careless effort at best, sinister agenda at worst.
Just my take.
iskra said
Not technically qualified to participate meaningfully here. Just that for the life of me, never to understand any photos in sincere effort to sell a pricey gun looking like they came out of a Brownie box camera! The two lead in pix in just that category. Leaving me speculating the seller(s) needed to sober up before posting those pix. Careless effort at best, sinister agenda at worst.
Just my take.
Careless or purposeful effort? With digital photography there is no excuse for bad pictures.
November 7, 2015
Offline
Chuck said
Careless or purposeful effort? With digital photography there is no excuse for bad pictures.
Excuse me? My pics pretty much suck in spite of the technology available, LOL. I’m trying to do better so please cut me some slack. 😉 I was equally handicapped with an SLR unless I was shooting Kodachrome outdoors. OTOH when someone knows what they’re doing with a digital camera I can see more in pics than I’ll notice in person.
Mike
TXGunNut said
Excuse me? My pics pretty much suck in spite of the technology available, LOL. I’m trying to do better so please cut me some slack. 😉 I was equally handicapped with an SLR unless I was shooting Kodachrome outdoors. OTOH when someone knows what they’re doing with a digital camera I can see more in pics than I’ll notice in person.
Mike
OK you’re off the hook. With digital photos you have the chance to look at what you took before you use it. If it isn’t good delete it and take as many as necessary to get a good one. Although I have been using SLR’s and DSLR’s since the early 70’s, I use my I phone a lot then email the photo to myself. 
A bit of tongue biting concerning your initial ‘photography-challenged’ commentary Mike, but affording a silent pass. Yet now, further Post & comment. Responding here to further speak my mind.
First, the objective circumstance as viewed in listing. Two, perceptively pivotal lead-in photos, notably poor. Yet moreover, notably contrasting with many close-up’s typically presenting geometrically greater challenges in reflecting good ‘details’ than more focal-length distant ones. That itself something of anomaly in context of ‘camera challenged’ operator.
Second, the very fact of actual circumstances in reference to the particular category of goods. No “truck gun” subject matter here! Rather, concerning a “quite pricey” rifle! Reasonable expectation, comparable quality photos! Where not, to suggest inference of ‘with agenda’ intent.
Third, all wrapped in matter of “objective buyer expectations” taking precedence over “subjective seller excuses”, no matter how real. Buyers rightfully relying upon ‘what’ & ‘manner’ wares advertised; written and depicted. Further, their only window to ‘you – as seller’.
Perhaps subjectively to grant your “break”. Little difference here. Yet, result oriented, ‘reasonable’ excuse to remain lacking. Perception of seller shooting self in foot at best. Sorry!
No offense intended here. Speaking straight, as I would to my own son.
Resulting frank…
My take
John
November 7, 2015
Offline
All kidding aside I’ve been disappointed in some pics in “For Sale” listings, some quality issues and omissions do seem to be deliberate. Several guys on here seem to have a special talent for taking quality digital pics and I truly am in awe of their ability. It’s little more than lighting, focal point and composition but ….oh well.
Mike
iskra said
A bit of tongue biting concerning your initial ‘photography-challenged’ commentary Mike, but affording a silent pass. Yet now, further Post & comment. Responding here to further speak my mind.
First, the objective circumstance as viewed in listing. Two, perceptively pivotal lead-in photos, notably poor. Yet moreover, notably contrasting with many close-up’s typically presenting geometrically greater challenges in reflecting good ‘details’ than more focal-length distant ones. That itself something of anomaly in context of ‘camera challenged’ operator.
Second, the very fact of actual circumstances in reference to the particular category of goods. No “truck gun” subject matter here! Rather, concerning a “quite pricey” rifle! Reasonable expectation, comparable quality photos! Where not, to suggest inference of ‘with agenda’ intent.
Third, all wrapped in matter of “objective buyer expectations” taking precedence over “subjective seller excuses”, no matter how real. Buyers rightfully relying upon ‘what’ & ‘manner’ wares advertised; written and depicted. Further, their only window to ‘you – as seller’.Perhaps subjectively to grant your “break”. Little difference here. Yet, result oriented, ‘reasonable’ excuse to remain lacking. Perception of seller shooting self in foot at best. Sorry!
No offense intended here. Speaking straight, as I would to my own son.
Resulting frank…
My take
John
I am not sure that Mike took the pictures of the gun shown on Gunbroker?? I believe Mike lives in Texas and the poster/seller is from Illinois.
First let me say that I recently re-upped as a member of the WACA having dropped out in the early 90’s…
Living in Wy allows me the opportunity to get to the Cody show regularly but still the last time was 2004. Given that we always attended the “WCA Museum Auction” –
Regarding the .219 Zipper. While my brother and I attended the Auction there at the Buffalo Bill Historical Center in the late 80’s/ early 90’s we witnessed the sale of a “Museum tagged” .219 Zipper that sold for $25K+. As I remembered it, it was lettered, had been a limited run test rifle based on a .22 Hornet? Purchased by phone by unnamed buyer at the Museum’s Auction. The star attraction at the show that year.
I’m on the fence now-he just dropped it 200.00.
Makes me want to make a move.
The sad thing, someone will come along at some point and claim this “treasure”!
Hey Guys! Just joined the WACA a few minutes and wanted to share what I just found.
Came across this thread while I was doing some research on a gun I just saw on Gunbroker, a supposed Model 70 chambered in .219 Zipper. After looking through the pics on GB and seeing the SN# 1419, it seems to be the rifle you all were discussing a several years ago. Looks like someone is trying to pass it along already.
Cody
November 5, 2014
Offline
Yup… That’s the gun. Attached below are the poor quality photos that went with the original GB ad:
The current photos, while more numerous, aren’t much better. At least this is a penny start no reserve auction. Be interesting to see what the gun eventually brings.
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Present owner should have sent it to Amoskeag or RI, where there’s no doubt an expert who’d “authenticate” the gun.
Old fakes never die; they just move along to the next auction.
1 Guest(s)
