Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
November 5, 2014
Offline
All-
I know little about Winchester ephemera (boxes, tags, paperwork, etc.) beyond what I can see pictured in books. While I like nice condition guns, I’ve not been too concerned about the packaging.
Well the recent discussion about “NIB” Winchesters, in particular the sentiment that “if it’s for sale it’s a fake” got me curious. So I went through my “virtual” Model 70 collection… Meaning images of “NIB” rifles I’d downloaded from the internet that included pictures of the box labels. (It costs only a little time to “collect” guns this way – And one cannot make “costly” mistakes!!!) 
Then I arranged them into chronological order based on serial number of the gun inside.
As a disclaimer, none of these images are from GB and only one is from RIA. Also they represent a fair span of time, maybe 10 years. Not a search done today for “NIB” Winchesters on the market at the same time. So here are 15 of them…
My question, if anyone would care to comment, is which of these boxes would cause you to immediately turn and walk away, based only on the label? With only two exceptions, the guns inside these boxes looked “new”. I am not asking anyone to reveal any “trade secrets”, just say “good” or “bad” based only on the label (not why you feel that way). I’m just trying to educate myself, so no worries if there are no replies…
Set 1 (blue and white labels):
Since #1 and #3 look the same (and bracket #2) in year of manufacture, I’m assuming that #2 has a “home made” label. Am I wrong? Box #1 may have belonged to another gun (serial number re-written) but is it an original box label?
Set 2 (yellow and red labels):
I’ve thought the Alaskan boxes (#9, 10 and 14) looked OK, since they match a picture shown in Rule’s book (figure 3-17) of an Alaskan box. What about #11? VARMIT as opposed to VARMINT? Is this an example of a very good label faker who cannot spell, or was the factory going “rustic”? Anybody got a 1960 varmint rifle box handy? I’ve wondered about that one…
As for box #15, I thought that the pre-64 plaid boxes had yellow/red labels. Is this a “pre-64” gun housed in a “post-63” box? Or am I wrong about when the label printing changed?
Any comments, humorous or otherwise, would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
A label is so easy to duplicate by someone with the facilities that you could never tell the difference between an original label and a copy. A skilled printer can take a real label and make an exact duplicate of it, indistinguishable from the original. If the duplicate is not an exact rendition of the original, all that means is that the printer was unskilled or did not have an original to copy. Counterfeit money is now so well done that only the most highly skilled technicians can detect it, and they even admit that they may be missing counterfeits that are undetectable. You may be able to detect the poor label copies, but you will never be able to tell skillfully reproduced labels. Plus Winchester may have changed suppliers, even temporarily, and even the original suppliers may have changed their label style, paper, or font for some production reason. Bottom line is that you may be able to detect poor label copies, but any of the labels shown may be skillful reproductions, artfully aged.
November 5, 2014
Offline
Hi wolfbait-
I certainly agree with all you say. Thanks for the reply.
I guess what drove my question is that there is not much information out there (available to people like me) about how Winchester labels evolved over time. Not whether original labels can be copied/counterfeited (they certainly can). For example I can find only one photo of a M70 box end label in the whole of Rule or Whitaker’s M70 books (on purpose?). Bob Rennenberg has more information in his M94 book, but I only own the first edition.
How did the label printing evolve over time?
It’s difficult to independently reconstruct a chronology using information collected from the internet, b/c the general perception is that if it’s for sale it’s a fake. Probably true… But I’m not asking whether the pictured labels are “real”, rather I want to know if the label printing is correct for the period of manufacture.
There’s a nice book on “Colt ephemera” that has been published, but Winchesters have nothing comparable that I know of.
Best,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
OK, with your asking about faked labels I thought that was your concern. But again, even during an era of production, label manufacturers may have changed. Label design may have changed, and changed back again. Boxes changed, brochures changed, and advertising changed. Dating may be difficult to prove, unless it is obviously incorrect. “Varmit” on a box? Sounds peculiar to me, but who knows? Maybe the guy ordering that batch of labels had a sense of humor. On the Colt forum the ebay box guy Blovit is continually discussed. Experts will show one of his box labels and point out something on the label that “proves” it is fake and not of the correct era design. Other experts will concur. Then another person will show his box label on the same era gun as discussed that was “proven” fake, a gun this person was the first owner of and bought brand new, and the label is exactly like the one “proven” fake. Obviously it can get confusing, and just when you think you have the answer someone comes up with proof that your conclusions were incorrect.
November 5, 2014
Offline
Wolfbait-
Right you are… Pretty much why I’ve never been into boxes. “Buy the gun, not the box” (or story, as is often stated).
There have to be some general trends in printed ephemera, though. Certainly an early gun with a red/yellow label box is “wrong”. And labels certainly changed over time with respect to Winchester/Olin Corporation designation, etc. But how/when?
As far as I can tell that information (which admittedly represents “trends” – since old batches of labels would likely have been used up before new ones were ordered from the printer) is not available and can’t be independently reconstructed due to the prevalence of fake boxes (and the relative rarity of both real and fake NIB guns). Labels include catalog number/chambering, so are very specific, e.g. a 243 WIN “VARMINT” RIFLE label may/may not be printed like a 220 SWIFT “VARMIT” RIFLE. 
Think about it… The WACA folks who are conducting surveys of their favorite model face a similar problem, as evidenced by examples where the same serial number has been encountered in two different configurations. Some fraction of the data collected will inevitably be wrong b/c old guns have been altered (maybe more than once). But if one gets enough data (especially from rifles that are old/worn/drilled/modified and not worth restoring so not likely to have been faked) one can get a pretty accurate estimate of when certain manufacturing processes changed, and end up with something really valuable…
It’s just simple statistics based on the projected accuracy of the sample. As you likely know, it’s called a “power calculation”; a function that incorporates estimated sample variation (error) and expected effect size to determine the sample number needed to achieve a given level of confidence. Who’d’ve ever thought gun collectors could be so sophisticated… But they are… 
Just trying to expand my horizons. Or entertain our fellow members… I’m sure I would have flunked graduate level statistics if I’d’ve ever taken it…
Cheers,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Certainly generalizations from evidence can be made and will be mostly accurate. Strange things happen though that confuse the issue. My friend sent a 30 year old gun to Colt for repair. They returned the gun to him in a current, incorrect for the era box of that model. They even put the serial number on the label, perhaps to keep the parts together as it moved around. In the future, someone will scratch their head about that gun/box configuration. In a period of transition at Winchester, a crate of older style boxes may have been located long after new style boxes began being used. Throw them away? Probably not, use them up. Winchester probably had many work stations in this era of high production. Open a drawer and find a box of the older style labels. Throw them away? Heck, use them up. Who knows? That Varmit label may have been an uncaught error that was quickly corrected. If legitimate it may be a very expensive, desirable box. Like you said, research will give us some guidelines to follow. Just don’t automatically consider them absolutes. And then again, if you are considering buying a gun in a box, like the looks of it and would like to own the set, maybe just buy the darn thing, enjoy it, and don’t worry too much about it. Some people consider firearms boxes historical artifacts, to other people they are just pleasing decorations.
November 5, 2014
Offline
Hi wolfbait-
You put your finger precisely on one of the tensions that comes up all the time here… True… Almost anything is possible. But on average things should ‘average out’ and reflect the ‘norm’ as people understand it. The exception may prove the rule, but only when the exception isn’t the rule…. Maybe now I understand FromTheWoods bucket analogy…
So… If I m a prospective buyer, I want something that no ‘expert’ will question, b/c it looks ‘like it should’. Such objects will always generate the most interest b/c they’ll generate the least doubt. Something that requires ‘explanation’ will always be a problem. Not that it is not plausible (or even real)… Just b/c it might be harder to sell the next time around.
There is a business side to all this, after all. Maybe not for me, but for my heirs…
Thanks.
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Louis Luttrell said
Hi wolfbait-
I certainly agree with all you say. Thanks for the reply.
I guess what drove my question is that there is not much information out there (available to people like me) about how Winchester labels evolved over time. Not whether original labels can be copied/counterfeited (they certainly can). For example I can find only one photo of a M70 box end label in the whole of Rule or Whitaker’s M70 books (on purpose?). Bob Rennenberg has more information in his M94 book, but I only own the first edition.
How did the label printing evolve over time?
It’s difficult to independently reconstruct a chronology using information collected from the internet, b/c the general perception is that if it’s for sale it’s a fake. Probably true… But I’m not asking whether the pictured labels are “real”, rather I want to know if the label printing is correct for the period of manufacture.
There’s a nice book on “Colt ephemera” that has been published, but Winchesters have nothing comparable that I know of.
Best,
Lou
Lou,
Ned Scwing illustrates boxes and paperwork from various eras in his model 61/62 slide action book.
Al
Louis Luttrell said
Hi wolfbait-
You put your finger precisely on one of the tensions that comes up all the time here… True… Almost anything is possible. But on average things should ‘average out’ and reflect the ‘norm’ as people understand it. The exception may prove the rule, but only when the exception isn’t the rule…. Maybe now I understand FromTheWoods bucket analogy…
So… If I m a prospective buyer, I want something that no ‘expert’ will question, b/c it looks ‘like it should’. Such objects will always generate the most interest b/c they’ll generate the least doubt. Something that requires ‘explanation’ will always be a problem. Not that it is not plausible (or even real)… Just b/c it might be harder to sell the next time around.
There is a business side to all this, after all. Maybe not for me, but for my heirs…
Thanks.
Lou
Everyone has their own objective in collecting guns. To me they are just something to enjoy, I have no other motives. For over 50 years guns have brought me great pleasure. I have gotten bargains, and I have paid too much. But I have enjoyed them all. Considering their ownership a business would take the fun out of it for me. My friends buy motorcycles, boats, ATVs, and sports cars, and lose thousands of dollars from the get go. They do not care, they spend their money on items that bring joy to their lives. That’s how I feel about my guns. My heirs will do just fine, my bequest is just a freebie for them anyway. Back to labels. It is an area ripe for research. We must also be critical of the research. As great as Madis was, we now know that much of his previously accepted as fact information is incorrect. And I still do not get the bucket thing.
November 5, 2014
Offline
Al-
Thanks…. Truly… Just ordered a copy from Amazon.com.
Besides, my brother (not me) has an interest in M61s and owns several of them, including some ‘oddballs’… (Who’s that Routledge guy and what’s up with the the ‘Mosquito’ thing anyway? Didn’t they make this miniature target thrower thing to go with the gun? I believe he’s got one…) Maybe we should check if that rifle is ‘real” b/c I’ve NO idea…
The book will some in handy either way. Awesome…
Best,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
November 5, 2014
Offline
Wolfbait-
Maybe the ‘bucket’ is one of those existential things you’ve got to dwell on for a while and then get someone to explain to you… The analogy was apt, if obtuse at first glance… GOD I love these guys…
I do not collect with an eye toward future sale. My ‘heirs’ will come out OK in any event. Rather, I would like nothing more than to give my/my Dad’s M70 collection away (don’t want a tax deduction either).
But the same rules apply… To donate my M70 collection it would have to pass muster with the ‘experts’ (for whom I have great respect BTW…). Those who are looking for faults at every turn. As they should…
Cheers,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
I started to collect guns over 50 years ago. It was different then, a simpler time. We all just bought what we liked and didn’t worry about the details. It was fun, and fun is all it was expected to be. It morphed over time to where most people seemed to be collector/dealers. Monetary appreciation and investment value became important elements of the equation. Your collection became part of your financial portfolio instead of just a hobby. Collecting was less worrisome in times past. I bet those guns enriched your Dad’s life and brought him great pleasure.
Louis Luttrell said
Al-
Thanks…. Truly… Just ordered a copy from Amazon.com.
Besides, my brother (not me) has an interest in M61s and owns several of them, including some ‘oddballs’… (Who’s that Routledge guy and what’s up with the the ‘Mosquito’ thing anyway? Didn’t they make this miniature target thrower thing to go with the gun? I believe he’s got one…) Maybe we should check if that rifle is ‘real” b/c I’ve NO idea…
The book will some in handy either way. Awesome…
Best,
Lou
Lou,
I’m not an expert on the model 61, but have a few. Ned Schwing’s book on the model talks about the Routledge bore, as well as “Winchester” smooth bores, and the miniature target throwers, but I don’t think goes into considerable detail on them. Still a highly informative book for anyone starting out in collecting model 61’s/62’s. The chapters on boxes and paperwork helps me in determining what is correct or not for a specific time period, and I’ve used this as a guideline for other Winchester models.
Al
tionesta1 said
Louis Luttrell said
Al-
Thanks…. Truly… Just ordered a copy from Amazon.com.
Besides, my brother (not me) has an interest in M61s and owns several of them, including some ‘oddballs’… (Who’s that Routledge guy and what’s up with the the ‘Mosquito’ thing anyway? Didn’t they make this miniature target thrower thing to go with the gun? I believe he’s got one…) Maybe we should check if that rifle is ‘real” b/c I’ve NO idea…
The book will some in handy either way. Awesome…
Best,
Lou
Lou,
I’m not an expert on the model 61, but have a few. Ned Schwing’s book on the model talks about the Routledge bore, as well as “Winchester” smooth bores, and the miniature target throwers, but I don’t think goes into considerable detail on them. Still a highly informative book for anyone starting out in collecting model 61’s/62’s. The chapters on boxes and paperwork helps me in determining what is correct or not for a specific time period, and I’ve used this as a guideline for other Winchester models.
Al
Lou,
Also, Bob Renneberg’s Model 94, second edition book has a good chapter on packaging, listing various eras.
Al
November 5, 2014
Offline
Thank you, Al for your help answering my original question.
My brother has a number of M61s and I’m sure he has a copy of Ned Schwing’s book. I know little about them, so it will be fun to learn. For me the enjoyment in collecting anything old is in the details of how it was made, what changed over time, etc. In other words, what’s “original manufacture” and what is not.
I think I’ll have the find Bob Rennenberg’s second edition M94 book now as well. I only have the first edition.
Best,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
November 5, 2014
Offline
Hi Wolfbait-
The fact that ‘business’ has intruded into an amateur (meaning for the love of it) hobby is indeed sad, but an inescapable fact of life. That WACA members try, on their own, to shed light into otherwise murky corners is a wonderful thing.
To highlight your last post, here’s a ‘funny’ story… I have two M70 rifles that my late Dad bought from Roger Rule (via Shotgun News ads) in the early 1980s. I guess that after Mr. Rule’s book was published he downsized his holdings (or sold them off entirely?)…
One of these two is s/n 346487 (1955 s/n). A 270 WIN Super Grade rifle with the later style of low comb SG stock. Like new condition… Not a scratch… Now… according to Mr. Rule’s book, 1955 was a key year in SG rifles, b/c that was when rust blued barrels, jeweled action components, and steel pistol grip caps came into play (along with barrels stamped ‘SUPER’).
Well… This rifle has a hard rubber pistol grip cap and the regular metal finishes, despite the later style cheek piece (this is correct for 1952-1954/5 SG rifles). Is that OK…? Probably yes. Interestingly, it also has a Lyman 16B rear sight (correct for MC combs), when (according to Mr. Rule – who owned the gun – and contemporary factory catalogs) it should have a Winchester 22K with 3C elevator. Is that bad? I doubt it… (If anyone cares, it does carry a Redfield No. 255 front sight). Perhaps Mr. Rule played with his guns (too) or perhaps (as you’ve said) there was considerable overlap/variability. Indicating that his wonderful book (and factory catalogs?) represent “guidelines more that actual rules” (to steal a phrase from ‘Pirates of the Caribbean’).
But any newcomer/’potential investor’ who has studied the gospel according to Mr. Rule, and who was considering the purchase of this rifle (Which is not for sale… BTW… None of my M70s are…) might conclude it was an altered gun b/c of the absence of a 22K rear sight…
Another example…. I’ve wondered about s/n 166387 (1950 s/n) pictured in Mr. Rule’s book in the chapter on styles (p 78). A 250-3000 Savage SG with the later style low comb stock. According to the book, the cheek piece style did not change from ‘oval’ to ‘full fashioned’ until 1952. So the gun is not correct as defined by the person who ‘wrote the book’… But it’s ‘in the book’ nonetheless… So was Mr. Rule including ‘fakes’ his own book, or tacitly acknowledging the variability that may legitimately be out there.
At the end of the day, having a ‘definitive’ book is a two-edged sword. On the one hand it makes information available that can protect the unwary from the unscrupulous operators everyone knows are out there. That is a major plus!!! On the other, a ‘bible’ creates an unambiguous standard used adversely to judge pieces that might actually be legit…
Best,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Here is an another question. Is anyone in the future even going to care about boxes and labels? I don’t know much about 70s. I collect mainly antique Winchesters and Colts. At every show we talk about how most everyone interested in antiques is 60+, just a few in their 50s, and a handful younger. Collecting firearms is pretty much a one generation phenomenon. Even when I started in the 1960s it was really a niche hobby. Prices were low, with most antiques selling for much less than similar new guns. Then those of us with expendable income pushed the prices ever forward, in some cases to ridiculous levels. We had the money, so we made this a big money game. Young people are taught in school today to stay away from the evils- drugs, alcohol, and guns. Draw a picture of a gun in your notebook in school and you get expelled. Kids are socialized against guns. Of course very rural areas are probably different, but that is a small and deceasing percent of the population. I find many young people do like guns, black guns. Semi-auto pistols and ARs. They are growing up with computers and cell phones starting in grade school. They are continually exposed to new, advanced technology, and they love it. We who collect antiques are not fooling ourselves into thinking today’s youngsters will suddenly get interested in 1873 Winchesters and Colt SAAs. Growing up with Stallone, Schwarzenegger, and other action heroes shooting only hi cap autos, will today’s youngsters develop an interest in old bolt action rifles that cost 4 times what their prized fast firing guns cost? What is the future of Model 70s, and will today’s young people give a hoot about a cardboard box and a paper label?
November 5, 2014
Offline
Hi wolfbait-
Certainly a pointed, if disheartening, appraisal. My late father, who was born in 1927, grew up in relative poverty (not dirt poor) in rural VA, where firearms/hunting were part of life. My brother and I, on the other hand, grew up in suburban PA, reading Jack O’Connor’s hunting tales in Outdoor Life. Maybe that’s partly where the fascination with ‘The Rifleman’s Rifle’ came from… Ironically, it was us ‘kids’ who got our dad interested in collecting M70s back in the late 1970’s when we were college age (and broke – of course). My kids grew up in more Ritzy neighborhoods, and are of the tech-saavy generation. They enjoy shooting and know how to safely handle firearms, but thus far at least their interests do not extend to collecting old guns. (Through all the generations we seem to share an OCD streak that lends itself to collecting/organizing/studying something or other in minute detail – as a hobby/relaxation).
There may indeed be a generational ‘bubble’ in gun collecting as a hobby, and likely the ‘hot’ areas in gun collecting will evolve over time. Certainly, I got interested in the guns I associated with “adventure” as a kid, and decided to focus on just one model so as to be able to pursue (afford) as “complete” a collection as I could find (that’s the OCD streak). I could not collect M73s or M76s, for example, b/c I’d have to have good condition examples of “all of them” (and I do not own an oil company). Besides, with M70s I had somewhat of an advantage in that many of the rarer chamberings/configurations I have were acquired by my Dad decades ago. Not claiming they’re all “real” (there was mischief going on then too), just that they look “real” to me and were not faked (refinished/refurbished – as they say at RIA) recently.
Your points about gun collecting as an “investment strategy” are well taken. The very best stuff will always be in high demand; I think that as long as we are allowed to own firearms in this country there will be enough interest to maintain that segment of the market. But, just like any other investment bubble it will burst if the current level of demand is generationally driven and new collectors are drawn to other interests or scared off by rampant forgeries (that only an “expert” can detect with the help of a mass spectrometer).
So collect what interests you enough to study/develop your own expertise, and don’t consider your gun collection as a sure-fire alternative to starting a college fund.
Just my opinion…
Lou
P.S. My initial post on box labels (intended to be humorous more than anything – I’m still curious about ‘VARMIT’!!!) simply reflects my relative ignorance of Winchester ephemera (as opposed to a current/future plan to collect boxed guns). I’m not buying much these days… My thanks again to Al for the book recommendations. I’ve ordered both and will study them…
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
“Varmit” is an example of “anything can happen”. The label looks good to my eye. Maybe the guy who ordered those labels hunted these critters all of his life, everyone he knew called them dang Varmits, and he thought that was the correct name. Maybe it was a typo on the order form. Maybe the procurement person at Winchester had a sense of humor and got a chuckle out of it. That was the era when Yosemite Sam said “Rackin’ Frackin’ Varmit Rabbit!!” The labels may have actually been used until the error was noticed. It is another example of, just because it looks “wrong”, it may not really be “wrong”, as far as an evaluation of a factory produced item goes.
November 5, 2014
Offline
Just wanted to thank Al (tionesta1) for his recommendations on books containing information about Winchester boxes, labels, etc.
I’ve gotten copies of both Ned Schwing’s M61/62 book and Bob Renneberg’s 2nd edition M94 books, and both are helpful. Obviously, both are also great references for the firearms they describe.
Maybe someday, one of the WACA members will take upon themselves (the Herculean task) of publishing a Winchester equivalent of John Ogle’s “The Book of Colt Paper – 1834-2011”, a very well organized, informative, and colorful presentation of everything from Colt boxes/instructions/tags to catalogs and advertising artwork.
Best,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
1 Guest(s)
