Log In
September 21, 2016
Offline
On another forum there is an ongoing discussion regarding the “358” barrel stamp on the Pre-64 Model 70 358 WIN. rifles. Specifically whether or not some (or any) of the rifles currently up for sale on the web are authentic. The concern is focused on the position of the “5” in “358” being lower than the “3” and “8”.
Some speculate that this may be a 308 barrel stamp that has been modified.
I have an early, low comb 358 FW that I’m certain is original. It has what I now call the “low 5” barrel stamp, as many other 358 rifles seem to have.
Another observation is that the center of the top flat of my “5” seems to be mushroomed out a but where it was struck. This is also found in other examples of the 358 FW I’ve seen.
Im interested to hear from or see pictures of any 358 owners out there who would be willing to check their guns.
Are all 358 FW’s struck this way?
” src=”
” width=”2862″ />
” src=”
” width=”1130″ />
October 11, 2012
Offline
I have never owned a 358 FW for this reason.
The ones I have looked at the roll stamp never looked “right”.
The two M88 in .358 that I have owned, the stamping was perfectly aligned….
September 21, 2016
Offline
Gregory said
I have never owned a 358 FW for this reason.The ones I have looked at the roll stamp never looked “right”.
The two M88 in .358 that I have owned, the stamping was perfectly aligned….
Gregory, that actually answers a question I had forgot to ask, but wondered about when considering the 358 FW’s.
I questioned if Winchester would have used the same caliber roll stamp for both the 70 and the 88.
Thank you for that bit of info!
November 8, 2011
Offline
I’ve had 3 FW 358’s. I looked each one over VERY closely when I got it and I don’t recall seeing this misalignment. I have seen a lot of 358’s that have it and I have always steered clear of them because of it. It looks like I may have been mistaken in my thinking. Could be the guys making fakes make the caliber marking look better than the originals 🙂
I don’t have any 358’s now so I can’t check them now.
September 21, 2016
Offline
I’ve spoken with a gentleman that says he bought his 358 FW brand new and his stamp is misaligned identically to mine, including the top of the “5” being mushroomed a bit.
His was also an early low comb variation, as are all the others I’ve been able to clearly compare and match as having the “low 5”.
Im interested to hear from people with the Monte Carlo/raised comb/later variation to see if their stamp is aligned or misaligned.
Ive seen a couple later Monte Carlo variations with perfectly aligned stamps, but ALWAYS on near mint condition examples… which always makes me question authenticity in the first place.
November 5, 2014
Offline
Hi Everyone-
I personally cannot answer this question with certainty. I too have seen 358 WIN caliber designation stamps with a ‘misaligned 5’ as well as ones with a perfectly aligned ‘5’. If the former were one-of-a-kind, I’d have to conclude it was a rebored and remarked 308 WIN barrel even if traces of the original ‘0’ were not detectable. But having seen several of the funny looking ones I have to guess either that a roll die like that was used by the factory OR somebody mass produced fake 358 WIN FWT barrels, got everything else right, and then did a sloppy job with the stamp.
For comparison, here’s one (screenshot of a photo provided by Tedk) with the perfect ‘358’. I have one M70 FWT 358 WIN and as I recall (it’s in a safe in another State) it looks like this one:
To make matters more confusing, here’s a photo of a M88 358 WIN from GI/Perry County. Note that while the ‘5’ is perfectly aligned, the die uses a different ‘3’:
Two points to make that I think are valid. First is that by 1955, Winchester was using one-piece roll marking dies that incorporated the caliber designation into the same die as the Model/Barrel Address. So the M88 would have its own marking dies, and evidently at least some of those used a different ‘3’. Maybe (???) there was some variation in the dies used to mark the 2000 or so M70 FWT barrels such that both variations are correct (???). In any event, since it was a roll marking die, I’d expect the numerals to be of consistent depth in a factory ‘358 WIN’ stamp. It is interesting that in the ‘misaligned ‘5’ stamp (as I recall of others as well) the bottom of the ‘5’ is aligned with the bottom of the ‘3’ and ‘8’, it’s just that the ‘5’ is not quite as tall. That would be possible using a roll marking die… 
Second is that the M70 358 WIN was only ever catalogued with the low comb stock. If you find one with a MC stock it was either replaced or ordered that way. But it was not bought from inventory.
One other point. The MC stock style was approved in ’51 and cataloged beginning in ’52 for both regular and FWT rifles, including the earliest FWTs (when 308 WIN as the only chambering). From the point that the offerings were expanded in ’55, the 308 WIN, 270 WIN and 30-06 SPRG were cataloged with both LC and MC, the 243 MC was only offered with the MC stock, and the 358 WIN was only listed with the LC stock. The LC stocks were dropped from the catalog by about 1959, with the (plastic butt plate) MC stocks only made until 1963.
If anyone has the definitive answer to this, I’d love to read it!!!
Best,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
1 Guest(s)
