Log In
March 20, 2009
Offline
Here is an interesting occurrence that I am at a loss to explain. The serial number on this standard sporting rifle with OB FM CB is 659069 which corresponds to 1912 production yet the upper tang stamp has “MODEL 92” which does not appear in production until 8 years later at the begining of 1920!!! Did the serialized receiver act as a paper weight for 8 years years before it was picked up, had the tang stamped and finally used in the production of a full rifle? It is my understanding that the tang stamp is applied before the receiver is blued and the serial number afterwards. Then how did a receiver, with a supposed post 1920 production time frame based on the use of the tang stamp, end up getting serialized with a number from 8 years prior?
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
November 1, 2013
Offline
twobit said
Did the serialized receiver act as a paper weight for 8 years years before it was picked up, had the tang stamped and finally used in the production of a full rifle?
Why not, if it had been at the bottom of a parts bin, or was otherwise misplaced? Stranger parts mismatches have occurred.
December 21, 2006
Offline
Michael You know and I know there were some odd things done at the factory, at least I,ve seen some “different” pieces. All We “experts have to go by is the knowledge that others have passed down, our own observations, and literature from a long time ago. Sometimes when I think I know a lot about these old firearms something like this comes along , I have to eat a little humble pie and open up My mind to the possibilities and discrepancies that may occur in these old guns due to the thinking of the time. It tends to keep collecting old Winchesters interesting
W.A.C.A. life member, Marlin Collectors Assn. charter and life member, C,S.S.A. member and general gun nut.
April 15, 2005
Offline
Michael,
Based on my understanding, both the serial number and the upper tang markings were stamped before final polishing and then being blued. It appears that the receiver in question got “lost in the shuffle” after being serialized and before the upper tang was stamped. I have not run across an Model 1894 receivers with a simialr mismatch… yet.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
November 8, 2011
Offline
I might be off but the markings on the upper tang look odd. Is it possible that, perhaps, a hole was repaired and the 18 removed during the process? Some of the other characters look off to my eye.
March 20, 2009
Offline
Bert H. said
Michael,Based on my understanding, both the serial number and the upper tang markings were stamped before final polishing and then being blued. It appears that the receiver in question got “lost in the shuffle” after being serialized and before the upper tang was stamped. I have not run across an Model 1894 receivers with a simialr mismatch… yet.
Bert
It would make more sense, to me, that the receiver would have all production steps occur to it; and then be blued and final polish and then be serialized as the last step before being used for final assembly into a functional firearm. That way there could be no gap in serialization due to having some production failure. It certainly is common to see that the serial number has impacted the bluing and thus occurred after that process. I am not certain that I would agree that the tang stamp has ever looked like that. But, I will look in more detail at my photo files.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
Online
1 Guest(s)
