Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Rob Kassab said
Brad and I had much discussion while writing our book regarding original terminology versus modern collector-speak. We at first stuck to original Winchester terms but as time went on it became apparent that in order to make for an easier read by today’s collectors, we needed to use some modern terms as well. From page 9:We chose to use original WRACo terminology whenever possible. This was difficult at times and required some modification. For example, the terms Saddle Ring Carbine and Deluxe were not used as they are today by collectors. We hope that our choices will be both sensible and clear to the reader.
Thanks for replying Rob & I certainly understand your decision for that. To the less experienced collector or Winchester novice certain collector terms are more known & when dealing with a large audience such as book publications it’s understandable.
Sling ring & breech pin still don’t sound right, but…
Offline
Bert H. said
That is when you politely educate the people who emailed you that your description is accurate per Winchester’s original literature.
Bert
Speaking of Winchester’s original literature, show me a catalog or ad that refers to a (so-called) Model 1885! The company never called it by any other name than “Winchester Single Shot,” before the queer duck M. 87 came along. One might say “1885” was a logical inference IF this model was listed in catalogs right before the M. 1886, but it never was–it always appeared at the end of the repeater listings. I try to resist using that non-historical name, but if, for ex., I’m looking for parts, I’m forced to.
I think most collectors are dimly aware High & Low Wall are made-up collector names, but there’s at least an excuse for that–the company’s inexplicable failure to differentiate between them in catalog descriptions, when the illustrations themselves showed customers two completely different kinds of receivers were available. How much trouble would it have been to use in the catalog (at least in the parts list) the numbers 2 & 3 used within the factory?
clarence said
Bert H. said
That is when you politely educate the people who emailed you that your description is accurate per Winchester’s original literature.
BertSpeaking of Winchester’s original literature, show me a catalog or ad that refers to a (so-called) Model 1885! The company never called it by any other name than “Winchester Single Shot,” before the queer duck M. 87 came along. One might say “1885” was a logical inference IF this model was listed in catalogs right before the M. 1886, but it never was–it always appeared at the end of the repeater listings. I try to resist using that non-historical name, but if, for ex., I’m looking for parts, I’m forced to.
I think most collectors are dimly aware High & Low Wall are made-up collector names, but there’s at least an excuse for that–the company’s inexplicable failure to differentiate between them in catalog descriptions, when the illustrations themselves showed customers two completely different kinds of receivers were available. How much trouble would it have been to use in the catalog (at least in the parts list) the numbers 2 & 3 used within the factory?
Clarence,
Good point. The first few times I browsed a vintage catalog quickly I couldn’t find the m1885 & thought the pages were missing. After searching another time for m95’s, I came across the single shot… 1885.
So basically another collector word ?
RickC
RickC said
Clarence,
Good point. The first few times I browsed a vintage catalog quickly I couldn’t find the m1885 & thought the pages were missing. After searching another time for m95’s, I came across the single shot… 1885.
So basically another collector word ?RickC
As far as the factory’s own terminology, it is.
No more 1885 terminology from me. It’s a SINGLE SHOT.
RickC
It is nice to get educated but a lot of the times the “collector’s” way of describing things seem to make more sense. In my quest to shoot my Henry I had to use an old catalog to figure out how to take it apart. Any guesses as to what a breech pin, piston, spring catch or a snapper is? Some times it is just easier to say bolt assembly including firing pin and extractor. The snapper is actually the piece screwed onto the end of the piston, oh sorry I meant firing pin, that has the 2 protrusions that strike the rim of the cartridge.
Just think, in a conversation, how would you differentiate a high wall from a low wall?
Chuck said
Just think, in a conversation, how would you differentiate a high wall from a low wall?
True, but that’s the fault of the factory, for failing in their consumer pubs to differentiate between them. (Within the factory they were the #2 & #3 rcvrs.) Could simply have called them the light & heavy wt. actions, for ex.
Like many threads here, this is an interesting one. I’m not a horse guy or a saddle guy. This surely contributed to some very wrong perceptions of how a, “saddle ring” was used in conjunction with a saddle. Basically, I thought a leather tie was attached to the carbine ring and the other end was looped around the saddle horn, while the carbine sat in a scabbard. Now that I looked at some photos this morning of rifles sitting in scabbards attached to saddles – I can see how wrong I was. So, I’ve gone from having a tidy picture of how it all worked together (albeit a wrong picture) to having no picture (for how a “saddle” ring is used in conjunction with a saddle).
steve004 said
Basically, I thought a leather tie was attached to the carbine ring and the other end was looped around the saddle horn, while the carbine sat in a scabbard.
That’s somewhat the way cavalry troopers carried their carbines, except the sling ring was attached to a shoulder sling, & the scabbard was just a short boot tied to the back of the saddle to prevent the gun flopping around & hitting the horse’s flanks. But with a gun in a full length saddle scabbard, which it’s not likely to fall out of short of riding over a cliff, having it tied to the horn would just hinder unsheathing it quickly.
Here is a .32 special sling ring carbine that I have. It was used a lot of years of its long life and I think the leather tie has been on there for a long time. It was a North Dakota ranch gun. I can’t help but believe that long leather tie had a purpose.
Steve – For some reason I can change my jargon from 1885 to Single Shot but I’m having a hard time changing from Deluxe to Fancy & Special sporting rifle & saddle ring to sling ring. I salute you Steve for staying the course. I’m trying lol.
RickC
RickC, When you describe a gun as a “Deluxe”, it’s one word six letters. When you describe a gun as a “Fancy and Special sporting rifle” it’s five words and 28 letters. How about I do a military style abbreviation, “FSSR” instead of Deluxe, four letters. T/R
Along this same vein, the Single Shot (Model 1885) is more correctly referred to as;
1. Plain Sporting Rifle
2. Special Sporting Rifle
3. Special Single Shot Rifle
4. Schuetzen Rifle
5. Lightweight Single Shot Carbine
6. Musket
7. 22 Caliber Musket
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
TR said
RickC, When you describe a gun as a “Deluxe”, it’s one word six letters. When you describe a gun as a “Fancy and Special sporting rifle” it’s five words and 28 letters. How about I do a military style abbreviation, “FSSR” instead of Deluxe, four letters. T/R
Please don’t. There is too much of this already. I get tired of trying to figure out what some idiots are trying to say. 
Here’s the rifle I recall Merz had with the sling ring. Even though the ledger doesn’t mention the ring, this rifle has some interesting features (matted barrel) that he states are on the letter. He wasn’t shy about the price, however, the rifle did sell – I don’t recall seeing it in subsequent catalogs. I would have enjoyed owning this rifle, but much more so had the ledger documented the ring.
Thanks for sharing Steve. I think I like mine better but I’m biased. If I was ever selling I will take lass than $21k ?
I am always helping others learn what the ring is actually for. I use this picture, and once they see the visual, they get it.
To me, the notion the ring was to tie the gun to the saddle is illogical. It would render the gun useless in a situation where it was urgently needed as one whoukd have to stop and untie it.
All men have fears. The brave put down their fears and go forward, sometimes to death but always to victory.
Old guns are like old cars and old men. They are meant to be taken out and used from time to time, not locked away or put on display in a museum.
J B said
I am always helping others learn what the ring is actually for. I use this picture, and once they see the visual, they get it.To me, the notion the ring was to tie the gun to the saddle is illogical. It would render the gun useless in a situation where it was urgently needed as one whoukd have to stop and untie it.
Thank you J B. All the more reason why collectors need to start using the term “sling” ring.
RickC
RickC said
Thank you J B. All the more reason why collectors need to start using the term “sling” ring.
RickC
Rick – so what percentage collectors will be able to switch over – SRC means: “sling ring carbine”?
steve004 said
Rick – so what percentage collectors will be able to switch over – SRC means: “sling ring carbine”?
Good question Steve. Probably not very many. Sling ring is the correct, technical, & proper term but, sellers will want to use saddle instead of sling because it sounds more historical & western. It’s sling to me.
2 Guest(s)
