Log In
March 31, 2009
Offline
steve004 said
For the rifle under discussion, it sounds like we’re back to either an error in reading the ledger or in the ledger itself as the very topic candidates for an explanation.
I agree.
May 21, 2015
Offline
There is always the chance that the letter may be correct. This rifle is a long way from “mint”, and its not hard to blend the bottom tang to frame
joint on an old gun. The hardest part is the front of tang joint area. May have been done 100 years ago. I still think that out there somewhere
there is an old 1873 in 44WCF with no Bottom Tang.
Eric
March 31, 2009
Offline
Eric Ryan said
There is always the chance that the letter may be correct.Eric
I highly doubt it. The receiver is not a 44 WCF receiver.
May 2, 2009
Offline
Aaron,
It might be interesting to pull the stock and see if there are any markings on the left side of the lower tang. Some guns have assemble numbers there.
Bob
WACA Life Member--- NRA Life Member---- Cody Firearms member since 1991 Researching the Winchester 1873's
Email: [email protected]
December 5, 2020
Offline
So I got a reply after they double checked. The serial number was correct and there weren’t any mistakes in the letter. Looks like the lower tang must have been switched out at some point.
Thank you for reaching out. Have you checked to be sure the correct serial number was submitted for the letter? That is always my first question.
I have re-checked the records and serial number 308xxx is clearly recorded as a 44 caliber in the records. The record for this serial number does not include any repair and return orders, any returns after about 1915 did not make it into the ledgers.
Let me know if you have any other questions.
Best,
Jesi Bennett
May 2, 2009
Offline
Pull the stock and look for assembly numbers.
Bob
WACA Life Member--- NRA Life Member---- Cody Firearms member since 1991 Researching the Winchester 1873's
Email: [email protected]
