Log In
March 6, 2011
Offline
Bert H. said
wolfbait said
An official response from ATF will provide the proper guideline.
Good luck getting the answer you seek. Finding the person at the BATF that is both authorized and willing to put out a written signed statement to the affect that you seek is highly unlikely. Again, I strongly suggest that you very simply follow the verifiable and legal serialization records to determine what is, and is not, a bona fide Antique Winchester (like the vast majority of WACA members do).
Bert
I now use the polishing room numbers. I do not understand why you believe ATF would not be willing to officially answer this simple question. No one has said they have tried, and have not been able to get a response. If ATF, after 50 years, changed how they determine the antique status of a Winchester, and have made no attempt to make that change public knowledge, they are very negligent. As a law enforcement agency, they want people to obey the law.
For some reason I have been putting this off, but I am going to contact ATF and request an official response.
April 15, 2005
Offline
wolfbait said
Bert H. said
wolfbait said
An official response from ATF will provide the proper guideline.
Good luck getting the answer you seek. Finding the person at the BATF that is both authorized and willing to put out a written signed statement to the affect that you seek is highly unlikely. Again, I strongly suggest that you very simply follow the verifiable and legal serialization records to determine what is, and is not, a bona fide Antique Winchester (like the vast majority of WACA members do).
Bert
I now use the polishing room numbers. I do not understand why you believe ATF would not be willing to officially answer this simple question. No one has said they have tried, and have not been able to get a response. If ATF, after 50 years, changed how they determine the antique status of a Winchester, and have made no attempt to make that change public knowledge, they are very negligent. As a law enforcement agency, they want people to obey the law.
For some reason I have been putting this off, but I am going to contact ATF and request an official response.
Based on your question “I do not understand why you believe ATF would not be willing to officially answer this simple question.” it is quite apparent that you have not never directly dealt with a U.S. Government law enforcement agency, and the multitude of layers within them. I wish you the very best of luck finding the one person who is both authorized to answer your question and then put it in official text. Bureaucrats seldom ever want to put their personal necks on the line.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
March 6, 2011
Offline
It seems so simple. Do you use the same Madis numbers you have used for 50 years to determine the antique status of a Winchester, or do you now use the polishing room numbers to determine the antique status of a Winchester. 150,000 Winchester 1892s and 1894s want to know. I understand your opinion of dealing with government agencies. I will see what happens.
August 14, 2021
Offline
OMG it never ends.
December 9, 2002
Offline
Thanks Steven! 
Anthony
September 22, 2011
Offline
Bert H. said
wolfbait said
Bert H. said
wolfbait said
An official response from ATF will provide the proper guideline.
Good luck getting the answer you seek. Finding the person at the BATF that is both authorized and willing to put out a written signed statement to the affect that you seek is highly unlikely. Again, I strongly suggest that you very simply follow the verifiable and legal serialization records to determine what is, and is not, a bona fide Antique Winchester (like the vast majority of WACA members do).
Bert
I now use the polishing room numbers. I do not understand why you believe ATF would not be willing to officially answer this simple question. No one has said they have tried, and have not been able to get a response. If ATF, after 50 years, changed how they determine the antique status of a Winchester, and have made no attempt to make that change public knowledge, they are very negligent. As a law enforcement agency, they want people to obey the law.
For some reason I have been putting this off, but I am going to contact ATF and request an official response.
Based on your question “I do not understand why you believe ATF would not be willing to officially answer this simple question.” it is quite apparent that you have not never directly dealt with a U.S. Government law enforcement agency, and the multitude of layers within them. I wish you the very best of luck finding the one person who is both authorized to answer your question and then put it in official text. Bureaucrats seldom ever want to put their personal necks on the line.
Bert
I have firsthand experience dealing with an agency tasked with enforcing regulations.
Here’s how it works. The powers that be interpret the regulations as THEY want to at any given time, often not based in fact. THEY tell you what to do, verbally. When asked to put it in writing, they refuse to do so.
December 21, 2006
Offline
I don’t understand what all the conundrum is. If You go on the B.A.T.F,E, site , (rules and regulations), it’s all there in black and white. If I can get that information in Canada , i’m sure You should be able to get it in the U.S.A., it’s actually a good read and very informative.
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
wolfbait said
It seems so simple. Do you use the same Madis numbers you have used for 50 years to determine the antique status of a Winchester, or do you now use the polishing room numbers to determine the antique status of a Winchester. 150,000 Winchester 1892s and 1894s want to know. I understand your opinion of dealing with government agencies. I will see what happens.
You are asking a stupid question… I am the person who first published the Polishing Room numbers (back in 2011), and I helped bring them to light. I had several conversations with former CFM Curator (David Kennedy) about using the PR records for the CFM factory letters back in 2008.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
March 6, 2011
Offline
Steven Gabrielli said
OMG it never ends.
This is a discussion forum amongst guys with a similar interest. This is relevant to the thread, so I will proceed.
You know why it never ends? Because collectors have never received any information from ATF indicating that they have changed the numbers they use to determine the antique status of Winchesters. For 50 years they have used the Madis numbers. If they have never announced a change to new numbers, why would you believe they have changed the long established numbers? The Madis numbers are still available in the currently available Madis Winchester Book and Dates of Manufacture guide, Flayderman’s book, Proofhouse, and still today on Winchester Firearms official site. Where are the new PR numbers available for the public to use? On an internet collector site and in a new book that has very little distribution. And if you go on the internet to date your Winchester there is only one site that has the PR numbers, and many long established sites that have the Madis numbers. ATF knows this. If they wanted to make felons out of collectors because the new numbers show a 125+ year old rifle was made one year earlier than we thought, they would have made the change in numbers known. I get the ATF newsletter, where ATF announces all changes in policies and procedures. Never have they announced a change in how they date antique Winchesters.
Think about it. ATF has never announced a change in how they date Winchesters. The difference the PR records makes is a year or two, on guns made 125+ years ago. There is absolutely no difference in a Winchester made in 1898, and one made in 1899. If ATF changed how they date Winchesters, making felons out of collectors who use the currently widely available Madis numbers (including the official Winchester Firearm site), would they not have made an effort to inform collectors? I am going to find the answer. Officially. Then this frequently discussed issue will be moot.
Many of us buy/sell/trade Winchesters on the internet and at gun shows to improve our collections. What numbers are officially used by ATF to date an antique greatly affects how we can deal with other collectors from other states. The original poster brought this issue up. The thread has shown great interest by the number of views. So obviously the matter is a concern to many collectors.
July 17, 2012
Offline
This thread is not progressing in a good direction. Send a letter or don’t send a letter but this topic has been thoroughly discussed.
I am locking this thread before it degenerates further. We can revisit it with a new thread if there is new written (BATF) information to discuss.
There are many more interesting Winchester topics to discuss so let’s move on.
Best Regards,
WACA Life Member #6284 - Specializing in Pre-64 Winchester .22 Rimfire
April 15, 2005
Offline
wolfbait said
You are asking a stupid question… I am the person who first published the Polishing Room numbers (back in 2011), and I helped bring them to light. I had several conversations with former CFM Curator (David Kennedy) about using the PR records for the CFM factory letters back in 2008.
Bert
I understand, you are on a personal mission to publicize the PR numbers and refute Madis. Changing the DOM a year or two on 125+ Winchesters, and making 150,000 1892s and 1894s that were previously considered antiques now modern guns, and subjecting those guns to modern firearm restrictions. Thanks a lot.
Not really a “personal” mission per se, but Yes, I do strive to be precisely accurate. The actual difference between the Madis published dates and the verified factory records is not just “a year or two” as you have erroneously stated… it is actually nearly 3.5-years for the Model 1894 and 3-years for the Model 1892.
This is the article I wrote and published back in 2012 discussing the erroneous Model 1894 dates of manufacture. I urge you to read it – Fall 2012 (winchestercollector.org)
What I find difficult to understand is why you personally and purposefully choose to ignore factual information? Your apparent position in this regard is to intentionally (and deceitfully) use erroneous numbers to suit your firearms business. I on the other hand, choose to be 100% accurate (it could be related to my prior professions as a U.S. Navy Submariner (retired) and as an Engineer (also retired). In my personal view, the dates of manufacture are a “black & white” subject.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
1 Guest(s)
