Log In
November 19, 2006
Offline
I’m particularly referring to the earlier rather than later production Winchester lever action rifles. Often the fitting is a thing of beauty.
I was watching a video from Wyoming Armory and imbedded in it, Mark provides a great explanation and illustration of what is involved in fitting new wood to a Winchester rifle. This greatly helped me understand why a quality restoration costs so much – the immense amount of time involved. One can see what is involved to make a stock fit to the same level that Winchester did. So my question is – how did Winchester do it? Surely they didn’t have someone spend 20 hours on fitting a Model 1894 stock? Yet they must have been using hand tools? We know many stocks were interchangeable from rifle to rifle (e.g. not only among the same models but across some models – such as between the M1892 and Model 1894). It perplexes me further when I think about the machinery (and electricity!) available today vs. 100 – 150 years ago.
I always thought they had racks of finished stocks. But how did they get those stocks cut to such exact dimensions? It sure seems that can’t be done today – otherwise a person would just order one vs. pay a restoration gunsmith a couple thousand dollars to trim 2% of the wood off a 98% inletted stock?
It’s at the 6:30 point in the video that Mark discusses this topic:
September 22, 2011
Offline
Machines and jigs set up to cut each piece precisely the same way to minimize the amount of hand fitting. Also, in the 19th Century, labor was cheap, raw materials were expensive. Now, in a relative sense, it’s the other way around. Labor costs much more now.
November 19, 2006
Offline
mrcvs said
Machines and jigs set up to cut each piece precisely the same way to minimize the amount of hand fitting. Also, in the 19th Century, labor was cheap, raw materials were expensive. Now, in a relative sense, it’s the other way around. Labor costs much more now.
So after they pulled a stock off the shelf, there was still some hand-fitting required? This implies to me that the hand-fitting would occur before staining and varnish?
I don’t think we can say Winchester stocks are necessarily perfectly interchangeable.
I did an internet search and it doesn’t appear anyone sells a stock for a Model 1894 that isn’t any closer than 98% inletted.
September 22, 2011
Offline
Yes, some hand fitting was required, but it was minimal. When wages are cheap, that’s inconsequential. Wages aren’t cheap anymore, no one wants to be in that lower echelon.
November 7, 2015
Offline
Steve-
I believe that is why vintage Winchesters (and probably other makes as well) will always appeal to the discriminating collector. We just don’t often see the level of craftmanship today that we see in old Winchesters. When you realize “power tools” were belt driven by overhead shafts it boggles my feeble mind. When we realize Winchester employees and contractors made virtually every part of their firearms down to the last screw and pin we realize it was a different time, indeed. They even made many of the tools used to make the parts! Awhile back I bought a “98%” stock that was one flick of a pocket knife away from a perfect fit so it is possible to get a good fit with today’s technology and workforce. At today’s price points, labor costs and overhead most manufactured goods cannot have much skilled labor involved. IMHO we have a shortage of people who will bother to learn the skills to work with their hands.
Mike
1 Guest(s)
