Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
TXGunNut said
Not really, most are unremarkable specimens. I saw him and this collection displayed at a show years ago. Ranger Jackson, OTOH, was a very interesting man and avid gun collector. He even played bit parts in a few of my favorite movies.
I don’t doubt Jackson himself was interesting, but his collection? Utterly boring. Only conceivable point of it would be to study gradual decline in ’94 quality. Nothing spectacular in his career, no Bonnie & Clyde type of drama (not his fault).
clarence said
TXGunNut said
Not really, most are unremarkable specimens. I saw him and this collection displayed at a show years ago. Ranger Jackson, OTOH, was a very interesting man and avid gun collector. He even played bit parts in a few of my favorite movies.
I don’t doubt Jackson himself was interesting, but his collection? Utterly boring. Only conceivable point of it would be to study gradual decline in ’94 quality. Nothing spectacular in his career, no Bonnie & Clyde type of drama (not his fault).
I would cut him more slack. I admire people who have passion and enthusiasm for something – and put their energy into pursuing it. There’s lot of people who pursue collections of things that I have no interest in at all – that’s the utterly boring stuff for me. M1894 and 94 Winchesters aren’t my favorites, but I do like them and own many. Seeing a grouping like this would be worth my time. As Clarence mentioned, the gradual decline in quality, would be an interesting aspect for me.
I did that a while back , 1 of each year of production of 1894’s, from ser#601,1894 right up to 2006 . That was an interesting project
W.A.C.A. life member, Marlin Collectors Assn. charter and life member, C,S.S.A. member and general gun nut.
Henry Mero said
I did that a while back , 1 of each year of production of 1894’s, from ser#601,1894 right up to 2006 . That was an interesting project
Henry –
Weren’t you putting a grouping together of the main lever models (e.g. M1873, M1876, M1886, etc.) that consisted of a carbine, rifle and musket of each model?
Henry Mero said
I did that a while back , 1 of each year of production of 1894’s, from ser#601,1894 right up to 2006 . That was an interesting project
Now that I’m thinking of of it, didn’t you have a collection of basically all the Winchester ’94 commemoratives?
Online
Henry Mero said
I did that a while back , 1 of each year of production of 1894’s, from ser#601,1894 right up to 2006 . That was an interesting project
Not to belittle or downplay what Ranger Jackson did with his collection, but the vast majority of his Model 1894/94s were not manufactured in the year that they were advertised to be. It is apparent that he used the Madis DOM table. I spent several hours last night documenting all of the guns & serial numbers listed in that auction and found that more than 75% of them did not match the year listed. For instance, there were (4) of those Carbines that were all manufactured in 1932. The last gun (claimed to be 1964) was actually a 1962 production gun.
Someday soon. I hope to put together a complete Model 1894/94 DOM table covering the years 1894 – 1963 (I am missing 1946 – 1962).
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
November 7, 2015
Offline
Bert H. said
Henry Mero said
I did that a while back , 1 of each year of production of 1894’s, from ser#601,1894 right up to 2006 . That was an interesting project
Not to belittle or downplay what Ranger Jackson did with his collection, but the vast majority of his Model 1894/94s were not manufactured in the year that they were advertised to be. It is apparent that he used the Madis DOM table. I spent several hours last night documenting all of the guns & serial numbers listed in that auction and found that more than 75% of them did not match the year listed. For instance, there were (4) of those Carbines that were all manufactured in 1932. The last gun (claimed to be 1964) was actually a 1962 production gun.
Someday soon. I hope to put together a complete Model 1894/94 DOM table covering the years 1894 – 1963 (I am missing 1946 – 1962).
Bert
Bert-
You are correct, as usual. Ranger Jackson started this project before the polishing room records were widely known and accepted. This collection has been offered before, apparently there weren’t many takers. Jackson was from the “BBQ Gun” era of law enforcement and had good taste in custom Colts. The times I had the pleasure of visiting with him he exhibited the cool professionalism Rangers of his era are famous for. One possible reason he wasn’t involved in more “scrapes” is that cool, no-BS demeanor. Most folks could sense he wasn’t someone to push your luck with.
Mike
oldcrankyyankee said
Why is it that certain groups feel it is necessary to chronically find fault and belittle another person’s collection, ie passion? Seems as if we’re a little to high on our own horse here.Good info is helpful to all, but the negativity is becoming over whelming. Just my thoughts.
If you coll ct junk, it needs to be brought to your attention. There is ZERO benefit to telling someone they have a nice gun or collection, when they don’t, only so that they repeat the same mistake(s).
It’s called tough love.
steve004 said
But still an interesting project. It wouldn’t be near as many specimens but doing one for every year of Model 1886 production would be fun to see. I’m not surprised to hear the ’94 collector was an interesting fellow.
And the provenance must be priceless!
deerhunter said
steve004 said
But still an interesting project. It wouldn’t be near as many specimens but doing one for every year of Model 1886 production would be fun to see. I’m not surprised to hear the ’94 collector was an interesting fellow.
And the provenance must be priceless!
https://www.gunbroker.com/item/989337883
Don,
That seller is a pure epitome of a true village idiot. I have to wonder if he ever sells anything at the astronomical starting bid amounts he puts on his falsely advertised stuff.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Giving him the benefit of the doubt (which given all the other aspects of this auction – I doubt he deserves) presumably this carbine had the serial number applied in 1897 and was shipped in 1900? I know on our WACA site, the serial number date comes up as 1900.
steve004 said
Giving him the benefit of the doubt (which given all the other aspects of this auction – I doubt he deserves) presumably this carbine had the serial number applied in 1897 and was shipped in 1900? I know on our WACA site, the serial number date comes up as 1900.
Steve,
The seller knows that the gun was not manufactured in 1897, but he intentionally uses the Madis dates as a selling point. In the past I have tried to politely inform him that his listings contain verifiable errors, but his crude replies for me to mind my own business made it clear he is not an honest person.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert H. said The seller knows that the gun was not manufactured in 1897, but he intentionally uses the Madis dates as a selling point. In the past I have tried to politely inform him that his listings contain verifiable errors, but his crude replies for me to mind my own business made it clear he is not an honest person.
Surprised you’d even take the trouble with such a manifest idiot & liar! Clearly some sort of crooked dealing going on with this listing, though I can’t figure out how the scam is supposed to work. Groundwork for ins. fraud, perhaps? Whatever it is, it’s plain this isn’t a legit sales offer.
clarence said
Bert H. said The seller knows that the gun was not manufactured in 1897, but he intentionally uses the Madis dates as a selling point. In the past I have tried to politely inform him that his listings contain verifiable errors, but his crude replies for me to mind my own business made it clear he is not an honest person.
Surprised you’d even take the trouble with such a manifest idiot & liar! Clearly some sort of crooked dealing going on with this listing, though I can’t figure out how the scam is supposed to work. Groundwork for ins. fraud, perhaps? Whatever it is, it’s plain this isn’t a legit sales offer.
The interesting thing he says he has a Cody letter. If he really does, and if it lists 1900 as the manufacture date, he is providing legal proof that the carbine is not an antique. How can you stick to the Madis dates when you are holding proof in your hand of the exact legal date?
Photo #7 is the Cody research form stating 1900. He is clearly breaking the law advertising it as a no-FFL antique and contradicting himself in his own listing. What an idiot…
clarence said
Bert H. said The seller knows that the gun was not manufactured in 1897, but he intentionally uses the Madis dates as a selling point. In the past I have tried to politely inform him that his listings contain verifiable errors, but his crude replies for me to mind my own business made it clear he is not an honest person.
Surprised you’d even take the trouble with such a manifest idiot & liar! Clearly some sort of crooked dealing going on with this listing, though I can’t figure out how the scam is supposed to work. Groundwork for ins. fraud, perhaps? Whatever it is, it’s plain this isn’t a legit sales offer.
It was a few years ago when he listed a different Model 1894 that he claimed was antique (and had it priced at 5X its actual value). I informed him that it was not a legal “antique” and that he should update his listing to reflect that. His response was rude, crude, and grossly unflattering. I responded to him with a “friendly” bet concerning the actual date of manufacture, and he replied with an “Fxxx Off” message. I then informed him that I would report his false listing to Gunbroker, and to the BATF concerning his potential illegal transfer of the gun… predictably, he went totally silent. Undoubtedly, I am on his “Sxxt list”.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
November 7, 2015
Offline
All this nonsense and he’ll even ship it to you for $499! I suppose if you sell a gun like this one now and then you don’t have to sell many.
Mike
Bert H. said Undoubtedly, I am on his “Sxxt list”.
I’d call it the “Honor Roll.” But neither he nor GB’s many other con-artists need worry their little (brainless) heads, as GB is the know-nothings’ playground. “One born every minute,” as Phineas said? I believe the birth-rate is higher than that in the 21st C.
1 Guest(s)
