Winchester Collector - Forum: Winchester Rifles

steve004 on An old wivestail???

Wed, 06 May 2026 22:56:35 +0000

Maverick said

Bert H. said

steve004 said
Were they sighted in at the factory with either smokeless or black powder? I don't quite see how they would have done this with the .32 Special given they didn't offer black powder cartridges in this chambering.

Steve,
Take a close look at the picture of scanned copy of the 1905 catalog I posted earlier in this topic. Directyl below the high-lighted box is the ballistics data for the 32 W.S. black powder loading. While Winchester may not have offered factory (commercially) loaded BP ammo for the 32 W.S., they apparently did load and test it.
Bert

They offered to the public and stated "We load this cartridge with Smokeless powder only, but are prepared to furnish primed shells, full metal patched, metal patched soft pointed, or plain lead bullets, and reloading tools, for loading with black powder. We do not advise hand loading or reloading of this cartridge with Smokeless powder by individuals.", on the original announcement flyer.
They sold the Winchester Model 1894 Reloading Tool in 32 W.S. and as the flyer state you could use 40 grains of black powder to reload with. The flyer is an early flyer as it describes the 165 grain bullet, which was later changed to 170 grains.

On the reloading tool boxes the end labels also recommended using Black Powder Only. Winchester discouraged the public from reloading with Smokeless Powder not wanting to risk the liability from a lawsuit.

Sincerely,
Maverick

I found this interesting as well. I was struck by their statement that the 32 W.S., loaded with black powder, makes it a, "powerful black powder cartridge."

And of course, their recommendation that individuals not attempt to load with smokeless powder but they're all for individuals loading with smokeless powder. I always think of black powder as being more volatile than smokeless powder, so this is counter-intuitive to me. Was the main worry that handloader would put too much smokeless powder in the case and that couldn't happen with black powder.

And finally, I didn't spot any mention of the need for sight adjust between smokeless powder vs. black powder loads. There is quite a difference in velocity between the two.

I'm really enjoying all of this information - thanks Bert and Maverick.

steve004 on An old wivestail???

Wed, 06 May 2026 22:44:34 +0000

Bert H. said
Here is the April 1905 catalog again, bit with just the 32 W.S. load data high-lighted.

This is very interesting. One aspect I find most interesting is that the .32 Special is the only cartridge listed loaded with black powder!

win4575 on An old wivestail???

Wed, 06 May 2026 21:30:12 +0000

I have the same 1894 reloading tool and mold, new in the box. Label reads for "Black Powder Only".

Commissioner on Can anyone identify the engraver of this 1958 Winchester Model 70

Wed, 06 May 2026 21:24:31 +0000

Fellows: I have this beautiful high relief engraved model 70, made in 1958. 68 years ago. It is in pristine condition and I paid a lot of money for it. The stock is also beautifully carved. I would like to find out who the engraver was? It was not a factory engraver. Perhaps someone here will recognize the engraving. It was done by a Master the old fashioned way long before any lasers were around. Hammer and Chisel. Murene said it was not done by Winchester. Any help would be

Maverick on An old wivestail???

Wed, 06 May 2026 21:10:59 +0000

Bert H. said

steve004 said
Were they sighted in at the factory with either smokeless or black powder? I don't quite see how they would have done this with the .32 Special given they didn't offer black powder cartridges in this chambering.

Steve,
Take a close look at the picture of scanned copy of the 1905 catalog I posted earlier in this topic. Directyl below the high-lighted box is the ballistics data for the 32 W.S. black powder loading. While Winchester may not have offered factory (commercially) loaded BP ammo for the 32 W.S., they apparently did load and test it.
Bert

They offered to the public and stated "We load this cartridge with Smokeless powder only, but are prepared to furnish primed shells, full metal patched, metal patched soft pointed, or plain lead bullets, and reloading tools, for loading with black powder. We do not advise hand loading or reloading of this cartridge with Smokeless powder by individuals.", on the original announcement flyer.

They sold the Winchester Model 1894 Reloading Tool in 32 W.S. and as the flyer state you could use 40 grains of black powder to reload with. The flyer is an early flyer as it describes the 165 grain bullet, which was later changed to 170 grains.

On the reloading tool boxes the end labels also recommended using Black Powder Only. Winchester discouraged the public from reloading with Smokeless Powder not wanting to risk the liability from a lawsuit.

Sincerely,

Maverick

wolfbait on 1876 Winchester SRC - Pictures

Wed, 06 May 2026 19:47:19 +0000

It functions perfectly, and everything fits right. The aging of the wood and metal all match, and appear to have been done long ago. I thought maybe someone had heard of Bates.

Thanks for posting the pictures.

tim tomlinson on 1876 Winchester SRC - Pictures

Wed, 06 May 2026 19:22:10 +0000

Maverick is correct, but the carbine is an interesting piece for sure. Took more than a bit of imagination plus moderate skill to put it together. Tim

Maverick on 1876 Winchester SRC - Pictures

Wed, 06 May 2026 19:09:32 +0000

Looks like the whole front half of the old girl was made up by a gunsmith, perhaps that would've been Mr. Bates himself, and certainly not factory. I imagine the buttstock is a replacement as well. They only made the 76 SRCs with the full stock forearm and they never made them for 50 Gov. and only in 50-95 Express caliber. I suppose joe blow gunsmith could have robbed the parts from a 86 carbine to make up this Frankenwinchester.

Sincerely,

Maverick

1873man on 1876 Winchester SRC - Pictures

Wed, 06 May 2026 18:49:26 +0000

Here they are.

Bob

Bert H. on An old wivestail???

Wed, 06 May 2026 17:36:27 +0000

Here is the April 1905 catalog again, bit with just the 32 W.S. load data high-lighted.

Bert H. on An old wivestail???

Wed, 06 May 2026 17:22:07 +0000

steve004 said
Were they sighted in at the factory with either smokeless or black powder? I don't quite see how they would have done this with the .32 Special given they didn't offer black powder cartridges in this chambering.

View post on imgur.com

View post on imgur.com

Steve,

Take a close look at the picture of scanned copy of the 1905 catalog I posted earlier in this topic. Directyl below the high-lighted box is the ballistics data for the 32 W.S. black powder loading. While Winchester may not have offered factory (commercially) loaded BP ammo for the 32 W.S., they apparently did load and test it.

Bert

steve004 on An old wivestail???

Wed, 06 May 2026 17:09:54 +0000

Anthony said
Steve,
I know that you have shot and do like to shoot you're rifles. What in particular do you like about shooting you're .32 Special, with that style of rear sight on it. Not being familiar with that style rear sight, is it the graduations? If I remember correctly, and without looking into my library here, is it a type of ladder sight, with the sliding graduated adjustment on it?
I did find it interesting that in you're post, you quoted what Winchester stated, that it was graduated for the B/P, and the smokeless powder! Interesting.
Thanks for sharing!
Tony

Tony -

My eyes aren't great and iron sights and eye glasses are not a great combination for me. As far as rear sights go, the .32 Special Smokeless sight isn't as bad as others for me. However, what has worked the very best for me (by a country mile) is this rear sight:

View post on imgur.com

tim tomlinson on Winchester 1895 case colored vs blued hammers & levers

Wed, 06 May 2026 15:57:59 +0000

Decided to throw in the dates just because. 60,000 was 1907. 70,000 was 1910. 80,000 was 1912. So now you also have a date range for the links and hammers being case hardened and colored. Cheers! Tim

steve004 on An old wivestail???

Wed, 06 May 2026 15:55:10 +0000

I am amused to note that despite Winchester's catalog statement about the .32 Special sight - “Rifles for the .32 Winchester Special Cartridge are fitted with a new and specially designed rear sight…which is graduated for either Smokeless or Black powder cartridges." As will be seen in the photo below, the "SMOKELESS" as aspect if very prominent. And no, the other side is not marked Black Powder. I recall on other Winchester lever rifles, the catalog descriptions mentioned that the buyer shoot specify whether the rifle should be sighted for smokeless or black powder. I don't quite understand how this actually played out. Were they sighted in at the factory with either smokeless or black powder? I don't quite see how they would have done this with the .32 Special given they didn't offer black powder cartridges in this chambering.

View post on imgur.com

tim tomlinson on Winchester 1895 case colored vs blued hammers & levers

Wed, 06 May 2026 15:15:53 +0000

If anyone is thinking an answer to this question is going to be neat and all inclusive, they will be disappointed!! I perused the chapter on receivers in the 1895 book starting on page 94. Answers appear in or under the various pictures. Distilled they look like this. Two rifles in the 20,000 sn range had blued triggers but case hardened lever links. I saw no hardened and colored triggers. I did not see any lever being anything other than blued. Links were case hardened up to the 60,000 to 70,000 sn ranges. Hammers were case hardened up to the 70,000 to 80,000 sn ranges. Now, I did not try to cross reference the serial number ranges to dates, but expect anyone sufficiently curious may do so with the "when was your Winchester made" look up at the beginning of our forum. Now, were any 1895's factory color case hardened for the receiver? I do not know but have not seen one yet except a couple admittedly done after market just for the fun of it. Tim