Winchester M-1873 SRC|Page 2|Winchester Rifles|Forum|Winchester Collector

Steve,

Well said, as I’ve tried to explain in detail just that, and you’ve picked up on it. Some of the dark and hardened grease or father time in some hard to get at places, which I could have gotten too with my capabilities, needed to stay on the carbine.

As I stated, the crud and rusted gunk inside, needed to get removed, (IMHO), and some wiping down internally, was justified in the hidden areas, and being careful to use the right stuff, so as not to take off more than was needed or wanted. Then, a light gun grease applied inside, preventing moisture, and  unwanted wear and tear, that can happen due to poor storage also.

I’m in agreement with you as far as once you get started, to try not to go too far on it!  Some can’t do that! Don’t get me wrong as their are some pieces, that could be resurrected, to as close to original as possible, without a full refinishing or restoration! IMO!

Tony

Thanks Bob,

That information helps out, so many of us collectors, who are wanting to constantly know more,  all the time, and by you so generously posting that for us. It gives us research information down the road!

Tony 

win4575 said
I like it.  Looks like a used carbine in untouched condition.  I wondered too, about the caliber marking, WGF.  Caliber marking is hard to read, so maybe someone over stamped the C, thinking it was supposed to be a G.  From the photo I see, it definitely looks like a G. 
  

Rick, and others, I tried to break this down, as much as I could to, figure out what the heck that middle initial is, or was! In the post above, I explained my thoughts!

Jeremy P said,

…and chambered in .44 WGF, very rare I hear!

Anthony said,

Possibly, one of One! LOL!

Anthony

1873man said
Tony.
The caliber stamps were made so the numbers were one stamp and the W.C.F.  or CAL was one stamp like they used on the elevator and I would think the barrel stamp would of been all one stamp. I would have to compare barrel marks to see how they stamped them. From your last pictures I would say its a scratch or ding that happened afterwards. 
Bob

  

Thanks for that Bob, 

As that could surely make sense, and the small mark that make it look like a, “G”, instead of the, “C”, in the middle of the caliber marking, “WCF”, is in such the most peculiar place as to mi represent the caliber mark, it sure had me wondering!

To me, it shows how crazy, we could get with our research and as collectors we sure can chase these things until we can find the possible common sense solution, but in this case, you’re research has helped me out once again, and any further proof or development is always appreciated.

Thanks Again, Bob!

Tony

win4575 said
Tony,
After seeing the last three close-up photos you posted, I am now convinced that it is an accidental mark that changed the look of what is or was a legitimate “C”.  I don’t think it was done on purpose.
  

Rick,

I can agree with you on that, as it sure looked like a “G’, to me also!

Tony

1873man said
I compared two 38 WCF’s that are 864 apart in the 297,000 range with Photoshop were I could superimpose them and they were stamped with the same number stamp then stamped with the same WCF stamp, two separate operations. There was a space differance between the two stamps. I then compared to another gun over 200,000 higher and the WCF was identical but the 38 on the higher one was a different design. 
Bob
  

Very interesting Bob, as it sounds like were talking around 1889-1895, or there a bouts. Putting the one in question around the middle of these, in 1891. So Bob, being stamped with the same, “WCF”, stamp, are there any signs of a small mark, making it look like a possible, “G” ?  I would guess not! Making this an isolated incident. With the one I showed haven a scratch, or small mark, making it look the way it does. 

We’re seeing this in the M-1873, and during these years Winchester was in full Bloom, so to speak, as far as several models were being produced. My point is that I was wondering if this was ever seen on other models? I’m thinking possibly not, as a Conglomerate as large as Winchester, back during that time, and so many Craftsman and employees, with that much going on, they weren’t sharing stamps, in different departments to mark these firearms with! I can see where this would be an isolated situation to one particular model, the 1873, Rifle or Carbine, and possibly the musket also, but in this one isolated department. My other thought in my semi warped mind, is that I can only image a particular one person doing this work and possibly making this slight of hand errors.

Another question! Was Winchester using a Roll Die for these, in a press, or a so called hand stamp, at this time?

Tony

1873man said
Tony,
I have never seen a C in the WCF look like a G before.
My only information on how Winchester made barrels is based on the polishing room records where they made runs of certain type of  receivers in batches. I would think they ran the barrels through the barrel department similarly. It wouldn’t make sense to have separate barrel department for different models. So the same people were marking all the barrels and they would of had extra stamps in case one broke. The stamps were made by the in house engravers as you can see in the pictures of the stamps I posted. I think they marked them so they could be returned to them if they needed repair. On later models they went to the all in one caliber stamp as pictured in the 25-20 WCF stamp that was made by J. Ulrich as well. I believe they kept using the separate stamps for the 73 because they had them and the new models used a all in one stamp. 
Once the stamp got too long they went to a roll die which was harder to make. The roll die concentrated the pressure in one spot as it rolled over the metal where if it was a flat hand stamp it would take a hard hit to get a good impression and the possibility of a double stamp.  
Bob
  

That sure makes all the sense in the world to me Bob. What a find those J. Ulrich stamps are! Sure does help to explain things also, just by looking at them.

They were too professional, and smart buy all standards, IMO, to reinvent the wheel, so to speak, and to waste steps, in production.

Thanks for that!

Tony

Maverick said
It is a “C” mark with a wear mark that just happens to appear like a dash that would make the letter G. The dash is most likely simply from heavy wear and use from being banged around. The reason you can tell is the dash is not as deep as the C stamping and it is a different color from the rest of the mark. The rest of the barrel and the rest of the gun has plenty of other pop marks or wear marks all over it.
Also the fact that have a G between the W and F, doesn’t make any logical sense. What the hell would a G stand for? Winchester Gun Fire? Makes no sense.
Sincerely,
Maverick
  

You are absolutely correct in you’re assessment, as it is easy to determine and see that now, on 2/24, as we started this, with photo’s on 2/19! This being after several discussions and pictures to try to understand this along the way!

Glad you could join in and make it apparent to us, Brady ! LOL!

You are correct in you’re logical assessment! It doesn’t make any sense!

Tony

Henry,

That’s also interesting, as I’ve never seen anything like that before. I can’t ever remember reading of anything like that.

There doesn’t appear to be even a faint hit or strike of the 0, (zero), at the end of the model designation.

Anthony