Log In
September 22, 2011
Offline
My understanding is that Winchester did not really differentiate between low wall vs high wall receivers with regards to the customer. It stands to reason that a .22 cal Winchester Model 1885 would be a low wall and a .50 cal Winchester Model 1885 would be a high wall, but what about everything in between? I seem to recall a .38-56 that was posted to this forum as having recently sold and it might have been one of a kind, as maybe the only .38-56 on a low wall frame. I own a .38-40 and that’s a low wall frame but is .401 diameter. Granted, a shorter case…
So what determines what should be a high wall and what should be a low wall based on calibre and a great achievement might be to collect a compilation of Winchester Model 1885 rifles that were built on the frame not typical of the calibre, such as the .38-56 on a low wall frame.
April 15, 2005
Offline
Winchester stated that the low-wall frame would be used for the rim fire and pistol sized cartridges, and for the most part, that is what they did.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
November 1, 2013
Offline
Bert H. said
Winchester stated that the low-wall frame would be used for the rim fire and pistol sized cartridges, and for the most part, that is what they did.
Yes, but where was that stated? It was not in the regular catalogs or advertising, or they would have had to give separate names to the two different receivers, which they never did.
And there were quite a few exceptions to the usual procedure, such as the .22RF High Wall I once had–a pain to load, with no advantage to the unneeded sidewalls. An order for a .22RF with CC or DS triggers would have to be made on a HW action, as those trigger plates wouldn’t fit a LW action.
April 15, 2005
Offline
clarence said
Yes, but where was that stated? It was not in the regular catalogs or advertising, or they would have had to give separate names to the two different receivers, which they never did.
And there were quite a few exceptions to the usual procedure, such as the .22RF High Wall I once had–a pain to load, with no advantage to the unneeded sidewalls. An order for a .22RF with CC or DS triggers would have to be made on a HW action, as those trigger plates wouldn’t fit a LW action.
Actually, it was in their early catalogs. I will look through several and scan a copy of it when I find it. In regards to the exceptions, as I stated, “for the most part”.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
I recently looked at a high wall SINGLE SHOT 25-20 DOM 1909. The owner had described it as rare due to its caliber with a high wall configuration. It would be interesting to know what Winchester was thinking but I have to surmise what the customer wanted, the customer got.
RickC
September 22, 2011
Offline
Did it have a letter confirming the original calibre configuration? To prove the barrel wasn’t changed.
I would think it would be a rare customer, if at all, who would even care if it was a low wall vs a high wall. That was internal to the factory, I should think.
mrcvs said
Did it have a letter confirming the original calibre configuration? To prove the barrel wasn’t changed.I would think it would be a rare customer, if at all, who would even care if it was a low wall vs a high wall. That was internal to the factory, I should think.
Sure did.
September 22, 2011
Offline
What were they asking for it and did you buy it?
September 22, 2011
Offline
The serial number was applied in 1909 and it did not ship until 1916. The Model 1885 was discontinued in 1920, and by then, it was fairly unpopular, and the .25-20 was not a particularly desirable calibre, either, so it might have been simply a means of fitting a barrel and receiver together, independent of the configuration, just to use up stock.
mrcvs said
The serial number was applied in 1909 and it did not ship until 1916. The Model 1885 was discontinued in 1920, and by then, it was fairly unpopular, and the .25-20 was not a particularly desirable calibre, either, so it might have been simply a means of fitting a barrel and receiver together, independent of the configuration, just to use up stock.
Ya it could’ve been. Like I said previous, it would be nice to know what Winchester or the production team was thinking or would allow. JWA might have internal memos in his files on some of this stuff.
July 17, 2012
Offline
RickC said
Ya it could’ve been. Like I said previous, it would be nice to know what Winchester or the production team was thinking or would allow. JWA might have internal memos in his files on some of this stuff.
I defer to Bert on the Single Shot (1885) rifles, he has way more info in his files regarding that model than I do. I have some drawings and Change of Manufacturing notices and sight info for the Single Shot but nothing that relates to this specific topic.
Best Regards,
WACA Life Member #6284 - Specializing in Pre-64 Winchester .22 Rimfire
November 1, 2013
Offline
mrcvs said
The Model 1885 was discontinued in 1920, and by then, it was fairly unpopular, and the .25-20 was not a particularly desirable calibre, either, so it might have been simply a means of fitting a barrel and receiver together, independent of the configuration, just to use up stock.
Can’t read letter. If it has a #3 wt. brl., it would have to have a HW rcvr., because it would need the large brl. shank. I have one in .32 WCF with a #3 brl. (Sure helps to tame the heavy recoil of a .32!) LOTS of them were produced in .25-20 SS, if that’s what it is. If it’s .25 WCF, that’s very unusual.
“Model 1885”? It was simply the Winchester Single Shot.
November 1, 2013
Offline
RickC said
Like I said previous, it would be nice to know what Winchester or the production team was thinking or would allow.
They would “allow” anything a customer would pay for, if it was technically feasible to mfg.
clarence said
Can’t read letter. If it has a #3 wt. brl., it would have to have a HW rcvr., because it would need the large brl. shank. I have one in .32 WCF with a #3 brl. (Sure helps to tame the heavy recoil of a .32!) LOTS of them were produced in .25-20 SS, if that’s what it is. If it’s .25 WCF, that’s very unusual.
“Model 1885”? It was simply the Winchester Single Shot.
25-20
#3 oct barrel
November 1, 2013
Offline
RickC said
25-20
#3 oct barrel
That accounts for the HW rcvr, but which .25-20?
clarence said
That accounts for the HW rcvr, but which .25-20?
November 1, 2013
Offline
RickC said
Rick, neither attachment will open. What does the letter SAY the cartridge is?
Ok sorry Clarence not sure why. The barrel is stamped 25-20 SS.
clarence said
Can’t read letter. If it has a #3 wt. brl., it would have to have a HW rcvr., because it would need the large brl. shank. I have one in .32 WCF with a #3 brl. (Sure helps to tame the heavy recoil of a .32!) LOTS of them were produced in .25-20 SS, if that’s what it is. If it’s .25 WCF, that’s very unusual.
“Model 1885”? It was simply the Winchester Single Shot.
Bert may have some numbers on how many were in 25-20 SS.
