Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
mrcvs said
The question I have is WHY would Winchester create this vast number of chamberings for the production of one or few rifles in a specific chambering? The cost of retooling for one or few examples would far outweigh any profit.
Esp. after the factory had already discovered with the 54 that oddball chamberings like 7.65 mm did not sell. Who would be crazy enough to choose a .30-03 (for which ammo was scarce or unobtainable) over the ballistically far superior .30-06, for which ammo could be found in the smallest gun store in the remotest part of the county? It defies rational explanation!
Louis Luttrell said
But we can all question his/our “ability” to recognize what’s before us…
Dedication to a particular cause or interest, not even passionate zeal, compensates for hasty or otherwise imperfect observation. (Think of an observation made in a mob-scene like Tulsa!) If Porter believed he was looking at a one-of-a-kind M70 chambering, it seems incredible to me that he failed to buy the gun (whatever the cost!) in order to examine it under magnification, take extreme close-up photos, etc., & document beyond doubt his amazing discovery.
November 5, 2014
Offline
Hi Ian and Clarence-
In my initial response to Kendall I said these “oddball” M70s make me nervous and that I avoid them. No matter how much the internet has increased the exposure of “collector” guns for sale, I am incredulous that 2% (!!!!) of the M70s I’ve recorded for sale over that past few years are in uncataloged chamberings. However, with only a few exceptions where a serial number was previously documented as something else (Porter saw this quite often in his own survey), I cannot “prove” that any/all of these rifles are forgeries. So I will not claim that they are/are not genuine… They just defy my limited credulity…
There have been a couple “fakers” in operation whose work is easy to spot and I’ve excluded those rifles from my survey.
But the rifles we’ve been discussing in this post actually look pretty good. If they’re non-factory work, in many cases it might well take high magnification, etc. to demonstrate enough deviation from factory practice to make a case for forgery. While I’ve handled many examples of these uncataloged M70s, I’ve not subjected any of them to microscopic or mass spectroscopic analysis. I’ll just leave it to potential purchasers to form their own opinions.
I will say that several of the guns in chamberings that were used or considered by foreign or US military, e.g. 276 Pedersen, 30 M1 carbine, etc. had very real looking “Frankford Arsenal” and “HBJ” stamps on both wood and metal. So it’s possible (???) that they were built on Government contract for testing. It might even be possible to document their existence through non-Winchester sources, but I’ve not tried. I’ve never seen one in 30 GOV’T’03 so can’t comment. When I tossed that list together yesterday, I omitted other known R&D (experimental) chamberings, like the 22, 25, and 27 caliber Project Salvo (multiple projectile) series. Those were built on Government contract and I’m sure that Winchester made money on them. But they weren’t “sporting arms” in obscure chamberings made for commercial sale.
As for the 7.65M/M and 9M/M the ones that are “real” were (almost) all made from leftover M54 CMS (forged integral ramp) barrel blanks, precisely because as you said, they didn’t sell in the M54 and Winchester never threw away parts. The issue with them is that there appear to be many more of them out there than the factory was likely to have made. The 30 WCF, while a legit former M54 chambering, is perplexing since the chambering was dropped before the switch from Nickel Steel to CMS barrels in 1932. It’s possible, even probable, that the factory made some CMS barrels in 30 WCF that got used up assembling M70s, but so far I’ve no documentation. If you could make a M54 feed/fire/extract a rimmed cartridge (albeit with a specially designed receiver), you could make a M70 do it as well. Like the M54, the realistic looking M70s that I’ve seen in 30 WCF used a flat breech system for establishing headspace.
Hi Bert-
FWIW… I checked my notes and the barrels on the 32-40 and 38-55 M70s I’ve seen are not marked “WCF”. Just the numerals. It was my mistake while cobbling the list together…
Best,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
I bought afew Model 70s from Bob Porter back in the 1990s. Along with Mike Nelson, Pete Solle, Jan Carey, Michael Tenny,Tom Koessl,Chuck Marshal,Bob Mason, Randy Shuman, and Don L Shrum’s Cape Outfitters. Most were listed in the Shotgun News, or purchased at the OGCA shows. A nice group of guys that I enjoyed talking, and visiting with. A young fella could learn alot back them from that bunch! Seeing Bob Porters name bought back some nice memories. Now to the future. At the last OGCA show I saw a interesting Model 70, that a older couple had. The gun was a Transitional Super Grade that showed a great deal of wear. The interesting thing was that the barrel was marked 30Gov’t03. The first thing that caught my attention was that the 3 in the 03 looked odd. I asked them if they had removed the stock from the barreled action to see what was marked on the under barrel. They had not. I told them that they should do that, and don’t be surprised if it is marked 1906. It looked to me that the barrel die did not stamp the 06 marking properly, and it appeared to be a 03 marked barrel. I have found over the years that Model 70s in rare calibers like the 7.65 M/M, 9M/M,.35 Whelen or any other non cataloged caliber were made very early in production. If I see one of the above made after 1940 a red flag goes off! Of. Ourse each gun is unique, and needs to be examined on its own.
Bo Rich said The interesting thing was that the barrel was marked 30Gov’t03. The first thing that caught my attention was that the 3 in the 03 looked odd. I asked them if they had removed the stock from the barreled action to see what was marked on the under barrel. They had not. I told them that they should do that, and don’t be surprised if it is marked 1906. It looked to me that the barrel die did not stamp the 06 marking properly, and it appeared to be a 03 marked barrel.
I don’t know how to find it again, but within the last yr someone posted an excellent close-up photo of the alleged .30-03 marking which CLEARLY revealed it to be the result of a poor die strike, or a badly worn die, which made the “6” superficially resemble a “3.” Yes, if one glanced hastily at the marking in the poor light of gun show, it might be misinterpreted as .30-03, but that’s no excuse for the perpetuation of this silly myth. I think the member providing this photo said he would ask the gun’s owner to remove the stock & check under the barrel, but don’t believe this ever happened…maybe for fear doing so would let the cat out the bag!
Online
I’ve never collected M70’s but have greatly enjoyed the information in this thread. I love the thought of original special order M70’s and M54’sin the various oddball calibers. I was thrilled to read of one in .32 special. I thought .348 was very cool as well. I’d like to see one in .33 WCF and .44-40 would really be something.
1 Guest(s)
