Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
in 1987 I purchased a (NIB -Mod 70 anniversary model, 300 win – with paperwork that confirmed it was 1 of 500.  I still have the rifle which I’ve  never fired. However, over time and with moving etc, I lost the factory letter confirming that this rifle was a Winchester anniversary model. In researching (Fjestad – Blue Book of Gun Values) the product description & pictures are a perfect match with my rifle – with one exception.  The serial numbering?  My rifle: On the right side of barrel the dates are inscribed 1937 – 1987 along with the scrolled writing “The Rifleman’s Rifle”…..also, the engraving on the floor plate & and side match exactly with those pictures of an anniversary rifle.   Everything matches exactly – wood – butt pad etc.  however, according to (Fjestad) the serial number should be: 50 ANN 1 – 500 ….. The serial number on my rifle is G1788xxxx . I looked up the serial number using Fjestad data page and the production date of that rifle falls between 1986 – 1987; so the time of production matches.  I called Winchester and talked with their “Historical expert” and she didn’t have a clue. I’m curious if any serious Winchester collectors can provide me with any information on this rifle… Thank you. JdsÂ
Offline
John di Stasio said
IÂ called Winchester and talked with their “Historical expert” and she didn’t have a clue.
Oh brother, I’ll bet THAT conversation was a hoot!
Sadly, sounds like one of those “swapped at birth” stories. If the Anniversaries were all within a special serial number range and so-marked, de facto, your’s wasn’t such a model. You mention NIB purchase, but possibly the seller a private party or non-Winchester authorized dealer? Was your transaction contemporaneous with the 1987 marketing of this model? Wondering if a gunshow transaction. Environment where folks unlikely with time to research and seller, folding tent Sunday afternoon! The ‘fasten seat belt, buy & punt’ syndrome.
Excuse the frankness, but sounds like your got snookered. Perhaps a seller to market such a limited edition to you and the actual, correct rifle less even all components, to another “without box or paperwork but wearing that pivotal nomenclature! Who knows!
The necessary junction to admit, not an expert here. Yet with firm belief that regardless of any “correct” limited edition representations, without correct nomenclature, the old saying… Buy the rifle, not the story!
Good luck and if you do get an answer beyond this forum, please do return with ‘the rest of the story’.
My take
Thank you both for the reply.  In answer to the second response, I did purchased this rifle through a sporting goods store (Garts Brothers – Colorado springs – 1987) Garts Brorthers was a distributor for  the whole line of Winchester products.  This rifle wasn’t purchased through a private party or a gun show.  And, the letter included in the box attesting to it authenticity  was on Winchester letterhead.   I have no interest in ever selling the rifle and as I said, just curious.  The rifle itself  is beautiful and well made. A quality rifle that’s sits in one of my safes alongside my Colt Saurers, Weatherbys, Sakos and Merkels. It’s a keeper!  One possibility that crossed my mind was that Winchester actually produced more than the published 500? I’m probably wrong, but….who knows?  Bottom line, I’ll now consider it a shooter not a collectable.  At my age I’m passing many of my guns down to relatives – my nephew will probably get this one.  Thanks again for your responses.  JdsÂ
iskra said
Sadly, sounds like one of those “swapped at birth” stories. If the Anniversaries were all within a special serial number range and so-marked, de facto, your’s wasn’t such a model. You mention NIB purchase, but possibly the seller a private party or non-Winchester authorized dealer? Was your transaction contemporaneous with the 1987 marketing of this model? Wondering if a gunshow transaction. Environment where folks unlikely with time to research and seller, folding tent Sunday afternoon! The ‘fasten seat belt, buy & punt’ syndrome.
Excuse the frankness, but sounds like your got snookered. Perhaps a seller to market such a limited edition to you and the actual, correct rifle less even all components, to another “without box or paperwork but wearing that pivotal nomenclature! Who knows!
The necessary junction to admit, not an expert here. Yet with firm belief that regardless of any “correct” limited edition representations, without correct nomenclature, the old saying… Buy the rifle, not the story!
Good luck and if you do get an answer beyond this forum, please do return with ‘the rest of the story’.
My take Â
iskra, what from JdS’ original posting led you to such skepticism?? Sounded like a reasonable acquisition scenario to me – though I must admit I am a very inexperienced collector. I he was snookered, educated, don’t rub our noses in it. Â
John di Stasio saidÂ
 One possibility that crossed my mind was that Winchester actually produced more than the published 500?   Â
In the limited edition book & print market, this is very common. In addition to the numbered items, the “official” ones, un-numbered ones are later, more or less covertly, made available.Â
Thank you Clarence. Â Your comments make the most sense. In fairness to the young lady “historian” I called who worked at the Winchester plant , she did say that the gentleman who was their actual “historian” retired and she was filling in …..just for the fun of it- I wish I still had that original letter (on Winchester letterhead) that came with the rifle. Â Thank you again for your input. Â Have a very nice day – JdsÂ
John,
There is No “Winchester” plant (factory) that manufactures firearms. Winchester (owned by Olin Industries) ceased manufacturing firearms in late 1980. The young lady you spoke with is actually an employee of the Browning Arms Company, which has a “Winchester” division. Browning Arms is owned by FN Herstal, and production of Winchester marked firearms currently takes place in Japan and Portugal. The current production Model 70 rifles are manufactured in Portugal. FN Herstal secured a lease from Olin to continue using the trademarked “Winchester” name.
In regards to your Model 70 rifle, I am in agreement with Clarence on how it came to be.
Bert – WACA Historian
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert. Thank you for your response but all that manufacturing information is detailed in Fjestad …Blue Book of Gun Values”. For expediency I took “poetic license” and simply phrased “Winchester mfg” as a side comment in answering a specific question by Clarence. Â In the mean time if Olin ever returns my call I might get a definitive answer…. Or maybe not. Â Thank you, JdsÂ
First, Mr. De Stasio, an apology for my use of the term “snookered”. I do tend to speak frankly, but with foxfire’s apt notation; reviewing. Perhaps too frank. A bit caustic and not intended to be, nor even to sound demeaning in any context. Such matters part of accruing collector ‘stripes’; similarly with other investments, as well as ‘life’! Some such detrimental transactions. Certainly with my share in guns and war stories appended!
As I’ve noted, not an expert here. But the fact pattern seems quite unusual. Adding to that… Bert and Clarence, if understood correctly, painting a picture rather like the barrel utilization programs of the old Winchester. Yet here, a fundamental difference and significant; again if I understand. To stand back a moment.
Commemoratives one matter, limited editions quite another. When the firm commits to offering such a finite, limited production model; an inducement. Purchasers acting in reliance forming not just an ethical relationship but a contract. John’s rifle in context of all descriptors listed, is such a limited edition. IF, five hundred were produced within the hallowed serialization pattern and then ‘others’, perhaps as parts cleanup were also offered, a seemingly clear detriment to the chosen 500 as the ‘pool’ of rifles is essentially watered down. Moreover, purchasers as John, reasonably relying on nomenclature and background information; mislead. A category of consumer, responding to misleading information. Merely altering a detail (and in context of serial ‘presentation’, such) does not suggest a sufficient variation to excuse the ‘limited production of 500’ context or commitment. The only question is whether for some reason, rifles counted within that 500 were serialized in normal fashion. Perhaps technically ‘no actionable foul’ unless the promotion also showed or referred to the special serialization. Beyond legal liability and ‘getting away’ without class action lawsuit, the ethical matter. The dimension of that in an era rifle with commemoratives, setting a negative marketing precedent like a hovering iceberg. I’d be very surprised to learn that for the sake of some extra bucks and presumably small numbers at that, a ‘lookalike’ model to issue.
Giving some thought, what I conjured occurring, some casualty or warranty claim involving the receiver itself and the firm simply unable to furnish another one similarly serialed. Of course in my scenario, postulating the rifle originally left the factory as one of the 500, returned and made right before any retail purchase. Thus, the rifle as presented, correct ‘ruffles & flourishes, documentation, etc. Only the single, if quite significant serialization detail altered.
John, were I you, to invest postage in a letter to Winchester/Browning. An inquiry. Likely response amounting to ‘didn’t happen on our watch’/no info. But interesting how a neutral, factual inquiry might be answered. Beyond, you’re at the best place possible if to find any answer… Or, as mine, wild speculation. 🙂
Just the last matter. No legal advice intended or to be taken. Further, whatever actionable civil wrongs involved, USRA, the firm of such day, long defunct.
Good luck and…
Just a hypothetical take
Postscript: Just this notation, following up on a thought. To recall that in 1989, USRA filing bankruptcy. During such times, who knows exactly what happened on the production floor. Many ordinary rules & procedures suspended as ‘survival’; in this instance – buyout, and posturing associated taking precedence.
***
1 Guest(s)
