Log In
On some of my ladder sights, the slide looks to have a spring steel spacer that keeps the slide tight on the ladder; on others there is no such spring steel spacer and it appears there was no room for one.
were they made to be press fitted?
I would appreciate some info on this.
thanks
April 15, 2005
Offline
To the best of my knowledge, all of the No. 44A Carbine ladder sights should have the spring steel piece on the right-hand side of the sliding elevation piece.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
November 1, 2013
Offline
Bert H. said
To the best of my knowledge, all of the No. 44A Carbine ladder sights should have the spring steel piece on the right-hand side of the sliding elevation piece.
44A implies a preceding 44; could that be one made without the spring?
April 15, 2005
Offline
clarence said
Bert H. said
To the best of my knowledge, all of the No. 44A Carbine ladder sights should have the spring steel piece on the right-hand side of the sliding elevation piece.
44A implies a preceding 44; could that be one made without the spring?
Not in this case. There are no records that corroborate a No. 44 sight.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
July 17, 2012
Offline
Bert H. said
To the best of my knowledge, all of the No. 44A Carbine ladder sights should have the spring steel piece on the right-hand side of the sliding elevation piece.
There are 2 pages of change notes on the back side of the Winchester 44A sight drawing.
Is this the spring you are discussing? It looks like it was not added until 1915.
WACA Life Member #6284 - Specializing in Pre-64 Winchester .22 Rimfire
April 15, 2005
Offline
Jeff,
You are awesome!! It appears that the mystery is solved 
Thanks,
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
November 1, 2013
Offline
Bert H. said
Jeff,You are awesome!! It appears that the mystery is solved
Thanks,
Bert
One solved, but here’s another: the 82A is my favorite factory sight, but that “A” likewise implies a preceding sight that was modified in some way to require addition of the suffix.
July 17, 2012
Offline
clarence said
One solved, but here’s another: the 82A is my favorite factory sight, but that “A” likewise implies a preceding sight that was modified in some way to require addition of the suffix.
Hi Clarence,
Logically, I get your point but I am not sure it is a mystery. The Winchester sights did not follow the rifle model suffix naming protocol for significant changes (i.e, incompatible component interchangeability) to the design.
I have over 400 original Winchester sight drawings and they all start with “A” after the initial number on the post 1900 drawings, even though in many cases there is only 1 version of the sight. It “seems like” (and this is just speculation) that when Winchester developed a new sight they named/numbered it expecting in the future it could become a series of sights based on the same design (and in many cases this did, in fact, happen.) When the beloved Model 52 was introduced it was offered with a 93A front sight blade and the 82A rear, there was only ONE version of each of those sights at the time. It was years later but eventually they made a 93B which had a different height and was used on many other rifles . Note: There is a MUCH longer and more convoluted and interesting story there which I will save for a WACA magazine article but that example serves my point.
And, since I know that you would be interested, I checked the revision list on the back of the 82A drawing and was surprised to see that it is one of the VERY few sights that had NO revisions whatsoever during the entire production.
Best Regards,
WACA Life Member #6284 - Specializing in Pre-64 Winchester .22 Rimfire
November 1, 2013
Offline
Logically, I get your point but I am not sure it is a mystery. The Winchester sights did not follow the rifle model suffix naming protocol for significant changes (i.e, incompatible component interchangeability) to the design.
I have over 400 original Winchester sight drawings and they all start with “A” after the number on the post 1900 drawings, even though in many cases there is only 1 version of the sight. It “seems like” (and this is just speculation) that when Winchester developed a new sight they named/numbered it expecting in the future it could become a series of sights based on the same design (and in many cases this did, in fact, happen.) When the beloved Model 52 was introduced it was offered with a 93A front sight blade and the 82A rear, there was only ONE version of each of those sights at the time. JWA said
Very queer, if that was the official protocol for designating newly designed sights, or any other products; it defies the common logic behind the use of a suffix observed by every other manufacturer I’m aware of. My theory was that the “original” 82 was a prototype modified before production got underway. (One minor revision in the design that could have been made was in the diameter of the windage knobs, hard to turn, & attached to shafts so thin that they bent fairly easily. But no great problem, as changes in windage adjustment aren’t usually made very often.)
Anyway, thanks for dispelling my false assumption about the evolution of this sight!
July 17, 2012
Offline
Hi Clarence,
I agree, I can logically follow the letter suffix on the Winchester rifle model numbers since the suffixes usually meant that the change in the design meant that some components would no longer be interchangeable with earlier models. I don’t think Winchester ever thought that sights would normally be user serviceable when it came to replacing individual components (although they did offer the individual components for sale). The letters simply meant (in most cases) that it was the same sight family but with a different height or aperture/notch.
Another example (which you will read about in the upcoming book on the Model 75) is the Winchester 84A rear sight. This sight was specifically developed solely for the Model 75 Target and it was designated with the “A” suffix, even in the prototype stage. In fact, an example of the prototype 84A was submitted to American Rifleman “Dope Bag” for review prior to the release of the Model 75. AR found it deficient in several areas so Winchester revised the sight, both mechanically and visually but it retained the “84A” nomenclature both before and after the physical changes.
If you want to pick on a department at Winchester, let’s discuss the Sales department, those guys made up their own rules and descriptions……
Best Regards,
WACA Life Member #6284 - Specializing in Pre-64 Winchester .22 Rimfire
November 19, 2006
Offline
“A” is the first letter in the alphabet. It’s not illogical that the very first of something would be marked A. But from what I can tell, that may be true of some Winchester sights but not others. We will not find a consistent pattern.
November 1, 2013
Offline
steve004 said
“A” is the first letter in the alphabet. It’s not illogical that the very first of something would be marked A. But from what I can tell, that may be true of some Winchester sights but not others. We will not find a consistent pattern.
So by application of that principle, the first Model 52 should have been the 52A, the model now designated 52A should be the 52B, & so on, down to the final 52, not the E model, but the F.
November 19, 2006
Offline
clarence said
steve004 said
“A” is the first letter in the alphabet. It’s not illogical that the very first of something would be marked A. But from what I can tell, that may be true of some Winchester sights but not others. We will not find a consistent pattern.
So by application of that principle, the first Model 52 should have been the 52A, the model now designated 52A should be the 52B, & so on, down to the final 52, not the E model, but the F.
It seems Winchester did use this principle, but with variability 
