Log In
April 15, 2005
Offline
Henry,
You need to ask the CFM to recheck the SNA records… based on my research and tables I created for the Red Book and WACA serial number look-up tables, serial number 137058 was the last one completed in the year 1901. That would indicate that your rifle was most likely serialized in early 1902. When I went through the Model 1894 PR (SNA) records in Dave Kennedy’s office at the CFM, there were no gaps in the serial numbers listed in the records.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
July 7, 2011
Offline
Yes, that carbine has the proof under the caliber but, a much neater application. Now, as stated in Bob’s book, the barrel has the patent error date which puts the barrel from 1907. ( All 10 guns that I have recorded with that date were from 1907 ) The receiver was from June of 1919. So if it was factory made, both barrel and receiver were both from a period when they would have been proofed. The rifle with s/n 137206 from Jan. 1902 would not have been proofed when it first left the factory on April 7, 1902. It had to have been done later for what ever reason. That is all I am trying to point out.
Paul
April 15, 2005
Offline
podufa said
Robert Renneberg’s book,2nd edition page 106 has a picture of a proof mark under the caliber mark.
Ray,
I do not believe that the barrel on that SRC was installed by Winchester. Bob clearly stated “(albeit possibly factory re-barreled)” in the caption under the picture. He then further went on to state that it has the early patent date error on the barrel, “found on guns with serial numbers in the mid-300,000 to the early 400,000 range”.
In my on going survey of the Model 1894 production, I have positively confirmed that the patent date error die was used on round barreled guns only, and that it was used in the 273334 – 400073 serial number range only. I currently have (17) patent date error guns in my survey. I would truly like to examine that Trapper… there is a good chance that it has another proof mark on the barrel (under the rear portion of the 3-leaf express sight).
The trapper shown in Bob’s book also has “questionable” issues in its at present configuration, and it that regard, it is similar to Henry’s Model 1894.
Just my 2-cents,
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
