Winchester Polishing Room Serial Numbers
Winchester Polishing Room Serial Numbers for the Model 1894 are now incorporated with the old serialization numbers in Thirty-Second Edition of the Blue Book of Gun Values (BBGV) on page 2346. These numbers have been introduced as "MODEL 1894 Records at the factory, and in some years, estimates, indicate the following serial numbers were assigned to guns at the end of the calendar year."
I don't know if this is the first time the above mentioned data has been published in the BBGV, but it is the first time that I have noticed it, and my personal congratulations is herewith submitted to Bert, David Kennedy, and all other people who might have had a hand in bringing this information to the public via a major national publication.
I don't know if this is the first time the above mentioned data has been published in the BBGV, but it is the first time that I have noticed it, and my personal congratulations is herewith submitted to Bert, David Kennedy, and all other people who might have had a hand in bringing this information to the public via a major national publication.
0
-
The way the Blue Book presented it is confusing. I don't know why they continued to publish the known to be incorrect numbers. They muddied the waters by presenting the old incorrect numbers, when they could have just published the known to be correct Polishing Room numbers and cleared up the serial number confusion. 0 -
It is difficult to get someone to make radical changes to something that has been published for decades... change comes hard to some, and Fjestad is no different. Fortunately, once the door is opened even a small crack, it will get easier. The Polishing Room records have been one of the most enlightening discoveries to emerge in the last 40+ years concerning Winchester history, and I am very happy to have played a role in raising the awareness of the Winchester collecting community. 0 -
It still does not make sense. You have the right numbers and you have the wrong numbers. Why continue to publish the wrong numbers. The way it is presented in the BB you can not really figure what they are saying. Even Kennedy in his article in the Gun Collector magazine can not get himself to come out and just say Madis' numbers are wrong. His conclusion to the article is wishy washy, saying there is still more to be learned on the subject. He just could not come out and say here are the correct numbers, forget those old incorrect numbers. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by capgun
Even Kennedy in his article in the Gun Collector magazine can not get himself to come out and just say Madis' numbers are wrong. His conclusion to the article is wishy washy, saying there is still more to be learned on the subject. He just could not come out and say here are the correct numbers, forget those old incorrect numbers.
I agree that Dave's statement could have been more direct, but at the same time, I also partially understand the position he took on it. What most of you are not aware of, is the intense resistance by many "old" time Winchester collectors & dealers to the new (accurate) information, and the fact that someone (or in this case a few people) are challenging their "old buddy" George Madis. Still to this day, I receive hate mail, or when out in the public, scorn and derision whenever I openly discuss the short comings of Madis' works. There are still just way too many people out there who believe absolutely everything that he ever said and published. Madis' word is still the "gospel" to the majority of the old school Winchester collectors.0 -
Too bad for the "old timers". The facts are the facts, and the truth is the truth. When respected sources continue to publish incorrect information they may encourage sellers to violate Federal Law by selling modern guns as antiques. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by Bert H.
It is difficult to get someone to make radical changes to something that has been published for decades... change comes hard to some, and Fjestad is no different. Fortunately, once the door is opened even a small crack, it will get easier. The Polishing Room records have been one of the most enlightening discoveries to emerge in the last 40+ years concerning Winchester history, and I am very happy to have played a role in raising the awareness of the Winchester collecting community.
Agree with everything you have said, Bert, except that Fjestad took the ball here and is running with it right now, and as long as he is the only major publisher recognizing the polishing room record serial numbers the BBGV sales might well increase.
What we should see now are more buyers and sellers paying greater attention to what constitutes an antique model 94, and in time this situation will run its course and right itself.0 -
Kimi,
The BBGV did not exactly "take the ball and run with it"... It took repeated attempts over several years to get the BBGV to publish the PRSRB data, and there is still a lot of data they did not publish. It is not just the Model 1894 that has accuracy issues (nearly all of the various models have accuracy issues, with the 1894, 1892, 1885, and 1897 being the worst).
As I previously stated, change is slow, but with the door now cracked open, it should come faster in the future. After I finish my research survey of the Model 1885 (hopefully later this year), I will put together and publish a new Winchester DOM book separate from the Red Book Of Winchester Values that I co-wrote last year (it has a full set of DOM tables in chapter 8). Once published, it will cause a significant stir, and hopefully, a lot of changes to peoples perspective.0 -
quote:Originally posted by kimi
Winchester Polishing Room Serial Numbers for the Model 1894 are now incorporated with the old serialization numbers in Thirty-Second Edition of the Blue Book of Gun Values (BBGV) on page 2346. These numbers have been introduced as "MODEL 1894 Records at the factory, and in some years, estimates, indicate the following serial numbers were assigned to guns at the end of the calendar year."
I don't know if this is the first time the above mentioned data has been published in the BBGV, but it is the first time that I have noticed it, and my personal congratulations is herewith submitted to Bert, David Kennedy, and all other people who might have had a hand in bringing this information to the public via a major national publication.
ADDED: capgun, I don't know what David Kennedy said in the Gun Collector magazine about Madis' numbers being wrong, but I do know that he addressed this same subject here on this forum in a most respectful manner giving credit where credit was due in regards to the subject serial numbers, and did not denigrate the highly respected George Madis in the process, see:
http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=3176780 -
quote:Originally posted by Bert H.
Kimi,
The BBGV did not exactly "take the ball and run with it"... It took repeated attempts over several years to get the BBGV to publish the PRSRB data, and there is still a lot of data they did not publish. It is not just the Model 1894 that has accuracy issues (nearly all of the various models have accuracy issues, with the 1894, 1892, 1885, and 1897 being the worst).
As I previously stated, change is slow, but with the door now cracked open, it should come faster in the future. After I finish my research survey of the Model 1885 (hopefully later this year), I will put together and publish a new Winchester DOM book separate from the Red Book Of Winchester Values that I co-wrote last year (it has a full set of DOM tables in chapter 8). Once published, it will cause a significant stir, and hopefully, a lot of changes to peoples perspective.
Good point on the other models, Bert. It's damned difficult to get the attention of any editor it seems, and trying to get Fjestad's attention is far worse than having your wisdom teeth pulled. I've sent them several emails about my Winchester Type 2 Sniper Rifle which was built on a 1903 Springfield action at the Winchester factory and did not even get an answer, much less a thank you. They did not even show the least little bit of interest about one of the most ultra rare custom built rifles ever produced by Winchester. The very fact that David Kennedy did get his foot in the door with Fjestad most likely had a lot to do with his position at the Cody Museum...so much for the peons like me who have something very important to offer Fjestad and the Winchester Community!
Your book idea sounds great, Bert, and will surely go far in creating the right kind of stir...so long as you don't alienate the thousands of fans of the late George Madis! [:D][;)]0 -
We who are all grown up realize that researchers make mistakes, and when mistakes are found we correct them. I think if Madis were alive he would take this available information and correct his mistakes. I believe Madis, being a man of high regard, would want the truth to be known. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by capgun
We who are all grown up realize that researchers make mistakes, and when mistakes are found we correct them. I think if Madis were alive he would take this available information and correct his mistakes. I believe Madis, being a man of high regard, would want the truth to be known.
Absoultely agree with you, capgun, which brings to mind Bert's comment about change.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
11 comments