Bert
saw a winchester 32 rimfire octagon barrel and striped receiver only no markings on tang. barrel had a 2 line address and 32 rimfire and the winchester proof mark on it.it did have a front sight and a rear sight which looked like a buck horn sight barrel did have rifling let but was pretty dark and looked pitted it measured 26" long not sure if it was a high wall or low wall i dont know alot about these rifles he wanted a 100.00 for it mabe i should have bought it????barrel had no pits on out side but mostly in petina the receiver did have 1 pitted spot not real bad had no camera with me..Thanks
0
-
Hi Bert. I came across an 1892 today. Takedown model with a round barrel. Tang sight. Serial # 488388. It's original finish is all gone and it has a nice patina. Would you have any info on his rifle and its approximate value? Most I see have an octagon barrel.
Thank you
Mark0 -
There are no other specific features that idenitfy a first year Model 67 rifle, but there were a number of feature changes that identify later production years. Winchester made a fair number of production changes to nearly all of their many different models, and the Model 67 was no exception. Herb Houze covers all of those changes in great detail in his books... something that Madis did not do.
In regards to Herb's many reference books, they are technically accurate, and they provide highly detailed schematics and production information. For anyone who is truly interested in learning about specific Winchester Models, his books are simply the best available.
The one book I mentioned covers many different models (e.g. the 1885, 1900, 1902, Thumb Trigger, 1904/04/04A, 47, 55, 58, 59, 60, 60A, 67, 677, 68, 121, and 310)... not what I would consider a "small portion of models". His other books (covering the Model 1876, Model 52, and the entire History of Winchester from 1865 through 1981) are of the same quality. If someone wants a lot of very good information, buy one copy of each of his books... and then spend the next sevral months reading and re-reading them.
Madis's books on the other hand, are simply full of techincal errors, with very little true production detail, and in general, they are a poor source for obtaining accurate information.
It would be a nightmare and extremely difficult for just "one" book to cover all Winchester Models with any reasonable accuracy, and if it were to be tried, the book would end up being more than a foot thick.
For advanced Winchester collectors, Madis's books simply do not make the cut in my learned opinion... and there is no "seems like you do not want to recognize this piece of work...". I flat-out do not care for the content of his books, and I fully recognize the many hundreds of errors in them. For the beginner, they are adequate documents to begin the learning process, but for the serious Winchester collectors, they should be taken with a very large grain of salt. As for George Madis the man, he was a tremendous and guinely nice person, and was a superb ambassador to the Winchester collecting community. His efforts to help educate the community were commendable.0 -
Thank you so much Bert! I really need to step up and buy some of the newer material. Currently I'm using an older blue book(which of course has lots of inaccuracies) and I have several books by R.L Wilson(who is most likely a crook) and I do not know how accurate he is, although his books seem to be decent. I'll have to pick up Herb's book. I also need to get Supica's S&W book. 0 -
Houze's book "Winchester Repeating Arms Co. History and Developement" has numerous errors. In the section alone, on George Ulrich the engraver and his successors, his dates and time line is way off. I would love to know how he came up with this. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by Bert H.
There are no other specific features that idenitfy a first year Model 67 rifle, but there were a number of feature changes that identify later production years. Winchester made a fair number of production changes to nearly all of their many different models, and the Model 67 was no exception. Herb Houze covers all of those changes in great detail in his books... something that Madis did not do.
In regards to Herb's many reference books, they are technically accurate, and they provide highly detailed schematics and production information. For anyone who is truly interested in learning about specific Winchester Models, his books are simply the best available.
The one book I mentioned covers many different models (e.g. the 1885, 1900, 1902, Thumb Trigger, 1904/04/04A, 47, 55, 58, 59, 60, 60A, 67, 677, 68, 121, and 310)... not what I would consider a "small portion of models". His other books (covering the Model 1876, Model 52, and the entire History of Winchester from 1865 through 1981) are of the same quality. If someone wants a lot of very good information, buy one copy of each of his books... and then spend the next sevral months reading and re-reading them.
Madis's books on the other hand, are simply full of techincal errors, with very little true production detail, and in general, they are a poor source for obtaining accurate information.
It would be a nightmare and extremely difficult for just "one" book to cover all Winchester Models with any reasonable accuracy, and if it were to be tried, the book would end up being more than a foot thick.
For advanced Winchester collectors, Madis's books simply do not make the cut in my learned opinion... and there is no "seems like you do not want to recognize this piece of work...". I flat-out do not care for the content of his books, and I fully recognize the many hundreds of errors in them. For the beginner, they are adequate documents to begin the learning process, but for the serious Winchester collectors, they should be taken with a very large grain of salt. As for George Madis the man, he was a tremendous and guinely nice person, and was a superb ambassador to the Winchester collecting community. His efforts to help educate the community were commendable.
I'm glad to hear from you that there were no other features that identify the Model 67. This is in line with what Madis noted about the Model 67 without mentioning any correct details, and you are correct in noting that there were a number of changes made in later years, Madis points out many of these errors as well. [:D]
I will probably buy some of Houze's books like the one you mentioned earlier, but I believe ruger 41's question to you was specifically, "is there a better book for info out there that covers so many guns at once?" Notice that he did not specify a book that covered just single shot rifles. It was ruger's inquiry that prompted me to point out George Madis' excellent work titled The Winchester Handbook, and I still highly recommend this book for anyone wanting a good reference on most all Winchester rifles. The Houze book you mentioned does not in any way compare to Madis' work when it comes to one book that covers a lot of guns, since it covers most all models that Winchester made as compared to just single shots. Considering the great number of Winchester rilfes that were made, single shots were few, or small, in comparison when a total number of Winchester models are considered.
I'd like to make note, once again, that most Winchester fans will never buy all of anyone's books if these books cover just a few models, IMO. Here again, if people like ruger are truly concerned about "one book covering most all of Winchesters models, and each with some very good details," then Madis' book will fit their need better than any other one reference book that I am aware of to date.
Madis' book has some technical errors in them, and one of these areas has to do with serial numbers that you have helped people learn about, but I'm not aware of the other errors that you refer to. Your point about Houze's books is well taken, but the same can be said for Madis' books too when it comes to one book covering Winchester's rifles on the whole. The aim of the authors were apparently different as well. Do you own Madis' books, Bert?
It would be interesting to know how many advanced collectors cut their teeth on George Madis' work, and how many more will in the future.
I do need to buy Houze's books though!
EDIT:
Pualine:
The only author whose work gets criticized on this forum is George Madis, but I could be wrong. Granted Madis' work does have some errors in it, but through Bert's research the MAIN errors seem to have been pointed out.
I also find it refreshing to know that your comment about the work of George Madis, on the whole, is spot on, which is the way I see it myself, despite any and all errors that are in his work. The very fact that you have spent a distinguished career as a highly accomplished artist at Winchester gives those of us here at GB another highly credible source of expert knowledge and guidance. This, plus the fact that you can speak with first hand knowledge about what you and your colleagues had to say about the quality of Madis and his work speaks volumes then as well as now. Thank you for helping to educate all Winchester fans, be they like an advanced collector that might collect only one model and, therefore, in reality need only one good reference book, or be they like someone with a strong urge to learn as much as possible about most every model Winchester ever made, whose budget might be stretched at $25.00.
Your comment about George Madis working with the information he had available to him at the time he wrote his books also speaks volumes.
Givette: Madis book is still a good buy for anyone wanting to learn about Winchester. As to your question about XYZ, name me one author who has published one book that covers most all of the Winchester rifles. Madis is the only man that I'm aware of who has done this with any degree of detailed information that people would want to know. That's the point I have been trying to make here, and no one can provide an answer a better reference book. Quite obviously, those authors who might have pondered writing such a book did not do it - I wonder why? Madis wrote two of them. Now, if you just want to learn about three rifles (XYZ), by all means, buy the three up to date books, but if you want just one book then you'll buy one of Madis' books.
As to questions that are available to our forum members, most of the questions aside from serial numbers and "rarity" details that Bert has mentioned, Madis' book has the correct information in most cases. It's as simple as that.
Bert: It's good to know that you have Madis' books. Now, let me ask you another question. Knowing what you know now about the errors that are in Madis' books, would you still buy the two (The Winchester Book or The Winchester Handbook) that cover most all models that Winchester ever made, provided you wanted one source that covered the most Winchester models? Also, is there another book, just "one" book that I could buy that covers as many models as either of his books do, that provides the details that his books provide? I'm serious, because I'll check it out and compare it with Madis' books, and then I'll give you my opinion of it right here on GB where a discussion could take place about the reference book that you recommend instead of Madis' book.
One other note Bert. I imagine that someone still owns the copyrights to Madis two books that cover Winchester's rifles, and that an updated printing of them both would make for absolutely the best buys that could be found today and for a long time to come. Someone like you might be able to make this happen, and what a great service this would be to people like us! I might be able to go line by line on these books with you and make such corrections provided you can provide the new found references. Just a thought.
Another note here Bert: Your note as to Madis' statistical data is well received. Thank you.
EDIT:
I would buy his books again knowing like you that the serial numbers and statistical data is flawed. The very fact that you mention that there is "NO" other book that covers as many Winchester models as Madis' two books, plus the very fact that you admit that Madis' information about all of these models, and their many variations of them, to include, his many descriptions as being very good in your own words make these two publications unlike any other Winchester books available to the public today, and that's worth a whole lot to a lot of people, which is exactly why I bought his books. Let me also add that the details that George Madis includes in these many descriptions is not only very good, but provides some information about some models that cannot be found in any other publication at all, some of which I have used to answer inquiries here on this forum, and some of which I have used to enhance my own collection.
I think that you would be doing a service to the Winchester community if you did consider and eventually execute such a project with Pat, George's widow. It could be done as well, in a "very small supplement to his existing work" which you could author yourself. Either way Winchester fans would have a book that covered most all of Winschester's rifles with updated serial numbers, statistical data, and whatever minor errors might exist in any of his descriptions. Afterall, it was Madis' goal to provide this same information in the beginning.
Have a good day Bert.0 -
I whole heartedly agree with you regarding George Madis' work. As a former Winchester employee I have been collecting Winchester original documentation for the last 25 years along with interviewing employees. Most of what George has written is spot on. As for his serial nos., I have seen many DOM questions answered on this sight by people that dispute all of his serialization records. Alot of the DOM answers given by these people have the same DOM as Georges records. He may have been off to a certain degree but he worked with the info available at the time. All Winchester books will be subject to scrutiny as new info becomes available. 0 -
In answer to your question...
quote:Do you own Madis' books, Bert?
Yes, I have a copy of all of his books... and I have owned many of them for more than 20-years.
In addition to his serial number versus DOM errors, nearly all of his so called rarity tables (found at the end of each chapter) are way way off the mark, and for every single one of the Models that I have researched and collect.
To cite a specific example, take a look at the numbers Madis listed in his book "The Winchester Handbook" for the first 1-million Model 1894/94s made (page 147)
quote
"30 W.C.F. 857,613
32 WIN. SPL. 101,423
25-35 W.C.F. 16,581
32-40 W.C.F. (sic) 12,186
38-55 W.C.F. (sic) 12,197"
end quote
Please note that when added together, his numbers equal 1,000,000
Now, when the Cody Firearms Musuem research department conducted a detailed (and very time consuming) survey of the surviving Model 1894 factory ledger records (serial numbers 1 - 353,999) back in the mid 1990s, the numbers came out significantly different...
30 W.C.F. 162,568
38-55 (80,734)
32-40 (40,023)
25-35 W.C.F. (36,999)
32 W.S. (31,050)
In addition to Madis having the caliber numbers way out of whack, all of his other "special feature" numbers are equally and as grossly in error. He states that just 2,758 Take Down rifles were made in the first 1-million made. According to the actual factory records, Winchester actually made 26,934 Take Downs before serial number 354,000 was reached! His number of only 2,671 special shorter magazines is woefully short of the 27,554 that were actually made.
If I had the time and inclination, I could go on all night listing all of the many many errors contained within his works... but hopefully you (and anyone else who reads this) is getting my point.
Finally, it is just not the Model 1894 that his published information is so grossly in error... For the Model 1885, his information is totally inaccurate, and for the Models 1886, 1892, 1897, it is as equally flawed. I have personally not taken the time to closely investigate the many other models for which records exist, but I very strongly believe that they too are not accurate. Madis's information about the models that were made, their many variations, and his descriptions of them are very good... but his statisical numbers are all highly suspect, regardless of what model you want to discuss.
EDIT
quote:Bert: It's good to know that you have Madis' books. Now, let me ask you another question. Knowing what you know now about the errors that are in Madis' books, would you still buy the two (The Winchester Book or The Winchester Handbook) that cover most all models that Winchester ever made, provided you wanted one source that covered the most Winchester models? Also, is there another book, just "one" book that I could buy that covers as many models as either of his books do, that provides the details that his books provide? I'm serious, because I'll check it out and compare it with Madis' books, and then I'll give you my opinion of it right here on GB where a discussion could take place about the reference book that you recommend instead of Madis' book.
One other note Bert. I imagine that someone still owns the copyrights to Madis two books that cover Winchester's rifles, and that an updated printing of them both would make for absolutely the best buys that could be found today and for a long time to come. Someone like you might be able to make this happen, and what a great service this would be to people like us! I might be able to go line by line on these books with you and make such corrections provided you can provide the new found references. Just a thought.
Another note here Bert: Your note as to Madis' statistical data is well received. Thank you.
In answer to your first question, and knowing what I do about the vast number of errors, No, I would not buy either one of the books. Instead, I would buy the individual books I needed to cover my interests.
In answer to your second question, the answer is again No, there is not another "just one book" available that attempts to cover "all" Winchester models... as I pointed out previously, to do so, it would require an inhumanly amount of research time & effort, and you would end up with many volumes versus a single book. I personally advocate buying individual books that specifically cover what each individual collector is interested in. Fortunately, there are a several books out there that cover more than just one model (e.g. Houze, Schwing, Pirkle, etc.) Individually researched and written reference books covering specific Winchester models are simply a better choice in my opinion... especially in light of the fact that very very few people try to collect "all" Winchester models.
In regards to your first Note, I believe that Pat Madis (George's widow) owns the rights to his books. As for updating his books, I might consider it, but only after I complete my own book on the Model 1885, and after I research, compile, write, and publish a new Winchester serialization book.0 -
quote:From Kimi:
"It would be interesting to know how many advanced collectors cut their teeth on George Madis' work, and how many more will in the future"
Agreed. When 'cutting one's teeth', as it were, it would involve the novice collector. (Which I certainly am). And, yes, I'd be drawn (as a novice collector) to a volume that covered every model produced. One-stop shopping is attractive!
I have a problem, though:
If I were to open the Madis tome, and researched XYZ rifle, would that particular rifle's info be accurate? And so on, for every rifle I researched. Many firearms all in one spot. Neat. But what about the one I'm looking up?
No Sir!
Begrudgingly, I'd have to resort to the individual pubs that focus on specific areas of Winchester collection. After all, as a forums member here I most likely will be directed to the correct reference source anyway (as well as an outright answer to any querie I might have). Best, Joe0 -
I just look at the pictures! 0 -
"If I had the time and inclination, I could go on all night listing all of the many many errors contained within his works... but hopefully you (and anyone else who reads this) is getting my point."
I get the point, over and over and over, may I suggest that if you spent just a small portion of the time you use to harp about Mr. Midas doing research and writing you could have published by now.0 -
quote:Originally posted by MP
"If I had the time and inclination, I could go on all night listing all of the many many errors contained within his works... but hopefully you (and anyone else who reads this) is getting my point."
I get the point, over and over and over, may I suggest that if you spent just a small portion of the time you use to harp about Mr. Midas doing research and writing you could have published by now.
Your reply is both ignorant, and of very little use to this conversation. The man's name is properly "Madis".
For what it is worth, I am a regular working stiff, with a full-time job (as a Senior Engineer with L3 Communications). Collecting and researching Winchesters is just my hobby... not my full time job. You apparently have no concept for all of the work and time that is required to properly research and write a reference book that is both technically accurate, and written such that it useful to the average collector.0 -
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I don't think that makes it ignorant or of little use. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
12 comments