Winchester1885 Puzzle.
I have an 1885 winchester that Originally had a #3 30" barrel. the gun was "refinished" some time ago and the barrel was never reblued, just the reciever. I it possible that winchester redid this gun by cutting the original barrel to 26"? The gun has all of the right markings but the #3 stamped on the barrel is now hidden by the forearm...and you can tell where the barrel was marked to cut the dovetail rear sight, but then it was moved forward. Proof stamp and chambering stamp are strong and in the right place. ??????
0
-
This is right up <BERT H.>s Alley...You can contact Him Direct thru this Forum or just be patient...He'll be along....... 0 -
Todd,
The barrel on your 1885 rifle is much newer than the frame. Based on the caliber stamp and address & patent location (on the left flat), that barrel was not made until at least 1913/1914.
Winchester did make 26-inch barrels for the 1885, but the barrel you have was orignally 28-inches in length.
The sights are original Winchester sights, but may or may not be original to the rifle.
Based on what I see, the barrel was reblued after being modified. The number "139060" appears to be a factory work order number. I assume that you researched this through Cody... was there an "R & R" listed? Without better pictures (or having the rifle in my hands to inspect), I can not tell if the barrel was reworked by Winchester, or someone else. That said, there are clues pointing both directions.
Out of curiosity, what is the serial number, and what caliber/cartridge was it originally?0 -
quote:Originally posted by cartod
quote:Originally posted by captkirk3@dslextreme.com
This is right up <BERT H.>s Alley...You can contact Him Direct thru this Forum or just be patient...He'll be along.......
I guess I'm on his "pay no mind" list. [:D]
No, you are not on that list... yet[}:)]. It just took me awhile to get to it. I studied you pictures for almost 30-minutes before arriving at a conclusion.0 -
OK, so somebody found a newer barrel in the same cartridge. The proof mark on the frame ring is not original (somebody added it, but before they refinished it (blued). Remove the forend stock tenon... is the dovetail blued or in the white? Same thing for the flat-spring tenon slot? 0 -
Being that the chambering designation stamp is where it should be, andeverything else has been moved ahead, here is what I see and think. Yes the gun is altered, and I would get the cody letter, as I do believe that this was done by Winchester...though as of later, not earlier, but when it was still Winchester.
My reason for saying that is the chambering stamp looks correct for the Winchester factory, and it percieves that the back end of this original barrel was chopped off and rechambered. It was masterfully done to get the barrel indexed properly for the forend hanger, and the sights. Hence the "newer caliber stamp", and the hiding #3. The proof on the frame was added when they done the barrel work too.
Get the letter.
Bert, I am waiting to hear your thoughts on my theory.
Best
EDIT
What if the factory reworked the rifle after they did away with their case coloring operations? When did they cease the case coloring? Does the factory, or does the factory not have to be the ones to proof mark their work?0 -
"and you can tell where the barrel was marked to cut the dovetail rear sight,"........THE ORIGINAL SIGHT SLOT WAS 'FILLED' THEN A NEW DOVETAIL WAS CUT, THEY DIDN'T 'MARK' A DOVETAIL. IT DOES LOOK LIKE FACTORY WORK THO. 0 -
Todd,
Please send me a copy of the Cody information sheet (for my Model 1885 data base).
OK, here are my thoughts about your rifle;
(1) It is an 1893 vintage rifle, and as such, the frame was originally case color finished.
(2) The barrel is at least a 1913 vintage piece... 20-years+ newer than the rifle.
(3) There is no information in the original factory ledger indicating an "R&R", and as such, it does not support the "factory rework" theory.
(4) The barrel now on the rifle appears to originally have been 28-inches long, also confirming that it is not the original barrel.
(5) The caliber stamp on the left flat does look like an original factory stamp, and it is in the correct location.
(6) The "139060" number stamped on the bottom of the barrel is typical of a factory work order number, indicating that the barrel was shortened by the factory... but not for this rifle. The reblue on the barrel also points towards factory rework.
(7) The frame was refinished incorrectly, and after the Definitive proof mark was applied... strongly pointing towards non-factory work.
(8) If you remove the rear sight, forend stock tenon, and flat-spring tenon, I suspect that you will find milling marks identical to the open (non-used) slots, and that the new dovetail slots are blued... which supports/confirms the factory rework of the barrel.
In summary, I believe that the barrel was factory reworked, but not the rifle itself.0 -
Bert, yes this gun was originally case colored. After you mentioned it I looked up inside the reciever and the parts still have case coloring (photo). Would you order a letter if it were yours....of course you probably dont have any "refinished" guns..[}:)][:D] would a letter ad any overall value? 0 -
quote:Originally posted by cartod
Would you order a letter if it were yours....of course you probably dont have any "refinished" guns..[}:)][:D] would a letter ad any overall value?
No, I would not order a factory letter if the research sheet does not indicate an "R & R". No, a letter would not add anything to that rifle's value. You are correct... I do not own a "refinished" Model 1885, but I do own one that was fully "restored" (and not by Turnbull).0 -
quote:Originally posted by tsr1965
EDIT
What if the factory reworked the rifle after they did away with their case coloring operations? When did they cease the case coloring? Does the factory, or does the factory not have to be the ones to proof mark their work?
Winchester ceased case coloring the receiver frames in August of 1901. However, the various and assundry pieces & parts used to build the completed actions continued to be case color hardened up through at least 1920 (e.g. the lever, the hammer, the breech block, the trigger, etc.). Additionally, there were a fair number of case color finished frames on hand for several years beyond late 1901, which is why it is possible to find Model 1885s that letter several years after August of 1901 that are case color finished (I have found tham as late as 1908).
In order to properly blue a formerly case hardened item, it requires that it be reheat treated. Otherwise, the bluing can look mottled.
Based on the pictures Todd posted, I can easily see that the receiver frame was polished too aggressively before it was blued (many of the corners and radiuses are too soft and rounded). In other words, it is easy to see that it was prepped and blued by someone with minimal experience.
As for the Definitive proof mark stamp, there are a LOT of fake stamps in the hands of people outside of the factory. I know of at least a half-dozen people who have one. Ordinarily, Yes, the factory is the entity that applies the proof marks to their products. However, and in this case, it was not the factory who stamped the proof mark on the frame ring. The big clue is the fact that this rifle was apparently not returned to the factory for rework (R & R). The second clue is the fact that the proof mark was applied to the frame ring before the frame was polished and blued.
This is one of those cases where it is very important to understand exactly how Winchester went about their daily business of building and repairing/reworking their firearms.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
10 comments