Skip to main content
Help Center Community Shop

M97 with US but no flaming bomb on reciever

U856807
I have just acquired a M97 trench shotgun. Everything about the gun is consistent with the as issued specifications in Joe Poyer's book on Winchester Trench Guns except the stock has a steel butt plate and there is no flaming bomb to go along with the US markning on the left rear of the recciever.

Poyer does state that guns issued to the Navy, Coast Guard, Signal Corps, or Army Air Corps sometimes don't have the expected ordinance markings. I've seen several pictures on the internet of M97s with the US marking but no bomb. How do you guys explain this?

FYI here are a few of the specs:
serial number:E9303XX; take down receiver with same serial number on the extension. US, machine stamped on left rear of reciever before polish and blue, Winchester proof top front reciever; Barrell markings all consistent with 42 date stamp after polish and blue, no markings on the action slide bar, 6x29 steel handguard.

(stock has steel butt plate with widow peak, but no arsenal marks)
0

Comments

9 comments

Date Votes
  • rufe-snow
    I would get hold of a Blue Book, they have a specific section on "Trench Shotguns". The Model 97 is discussed in this section. There seems to be discrepancies between your shotgun and the Model 97's noted in the BB. I don't know who would be more accurate in this matter, either Poyer or the guys who's information the BB used?
    0
  • Bert H.
    For starters, the butt stock & butt plate are not original to the gun. They appear to be from a much older Model 1897. Is the butt plate smooth, or is it checkered?

    Where in Joe's book does he state...

    quote:guns issued to the Navy, Coast Guard, Signal Corps, or Army Air Corps sometimes don't have the expected ordinance markings.

    I can find no reference in his book (I have the 2nd Edition, Revised) where he stated that any of the WW II guns were devoid of the Ordnance Department markings, regardless of where or what service branch ultimately received them.

    According to the Polishing Room Serialization Records, serial number 930412 was the last Model 97 serialized in the year 1941. That would put your gun's manufacture date in December of 1941, and it most likely was not fully assembled and shipped until the early months of the year 1942 (matching the barrel date).

    You also stated that the receiver does not have the flaming ordnance bomb stamp, but failed to mention if the barrel is so marked.

    At this point (and without the benefit of actually inspecting the gun), my instinct tells me that it is a piece parts gun. If you can post some pictures of it, maybe that will will solve some of the mystery.
    0
  • Bert H.
    quote:Originally posted by rufe-snow
    I would get hold of a Blue Book, they have a specific section on "Trench Shotguns". The Model 97 is discussed in this section. There seems to be discrepancies between your shotgun and the Model 97's noted in the BB. I don't know who would be more accurate in this matter, either Poyer or the guys who's information the BB used?


    The Blue Book is a poor source of information in this instance (as is usually the case with most of their Winchester information). Between Joe Poyer and Bruce Canfield, there is precious little that they did not cover (or uncover) concerning the Military purchased and used Trench & Riot Guns.
    0
  • U856807
    Bert, thanks for the quick response.

    The quote regarding Navy, Coast Guard, etc. guns without the usual Ordnance Department markings may be found at the top of page 4 in the 2nd edition. The barrell has both the Winchester proof and the correct flaming bomb. Also present are all the period correct trademarks and patent numbers and the 2 3/4 CHAM/CYL mark.

    I know the stock and butt plate are not as issued. More than likly the stock and very nice steel plate are from a special order commercial gun (page 31, Poyer).

    The absence of the bomb on the receiver is a mystery. Have you ever heard of a "lunch box" M97? I know this term is applied to 1911A1s that left the factory, prematurely.

    Sorry about having no pictures, my wife is travelling with our camera.
    0
  • Bert H.
    The fact that the butt stock and butt plate have a widows peak is a very good indication that they belonged to a much older (Model 1897) gun. I do not know the exact year when Winchester discontinued the inletted widows peak, but I believe that it was just prior to, or very early in WW I.

    In reading the section of the book to which you refer, it is not real clear as to the exact timeframe that is being discussed, but my impression is that Joe is discussing the early purchases (pre-WW II). On pages 14 & 15, and again on page 55, Joe more clearly outlines the expected markings for a WW II vintage gun.

    Interesting mystery, and I would like to see a WW II vintage gun that does not have the flaming ordnance bomb on the receiver. If you know of any that are pictured online, please send me the weblink.

    Now, it is entirely possible that a few guns were manufactured that were not fully marked (both the "U.S." and the flaming ordnance bomb), but it is not something I would expect to see on a frequent basis.
    0
  • U856807
    Bert, here's a link to a photo that I saw on-line. In fact, it was this photo that introduced me to the forum. Mine looks exactly like this. On page 14, Joe says the bomb should proceed or follow the US marking of the left rear of the reciever. But on this gun and on mine the bomb is not there. The odd thing is that the US mark and I assume, the bomb were supposed to be in place before the final polish and bluing, such that there should not be any displaced metal. That's the case with the US mark, but where's the bomb? I'll include a couple of links to it in hopes that one works.

    http://www.hunt101.com/data/500/medium/IMG_5587.JPG

    forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=390319

    I hope you find my reply...I appreciate your interest and help!
    0
  • Bert H.
    Very interesting... and the link to the photo worked perfectly.

    I agree that the flaming ordnance bomb should have been stamped on the frame before it was polished and blued. Additionally, I have never seen one with the bomb stamped in front of the "U. S.".

    It would be really interesting to track the serial numbers of the guns that do not have the bomb on them to see if there is any corelation.
    0
  • U856807
    My gun is 9303XX and the one pictured in the link is 931,XXX. As discussed above mine has a '42 barrell. Both of these guns probably went out the factory door in early 1942.

    I assume that Joe Poyer would still like to receive the survey form in Appendix F of his book. I plan on filling it out and sending it in with a letter describing our mystery. I'll ask for a reply and include a stamped return envelope and an email address. If I get an answer, I'll share it with you and the forum.

    Other than the missing ordnance mark and the replacement stock mine is in near mint condition. If I had to guess at my gun's history, I'd suspect that a collector saw the missing mark on the receiver and decided to use my gun's stock on more complete M97. Mine then got the replacement stock and made it back into the marketplace. I'm happy about it all because if the mark were there and the stock was original with all the stamps, I could not afford to own it. There's some lemonade out of lemons for you.

    Thanks for your feedback.
    0
  • Bert H.
    You are quite welcome, and I hope that Joe Poyer gets back to you with his thoughts on this subject.

    On a different note, I also have a survey in the works for the Model 1897/97, but I have included all variations versus just the Riot & Trench Guns that Joe is seeking. If you are willing, please send me an email with the serial number on your gun (Win1885@msn.com).
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Recent Activity