1893 Winchester RIFLE not shotgun?????

[muddober]

Here are the pictures of a couple of early 94's that I promised Goody, they show the original scratches that I was referring too in my earlier post to his thread. Every very early 94's I have ever seen unless it was refinished had these scratches, some far more than others. I took several picture of different guns but most did not come out to good. Not that you can tell but photography has always escaped me.

Ron

[Jim88]

Originally Posted by muddober

Jim, there is no doubt in my mind that your gun is original, I was just trying to explain to you the letter thing and I wasn't insinuating for a second that your gun won't letter. As for pictures you have done a good job of making me drool enough.

Ron

Hi Ron, no problem I also used my fingernail around those couple of screws and it was dirt. There is no dishing. I don't think the receiver is case hardened like I thought, but all the other features has me wondering how many were made in this configuration. I hope CODY will not only letter my rifle with its special features, but also give me quantities made for the model. I still find it very strange that the rear shotgun style stock is not a pistol grip and has a brass disc without any engraving????
Jim

[muddober]

Jim, the letter will not provide you any information other than your particular gun. According to the Madis book there were less than 2,800 take-downs and less than 1,900 with checkering made. As for pistol grip there were less than 3,000 of them made, but if I had to guess your gun with a checkered straight grip is rarer than if it were a pistol grip as most of those were checkered.

Ron

[Jim88]

Originally Posted by muddober

Jim, the letter will not provide you any information other than your particular gun. According to the Madis book there were less than 2,800 take-downs and less than 1,900 with checkering made. As for pistol grip there were less than 3,000 of them made, but if I had to guess your gun with a checkered straight grip is rarer than if it were a pistol grip as most of those were checkered.

Ron

Thanks Ron for your help. Time will tell. I will wait until I get the CODY letter...

[Jim88]

Originally Posted by muddober

Jim, the letter will not provide you any information other than your particular gun. According to the Madis book there were less than 2,800 take-downs and less than 1,900 with checkering made. As for pistol grip there were less than 3,000 of them made, but if I had to guess your gun with a checkered straight grip is rarer than if it were a pistol grip as most of those were checkered.

Ron

Ron, it looks like Winchester DID inlay plates for presentation rifles...See below:

Left side of the buttstock is inlaid with a nickel oval plate 2" long x 1-1/4" wide inscribed "JOHN S. WOOFTER". Buttstock, under the buttplate, is stamped "1823", no indication of the context of this number. Also under the buttplate is a hole like a hole for buttplate with trap. Just above and to the left of this hole is a small recess with a small diameter steel pin with a fingernail notch that appears to be the retainer for the presentation plaque. Accompanied by a Cody Firearms Museum letter which identifies this rifle, as found, having been shipped Jan. 8, 1907, returned & repaired Aug. 29, 1911.

http://www.artfact.com/auction-lot/r...-c-072b733301#

[Dave Kennedy]

All -

I wanted to answer a couple of questions regarding the info folks have received from Cody - as referenced earlier in this thread.

First - there was a complaint about the information on one gun:

Now why would I spend $60.00 on a paper that has no credentials? Or is this paper some kind of preliminary document? Anyone know the answer? I want a factory verified letter....Here is the link to the example I am referring too:

http://www.antiquesandguns.com/terrypencil.html

The image at that link is of a serial number search. This is the equivalent of the old "Yellow Sheet". The reason for the disclaimer at the top is that anyone can easily change the information on the sheet. Cody faxes it to you, you add 'XXX Checkered' in the stock info, you fax it to the buyer, and you clear an extra grand to the value.

Second - the Factory Letters are just that - letters of how the gun is recorded as having left the factory. This is NOT a letter of verification or authentication, as some have claimed. This is information from the original handwritten factory ledgers transcribed onto computer and printed on paper with a special watermark (as of about 2-3 years ago). Cody does not look at the gun or pictures of the gun to make some sort of a determination. Cody looks at the record and only the record.

If you have questions, please feel free to holler.

Sincerely,
Dave Kennedy
Formerly the Robert Woodruff Curator of the Cody Firearms Museum

[Jim88]

Originally Posted by Dave Kennedy

All -

I wanted to answer a couple of questions regarding the info folks have received from Cody - as referenced earlier in this thread.

First - there was a complaint about the information on one gun:

The image at that link is of a serial number search. This is the equivalent of the old "Yellow Sheet". The reason for the disclaimer at the top is that anyone can easily change the information on the sheet. Cody faxes it to you, you add 'XXX Checkered' in the stock info, you fax it to the buyer, and you clear an extra grand to the value.

Second - the Factory Letters are just that - letters of how the gun is recorded as having left the factory. This is NOT a letter of verification or authentication, as some have claimed. This is information from the original handwritten factory ledgers transcribed onto computer and printed on paper with a special watermark (as of about 2-3 years ago). Cody does not look at the gun or pictures of the gun to make some sort of a determination. Cody looks at the record and only the record.

If you have questions, please feel free to holler.

Sincerely,
Dave Kennedy
Formerly the Robert Woodruff Curator of the Cody Firearms Museum

Thank you Dave for the clarification. I understand the difference. To my understanding it is like this:

The CODY records show how any rifle left the factory, but does not indicate if any particular rifle still has original parts. Chances are good that if the records match the rifle’s current configuration the rifle is authentic but that is not to say that any rifle matching features in documentation is still original pieces. Verification would take an expert who examines the rifle in person. Just like a piece of Chip & Dale furniture…..It looks original, but is it?

As for my rifle I am pretty certain it is original after speaking with many family members of how the rifle was taken care of for at least the past 80 years….

[Jim88]

Originally Posted by muddober

Once unscrewed you pull the magizine forward about 6" and with the lever of the gun itself fully open you twist the gun to left about a 1/4 turn and the gun is now in two different parts. Your gun was made in 1896.

Ron

Ron, I do think the rifle was made in 1896 like you said and not 1898 like Bert has suggested. Since I found a link to rare Winchesters and the two model 1894 rifles (2nd & 3rd down) before and after S/N 50212 show more likely the rifle was made in 1896. See link below:


http://www.rarewinchesters.com/gunro...model_94.shtml

[muddober]

Jim, according to Madis serial numbers from 44360 to 76464 were made in 1896 and they made 32,104 of them that year.

Ron

[Jim88]

Originally Posted by muddober

Alpo, is 100% correct and the museum charges about $60.00 to get a letter which will tell you the special features as it was ordered and who the gun was shipped to. Please advise us if you do and the result. I can tell you as a Winchester collector in my past life one could look at well over a thousand guns before seeing one like yours.

Ron

Sorry for getting back so late, anyway I got the official letter from Cody. Pretty much matches the rifle. No mention of who the rifle shipped too or where and the detail does not go so far as to mention the shotgun style stock. But, there is nothing in the letter to indicate anything different than what the rifle exhibits this day, so this is good!

[1 Eyed Jack]

Wow, that is a beautiful rifle you have there,

[Jim K]

Just a note on take down rifles. Please make sure that you retract the bolt before turning the barrel to take the rifle down, as it is possible to mess up the extractor and the barrel if the bolt is closed when the barrel and foreend are turned.

Jim

[Jim88]

Originally Posted by Jim K

Just a note on take down rifles. Please make sure that you retract the bolt before turning the barrel to take the rifle down, as it is possible to mess up the extractor and the barrel if the bolt is closed when the barrel and foreend are turned.

Jim

First, thanks 1eyedJack! Jim, I have never fired or even disassembled this rifle. I leave it be, and only have put a slight coat of oil on the metal. I still am wondering though about this case hardening, even after I was told that this serial # is not on the list for it by someone on another forum. Don't remember the name. It looks different from a receiver where the bluing is just worn off. Especially around the front of the receiver where the barrel mates. The bluing on the barrel band is not worn in the same manner.

Worn bluing on many rifles I have seen are more of a scuffy (sweeping) look, sometimes speckled (dotty) and not blotchy like this - as the only ways I can describe it...

If you look at the pictures muddober supplied with a Winchester that has worn bluing of the receiver, you will notice that the underlying metal is a uniform gray. It does not have the swirling or patchy red/brown, blues or gray tones. In addition, the receiver of my rifle visually matches the pattern of the known case hardened lever and hammer in appearance.

Since case hardened would have been a special order, then just maybe it was not included on that list that someone had referenced???

I'm just not convinced yet that it is not case hardened. I hope there is a way to tell through an inspection.

[Buffalochip]

I took the liberty of loading one of your earlier pics into Photoshop and messing with the contrast and brightness a bit. If that receiver and loading lever aren't casehardened, than I don't know what is. The hammer even seems to have some coloring. As you pointed out, the remainder of the gun metal is uniform in color and doesn't exhibit mottling due to age. I think some pics, taken outside without a flash and out of direct sunlight is all that is needed to conclude if it is casehardened or not. Now if that casehardening is original...

[Jim K]

Judging ONLY from the pictures posted by Jim88, that case coloring doesn't look right; it looks more like a blued receiver that has been rusted, then oiled. The lever and hammer appear to be color case hardened, which would be correct.

Buffalo, any chance of seeing your Photoshop product?

I believe the patent date "on the muzzle" is actually on the magazine tube latch; that is the last (and most common) of several tube latches used on the Model 1892 and 1894 so the tube could be pulled out to let the barrel turn without having to remove the magazine plug and drive out the retainer pin.

Jim

[Jim88]

Originally Posted by Buffalochip

I took the liberty of loading one of your earlier pics into Photoshop and messing with the contrast and brightness a bit. If that receiver and loading lever aren't casehardened, than I don't know what is. The hammer even seems to have some coloring. As you pointed out, the remainder of the gun metal is uniform in color and doesn't exhibit mottling due to age. I think some pics, taken outside without a flash and out of direct sunlight is all that is needed to conclude if it is casehardened or not. Now if that casehardening is original...

Yesterday I spoke with a gentleman who collects old rifles such as Winchester and showed him the photos. He said to bring the rifle to him, because he is interested in purchasing it. The CODY letter correctly matches the rifle and he liked that. I had met him at a gun show recently. He also said that the case hardened lever and hammer are proper, however as for the receiver it would not matter to him if it is just an aged blued receiver. According to him, bluing was normal on these 1898 made 1894 model rifles because the receiver is different in weight than the other models. He never saw an 1894 deluxe take-down full length magazine other than photos. Especially with a straight presentation grade fancy walnut shotgun style stock. He told me the brass disc inlet is most likely factory, because it was left blank. An aftermarket inlet would have been completed with a monogram, and not left unfinished.

I think I will show the rifle first to someone who is neutral on buying so as to get a better understanding on value.

Let me also try to get some better photos in sunlight as suggested. Whether or not the receiver is case hardened, is still a mystery at this time....

[Jim K]

Another FWIW, color case hardening could be ordered on the 94 at extra cost, but was rare since the 94 was made with a steel receiver from the beginning, where the older rifles had receivers made from wrought iron. Iron can't be hardened, so the only way to get a wear-resistant surface was case hardening - the color was an option. The steel receivers could be hardened, so case hardening was no longer needed and was a costly and time-consuming process that sometimes ruined the receiver, so makers dropped it as soon as they could. A few makers (e.g., Colt) kept it for cosmetic purposes and as a kind of trademark, but it was no longer necessary.

Jim

[Bert H.]

Originally Posted by Jim K

Another FWIW, color case hardening could be ordered on the 94 at extra cost, but was rare since the 94 was made with a steel receiver from the beginning, where the older rifles had receivers made from wrought iron. Iron can't be hardened, so the only way to get a wear-resistant surface was case hardening - the color was an option. The steel receivers could be hardened, so case hardening was no longer needed and was a costly and time-consuming process that sometimes ruined the receiver, so makers dropped it as soon as they could. A few makers (e.g., Colt) kept it for cosmetic purposes and as a kind of trademark, but it was no longer necessary.

Jim

Jim,

Winchester shifted to steel receiver frames in the late 1870s, and they continued to color case harden the Models 1873, 1876, 1885, 1886, and 1887 right up to August of 1901. Color case hardening could be special ordered on the Models 1892 and 1894 up to that same date.

Bert H.

[Jim88]

Originally Posted by Buffalochip

I took the liberty of loading one of your earlier pics into Photoshop and messing with the contrast and brightness a bit. If that receiver and loading lever aren't casehardened, than I don't know what is. The hammer even seems to have some coloring. As you pointed out, the remainder of the gun metal is uniform in color and doesn't exhibit mottling due to age. I think some pics, taken outside without a flash and out of direct sunlight is all that is needed to conclude if it is casehardened or not. Now if that casehardening is original...

Well, figured I'd start with this - Here is the verbatim details from the official CODY letter for this rifle: Which matches it perfectly, but does not give any other info such as stock/checkering etc. ....

"TYPE; Rifle
Caliber; 30
Barrel Type; Octagon
Trigger; Plain
TAKEDOWN

Received in warehouse on November 5, 1898. Shipped from warehouse on November 5, 1898. Order number 8549

No other information is available for this serial number."

[deadin]

Just another FWIW (aka Interesting Trivia)
If you go to the Browning Museum in Ogden UT you will see what we call the Winchester M1894 displayed as the Browning M1893. Same thing with the other JMB designed Winchesters. (M1895=M1894, M1886=M1885, M1885=M1884, etc.......) It all makes sense when you realize they are his prototypes.
(I can't even imagine what they would sell for on the open market.)

[Jim88]

Originally Posted by Buffalochip

I took the liberty of loading one of your earlier pics into Photoshop and messing with the contrast and brightness a bit. If that receiver and loading lever aren't casehardened, than I don't know what is. The hammer even seems to have some coloring. As you pointed out, the remainder of the gun metal is uniform in color and doesn't exhibit mottling due to age. I think some pics, taken outside without a flash and out of direct sunlight is all that is needed to conclude if it is casehardened or not. Now if that casehardening is original...

Buffalo, I just found out more news. Seems CODY is not as accurate as some people bet their life on.
I also may have given them the wrong model # of 1892 instead of 1894. Anyway there can be at times some addendum's or special order suffix lines on the original documents that CODY workers neglect, miss or confuse to correct serial #'s when printing letters. I will in the near future get you those outdoor photos AND will be demanding CODY perform another lettering for free. Will update soon. Thank you for your expertise.