In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

1873 Winchester with unusual stamp on receiver

carussellcarussell Member Posts: 15 ✭✭
edited September 2010 in Ask the Experts
I have acquired a Winchester 1873 that has an unusual stamping on the receiver. Although partially worn, it appears to be an O in a diamond-shaped parallelogram. There might be another letter beside the O but I cannot be certain. Has anyone seen such a stamping on any Winchester lever-gun? This gun was shipped in 1878 and believed altered by Winchester in the 1890s. I have included an image of the stamping.
1873winchester30640q.jpg

Comments

  • martinphoto1martinphoto1 Member Posts: 56 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    This appears to be a "General Inspection" mark....I'm sure Bert will come along soon to let us know for sure.

    Regards,
    Marty
  • carussellcarussell Member Posts: 15 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    That's a possibility, but I am curious to know if this was applied initially during production or after perhaps a return to the factory for alteration or repair?
    Thanks for responding, Carl
  • martinphoto1martinphoto1 Member Posts: 56 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Hi Carl,

    My understanding is that these various inspection marks were applied during the firearm's assembly process, as far as I know only the Winchester Difinitive Proof mark was applied to those guns which were returned to the factory for any changes or repairs and then only after 1905, or was it 1903. Again , Bert H. will have the correct answers.

    Regards,
    Marty
  • carussellcarussell Member Posts: 15 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    This gun also has the Winchester proofs on barrel and receiver, so I am certain it was sent back. There are no records of it being altered or repaired by Winchester though (not that that's uncommon). I am including am image of the proofs: 1873winchester30640h.jpg

    Thanks again!
    Carl
  • martinphoto1martinphoto1 Member Posts: 56 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    The Proof Marks on your gun were probably put there following an "R & R", again after 1903/05. A letter from Cody may indicate this "R&R" and when it took place.
    Regards,
    Marty
  • carussellcarussell Member Posts: 15 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Marty:
    I lettered it from Cody and they do not have a record of repair or alteration (that's not uncommon); however, it was originally a 26" octagon and now it is 20" round barrel. To me that's the reason for the Winchester proofs. But I was more curious about the mark mentioned intially. I have not seen that on my other 1873s.
    Carl
  • Bert H.Bert H. Member Posts: 11,281 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    The mark in question is an inspection stamp, and most likely stamped during the intial manufacture of the rifle. Winchesters that were returned for Repair/Rework were seldom marked with anything in a readily visible area.

    The Definitive Winchester Proof marking did not make its appearance until 1907.

    WACA Historian & Life Member

  • Bert H.Bert H. Member Posts: 11,281 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by carussell
    Marty:
    I lettered it from Cody and they do not have a record of repair or alteration (that's not uncommon); however, it was originally a 26" octagon and now it is 20" round barrel. To me that's the reason for the Winchester proofs. But I was more curious about the mark mentioned intially. I have not seen that on my other 1873s.
    Carl


    Actually, it is very common for an R & R to be noted in the warehouse records (held by Cody). What is uncommon, is for there to be any information explaining what was done during the R & R.

    Over the past number of years I have examined several hundred thousand Winchester ledger entries, and there are tens of thousands of "R & R" entries, but only a few of them state what was done to the gun.

    I will add this as a final comment... there are a lot of fake Winchester Proof mark stamps out there in the hands of the not-so-honest people who sell old Winchesters.

    WACA Historian & Life Member

  • carussellcarussell Member Posts: 15 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    I did not state it was uncommon for R&R to be noted, just that it was not uncommon for failure to note an R&R in the records. Cody made this clear to me and Madis also mentions such occurrences in his work. Also, according to Madis, the Winchester proof first appeared circa 1890 (on the 1873) and was used randomly till 1905; beginning in 1905 it was used on all Winchester barrels except .22 caliber; in 1908 all guns had this proof, generally on barrel and receiver. Do you concur? If someone was trying to fake such a gun, why add controversy to the mix?
    I am very aware of fakery on the market and have actually caught unscrupulous persons in the process.
    Thank you for the response,
    Carl
  • carussellcarussell Member Posts: 15 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by Bert H.
    The mark in question is an inspection stamp, and most likely stamped during the intial manufacture of the rifle. Winchesters that were returned for Repair/Rework were seldom marked with anything in a readily visible area.

    The Definitive Winchester Proof marking did not make its appearance until 1907.

    I thought the general inspection mark was an "I" in a triangle?
  • Bert H.Bert H. Member Posts: 11,281 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by carussell
    I did not state it was uncommon for R&R to be noted, just that it was not uncommon for failure to note an R&R in the records. Cody made this clear to me and Madis also mentions such occurrences in his work. Also, according to Madis, the Winchester proof first appeared circa 1890 (on the 1873) and was used randomly till 1905; beginning in 1905 it was used on all Winchester barrels except .22 caliber; in 1908 all guns had this proof, generally on barrel and receiver. Do you concur? If someone was trying to fake such a gun, why add controversy to the mix?
    I am very aware of fakery on the market and have actually caught unscrupulous persons in the process.
    Thank you for the response,
    Carl


    Madis was mistaken concerning "when" the Winchester Definitive proof mark was first used, so No, I do not concur. Madis falsely assumed that because he saw a few Model 1873s with the proof mark stamp that Winchester put them on the guns when they were originally built. The fact is that they were put on the guns that were rebarreled after July of 1907. There are archival records at Cody that clearly state when the superposed "WP" stamp was first put into use. Madis also mistakenly used the 1905 date "for all barrels" because his serial number versus DOM lists are off by at least that much for most of the models, and even further for others (1892, 1894). I have extensively researched the records at Cody (I work as an official volunteer in the Research Office for two weeks each summer), and I can positively tell you that most of the statistical data (DOMs and rarity tables) that Madis published are not accurate... in some cases, they are horribly inaccurate.

    Are you aware that for the Model 1894, Madis' published dates of manufacture are in error by 3-1/2 years? For the Model 1892, the error is almost three full years. For a better explanation of these errors, read the Sticky post by former CFM Curator Davis Kennedy - http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=317678 and my Sticky post on the Model 1894 - http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=245213

    WACA 6571L
    Board of Directors member

    WACA Historian & Life Member

  • Bert H.Bert H. Member Posts: 11,281 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by carussell
    quote:Originally posted by Bert H.
    The mark in question is an inspection stamp, and most likely stamped during the intial manufacture of the rifle. Winchesters that were returned for Repair/Rework were seldom marked with anything in a readily visible area.

    The Definitive Winchester Proof marking did not make its appearance until 1907.

    I thought the general inspection mark was an "I" in a triangle?


    Each inspector had his own stamp. I have seen at least a half-dozen different style stamps used on the various nodels.

    WACA Historian & Life Member

  • carussellcarussell Member Posts: 15 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    Yes. I am all too aware of errors in Madis' book. I concur with you on that whole-heartedly. That is why I ask questions. I very much appreciate clarifications and errata when it becomes available from the various sources. Case and point, most books - including Madis' - show my particular gun as being manufactured in 1879. The records show it being shipped September 6, 1878.
    It is still possible for my gun to have been altered at the factory after 1907 and that would be acceptable to me as I am not a purist. But I am still curious about the "inspection mark" on mine - an "O?" in a diamond - as compared to the standard mark - an "I" in a triangle. Since the "I" in a triangle was a general inspection mark, assumably it was used by all and certainly the "I" stood for "Inspected". What would an "O" be for? Surely it has some significance or meaning (such as "O.F." was the abbreviation for "Outside Fitting")?
    I thought individual inspector's marks were numbers?
    Any further thoughts?
    Thank you,
    Carl
  • Bert H.Bert H. Member Posts: 11,281 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Carl,

    I have seen numbers in a triangle, in a diamond, and in a circle. I have also seen letters vice numerals. I have studied the Model 1885 in great detail, and many of the other models to a lesser degree. On the Model 1894, it is 50-50 to find letters vice numbers in the inspection stamp. I would speculate that the Model 1783 would be the same. In regards to the "I" in a triangle, I most often see it on the bottom of the barrel under the forend stock. I own several high-walls that have that stamp on the barrels.

    The "O" in the diamond stamp on your rifle could have been stamped during a factory rebuild, but without corroborating evidence (an "R & R" entry), we can not even be assured that the rifle was ever returned for rework. It is just one of the many unsolved mysteries.

    WACA Historian & Life Member

Sign In or Register to comment.