Hello fellows,
I am just a bit late getting into this discussion, but felt that this information might be helpful in the future (the follwing information is taken from my revised rough draft reference book);
Low-wall frame variations; The low-wall frame was made in three distinctly different variations, with the Second Variation being the most common by a wide margin. The following paragraphs provide a brief physical description of the three low-wall frame variations, and the approximate serial number and production timeframe of each;
First Variation: It features a frame with milled sides (paneled) just like the vast majority of the high-walls, and it has a full height breech block that is not scalloped (contour milled) to match the upper frame. It will always be found with a flat-spring action. Essentially, it is a high-wall with the rear portion of the frame (behind the breech block) milled down.
Both The
upper and lower tang
s are is dimensionally identical to the high-wall. The only notable difference is the frame ring, which is threaded for the standard .825” small shank barrel. It could be threaded for a large shank (.935”) barrel if special ordered with a No. 3 barrel, but it is very rarely encountered. The First Variation low-walls were made with a No. 1 barrel as standard, with a No. 2 barrel available as a special order option. The top of the frame ring is most often found with a milled longitudinal groove that was incorporated to allow for a better sight picture when a No. 1 barrel was installed. When a No. 2 barrel was special ordered, the longitudinal groove was omitted. The serial number range for the First Variation low-wall is from circa 2250 to circa 17,500 (early 1886 to late 1887). Because it is simply a milled down high-wall frame, the removable lower tang, stocks, and all other parts are interchangeable.
Second variation: It features a flat-sided frame with a scalloped (contoured milled) breech block to match the upper frame. In order to make the Second Variation low-wall frame trimmer and to lighten the overall weight, Winchester eliminated the flared sections of the frame, and milled (scalloped) the top of the breech block to match the contour of the frame. This resulted in the front and rear section of the frame being considerably thinner than the First Variation frame, and it also gave it a much sleeker look. The frame ring was threaded for the .825” small shank barrel only, and the No. 1 barrel was standard. As with the First Variation, the frame ring is milled with a longitudinal groove when a No. 1 barrel is present, and the groove was omitted when a No. 2 barrel was special ordered. The flat-spring action was used exclusively until 1908, then intermittently until being completely phased out by the coil-spring action in early 1909. Shortly after the coil-spring was introduced in 1908, Takedown frames were offered. The serial number range for the Second Variation is from circa 16,500 to circa 125,000 (mid 1887 to January 1918). The lower tang is not interchangeable with the high-wall, or with the First and Third Variation low-wall frames. Many other parts will not interchange.
Third variation: Found on the coil-spring action Model 87 Winder Muskets only. It has the exact same style milled sides as the First Variation low-wall frame, but with a scalloped (contour milled) breech block. The most unique feature of this variation is that they were all threaded for the large shank (.935”) barrel. The top of the frame ring was never made with the milled longitudinal groove. This third and final low-wall variation was simply a high-wall frame that was milled down, and other than the breech block, it is identical to the Second Model high-wall Winder Musket. All parts including the lower tang are interchangeable with a coil-spring action high-wall. The serial number range is from circa 119,100 to 139735 (end of production). It was never available as a Takedown. end quote
Now, in reference to the question about the strength of the low-wall frame, it really depends upon which variation you have, and when it was made (the steel alloy was improved in the later made frames).
From a strength standpoint, it is my belief that the Third variation Model 87 Winder musket frames are the strongest, followed by the early First variation frames (high-wall frame milled to low-wall dimension), and finally the Second variation (with the early specimens being the weakest).
I own a modifed Model 87 Winder that was rechambered to 22 K-Hornet more than 30 years ago, and I have fired a few thousand rounds through it with nary a problem
.
I also have a picture of a Second variation low-wall frame that cracked due to shooting it with hot loaded 44 W.C.F. handloads (not my rifle thankfully). The frame was recase color hardened before it was barreled with an original No. 1 barrel chambered for 44 W.C.F., and it cracked after less than a half-box of shells
. If anyone is interested, here it is... (it has an identical crack on the opposite side of the frame).
(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)