There's always been discussion of whether a low wall should be chambered in 32-40.  Do you suppose that Stevens and Harry had anything to do with this??

(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)

good thing he didn't have to buy film for those pictures.

Fitz- Look at picture 48- it shows the lettering to be oriented to the left side of the rifle.

Willis

Fitz pic. 48 as Willis pointed out does show it oriented correctly, I like yourself based on the prior pictures looked to be just the opposite. Strange you are not getting a picture in frame 48, are they good beyond that point?

JLouis

My Low-wall has been rebarrelled with a 28" tapered octagonal barrel in 32/40 only because the original Winchester barrel was so chambered. I have seen one in 38/55 with Winchester factory stamps.


(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)

It is possible to find original Winchester Barrels with the small diameter shank size. Winchester during the first year of production built some? number of rifles with the same size shank as the Lowall. I own one serial number 800. All the action parts were numbered. I think it was labeled as a 
#2 action. There have been reports of these actions being rebarreled in large calibers with the large diameter cartridges leaving too thin a wall between the chamber diameter and the Minor diameter of the threads. It has not been a problem if the Barrel is a modern steel. But in the older Mild steel barrels often rebored larger  it leaves the wall thickness too thin. For this reason I feel that original Winchester Lowall actions should not be rebarreled in large calibers. HTH Regards, FITZ.

FITZ wrote on Aug 21^st, 2014 at 6:00pm:

This would not be the first time that Winchester changed the shank size on an action. The very early model 1876 used a .812 diameter barrel shank which was then changed to an .875 diameter barrel shank. Keep in mind that the only chambering in the 76 originally was the 45-75. Obviously they had problems with the shank size, so it is interesting that they would repeat their mistake by making a barrel shank too small. At the same time we need to keep in mind that the 1894 uses a small shank at .812 diameter. The original chambering was 38-55, and this was before they started using nickel steel barrels. 
Either way you look at it, buyer beware and realize that the s/n on the 1885 is on the bottom tang, not the frame. It wouldn't be the first time parts have been cobbled together to make something appear more desirable than it really is.

Jesse

Old-Win wrote on Aug 21^st, 2014 at 6:56pm:



Just a note on Winchester small swiss buttplates. I've had several that were either ill fitting when I got them, or I removed the buttplate looking for any interesting info underneath, and when reinstalled they fit poorly. In every case, I found that they all fit better or worse, depending on how the screws were tightened. I could tighten the top tang, or the rear screw and make them fit better or worse, depending on what order I tightened them.

And I know some really talented gunsmiths who've built entire guns around a 1885 lower tang that had cool provenenance when they lettered the tang.