I recently bought a Winchester 1885 highwall. the rifle is in 40-70 Ballard caliber. when I received it, I had already bought ammo for it and shot it once it arrived. a few days later, I was wanting to do a though cleaning and removed the fore stock. much to my surprise, on the underside of the barrel was stamped "REBORE 25184 J.P.P."  The barrel is clearly marked 40-70 Ballard on top and on the bottom. so, I had the Cody Firearms Museum do a search for it and got it back today. it states that the gun was born a 38-55 in 1893. it however was sent back to the factory for a "repair and return on September 01, 1909, order number 25184". I bought this gun to use and also as somewhat of an investment on my money. so, I guess what I am asking, is would you be concerned about the value or not? thanks for any help.

As far as I would be concerned there would be no deduction in regards to value as the modification is period and is factory documented. 

blackpowder wrote on Jul 30^th, 2018 at 4:23pm:


Especially when the work was done by such a well-known Win. gunsmith, it SHOULD add to the value because it adds to its documented history in the form of the R&R order (which must have included removing the old cal. marking & rebluing).   

However, I've found that among most Win. collectors, mine is a minority opinion--most of them, judging by the remarks I hear on the Win. board, look askance at ANY deviation from the configuration in which it was originally built.  So I'd guess that some (not me!) would consider that this work detracted from its value in the original chambering to at least a slight degree.

I think it'll end up valued just as if it were made that way from the beginning. If it has special features. like high grade wood or set trigger, it'll help. If it's just a plain rifle that's what it would sell as, value depending on condition. 
I see it as a rifle somebody liked well enough to improve when he realized he needed more oomph. Or, one that got worn out and the rebore was just a way to keep it going. Signs of the times. Its, not ours.
edit: Vall and I were typing at the same time, but we sure almost said the same things, didn't we? Great minds, ya know.

marlinguy wrote on Jul 30^th, 2018 at 7:39pm:


Problem is, the specific work done is rarely described in R&R records.  It's reasonable to assume such changes were made when the gun was returned, but that's not documentation; that is, in the eyes of the more dogmatic Win. collectors, which I'm not.      

Best thing going for this gun isn't the R&R record but the JPP marking, which isn't routine on R&R work.

Redsetter wrote on Jul 30^th, 2018 at 8:08pm:


You're making up a scenario that doesn't exist in this situation. The owner's record check, and markings on his barrel already confirm what was done. And it's not unusual for older Winchester records to show quite good detail of the work. Yes, they can occasionally be vague, but it doesn't seem to apply to the OP's gun.
I've not had a bunch of Winchester 1885's, but had several that detailed the features very well. One particular Low Wall showed the 3x wood, pistol grip stocks, set trigger, and Swiss buttplate. Plus had the "XXX SB" stamped on the side of the lower tang. A record check also showed the gun left the factory in the 1890's with a #2 weight 26" octagon barrel in .22 Short. Then was sent back to the factory in 1909 to get a #1 weight 28" full octagon .22 Short barrel installed.

jhm wrote on Jul 30^th, 2018 at 5:04pm:

ha ha!!! not quite ready to part with it yet