I'm researching a Winchester Model 55 I am considering purchasing. It's a 30W.C.F. solid frame gun that is serial numbered in the M94 range, 10783XX which dates it to 1930.

The gun looks great, 99%. I can find no evidence of a reblue, no dished screw holes, all the screws look perfect, no carry wear on the receiver bottom. The barrel is beginning to get a slight plum cast to the blue but it's not thinning anywhere. The wood has a few dings but all the varnish is there and has aged beautifully.

I looked at a lot of online auctions and even guns in high condition from this era seem to have a bit of flaking on the receiver, the gun I am looking at has absolutely none. Is this alone cause for suspicion?

The flash pictures show the color of the blue, I was having some issues with the old point & shoot so some were taken w/o flash.

thanks, Rob

Looks like a very nice and high condition M55. They are not common.

I've never even heard of a 55 Winchester but it sure is very nice, and I bet it looks a lot better in life than in the photos too.

The one thing that surprises me though is that it looks like the final polishing was up and down across the action instead of lengthwise as I would have finished it. Is this diagnostic of factory guns? I'm interested in learning if there are any special tricks to identifying something like that.

Brent

I have the same question about the final factory polishing. What direction is it supposed to be? Does it normally show at all?

I'd like to know about the polishing as well, perhaps I can find out more info.

thanks, Rob

I think what you have there is a very nice hand polished reblue. The grit marks should be vertical but very parallel because they were factory polished on a large wheel. That rifles grit marks show signs of a hand polish because it's very difficult to keep them parallel. Also, if you look closely at the barrel stampings, you don't see any slightly raised edges that usually occur from the roll stamp. One more clue is the barrel turning a plum color as a hot blue will do after some years because of the high nickle content in the steel. From the color of the blue, I would say it was dipped in Dulite salts as they give a more blue look than some of the other salts used. Just my nickles worth.

What Bob said. The polish marks were the first clue for me but there are a few other questionable areas as well. But, altogether, it's a splendid refinish of a very rare factory offering and would grace almost anyone's collection.
Regards, Joe

Yes, Bob nailed it.

I emailed the photos to the Winchester Collector's Assoc. president who said "The gun clearly appears to have been refinished….."

I also emailed Turnbull's and they told me that while the direction of the polishing is correct (vertical), their assessment is that since the lines are not parallel it's a refinish.

While looking at the barrel in sunlight today I see it's not turning plum but rather is a grayer blue than the receiver.

When I first handled the gun last night I immediately thought "refinish". But the owner who is a friend said it wasn't so I didn't pursue it, looking at the job at night I didn't see any rounded edges, no dished screw holes,etc. It looked that good.

The pictures showed up the polishing marks though and the truth comes out.


I am learning to trust first impressions...

Thank you gentlemen.

As you've already discovered, it's been repolished and blued.
1930 production,,the receiver should be Carbonia Blue (Machine Blue) and the bbl rust blue.
You're correct in that the type of receiver blue flakes and wears off much more easily than the bbl blue. Leaving many otherwise pristine rifles with receivers showing less than perfect bluing coverage.

The polishing directions are correct (rotational,,not lengthwise) except for one missing.
On the sides of the leveractions, the rebate scallop cut at the rear of the side is not parallel to the rebate cut at the front.

That makes the polisher take an extra cut or sweep at the rear rebate to polish that area at a slight angle to the rest of the side.
The slight variance in width of that angled polish cut is more easily seen on some than others,,probably just a result of who rather than how it was done.

It shows wider if done after the side was parallel polished,,very narrow if done first. But in every case it's still present.
It's all done on belts and hard wheels. No hand polishing afterwards. Straight even polishing grit lines.
Nothing of the back and forth scratch pattern seen from hand polishing.

The sharp edges of machine polishing are missing here. The best of careful hand polishing will dull the edges.
Those crisp sharp lines on early firearms like Colt & S&W were put there with polishing belts and wheels.
It takes alot of skill to do that holding the part in your hands against a wheel.
The polishers in the old factorys were amoung the highest if not the highest paid skilled workers

I can't see it in the pics, but the serial number stampings should be standing proud and sharp as they were done after the polishing was done.

The proof mark on the recv'r looks slightly different in oval shape fom the bbl mark. Can't see the W/P markings inside the oval to compare.
They both should obviously be the same and done through the blue.
They were applied to a finished & blued firearm,,and should show it.

Aftermarked Winchester and other proof and mfg'r marking stamps are available for restoration work.
They aren't always represented as such however.

Rob:

When I reblue Winchester lever guns I hand polish in the direction that I think the factory did. I pull the barrel and rust blue it for contrast as I believe the factory did.

Whoever did the model 55 polished the receiver in the wrong direction as so many gunsmiths do because it's easier, also it appears to have been machine buffed.

As long as you know it's a re-blue and the gun is priced accordingly.

This '94 38-55 of mine is circa 1917 and I restored the gun, blueing and wood etc. trying to keep it in theme with the factory work, i.e. colors, hand polishing in the right direction etc. This is what I think they should look like IMO, but none-the-less, still a re-blue but I like it.



Best,

Beautiful work Doug. For anyone interested I found my bookmark for a M94 polishing tutorial put online by Jack Belk 11 years ago. Hope it stays up.

Belk Tutorial

Thanks Rob....

The thread you posted is a good one for anyone interested in hand polishing a lever gun frame. I noticed he didn't pull the barrel, which I always do first.

Thanks for posting.

Best,

That's not the barrel, that's a spud he inserts with flats to be held in a vise, it's mentioned in picture #17.

Thanks Rob, guess I didn't read far enough....I use an old junk barrel for the same purpose......

He does a good job for sure.......

Belk's an interesting story. He did some great work but has gotten a lot of flack for being a paid consultant against Remington in the M700 trigger AD issue.

Look at some of his other albums, there some nice stuff there about bolt handles, polishing Mausers...

Long ago, Belk sent me some short instructions on polishing and rust bluing. They were very helpful and I really appreciated them. Still do.

I like the guy, but he sure has become a pariah in Electroland, where the arguments against him are about as ignorant and stupid as any I've seen.

I wish him luck.

Brent

I've had one AD in my life and it was when I took the safety off a 700. Scared me and a guide but muzzle was in a safe direction. I agree with you about his treatment, whether he's right or wrong he doesn't deserve it.

A very nice hand polishing job on the link, but if you're doing a factory style restoration, most all the grit lines would be running the wrong way.
Should be verticle on the sides and accross the width of the frame on the top and bottom surfaces.
The bolt should be polished accrossed it too, not length wise.

The pump gun frames (12 &42) are the same (verticle) on the sides.

I've been reading that guns fro this era that have never been used, literally New In Box, have had all the blue flake off the receiver as a result of the nickel content of the steel. This leads me to wonder if just the receiver was refinished and the rest left as is.

Winchester using Nickel Steel for the 1894 frames is pure bunk.

For years I had heard that, and read it in at least one book, but it always bothered me that the supposed nickel steel frames didn’t exhibit the characteristics of nickel steel. I finally had a few frames tested; pre 1900 to mid 30’s, .The nickel content is way too low to be considered Nickel Steel.

The flaking on those frames is a result of the bluing process that Winchester used at the time; carbonia bluing. Winchester realized early on that the bluing would flake if not done properly, and used a small inspection stamp to check the bluing.

The polish marks on the frame should be North-South, and a Kutter brought up, the polishing lines near the rear the rear radius should match that angle.

Polishing old Winchesters to match the original polish is extremely difficult to do correctly, for a couple of reasons: Winchester’s polishing heads were mad of walrus hide, fairly difficult to get this day and age. The polishing heads were radiused to match the surface that was being polished, so for any one model you would need a dozen or so polishing heads.

V/R

Mike

Mike, interesting about the walrus hide. About 30 years ago,I found a book on manufacturing Winchesters at the Winchester plant. It showed a picture of the polishers and the wheels looked to be about 2" thick and maybe more than 30" in diameter. It described them as being made out of rhino hide. Totally agree on the nickle content of the receivers. It was the carbonia or gas bluing that caused the flaking.

I’m fairly certain that it’s Walrus, I’ve got some old (pre-1930s) documentation from Winchester, they were having some issues getting “Sea Horse” hide, and tried cow hide but found it unsuitable.

Sea horse was the period name for Walrus.

This was confirmed by a good friend of mine that used to work at Winchester; also, as late as the early 80s they still had a couple of remaining walrus hides to make wheels.

I can't cite a source, unfortunately, but remember hearing at a state park in Florida that manatees were hunted commercially to the point of local extermination for sale to industrial leather belt manufacturers. Apparently the belts were very durable and stretch-resistant. "Sea Horse"?

Manatees are colloquially called "sea cows" Not sea horses.

I'm sure lots of different leathers would work if need be. Some might be easier than others though. More than likely, if run by overhead belts, the Winchester factory operated on bison. The buffalo hide industry was built around powering factories with overhead belts made of specially tanned bison hides.

Manatees were indeed used for this purpose. I found a reference on page 3, section 3.5, of this proposal for inclusion of endangered species.

Google Document

When doing the research I concluded it was Walrus, in one of the documents, it actually showed a Walrus, and where the best pieces of polishing wheel hide came from. Winchester tried leather, found it unacceptable.

Believe me…The thought of gluing a bunch of itty bitty aquarium grade sea horse hides together did not appeal to me.

Buffalo/Bison was a huge commodity in this country around the turn of the century. I firmly believe that the bone charr used in period CCH was buffalo bone. Ebonex is the only company still producing bone charcoal; they got their start in the late 1800s supplying buffalo bone charcoal.

Surely you said that in jest?

Were the hides from whales ever used?

And then I would like to steer the thread back to Winchester lever gun actions. I have a Model 65 in 218 Bee. The serial numbers in Madis' Winchester book indicate that the action was close to the last one made in 1935. The action might have sat around until assembled as a Bee circa 1938 or 39. The action is blued, but the blue is very thin and looks to be worn through at places where the rifle has been handled. The blue is not flaking off, however. I have been told that this is common in late 1930s Winchesters. Can someone please explain this process?

Don

yes I jest

Waterman.

Late 1930s Winchester contracted with the Dulite Corp and started using their process; which we know today as hot salts.

V/R

Mike