doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Win 21 Grand Royal

Don: I don't know how you can say the guns were 'reworked' by CSMC. According to Pauline Muerrle who was there at the time U.S. Repeating Arms went under, CSMC received NO Winchester made receivers. I think since she was there, she would know. Therefore, any of these guns made by CSMC are NOT Winchester guns....they are ALL reproductions. Also, I think the number you are quoting of 38000 is incorrect. Many guns with serial numbers lower than this are reproductions.

I have no doubt Galazan's was authorized to produce authentic and so stamped Winchester M-21s following the USRA shutdown. They prominently published and promoted this at the time as a Galazan's product offering -- years before introduction of the CSMC M-21. I always assumed they were operating under license, but the authorization may have been some other form of agreement.

"Well is the new Model 21 produced by Galazan really better? It's not hand made. Is the steel used up to the standard of Winchester Proof Steel? How would one know; do they put these guns through rigorous proof and violent proof testing like Winchester did? Also, what about the future in terms of collector values? Are all these fake Winchester Model 21's going to depreciate the values of the real ones? Are the Galazan Model 21's going to hold their value and be collector items? I guess only time will tell. "

The above questions have been hashed out many times over the last decade. One makes one's own decision with your wallet. -Dick

[quote=buzz Also, I think the number you are quoting of 38000 is incorrect.
[/quote]

I think not!

The factory records in my posession show very few M21s produced in the 33000 range. I have two serial nos. listed in the 34000 range. The last one being W34XXX which was ordered the year the M21 job was closed. Anything above this would be extremely questionable as Cody has no records above this number either.

The Olin licensing department refers to any non-licensed Model 21 as a 'replica'. I think one could argue that a Model 21 without trademark could be referred to as a 'replica' or a 'reproduction'. However, a Model 21 with the Winchester trademark which in fact was not produced by Winchester or their license should be referred to as a 'fake' or 'counterfeit' and therefore, just like a counterfeit $US bill have virtually no worth as compared to a legitimate 'replica' or legitimate Winchester Model 21. I think what one should take away from all of this is....you better do your homework when contemplating the purchase of a Model 21 as there are lots and lots of fakes floating around out there.

The classic authenticity verification.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOzuoY9Blcg&feature=related

Sold!

"The Olin licensing department refers to any non-licensed Model 21 as a 'replica'."
Please provide a reference for this statement.-Dick

Dick: 'Replica' was the term used by Vicki Schrimpf of the Olin licensing department in a conversation I had with her by telephone a few days ago which was recommended by Pauline Muerrle in this forum a few days past to get to the bottom of the controversy in this post. The term 'replica' was used by Vicki to describe the non-trademarked Model 21s which have been produced since US Repeating Arms dropped the Model 21 job. She did not use the term 'reproduction'.

This sounds sinister ... and untrue. Not to say it hasn't happened, but "lots and lots" of fraudulently stamped guns?? No. And there's no evidence that the gun that sparked this thread is a fraud, more likely just a mistake in how it was represented. No way I believe Galazan's built and then mis-represented guns as Winchester M-21s. They openly marketed Win M-21s for many years, and couldn't have avoided notice by Olin if they weren't authorized to do so.

Jay