|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,445
Posts544,832
Members14,406
| |
Most Online1,258
Mar 29th, 2024
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 682
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 682 |
Last edited by Bushmaster; 12/02/19 07:41 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 385 Likes: 10
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 385 Likes: 10 |
If you are looking at the actual item,......NO idea.
If you are looking at a photo, then likely the digital photo is doing that.
Dumb, but learning...Prof Em, BSc(ME), CAE (FYI)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 13,146 Likes: 1146
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 13,146 Likes: 1146 |
That gun looks to have been restocked, or Winchester did a crappy job on it. The cheek panels are entirely different, right and left .... not to mention the terrible edge treatment on the rear of the left action panel side and the serrated look of the bottom tang, right side.
The digital aspect could not be doing what I'm seeing on the cheek panels. And, why would the digital aspect cause it on the bottom and left sides of the action, but not on the right?
SRH
May God bless America and those who defend her.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,982 Likes: 106
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,982 Likes: 106 |
Socialism is almost the worst.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,703 Likes: 406
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,703 Likes: 406 |
It is all in the photos. Nothing is serrated. That is digital photography for you. The two cheek panels are photoed at different angles and distances.
_________ BrentD, (Professor - just for Stan) ![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/qclHjMQ.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,084 Likes: 35
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,084 Likes: 35 |
What Brent said, digital photo quirks.
My problem lies in reconciling my gross habits with my net income.
- Errol Flynn
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 13,146 Likes: 1146
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 13,146 Likes: 1146 |
It's not all the digital aspect.
What I am seeing is that the top line of the left hand cheek panel does not meet up with the top line of the action metal, and there is a "hump" in that top line of the cheek panel that is not present on the right side.
Maybe the "serrations" we're seeing can be blamed on digital photography, but not the misshapened cheek panel.
SRH
May God bless America and those who defend her.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,701 Likes: 99
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,701 Likes: 99 |
The cheek panels look different, but its a field grade 21. I've seen girls who didn't quite match up either. Not really a problem in my mind...Geo
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,158 Likes: 114
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,158 Likes: 114 |
I concurr, Stan-- the older Winchesters were advertised, at least in my 1938 Salesman Catalog- as having the stock wood "Proud of the Steel" aprox. 1/16"- one of the many ways to determine either a re-stock or a wood refinish is if the stock wood (and including the forearm on the M21 and M24 doubleguns- is flush with the steel.
My late Dad's 12 M21 field grade was built in 1940- he accquired it used in 1948-gave it to me in 1980-- It has been shot but well cared for- The gold plated trigger selector button in the blade still shows the gold plating, albiet with wear. The M21 shown in this posting shows a silvery-grey selector button. ???? RWTF
"The field is the touchstone of the man"..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 496
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 496 |
How about the checkering? That doesn't appear to be up to par. Restock
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,084 Likes: 35
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,084 Likes: 35 |
The OP asked about the "serrations" effect in the photo, that's the digital photography.
As for the cheek panels and checkering, you guys can discuss that, I never found the M21 attractive enough to learn much about them.
My problem lies in reconciling my gross habits with my net income.
- Errol Flynn
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 13,146 Likes: 1146
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 13,146 Likes: 1146 |
So right, Rob. Point taken.
Thanks, SRH
May God bless America and those who defend her.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,158 Likes: 114
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,158 Likes: 114 |
Agreed- I wouldn't own one if my Dad hadn't bought it used in 1948. Now a Model 12-- that's a whole nother ballgame, IMO!! RWTF
"The field is the touchstone of the man"..
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,111 Likes: 195
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,111 Likes: 195 |
All the early guns look like that. They are still wonderful guns. Saw one lately for $1000 and it probably could be bought for less. Those guys who disparage this gun have never owned, shot, or held one. Of course, that goes for Parkers, Foxes, and Purdeys too. As for the checkering, follow the lines from the pattern edges, measure the lines per inch, and then check back with me. Maybe you like checkering that is not ninety years old and has not had the sweat and oil cleaned out. Sheesh!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,884 Likes: 106
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 5,884 Likes: 106 |
How about the checkering? That doesn't appear to be up to par. Restock
Looks like typical late 1930s-40s Model 21 Standard Grade checkering to me.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,111 Likes: 195
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,111 Likes: 195 |
Pretty good work as I see it.
|
|
|
|
|
