I have a question about a 1893 Deluxe Takedown rifle (S/N 158XXX) that is for sale with 30-30 and 38-55 bbls. The gun has an associated Cody letter that shows it's manufacture in 1897 and lists the 38-55 bbl. The 30-30 bbl is not shown in the letter. Is it common for only one barrel to be associated in factory records with a takedown gun?
My second question is around the fact that both bbls are marked "SPECIAL SMOKELESS STEEL". Flayderman's 9th Edition seems somewhat contradictory on when this bbl marking began. Stating in one place - "Rifles made after 1904 have marking on left side of barrel SPECIAL SMOKELESS STEEL", and in another "Later Model Rifle; Circa 1895 to 1916. BLACK POWDER or SPECIAL SMOKELESS STEEL marked barrels for all calibers"
So I guess the question is - Is there any worry that these barrels aren't original to this gun? If not, how does this affect the value?
Thanks in Advance,
OC
1893 Deluxe Takedown - Barrel Questions
Moderators: Regnier (gunrunner), JohnK, Sure-Shot, Marlin
Forum rules
I have unlocked this forum but made it read only for non members -- Webmaster --
I have unlocked this forum but made it read only for non members -- Webmaster --
-
Regnier (gunrunner)
- Distinguished Expert
- Posts: 4670
- Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2002 2:33 am
- Location: The Sunflower State
Re: 1893 Deluxe Takedown - Barrel Questions
OC;
Of all the multi-barrel Marlins I have ever checked in the records, only one barrel is listed. Some of the guns were quite obviously correct with the mutiple barrels as the wood matched perfectly and the general configuration looked correct as well.
As far as the Special Smokeless Steel marking is concerned, all that would have started after 1895 when smokeless powders came out, and Marlin started making the harder steel barrels compatable to the higher pressures developed from the smokeless powders. The "For Black Powder" barrel marking came out around 1904. Soft steel barrels made prior to 1895 were not marked either way.
Should you worry about the barrels not being original? Yes, but most likely, the .38-55 barrel is the original barrel. The .30-30 barrel could have been added to the "set" at a later date, but there is no way to know for sure. If the wood matches on both barrels, and are checkered alike, then I would worry a lot less. If the sights are similar, that is a good thing too. If the general configuration is alike, that to is a good thing.
Another thing to consider, and you did not mention is the ship date. Often times, a serial number may have more than one ship date. This could indicate the gun was returned to the factory and the other barrel was fitted and the wood matched up to make up the gun as it is now. If there is more than one ship date, then I certainly would be more comforted with the knowledge that this has a much better chance of being correct.
Of all the multi-barrel Marlins I have ever checked in the records, only one barrel is listed. Some of the guns were quite obviously correct with the mutiple barrels as the wood matched perfectly and the general configuration looked correct as well.
As far as the Special Smokeless Steel marking is concerned, all that would have started after 1895 when smokeless powders came out, and Marlin started making the harder steel barrels compatable to the higher pressures developed from the smokeless powders. The "For Black Powder" barrel marking came out around 1904. Soft steel barrels made prior to 1895 were not marked either way.
Should you worry about the barrels not being original? Yes, but most likely, the .38-55 barrel is the original barrel. The .30-30 barrel could have been added to the "set" at a later date, but there is no way to know for sure. If the wood matches on both barrels, and are checkered alike, then I would worry a lot less. If the sights are similar, that is a good thing too. If the general configuration is alike, that to is a good thing.
Another thing to consider, and you did not mention is the ship date. Often times, a serial number may have more than one ship date. This could indicate the gun was returned to the factory and the other barrel was fitted and the wood matched up to make up the gun as it is now. If there is more than one ship date, then I certainly would be more comforted with the knowledge that this has a much better chance of being correct.
Due to the increasing cost of ammunition, there will be no warning shot!
The growing federal deficit = generational slavery to the national debt.
If the world was perfect.......it wouldn't be.
The growing federal deficit = generational slavery to the national debt.
If the world was perfect.......it wouldn't be.
-
OCStomias66
Re: 1893 Deluxe Takedown - Barrel Questions
Thanks for the good information. The barrel marking dates make sense to me now.
The two barrels are practically identical in wood checkering and overall condition. It would be hard to imagine that they haven't been stored together for a very long time. The rear sights on each barrel are identical, but the front sights are different. The 38-55 barrel has a brass dot type sight, and the 30-30 barrel has a silver blade type. The difference in front sight type is the only thing that would cause me concern (Well, that and the lack of the 30-30 being listed in the Cody letter, which you have already explained.)
I misspoke (typed) when I said the Cody letter referenced the manufacture date as 1897. That is actually the shipped date, and there is only one date referenced.
Thanks again for your help.
OC
The two barrels are practically identical in wood checkering and overall condition. It would be hard to imagine that they haven't been stored together for a very long time. The rear sights on each barrel are identical, but the front sights are different. The 38-55 barrel has a brass dot type sight, and the 30-30 barrel has a silver blade type. The difference in front sight type is the only thing that would cause me concern (Well, that and the lack of the 30-30 being listed in the Cody letter, which you have already explained.)
I misspoke (typed) when I said the Cody letter referenced the manufacture date as 1897. That is actually the shipped date, and there is only one date referenced.
Thanks again for your help.
OC