First post, need help on a Winchester 5640289

[emmagee1917]

Finally draged out my Winchester . The barrel on it is .............Rockola !
While the OP carbine has been rebuilt , mine appears not to have been.
I know , I know , there is no records of a barrel transfer between Rockola and Winchester or any ( AFAIK) mfg. Winchester bought left over stock from. Still , my barrel looks original , and so the OP's MIGHT be , not that it matters a whole lot.
Chris

[CrossedCannons]

Does it bear a Winchester firing proof? Sort of self-documenting in the absence of "book knowledge". I have a very late Saginaw with a Winchester barrel which, based on proof markings, is probably original to the carbine

[emmagee1917]

Does it bear a Winchester firing proof? Sort of self-documenting in the absence of "book knowledge". I have a very late Saginaw with a Winchester barrel which, based on proof markings, is probably original to the carbine

How does the Winchester proof vary from the others ? I do have two slightly later Winchesters with Winchester bbls and a 4630XXX Roc-ola to compare to if needed.
Chris

[CrossedCannons]

Most barrel manufacturers proofed their barrels with some variation of "P". NPM used a punch ("dot"). Winchester uniquely used this



As a Winchester, it will definitely have this. If you are lucky, it will also have a RockOLa proof as well.

[deldriver]

Most barrel manufacturers proofed their barrels with some variation of "P". NPM used a punch ("dot"). Winchester uniquely used this

https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...ture0023-1.jpg

As a Winchester, it will definitely have this. If you are lucky, it will also have a RockOLa proof as well.

Remember, later Winchester barrels could only have the P intertwined with a W or just a W or both. I have had 3 or 4 late Winchesters with both or just one.

[CrossedCannons]

Figure 343 (WB) states that the Winchester intertwined 'PW" proof logo pictured is found (with or without oval) on all Winchester barrels.

While all the barrel manufactures seem to have deviated from the carbine committees "policy" on the exact format of the "P" for proofing barrels, I don't think "W" was ever an authorized proof marking, was it?

[ChipS]

Welcome to the Forum. The rear sight is marked SA for Springfield Armory and is a post-war replacement sight and not an original Winchester issue sight, which would probably (certainly?) have been a Hemphill. Nice looking arsenal rebuilt carbine. Winchesters do seem to bring a premium, regardless of originality. I would guess around $700 on the open market.

[emmagee1917]

I am familiar with that mark. I know it's on the '97s for sure . I think it is on some of the carbines , but I'm not sure on this one. I'll drag her back out and see.
Chris

[emmagee1917]

I pulled out all three.
The 5.61 has only a plain non-serif "P" with no punch marks just above the band ( type 2 band ) . The 5.77 has the " PW " mark above the band and a "W" mark further up ( type 2 band ) and the 6.5 has the "PW" only above the band ( type 3 band ) . I was in a hurry , so I didn't remove handguards , break them down , nor remove the muzzle covers .
Did Winchester put thier proof on ALL the barrels they bought during the buy-out ? Or some ? Or almost none ? Or is this a period of production collectors try to ignore ? I know that WB 1 covers the buy in the text , but completely ignores it in the Winchester section on markings . Then again , I know that that short period of production would be confusing , conflicting , and prob'ly with little firm info.
Chris

[CrossedCannons]

I think they would have proofed the barrel at the same time as the receiver and bolt were similarly stamped - after firing that one special round upon assembly