wra barrels

[Jeremy69]

what is the range for early/late based on the pad length? I was taken by a fake barrel on a rifle and bought what I consider to be a real one for a restoration, except I was under the impression I got one with the drawing number facing the wrong way. also fairly sure the stock was humpped as well because it is too nice, restoration project is on hold until I can find some legit wood. thanks in advance..

[latigo 1]

Short pad barrels started showing up on early 1.2 mil rifles and long pad barrels were pretty much gone by 1943. There is no "wrong way" for the drawing number to face on WRA barrels. They were randomly stamped both ways during all periods of production. Post some pics of your barrel and your stock and maybe we can figure out if they are legit.

[Bodyman]

I wrote this a long time ago and though it is quite long, it is still very good information. It discusses both the readable direction and the spline/pad length, as well as transition.

http://web.archive.org/web/200303040...rabarrels.html

You can also go back thru Lane's Tips page (hat's off to Lane) and see what the early days of CSP were like - it was unique. Lots of great info there. Here's the link (and you might want to save it);

http://web.archive.org/web/200302022...com/lanestips/

If you are looking for a good WRA barrel, take your time. You may have to get a little bit creative, like I have seen some really nice barrels for sale recently, but you have to buy the entire rifle to get it. Often these are priced rather attractively given what you get with them (which is, a whole 'nother rifle!). The hard part for me is then selling off the excess parts which those who know me, know that I can never really manage to declare much of anything as 'excess' ... (grin)).

[Rick B]

Thanks Bodyman, it has been so long I forgot when you wrote that up. Thank goodness the archives are there.

As for pad length time frame. It clearly did not make it to the 1.2 million period. I would say it dropped off more in the 123,000 range if even that late but I may be way off base so maybe Bodyman can give more details on this. Rick B

[Jeremy69]

I will post some pics of what I have soon. I don't have a good camera handy at the moment. I did look at the bbl. and it is a clip latch side and long pad, I have a OCT. 1943 rifle if memory suites me as it is deep in the safe.. Thanks, Jeremy.

[latigo 1]

As for pad length time frame. It clearly did not make it to the 1.2 million period. I would say it dropped off more in the 123,000 range if even that late but I may be way off base so maybe Bodyman can give more details on this. Rick B

Rick, Here is the information I have in my notes after talking to a couple of knowledgable collectors and gathering what info I could from discussions on the forums. Early WRA barrels, up to about serial #125000, were consistant in that they all had long pads and the drawing number was readable from the op rod side. After that they still had long pads up to the early 1.2 mil rifles, but the drawing number could either be op rod side or clip latch side. The short pad barrels started showing up in the early 1.2 mil series, but an occasional long pad barrel could still be found clear up into the 2 mil series with the drawing number still being randomly stamped. I don't know if this is totally correct information or whether anyone really knows for sure since there have not been a whole lot of original Winchesters found. If anyone else has any info I hope they will join in.

[Bodyman]

Below 125,000 everything 'seems' to be oprod readable and long spline/pad. After that the direction of print is both directions. Shorter pads and splines 'seem' to begin transitioning in around the change in contract or right around the 1.2 million mark. As with all almost all the earlier parts at WRA, they can show up at random on later rifles. With regard to these earlier profile barrels, while they may be less common on the midwar rifles, they do show up all the way thru production and quite a few have even been seen at the very end on Win-13's.

The earliest data is terribly thin, but that is basically what the observations (of many) support to this point.

[dbarn]

From my 2.4 million pictured below in another thread. TE 3.5 ME 1.5 hth.