Winchester listed it as a model 87. Good enough for me.
I think it serves as a better researched answer than the Wiki one that told the guy that he did not know what he was talking about with his own gun, anyway. If it had another model number, I am pretty sure that Mr. Campbell would have used the designation in his books, given the amount of time he has spent in the game.
Cheers Trevor Jones
LOL How about you read exactly what was said and then tell me when they started listing muskets as M87? Listing as M87 didn't mean they were marked as M87.
How about you visit this page in the same book and point out your M87 musket:
Tom
LOL How come it isn't listed in the index of the same book? Yet the M87 shotgun is.
Tom
Louis you're such a little tosspot. I notice you cut my post indicating I had things to do. However you come back slavering at the mouth with some reference which means nothing. I don't see any quotes backing up your claim.
Tom
Ask the author. If this is the first index provided in a book that was less than complete, it would be a surprise to me.
All he had to say about it was that the model was arbitrarily assigned. And that it should not have been, as it conflicted with the designation given the shotgun. I do not have a copy, so I cannot cite his references.
I have no vested interest in whether you beleive or not, in this case. If you choose to not, so be it. The information, that there IS indeed a variant of the 1885, called a Model 87, is a matter of record in several places. Anyone that wants to find the info, can.
I have not got the Madis book on hand, so cannot refer to it in any way at this point. I have The Winchester Reapeating Arms Company Its History and Development, by Herbert Houze, Former curator of the Winchester Arms Museum, now the Buffalo Bill Historical center, at Cody Wyoming. The athor of this book barely mentions the 1885, but spends a great deal of time on some very iteresting models that never amounted to much, production-wise, but are quite interesting.
I have the two editions of Campells works on the 1885 and it's variants. Given that the Campell works total somwhere near 500 pages of information on the 1885, it's history and variations, I expect that there is more coverage of the minutae relating specifically to the Single Shot, than in most of the references that came before.
Campell also mentions that the Model 87 designation seemed to fly in the face of logic, given that Winchester already had the 1887 shotguns in circulation.
I can recommend the Campell books as $100 well spent, if you have an interest in the Winchester 1885 and it's many variants. It is well written, and a pretty good read. He covers a lot of stuff that has been covered prior, as well as a fair bit of new information, as recovered from the mass of Winchester documentation that found it's way to Cody over the years.
Given the amount of still unsorted information stored at the Cody museum, I have little doubt that there is yet to be more info forthcoming.
Worth ordering in at the public library, if you have access to one that can do inter-library loans.
Cheers Trevor Jones
You think the author and editors would have made the same mistake here given their credentials, read the preface:
Actually, he is quoting previous editions, however, he says more than that but you refuse the implications. Just when did they arbitrarily "list" the musket as the M87? How many muskets had been made before this was instigated? By your reasoning do all muskets built prior to this arbitrary renaming become M87s by default? Listing the musket in catalogues as the M87 did not mean necessarily, they were marked as such.
Tom
Yup. Good credentials!
Same book says the the single shot musket production continued, after the 1885 rifles production ceased, and was listed as the Model 87. I figure that the author would know.
Page 28 of the book you posted the list from, a couple lines up from the bottom of the page. Right about the point where he says that the designation conflicted with the scheme of things.
Nope. The Model 87 designation referred to, according to Campbell, the third, and last version, of the Winder Musket. Fairly specific. The comment in the book you cite, states that they were listed as Model 87, and that production of them carried on, after the production of the other Single Shot's had ceased.
I have seen no mention of ANY of the 1885 rifles being marked as such, either. Not prior to the modern remakes coming on the scene, in any case. Know of any? Model 1885's, predating the modern era, that are marked with the Model 1885, that is. They still are 1885 rifles.
On the documents that are reproduced, Winchester personell refer to the model as the Single Loader, or Single Shot Rifle. Campbell states that references did not include the 1885 designation until quite a while into production, though he does not specify when that happened.
A comment, too, on you request to reference Madis. In Campbells intro to the first book, he names Madis specifically, as having given quite freely of his time towards this endeavor. He also names Houze, as well, Author of the book I made reference to earlier. I would have expected these esteemed authors to have been privvy to most if not all the information that Mr. Campbell has presented, and I would also have expected them to have been fairly vocal if any of the information being presented strayed from the realms of accurate.
Tom. Strange as this may seem, I figure that Campbell may have more time in the archives than you. He published the first book in 1995, and the second in 2000. I suspect that there has been rather a lot of information surfaced in the last decade, that could merit yet another book. In this information age, where folk like you and I, from far corners of the planet, are now able to compare notes in relative ease, information can be checked and cross checked quite readilly. I would venture to say that the Campell books on the Winchester Single Shot Rifles, are about as up to date info as one can expect to find, and that if there were any serious flaws in his reporting of the facts, they would become quite well known.
The Model 87 is a variant of the Winder Musket, is called Model 87 in Winchester documents reprinted in Campells book,and, is mentioned by name in several other books. Even if only to comment on the very issue wich you appear to think means that it cannot be a Model 87, which is that the designation is used on a shotgun as well.
Nobody is denying that the Model 1887 designation got attached to the shotgun. Doesn't much matter, either. We (Louis and I) were discussing a Musket, not a Shotgun, and at least we are both able to tell the difference.
You have produced a great deal of information regarding shotguns, and beyond that you see ommissions as proof in other places. Not my problem to make you beleive. The best I can do is put forth the info that is available. It may save someone in the future, from being stuck with as much a poor answer as the Wiki one, where the fellow was told that he did not actually have a rifle, but a shotgun.
Should you get a hand on the Campbell books, you could do worse things than to pay close attention to the various references therein, giving some of the details of the particular variant, as well as the reproductions of the Winchester drawings for parts relating specifically to this model. Campbell has reproduced two drawings of screws that were unique to the Model 87, as well as drawings of other parts. The model designation on the drawings is "G87R", and the drawings were sources from the collection of Mr. Bo Clerke.
Of particular interest is a Winchester Drawing dated in 1952, in which they refer to it as "Model 87 Single Shot"
The part in that case, is a fly for the hammer, to leave the hammer at half-c*ck on closing of the breech. Not likely to be found on a Shotgun. It is singled out for curiousity, as it was drawn by Winchester many years after they had cesed production of parts for these rifles, and it is a mystery as to why they went to the trouble.
There are also reprinted documents relating to the "Model 87" and production changes thereto, that refer to it by that designation.
I recommend the Campbell books. They really should be read together.
Lots of good info, many factory drawings, lots of info about accesories and accoutrements that were designed specifically for the Single Shot's, and awsome photo's.
Cheers Trevor Jones
.................
Trevor You don't get do you?
Louis wrote: "As has been surmised, the 1885 "High Wall" and the related "Low Wall" formed the basis for the 1887 Musket"
Which is a crock.
But Louis being Louis, and you being Trevor, must go to all sily lengths, to defend Louis perennial sloppy postings.
The Model 1887 was not a bloody rifle. End of story.
Now go back to picking scabs, Trevor.
Tom
Whatta you want to do? Small replacement parts can be made from drill rod or ground flat stock and hardened. Black powder muzzleloader action parts can be made from low-carbon stock and case-hardened, as were a lot of the originals. Chrome-moly is what's used for most high- power rifle actions. With those, you'd better have a good heat- treater lined up, a torch and a can of oil ain't going to cut it.
Sounds like you need to visit a good library and read some gunsmithing books, Howe's The Professional Gunsmith is a place to start. If you're trying to design your own cartridge arms, you'd better get a good grounding in stress, strain and some of the more intricate parts of mechanical engineering.
If single shots are your thing, read some of Frank de Haas' books, he's got some tips on what to use for what parts.
Stan
You running low on your meds Tom? You seem a bit tense.
Cheers Trevor Jones
FWIW, Tom, I am perfectly clear on what an 1887 is, it is a shotgun.
The Model 87 on the other hand, would be the Musket that Louis has.
Cheers Trevor Jones
My dad has Single Shot Rifles and Actions, the next one to get is Mr. Single Shot's Book of Rifle Plans
snipped-for-privacy@prolynx.com wrote:
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.