Comanche fight

ScottT · Post by **ScottT** » Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:26 pm

A little background. I find it amazing that Winchester got their new products on the market so quickly and into the hands of people who actually used them. I know of an incident in July of 1873 in which one of my ancestors used a Winchester 73 in a Comanche fight. Of course I had a fellow who did not believe it, but you decide what you think. Enjoy:

I am going to quote the account recorded by Julia Nott Waugh in her book "Castro-Ville and Henry Castro Empresario" published in 1934, Standard Printing Co, San Antonio, Texas.

Pg. 36

"This is a short story of how Mr. Edward Tschirhart killed a Comanche Chief as related by him to the writer.

"In 1873 Edward Tschirhart, Nic Tschirhart, Louis Ahr, Joe Tschirhart and Louis Tschirhart (the latter being the writer's grandfather) were freighting from San Antonio to Fort Kavett. On the 5th day of July 1873, they went into camp near the fort. In those days the wagons were all driven in a circle and the mules put inside the circle. When on such a trip one man had to stand guard every night.

"It was a beautiful moonlit night, everything was quiet, everybody in camp was sleeping soundly but Joe Tschirhart who was on guard. The hours creeped by slowly for Joe who sat on a wagon-tounge looking into the beautiful Heavens above and now and then he would gaze into the wilderness, always on the lookout for Redskins. All of the sudden about midnight he was surprized by the Redmen, who charged on horseback and commenced firing among the mules, stampeding them badly and killing one horse. Joe commenced firing with his Winchester immediately and the camp was soon aroused. [Joe was my great-great grandfather] Edward who had spread his blanket down near his wagon woke when the firing began and sprang up, seized his gun and ran around the wagon as the yelling and shooting of the Comanches was on the opposite side. When he came around the wagon he could see an Indian come towards him on horseback, leaning on one side to avoid the bullets from Joe's gun, who was on the opposite side. The Indian did not see Edward as he was watching Joe. Edward raised his gun to fire and took good aim by the moonlight at his left side. The Comanche was greatly surprised at the crack of a gun so near him, he swung to the other side of his horse quickly, and reigned the horse away and was soon out of sight.

"At this time all the men were shooting but Louis, the younger brother, who had to crawl through the weeds with more ammunition for Joe. When the Indians saw the one fired at by Edward fleeing from the scene they all followed or left in a different direction and soon everything was quiet again in camp.

"They succeeded in heading off the mules and all were brought back to camp safely. After this was done no one cared to go back to bed, so they sat up and waited for the day to break. Then the trail of the Indian was taken up. They soon found blood where he galloped away, and about two-hundred yards away they came upon the Indian's body where he fell from his horse. The ball struck him in the left arm, and going through the body came out where the neck joins the body. The dead Indian had a shield, bow and arrows, six shooter and a knife, all of which were taken by Edward. The Indian also had three white scalps, a woman's and two childrens'.

"On the trip back no further trouble was given them by the Redskins. Edward sold the shield and bow for thirty-five dollars and went on a good spree for a few days. VIVO INJUNS."

Now, my great grandfather, Joe's son, told me that story many times. As he told me that story, I stat on his lap and he put across my knees a Winchester 73 rifle in .44-40 which he represented as being Joe's rifle. I don't think he ever lied to me, and he sure did not need to lie about this story. My father has that rifle now and one day it may just pass to me, but I am in no hurry for it.

Could it be that this was not the rifle from the fight? Sure, I suppose it could be, but I would not bet on it.

ScottT · Post by **ScottT** » Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:27 pm

For a simplified version of the story, see Pg. 573 of A.J. Sowell's "Texas Indian Fighters."

Webb wrote an account of the fight and I believe it is in his Texas Ranger book.

lever-4-life · Post by **lever-4-life** » Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:35 pm

Great reading!! thanks for the post.

JerryB · Post by **JerryB** » Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:36 pm

A great story Scott,it's nice to have learned the early history from the old ones in the family.

KirkD · Post by **KirkD** » Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:44 pm

Excellent story. That '73 is a treasure.

GANJIRO · Post by **GANJIRO** » Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:49 pm

Scott- thanks for the great read, fine roots you sprung forth from.

I am always awestruck by the superior horsemanship the Comanches exhibited, what a worthy adversary they were.

ScottT · Post by **ScottT** » Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:50 pm

KirkD wrote:Excellent story. That '73 is a treasure.

Naw Kirk, it could not possibly exist!

At any rate, here is the rest of the story. Edward also took a headress of feathers and beads from this Indian (I believe it is in the Institute of Texas Cultures in San Antonio now) and every 4th of July, he would get pretty liquored up and march down the street in the parade wearing the headdress, drunker than Cooter Brown.

C. Cash · Post by **C. Cash** » Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:57 pm

Very neat story indeed Scott.

Post by **Ysabel Kid** » Thu Jan 24, 2008 11:40 pm

Scott -

Thank you for sharing such a great family story!!!

mescalero1 · Post by **mescalero1** » Thu Jan 24, 2008 11:50 pm

Spent two weeks on company buisiness in Anniston, Alabama once.
That is where I first heard about Cooter Brown.
For the first week and a half, I thought he was a real person!
Thank you for the fine story

Blaine · Post by **Blaine** » Thu Jan 24, 2008 11:54 pm

Thanks for sharing......the old ones in my family made the Sphinx seem downright chatty.......

jbm1968 · Post by **jbm1968** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 12:06 am

Sir,

That is a great story and you are honored to come from such a good line. I might not bet either, but that 1873 just may be the one...

I am a Texan from Tennessee, I just came a few years after several other well known men from Tennessee. My daughter is a 1st generation Texan and proud of it! I really enjoy hearing the stories of my new homeland.

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 12:38 am

Good story Scott. And I wouldn't bet against that being the rifle.

RIHMFIRE · Post by **RIHMFIRE** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 8:14 am

That was a great post.....
I love stories like that....
thanks for sharing it!

Borregos · Post by **Borregos** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 8:24 am

Thanks for sharing, great story

KirkD · Post by **KirkD** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 8:29 am

ScottT wrote:
KirkD wrote:Excellent story. That '73 is a treasure.
Naw Kirk, it could not possibly exist!

Scott, I took a look at Madis's info. According to him, only 18 Model 1873's were shipped in 1873 out of a total of 126 that were manufactured. Since the fight was in July, 1873, it does make it extremely unlikely that your great-great grandfather Joe owned one of the first 18 sold, but it cannot be proved that he didn't. Check the serial number on your father's 1873. It would have to be somewhere in the 1 to 126 range. If it is, then there's a very good chance it was purchased in 1873 and was at the fight. It would also be an extra valuable rifle, being a first - year rifle. If the serial number is too high, then I'm sure it still has great value as a old rifle that has been in the family for a long time. Also, if it turns out the serial number is too high, then it may be the case that your ancestor actually used a Winchester 1866 and the model number got mistakenly changed to 1873 over the years as the story was passed on and the Model 1873 became extremely common.

ScottT · Post by **ScottT** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:39 am

Kirk,

The serial number is in the low two digits.

Post by **Hobie** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 10:11 am

I love it! That's a great family story.

KirkD · Post by **KirkD** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 10:24 am

ScottT wrote:Kirk,

The serial number is in the low two digits.

Very interesting, Scott! Given that piece of info, there is a very good chance that your father has the real McCoy! What a privilege to possess such a rifle and what a history! There is one more thing you could do and that is to get a letter from the Cody museum. That will tell you the day and year it was shipped out of the Winchester warehouse. If it was before the date of that fight in 1873 (assuming that date is right), then you've hit the jackpot when it comes to provenance. Either way, your father still has a choice early '73.

Modoc ED · Post by **Modoc ED** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 10:31 am

KirkD wrote:Scott, I took a look at Madis's info. According to him, only 18 Model 1873's were shipped in 1873 out of a total of 126 that were manufactured. Since the fight was in July, 1873, it does make it extremely unlikely that your great-great grandfather Joe owned one of the first 18 sold, but it cannot be proved that he didn't. Check the serial number on your father's 1873. It would have to be somewhere in the 1 to 126 range. actually used a Winchester 1866 and the model number got mistakenly changed to 1873 over the years as the story was passed on and the Model 1873 became extremely common.

KirkD -

You're a very knowledgeable guy but I must beg to differ with you on this one. Winchest and other manufactures have in the past mass produced receivers with serial numbers during production runs and then used the receivers randomly throughout the run.

Yes, you are probably right whn you say 126 rifles were made in 1873 but only 18 were actually shipped in 1873 but those 126 rifles were not necessarily 1 - 126. They could have been randomly selected from the existing stock of receivers and who knows the fifth one actually produced may have been serial # 250.

Not trying to be picky here just passing on a thought. Although specifically written about the Model 94, "Renneberg's" book "The Winchester Model 94 ......" covers this topic and I have found this to be true throughout the Winchester Lever Guns through my years of buying, selling, trading, them.

kimwcook · Post by **kimwcook** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 10:37 am

Cool story Scott. Sounds like the 73 is potentially more than just a treasured heirloom.

ScottT · Post by **ScottT** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 10:37 am

Looking at the records from the Cody Museum, it is clear that rifles were shipped at different times and it does not necessarily follow serial numbers. What is real interesting is that rifles with serial numbers 1-50 were shipped in 1873 and 1874 and there seems to be little order to it.

I do't really know if this rifle is the rifle in the fight, I was not there. But it does not make the story any less interesting.

KirkD · Post by **KirkD** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:01 am

Modoc ED wrote:Winchest and other manufactures have in the past mass produced receivers with serial numbers during production runs and then used the receivers randomly throughout the run.

Yes, you are probably right whn you say 126 rifles were made in 1873 but only 18 were actually shipped in 1873 but those 126 rifles were not necessarily 1 - 126. They could have been randomly selected from the existing stock of receivers and who knows the fifth one actually produced may have been serial # 250.

Yes, that is possible. Madis's research indicate that 126 rifles were made, 18 were shipped, but as you point out, the lower tang was serialized in the polishing room, prior to manufacturing. However, although the lower tangs could be made in bulk, they were not serialized until they got to the polishing room and there usually was little time elapsed between the polishing room and final assembly and entry into the warehouse. In other words, there could have been a thousand lower tangs made in the first year, but only 126 of them were serialized and built (although, as you point out, there may have been more serialized and they did not build them in order).

Madis's numbers are now known to be not 100% accurate, however, so, the Cody records are the only way to really know when rifle was actually shipped from the warehouse and the order they were shipped does not reflect the order they were built (i.e., serial number 125 could have been shipped before serial number 23). The letters that I have for some of my old Winnies show the day, month, and year the rifle or carbine with that particular serial number was shipped from the warehouse, and usually the order number. It would be interesting for Scott to get the factory letter for his father's serial number to see the date it was shipped.

Charles · Post by **Charles** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:18 am

Well that is a great story and the rifle is a great treasure. That the fight took place with the recorded outcome is beyond dispute. It sounds to me, like the rifle could very well have been used. The very early 73s. had to go somewhere and Texans were quick to grab them up.

In Gillett's book, "Six Years With The Texas Rangers", he says the Rangers were issued 50-70 Sharps carbine, but were quick to lay out their own funds and purchase Win. 73's in 44-40. Gillett said the rifle was good for everything from squirrels to buffalo.

Even though the Comanche were diminished from their pre-Civil War numbers and activities, they were still very much a menace to those on the frontier of Texas. IIRC Ft. McKevitt along with Ft. Lancaster was built to guard the San Antonio to El Paso Road. That was rough and lonely country in 73 and a bunch of freighters would be the ideal Comanche target.

The Comanche were a nasty lot. Robert E. Lee said they were the finest light cavalry in the world. Anybody that bested them was a man to be reconded with.

I have my GGrandfathers Winc. 73 carbine in 38-40. It was made in 1881. The left side of the butt stock is carved with his brand.. Double O Bar.

Another GGrandfather Ranged with Ford, McCulloch, and Pitts on the Colorado up to the Staked Plains trying to pick a fight with the Comanche. They were sucessful on a number of occasions.

This was in the late 1850s until the outbreak of the War of Northern Agression. He carried a pair of Colt's revolvers and a single shot muzzle loading rifle that fired an ounce ball. I don't know any more about the rifle than that, but I suspect it was a Mississippi Rifle, which were very popular on the Texas Frontier at the time. The State of Texas armed their Indian allies on forays against the Comanche with these rifles. They did get them back after the campaign.

It is a great story, and a great heritage for a Texan. Make certain you steep your son of these stories of their ancestors who made this great State what it is. He has the same blood in his veins.

k8bor · Post by **k8bor** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:19 am

Good, deep roots. I'm jealous.

Great read, great post.

ScottT · Post by **ScottT** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:19 am

I may do that someday, I don't think that Dad would want to do that right now. He would not want the attention.

We will see.

RKrodle · Post by **RKrodle** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:21 am

Great story, if it is the rifle he used that is outstanding, if not, maybe the 35 dollars he made was used to upgrade to the 73. Either way it's great history.

ScottT · Post by **ScottT** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:27 am

Charles wrote:Well that is a great story and the rifle is a great treasure. That the fight took place with the recorded outcome is beyond dispute. It sounds to me, like the rifle could very well have been used. The very early 73s. had to go somewhere and Texans were quick to grab them up.

In Gillett's book, "Six Years With The Texas Rangers", he says the Rangers were issued 50-70 Sharps carbine, but were quick to lay out their own funds and purchase Win. 73's in 44-40. Gillett said the rifle was good for everything from squirrels to buffalo.

Even though the Comanche were diminished from their pre-Civil War numbers and activities, they were still very much a menace to those on the frontier of Texas. IIRC Ft. McKevitt along with Ft. Lancaster was built to guard the San Antonio to El Paso Road. That was rough and lonely country in 73 and a bunch of freighters would be the ideal Comanche target.

The Comanche were a nasty lot. Robert E. Lee said they were the finest light cavalry in the world. Anybody that bested them was a man to be reconded with.

I have my GGrandfathers Winc. 73 carbine in 38-40. It was made in 1881. The left side of the butt stock is carved with his brand.. Double O Bar.

Another GGrandfather Ranged with Ford, McCulloch, and Pitts on the Colorado up to the Staked Plains trying to pick a fight with the Comanche. They were sucessful on a number of occasions.

This was in the late 1850s until the outbreak of the War of Northern Agression. He carried a pair of Colt's revolvers and a single shot muzzle loading rifle that fired an ounce ball. I don't know any more about the rifle than that, but I suspect it was a Mississippi Rifle, which were very popular on the Texas Frontier at the time. The State of Texas armed their Indian allies on forays against the Comanche with these rifles. They did get them back after the campaign.

It is a great story, and a great heritage for a Texan. Make certain you steep your son of these stories of their ancestors who made this great State what it is. He has the same blood in his veins.

Thanks Charles,

The only thing I think I will not share with him is the stories of my own gunfights. He can learn that later if he wants to but he need not learn that from me.

I believe, from the accounts that I have read on this fight and the people I have talked to, that the Indian who was killed was probably killed with a muzzleloading rifle, quite possibly a Missisippi rifle or similar type. This really was not that long after the Civil War and cartridge guns were not that common. The rest of the men reputedly did obtain Winchesters after this incident though. I can see why.

gamekeeper · Post by **gamekeeper** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:45 am

Great story, family and Texan history.

hfcable · Post by **hfcable** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 2:20 pm

Scott, that is one of the best 'first hand' stories I have ever heard.
thanks, and that 1873 has the be one of the ultimate family treasures!

Mike D. · Post by **Mike D.** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 2:29 pm

Excellent post and great story, Scott. Your family's Texas history must be a great source of pride.

ScottT · Post by **ScottT** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 3:19 pm

Mike D. wrote:Excellent post and great story, Scott. Your family's Texas history must be a great source of pride.

Not really, we were a bunch of dirt farmers and ranchers. My dad was the first of us to go to finish high school. He was also the first to attend college (on the GI Bill).

We came here before Texas joined the Union and nobody has been able to run us off yet!

What I am proud of is my father. He worked his butt off to give us a good example when we were growing up. (My father plowed behind a mule when he was a kid.) His example led to none of us having to work plowing a field. Among my four siblings, three of us have Doctorates and two of those from Texas law schools.

The American dream is alive and well in my family. I look forward to planting that seed in my son.

Modoc ED · Post by **Modoc ED** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 3:22 pm

Oops!!! Sorry Scott T. Forgot to say in my first post when addressing serial #s with Kirk, that your story was a good one and greatly appreciated. Always nice to hear personal stories passed down through the generations.

66GTO · Post by **66GTO** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 5:26 pm

mescalero1 wrote:Spent two weeks on company buisiness in Anniston, Alabama once.
That is where I first heard about Cooter Brown.
For the first week and a half, I thought he was a real person!
Thank you for the fine story

My Daddy was from North Alabama and he referenced the aforementioned Cooter Brown more than once (and resembled him more often than that

)

We have a local saloon named after Cooter (or so I've been told

)

FWiedner · Post by **FWiedner** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 6:46 pm

ScottT wrote:
Charles wrote:Well that is a great story and the rifle is a great treasure. That the fight took place with the recorded outcome is beyond dispute. It sounds to me, like the rifle could very well have been used. The very early 73s. had to go somewhere and Texans were quick to grab them up.

In Gillett's book, "Six Years With The Texas Rangers", he says the Rangers were issued 50-70 Sharps carbine, but were quick to lay out their own funds and purchase Win. 73's in 44-40. Gillett said the rifle was good for everything from squirrels to buffalo.

Even though the Comanche were diminished from their pre-Civil War numbers and activities, they were still very much a menace to those on the frontier of Texas. IIRC Ft. McKevitt along with Ft. Lancaster was built to guard the San Antonio to El Paso Road. That was rough and lonely country in 73 and a bunch of freighters would be the ideal Comanche target.

The Comanche were a nasty lot. Robert E. Lee said they were the finest light cavalry in the world. Anybody that bested them was a man to be reconded with.

I have my GGrandfathers Winc. 73 carbine in 38-40. It was made in 1881. The left side of the butt stock is carved with his brand.. Double O Bar.

Another GGrandfather Ranged with Ford, McCulloch, and Pitts on the Colorado up to the Staked Plains trying to pick a fight with the Comanche. They were sucessful on a number of occasions.

This was in the late 1850s until the outbreak of the War of Northern Agression. He carried a pair of Colt's revolvers and a single shot muzzle loading rifle that fired an ounce ball. I don't know any more about the rifle than that, but I suspect it was a Mississippi Rifle, which were very popular on the Texas Frontier at the time. The State of Texas armed their Indian allies on forays against the Comanche with these rifles. They did get them back after the campaign.

It is a great story, and a great heritage for a Texan. Make certain you steep your son of these stories of their ancestors who made this great State what it is. He has the same blood in his veins.
Thanks Charles,

The only thing I think I will not share with him is the stories of my own gunfights. He can learn that later if he wants to but he need not learn that from me.

I believe, from the accounts that I have read on this fight and the people I have talked to, that the Indian who was killed was probably killed with a muzzleloading rifle, quite possibly a Missisippi rifle or similar type. This really was not that long after the Civil War and cartridge guns were not that common. The rest of the men reputedly did obtain Winchesters after this incident though. I can see why.

Maybe your Grandpap was one the fellows who made that (in hindsight) WISE purchase decision, and the '73 you have is that very iron purchased as a result .

Still a heck of a tale.

Charles · Post by **Charles** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 6:53 pm

Scott... You need to consider joining the Sons of the Republic of Texas. It is open ot all men whose ancestors were in Texas during the days of the Texas Republic. They do much to preserve the heritage of early Texas.

My wife is a DRT (Daughters of the Republic of Texas) and I am getting my paper work to join the SRT (Sons). The DRT are the ladies who have care, custody, and control of The Alamo.

I am also a member of the Sons of the American Revolution and the Sons of Confederate Veterans.

These organizations do much to preserve and pass on our heritage as Americans and Texans. They are not a bunch of snooty folks, just people who care about where they came from and want to see that heritage passed on to their children and grandchildren. It somebody doesn't do it, the heritage can be lost in a generation

ScottT · Post by **ScottT** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 7:02 pm

Charles,

I went through the cemetary to look at the graves of all of my fathers before me, going back to Nicholas, who came over on the boat. What struck me were medallians on some of the tombstones and some inscriptions (all made after Texas joined the union) that identified some ofthem as "Citizens of the Republic of Texas."

That probably had some meaning that was significant at the time, or it would not be so recorded. Do you have any light to shed on this?

Dastook · Post by **Dastook** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 7:07 pm

Great story and Levergun. Wish I could shake your hand and be a part of history.

Charles · Post by **Charles** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 7:27 pm

Scott.. One thing the DRT and SRT does is identify and mark the graves of folks who were here when Texas was a Republic. I suspect that is what you saw.

The SCV (Sons of Confederate Veterans) also markes the graves of Confederate soldiers (with a bronze medallion) and also maintain them if there is no family to do so.

Last month we spend a Saturday cleaning the graves of Confederate veterans at the old Robstown cemetary.

I consider such acts a small price to pay to honor those who delivered our heritage to us.

LeverBar · Post by **LeverBar** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 7:33 pm

Heck! I'll pay for the letter, and you can give it as a gift to your Father.

ScottT · Post by **ScottT** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 9:01 pm

My father is a private man and I think that if we got this letter, there is a possibility that he would end up getting calls from folks who chase such things.

I have seen the page from the Winchester logbook and there is not much information on the rifle there, except that it was manufactured as a rifle.

If it passes to me, I will probably letter it and donate it to a museum. The bore is not much good and the stocks have seen their better days, but it is pretty to look at still.

LeverBar · Post by **LeverBar** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 4:32 am

I understand. My Dad was a private person too.

jd45 · Post by **jd45** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 9:49 am

Please pardon my being just a little gruesome. Think for a minute about the description of the shot he made with that Winchester. More to the point, the penetration. If it was a .44-40 bullet coming out of that rifle, it certainly was no slouch! The more I read about this cartridge's performance, the more impressed with it I am! And IF the rifle used might've been a '66 firing the .44 Henry Rimfire, how much more impressive that thru-and-thru shot was, from the "supposedly" anemic cartridge! Anyway, thanks for the story, Scott. jd45

ScottT · Post by **ScottT** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 9:57 am

jd45 wrote:Please pardon my being just a little gruesome. Think for a minute about the description of the shot he made with that Winchester. More to the point, the penetration. If it was a .44-40 bullet coming out of that rifle, it certainly was no slouch! The more I read about this cartridge's performance, the more impressed with it I am! And IF the rifle used might've been a '66 firing the .44 Henry Rimfire, how much more impressive that thru-and-thru shot was, from the "supposedly" anemic cartridge! Anyway, thanks for the story, Scott. jd45

Please read the story again. Joe had the .44-40 and Edward probably had a muzzleloading rifle, but we don't know what Edward's rifle was for sure. Edward made the shot, not Joe.

jd45 · Post by **jd45** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 12:35 pm

Thanx for the correction, Scott. And thanx for your ancestors' contribution to our nation, ( unless,, of course you're of the opinion that Texas is a nation in & of itself!.....(grin!)) jd45

ScottT · Post by **ScottT** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 6:55 pm

jd45 wrote:Thanx for the correction, Scott. And thanx for your ancestors' contribution to our nation, ( unless,, of course you're of the opinion that Texas is a nation in & of itself!.....(grin!)) jd45

Well, we were once, but we could not really afford to keep it up! I'm proud to be an American.

Malamute · Post by **Malamute** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 7:28 pm

Great family story, and great family gun.

"The bore is not much good ...."

Scott, have you spent any time working on the bore? A good friend has a Henry that has been in the family for many years. He said the bore looked like a .32 when he got it. He said he used the foamimg bore cleaner probably 100 times in it, and let it set each time, then brushed it good. It looked pretty darn good when I saw it. Some serious pits, but very shootable.

ScottT · Post by **ScottT** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 7:36 pm

No, I dropped by the folks' ranch today. He is not interested in having it lettered.

When I last looked through the bore, several years ago, it looked like a sewer pipe.

Bullard4075 · Post by **Bullard4075** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 7:37 pm

I thought Indians didn't fight at night.

ScottT · Post by **ScottT** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 7:41 pm

Well, I don't know about that. I always heard that Indians carried off their dead. Did not happen this time.