Winchester Powders (?)

[Bass Ackward]

By now everyone has heard about Winchester closing it's doors.

Has anyone heard how this will affect Winchester's powder line?

[Dutch4122]

Maybe I'm wrong, and feel free to correct me if I am, but I think that the ammunition and reloading components line is manufactured by the Olin Corporation. They actually own the "Winchester" name. The firearms line was being produced by US Repeating Arms who had paid Olin to "use" the Winchester name on their firearms. If that is true then I don't think Winchester powder, primers, brass, or loaded ammunition should be affected at all.

Hope this helps,

[Scrounger]

Maybe I'm wrong, and feel free to correct me if I am, but I think that the ammunition and reloading components line is manufactured by the Olin Corporation. They actually own the "Winchester" name. The firearms line was being produced by US Repeating Arms who had paid Olin to "use" the Winchester name on their firearms. If that is true then I don't think Winchester powder, primers, brass, or loaded ammunition should be affected at all.

Hope this helps,

I think you are correct, Dutch. Also I was told yesterday by my dealer that USRA (and subsequently the European Corporation) had only leased the Trade name Winchester and patent rights for 25 years and was going to lose those rights in a year anyway. At that time ownership should revert back to Olin who can start production themselves, re-lease it to another company, or do nothing. I don't know if that is true or not, but I like the sound of it.

[9.3X62AL]

Scrounger et al--

Your account of the situation is likely the case--I seem to recall a similar version of events when USRA got under way initially.

NO WAY IN HELL that Olin would do away with the profitable side of their business--ammunition and components. They have now and have had for several years a LOCK on the California State Law Agency ammo contract, from which most CA agencies buy their ammo. Nicely enough, the products are pretty good stuff. Of course, there is also the geometrically larger U.S. Government/Military ammo contract.

Someone pointed out after all this news about the Winchester shop closing up that not only does a buyer of the rights to produce firearms have to fight competition from other makers--a new contractor has to compete against all those M-70's, M-94's, and shotguns already in the hands of customers. How to best exploit that rather restricted niche is the question.

Just brain-storming here......perhaps the way for a contractor to pursue this would be from the quality and enthusiast side of the market--rather than the mass-numbers bit. I think Miroku and others can produce a very nice version of the M-1885, M-1886, M-1892, M-1894, M-1895, Model 70--and Model 12/42 and Model 21 shotguns, too. These need not all sell for $2,500 each, either. None of that foo-fah-rah engraving or scrollwork--just attention to detail with fitting of good walnut and finish of metal. DON'T chamber them in 30-06, 30-30, 12/20 gauge right at first.......no, make that first series of '92's in 44-40 and 32-20, THAT will capture a BUNCH of CAS folks, esp. if priced around $750-$800. The 94's should start in 38-55 and 25-35....why go head-to-head with Marlin's 336? Sell those at around $500, and people will LINE UP to buy them. The 1895.....well, carbine and rifle variants in 30-40 and 405 Win sound all right to me, with a $900-$1200 price respectively. The Model 70 in 220 Swift--257 Roberts--35 Whelen--or, dare I post this--9.3 x 62 or 9.3 x 64--THOSE would sell. As for the Model 12/42, start THAT line out with a M-12 x 28 gauge and M-42 x 410 x 3", sold as a set or separately. Think those would sell? OH, MAYBE!, just as a well done M-21 in any bore would. Flush-fitted screw-in chokes for the M-12, the M-21 may require fixed chokes due to barrel wall dimensions.

No need to do this all at once--2 or 3 of these concepts each year, with plans for future production released 2-3 years ahead of time.

[onceabull]

With ideas like that ,Allen, your free time in retirement might get seriously compromised..Iffen you are ready to start raising capital, I'm in for $66.60 (fixed income retiree,you know) Really,though, wonder how much it would take to lease the name for a sufficient period. ..,and whether Olin might go for a smaller fee and % of sales,with realistic minimum annual guarantee.. ???? Onceabull

[Buckshot]

.................I think the death of Winchester started in 1964 and this is just the final bitter ending. Natually I have the benefit of hindsight here and no personal knowledge of their real corporate situation at the time. Maybe what they did then WAS the best choice. It's possible that with the M70 being "The Rifleman's Rifle" and the 1894 being what everyone and his brother deer hunted with, the rank and file gun person just was not going to tolerate Winchester cheapening anything?

But then, would the rank and file gunperson have forked over the extra bucks to keep the M70 as it had always been, and in some applications are stamped parts really bad? Looking at a M70 reciever and bolt vs a Remington reciever and bolt, there is no way you could built an M70 for the same thing Remington does. A Remington action is nothing more then a highly pedigreed piece of pipe and it's bolt not much more, and with a brazed on handle.

Ditto the Marlin 336 action compared to the Winchester 1894. The Marlin shares a few machining similarities with the Winchester with one glaring difference. That is the Marlin round bolt is an order of magnitude easier to machine then the M94's. While I personally think the Marlin 1893 was a superior looking action, I can see why Marlin went with a round bolt. Drilling a round hole is something any boob can do, but making a square hole?

................Buckshot

[StarMetal]

Simple facts boys, Winchester was losing money. Their products had skyrocketed in price, much as everyone elses, but more so. Hershel said they were making and selling guns at a lost. Couple this with their employees being Union and alot of them were coming up on retirement time, Hershel decided to kill two birds with one stone. My opinion? Another company that a Union killed.

Joe

[j4570]

Olin doesn't own the powder manufacturing anymore I don't think.

I think there plant is now St. Mark's Powder, a division of General Dynamics, in FL.

Primex owned it before that.

You can go to Olin's website and check it out I believe.

[StarMetal]

According to the Olin website it says it that Winchester ammo, brass, and canister powders are still their product lines.

Joe

[45 2.1]

If you check out a Winchester rifle advertisement, you'll find them located on Winchester Way in Morgan, Utah. And that is REALLY close to Browning. It looks like a reorganization is occurring.

[j4570]

Joe,

Olin still owns the rights I believe.

Check this out:

http://www.wwpowder.com/

Hodgdon is the new distributor of Winchester Powder!

Jason

[StarMetal]

Well it said on the Olin site something about Australia and that's where alot of Hodgdon's powders are made. Well I guess it's like our cars, they are still Chevys, Fords, Chrylers, but they sure as heck are totally made in Detroit or the U.S. anymore, assembled here is more the word. So Winchester is just having someone else handle their powder, still have the same designations and be the same stuff, just someone else making it. The only thing that Hodgdon ever made was their Pyrodex line. Seems Hodgdon's has garbled up every powder company except Alliant.

Joe