Thin wrist with 1897 cartouche isn't valid.  Either we're not seeing the wrist correctly, not surprising given the angle, or he's misreading that cartouche. 

Nucmedman, if you really want to know the details of that gun you're going to have to grin and bear it as I act in the role of prosecutor.  My role is to discount it.  Your role is to toe the line and provide the evidence to refute my allegations.  I'm going to be very annoying.  If that gun survives the scrutiny you'll be able to print this thread and keep it with the gun.  It'll be a record of the questions raised and the responses thereto.  If you do not provide the information requested I will stop and move on.  You will have lost given that the gun is significant.  Either way you'll know what it is if you cooperate to the end.  Consider it a test of fire for the gun.  I'll repeat - it's in your interest to complete the examination.  If it survives you'll have some useful information on it.  I'll repeat, lose your temper and I'll stop.  I will lose nothing by stopping but you will.  Get mad, call me names, that I don't care about.  Stop providing the information needed - that'll get me to stop.

Firstly, let's cover that "weld" looking bit.  It's disquieting.  That bit doesn't bother me as much as the other problem.  The other problem leaves me with a very unsettled feeling.

The receivers were roll stamped.  Your gun is very weak in the center of the stamp.

  (You need to Login   (You need to Login

Your receiver and its nearby neighbor.  The "ield" on 27782 is also very weak.  The weakness of the markings on your receiver in that area catch attention but it's not, as far as I can see, a big deal.  That chip looking thing above Armory just makes the weak stamping more suspicious.  So on that part I'll give it the benefit of the doubt.  Weak stamping on 27782 is consistent with your 27786.

Out of characters per post.  Next post is your first test.