Avatar
Search
Forum Scope




Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
Lost password?
Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1096
Member Since:
December 21, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
1
November 20, 2020 - 2:31 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

The up coming Amoskeag auction lot #20; 1886 deluxe rifle I’m pretty sure has been re-stocked, They say the numbers, 445 on the tang and 405 on  the stock and butt plate march. According to My math that’s 40 #’s apart , plus the stock has a sling mount , the forend does not.  Also what thoughts on lot#50, the ’94 eng. deluxe?

W.A.C.A. life member, Marlin Collectors Assn. charter and life member, C,S.S.A. member and general gun nut.

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 4250
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
2
November 20, 2020 - 4:31 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Maybe I’m just jaded or cynical but both the ’86 and the engraved ’94 left me a bit queasy.  The 86 doesn’t really add up (different stock numbers and the lack of a front swivel).  The condition gave me pause as well.  Some of the best case colors other combined with finish issues with the bluing.  Could of course just been due to bad storage (although that would mean only a portion of the rifle was stored poorly, not the entire rifle).

On the ’94, the caliber markings looked off to me.

Confused

Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 1118
Member Since:
May 24, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
3
November 20, 2020 - 7:35 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

I don’t care for the ’86 for the reasons stated by Steve, although, I do no believe that Winchester is above mismatching numbers…it’s a downer for potential buyers.  

The caliber markings do look a bit off to me, too.  What a great rifle, though, and I really like the King front sight.

James

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1096
Member Since:
December 21, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
4
November 21, 2020 - 2:26 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

I see they put up a “important ” notice “the assembly numbers all match”. They still can’t explain the sling mount in the stock though

W.A.C.A. life member, Marlin Collectors Assn. charter and life member, C,S.S.A. member and general gun nut.

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 4250
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
5
November 21, 2020 - 3:57 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

I recall many years back Merz had an ’86 with a swivel in the buttstock and nothing in the forearm.  The factory letter specified there was a swivel in the buttstock only.

Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 1118
Member Since:
May 24, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
6
November 21, 2020 - 5:53 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

Once, again, we are reminded to never say never with what Winchester would or would not do, and likewise with the saying about having to make excuses and/or explanations as to the why of the matter.  Like Steve, I’m aware of Winchester installing a sling base in the stock of a very rare and expensive rifle with factory provenance, and not one in the front as well, although the stock screw for the front band could easily be replaced with a sling swivel.  

James

Forum Timezone: UTC 0
Most Users Ever Online: 778
Currently Online: cj57, Byron Russell, rogertherelic, Nevada Paul, Steven Gabrielli
Guest(s) 166
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
clarence: 6367
TXGunNut: 5034
Chuck: 4598
1873man: 4322
steve004: 4250
Big Larry: 2344
twobit: 2295
mrcvs: 1726
TR: 1722
Forum Stats:
Groups: 1
Forums: 17
Topics: 12758
Posts: 111128

 

Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 1766
Members: 8853
Moderators: 4
Admins: 3
Navigation