Log In
March 20, 2009
Offline
Hello to all,
Over the past several weeks I have had numerous collectors from several countries contact me inquiring about potential value and rarity of various Model 1892 rifles. In the process of trying to be helpful and answer the questions put forth the results have been met with anything from gratitude to disbelief to “how dare I question Madis & Pirkle?” As a result, I am going to put post some information that I have accumulated and processed in an effort to dispel the inaccuracy of the earlier published work. I am not throwing stones at the authors but rather trying to shed light on the most up to date research and what it says about the rifles that we collect. Some of the following will be taken “cut and paste style” from my earlier conversations and I will attempt to make it flow as well as possible without totally having to rewrite my earlier thoughts. I know it will not be perfect by any chance.
Trappers
This all got started with a question as to how rare a certain trapper configuration was. I gave my reply based on my inspection of 288,000 factory ledgers combined with the current status of my survey. Madis states in his books that 2 out of 3 guns were rifles. Therefore 33% of production were carbines. Then he notes that 1 of 325 (.0031%) carbines had shorter than 20 inch barrels. If you run the math that works out to 985,000 (excluding Model 53 and 65 rifles in the 1892/92 SN sequence) x .33 = 325,050 carbines x .0031 = 1,007 carbines with barrels less than 20 inches. Pirkle states that carbines with 14 to 19 inch barrels make up 1200 samples.
To date I have examined the written factory production letters for the first 288,000 Model 1892’s that were produced and transferred all of that information into a huge excel spreadsheet. This represents the first 29% of the total production of the Model 1892/92’s. Within just this portion of production there are already a total of 5,387 proven/known short barreled carbines. Beyond SN 288,000 I have cataloged an additional 508 individual carbines with short barrels within the balance of the rifles that I have surveyed. Between SN 944970 to SN 945056 (86 SN’s) I have 6 SRC’s and each of them has a 16 inch barrel. That suggest that ALL 86 of those SN’s are trappers. There is another batch of 4,543 serial numbers in the 954,000 range where I have 92 samples. All are SRC’s and 22 of those (24%) are short barreled. Mostly 16” and a few 14” examples. If you gross that up for just that interval it suggests that another 1090 short barreled carbines were produced in that single interval alone. Add these numbers up and it totals: 5,387 + 508 + 86 + 1068 (extrapolated addition in the 954,000 range) = 7,049 short barrel carbines were produced. There are several additional runs of SRC’s that show similar concentrations of short barrels and I still have another 1000,000 production ledgers to compile plus listings from the BATF that are not included yet.
It was at this point that the house of cards begins to crumble in the published info and a thorough re-evaluation of its merits had to seriously considered. Both of these books were valiant efforts in their day but they need to be placed on the end of a book shelf and not taken as the current best knowledge of the subject.
Short Barrel Sporting Rifles
Madis states that 1 of each 850 (.00117%) sporting rifles had barrel less than the standard 24 inch. Pirkle does not really address this very well but notes that 21-23 inch rifles account for 800 examples. I only found 3 rifles with 21 inch barrels, 50 with 22 inch barrels and no 23 inch examples. Doing the math then 985,000 x .66 (the percentage of production that is sporting rifles) x .00117 = 760 short barrel sporting rifles. Within the first 288,000 ledger entries there are actually 15,761 documented sporting rifles with barrel lengths between 14 and 24 inches!!!
Muskets:
In Pirkle’s book covering the Model 1886 and 1892 on page 103 he has a Table 5-1 detailing “Model 1892 Variations.” On page 105 at the bottom of the table is a notation that “The numbers shown in this table are estimates based on the Authors research in factory records at the Cody Firearms Museum, Buffalo Bill Historical Center, Cody WY.” He then states that the number of muskets is unknown and probably less than 2%, or approximately 19,700 examples. There are actually 851 listed in the ledgers up to SN 288000. To date I have identified 16 within this interval and an additional 19 between 288000 and 992166 which extrapolates out to an additional 845 muskets and a total of only 1696 potential Musket configurations. That is a long way from 19,700.
Full vs Half Length Magazines
Pirkle claims that 99% of the produced rifles have full length magazines. That there were only 1214 examples with half or button magazines. Of the 21,000 rifles in my survey where I have magazine configuration data for the reality is that 11.5% of the rifles have something besides a full-length magazine. 11.5% of the approximately 985,000 Model 1892’s produced equals 113,275 magazines other than full length. That is 2 orders of magnitude difference.
Caliber distribution
Madis claims that 4 out or 5 (80%) of rifles are chambered for 44 WCF. Assuming around 1,000,000 total production that is 800,000. Pirkle has the listed caliber distribution as shown below. Am I shocked that Pirkle’s % for the 44 is identical to that of Madis? No.
Caliber Number Percentage Real World Data %
25-20 40,000 4% 29%
32 75,000 7% 20%
38 85,000 8% 14%
44 800,000 80% 37%
Extra Length Barrels
Madis postulates that 1 out of 1200 sporting rifles had extra-long barrels. That is .00083%. Pirkle suggests that rifle configurations with barrels longer than the standard 24-inch totals ONLY 35 examples. In the 379,999 production ledgers there are, 34 sporting rifles listed with 36-inch barrels. Is there really only one other rifle with 26, 28, 30, 32, or 34-inch barrels out there? We absolutely know that is not true. So far, I have cataloged 174 additional sporting rifles with barrel lengths between 24 and 36 inches within the 20,062 sporting rifles sampled. That calculates to .008% which is ten times larger than the Madis estimate.
Half Round/Octagon Barrels
Madis estimates that 1 out or 150 rifles or .0066% had these barrels. Pirkle claims that 6,675 examples were manufactured which is darn close to .0066 x 1,001,324, his highest SN for the 1892/92 rifles. A problem arises though that only 66% of the total production are sporting rifles and that would calculate to around 4362 1/2 round rifles. Real world data shows that the number is almost 3% of the sporting rifles are half round/octagon configurations. Granted, these are relatively small numbers but it is a 4.5 times increase.
End of Year / DOM Serialization
The serial number and Date of Manufacture information in both Madis and Pirkle are identical with regard to the end of year numbers. It is now accepted that the Polishing Room/Serial Number Application dates are actually the correct data to determine when a receiver was serialized and thus the Manufacture date for a rifle. If you look at the M/P tables they suggest that by the end of 1895 there had been 106,721 Model 1892 rifles produced. That would be very close to 10% of the total production within the first 3.7 years! When compared to the PRSNA numbers that is an overestimate of some 53,105 rifles or almost half what M/P claim.
I built a small Excel spread sheet showing the end of month SN for the first few years of 1892’s, the date they rifle arrived in the warehouse and the shipping dates. Based on this it appears that the typical rifle went from serialization to shipped out of the warehouse within 2 to 3 months. Obviously, we are all aware that there are outliers to this but they certainly make up a very small percentage of production.
There are additional shortcomings in both publications with regard to the style of both the upper tang stamps and the various styles of barrel address stamps. These are beyond the scope of this thread and will be addressed when I complete the website that synthesizes this information and so much more. I hope this helps for some of you when you are attempting to figure just what is out there. THIS is why I started working on this project.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
July 14, 2016
Offline
Fantastic work Michael! A well thought out topic that addresses the inaccuracy issue from previous published works.
We all appreciate the work you guys do compiling this data and recording the surviving Winchesters.
Waiting for your book now….
Chris
A man can never have too many WINCHESTERS...
November 7, 2015
Offline
I can see why sellers in some cases would prefer the information published by Madis and Pirkle as it seems to make their offerings more rare or desirable. I suppose any uninformed buyer will be disappointed when the truth is documented to be otherwise. As long as sellers cite these published numbers to help make a sale we’ll have to deal with another version of reality. The ratios and percentages in Madis’ book are pretty exciting for a neophyte collector who finds something outside of the normal configuration, I certainly believed them when I was getting started.
Good work, thanks!
Mike
May 2, 2009
Online
I have explained the Madis book to beginning collectors like this. If I was going to write a book on many models I would have to divide my time over all the models so it will never be as good if you concentrated on just one model. Its a good book to give you a general knowledge on Winchesters until you decide to narrow your collecting.
He did fairly good job considering he didn’t have a computer to help write it or the internet to do research. You had to travel to shows when the interstate road system was just starting. You drove on 2 lane roads through every little town to get anywhere.
Bob
WACA Life Member--- NRA Life Member---- Cody Firearms member since 1991 Researching the Winchester 1873's
Email: [email protected]
March 20, 2009
Offline
TXGunNut said
I can see why sellers in some cases would prefer the information published by Madis and Pirkle as it seems to make their offerings more rare or desirable. I suppose any uninformed buyer will be disappointed when the truth is documented to be otherwise. As long as sellers cite these published numbers to help make a sale we’ll have to deal with another version of reality. The ratios and percentages in Madis’ book are pretty exciting for a neophyte collector who finds something outside of the normal configuration, I certainly believed them when I was getting started.
Good work, thanks!
Mike
You are absolutely right Mike. In the rush to make a dollar the wrong “information” gets repeated over and over again. If that is all that folks are exposed to they do not know it is not correct. The willingness to pay more for an “antique” firearm just to avoid paying a much small FFL transfer fee only fuels that fire.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
March 20, 2009
Offline
1873man said
He did fairly good job considering he didn’t have a computer to help write it or the internet to do research. You had to travel to shows when the interstate road system was just starting. You drove on 2 lane roads through every little town to get anywhere.
Bob
I am in total agreement with you regarding Madis. For the time he did a good job. It would be impossible to duplicate what is possible today in the days of yellow legal pads and #2 pencils. And, as Mike pointed out above, there is money to be made via the wrong information.
What surprises me at times is the unwillingness of some to accept that there could be any “new information” that might contradict what they have read. The fact that it is in a +40 year old book or repeated time after time on the internet is all they can grasp. This exercise has definitely reinvigorated myself to be more proactive in building a definitive website that will synthesize what I have learned to date so that there is an alternate source of information out there. A limited publication of books or articles in journals do not nearly have the reach into the field of collectors in this world.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
February 17, 2022
Offline
I am amazed at the work all of you do in surveying the different models. I do respect the afore mentioned men for what they did and when they did it. But the times have changed and I still see sellers, ie auction houses primarily, using info known to be wrought with errors to say “it’s antique” when clearly it is not.
thank you all for your diligent work!
November 7, 2015
Offline
When I think of George Madis I’m in awe of the many thousands of Winchesters he handled and examined as well as his incredible eye for detail. His books will always be integral parts of my reference library.
Mike
May 23, 2009
Offline
George Madis, Herb Houze, and Dan Shuey are on my Mt. Rushmore of Winchester Authors.
WACA #8783 - Checkout my Reloading Tool Survey!
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-research-surveys/winchester-reloading-tool-survey/
December 9, 2002
Offline
I’ve been reading these posts with great interest, and have to agree, with the amount of time, the gentlemen that are mentioned here, and the time period in which they did they’re work. Without the aid of many of today’s tools.
They surely helped all of us with the hobby that we love and are so passionate about.
Today’s research, still involves a huge commitment of time and dedication. Sure with the aid of the computer and even our phones, there are many advantages to today’s current researchers, but it’s still a huge amount of time, that gets put into all of it. These current tools also create more work and other situations, that might not have been about years ago.
Who ever thought, we would still be trying to update the information, through the factory records, and the current Surveys that are ongoing, bringing to light so much more, as we search for the most minor details pertaining to our hobby.
Once again I say Thank You to All who try to help with they’re dedication, and the ones who constantly try to turn in more to the research survey teams! 
Anthony
March 20, 2009
Offline
Anthony said
Today’s research, still involves a huge commitment of time and dedication. Sure with the aid of the computer and even our phones, there are many advantages to today’s current researchers, but it’s still a huge amount of time, that gets put into all of it. These current tools also create more work and other situations, that might not have been about years ago.
Who ever thought, we would still be trying to update the information, through the factory records, and the current Surveys that are ongoing, bringing to light so much more, as we search for the most minor details pertaining to our hobby.
Once again I say Thank You to All who try to help with they’re dedication, and the ones who constantly try to turn in more to the research survey teams!
Anthony
Good morning,
Knowledge is built on a commitment of time and effort to find information/data then distill it all and formulate conclusions. I am not unlike the others who fell into this “survey rabbit hole” years ago. It has been 13 years now that I pretty much start every day at my computer looking at auctions, emailing with people from around the world, as I work on these projects. Hopefully there is a light at the end of the tunnel someday. I started it all because there were questions with no answers and the realization that every gun sale was a data point that could be captured. The help from others who are willing to pitch in and send info is so valuable to extend my reach. Thanks to everyone who has done so. I am glad that others appreciate the results.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
December 9, 2002
Offline
Well said Mike, and much appreciated!
Tony
March 31, 2009
Online
A good example of how data gets updated over the years is the article in ARMAX Vol IV Number 1 1992. Herbert Houze did an article on the Winchester revolvers and corrected the information that had been passed on for years by various noted Authors.
March 20, 2009
Offline
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
March 20, 2009
Offline
Chuck said
A good example of how data gets updated over the years is the article in ARMAX Vol IV Number 1 1992. Herbert Houze did an article on the Winchester revolvers and corrected the information that had been passed on for years by various noted Authors.
If information were never updated we would all be having leeches put on our arms to cure illness, watch mice spontaneously generate from old rags and grain piles, and falling off the edge of a flat Earth.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
December 9, 2002
Offline
Chuck said
A good example of how data gets updated over the years is the article in ARMAX Vol IV Number 1 1992. Herbert Houze did an article on the Winchester revolvers and corrected the information that had been passed on for years by various noted Authors.
Interesting Chuck!
A good follow up Michael!
Anthony
January 20, 2023
Offline
It occurs to me that the best way to honor Madis and preserve the utility of his work would be to publish a supplement correcting his errors in light of new knowledge.
Anyone familiar with the inside of a law library has pulled a volume of some State’s annotated statutes series, looked up a statute, read the pertinent annotations — and then looked at the “Pocket Part” – the bound pamphlet with a cardboard “wing” that’s installed in a slot in the back cover. Those Pocket Parts were replaced at least annually with more current ones. That system kept the main volume fairly, if not to the minute, current. (There were monthly Advance Sheets mailed out, too.)
But the Madis publications errors are much more static and regular supplementation is unnecessary. A one-and-done volume could do it, as a practical matter.
Despite the fact we have computers and the Web, plus all the search software to access relevant information, we still need a semi-permanent resource that organizes and makes trustworthy expertise handy enough to use on short notice — as when looking at a gun at a show that raises questions.
Much of what Madis published is still relevant and correct. Enough is wrong to be dangerous.
Rather than discard the work, a supplement would keep it useful. It would also put a lid on the mischievous use of the principal volume. “You say Madis but what about the Supplement?”
It would be a large undertaking, best done by a group.
I can’t opine whether permission would need to be secured from the present Madis publications copyright holder but I’d guess it might constitute fair use, particularly if the effort was not profit-seeking, charging only to recover costs. And permission might be available gratis since a supplement would encourage sales of the main volume. Those issues would need to be cleared away first.
Perhaps a WACA effort?
- Bill
WACA # 65205; life member, NRA; member, TGCA; member, TSRA; amateur preservationist
"I have seen wicked men and fools, a great many of both, and I believe they both get paid in the end, but the fools first." -- David Balfour, narrator and protagonist of the novel, Kidnapped, by Robert Louis Stevenson.
June 11, 2014
Offline
Madis’s book was the very first volume I purchased when I first started collecting old Winchesters. I almost wore it out. Over time, however, I became aware of the dating problem between Madis’s information and the actual factory records. I was also involved for several years in the Model 53 survey and the discrepencies between the real data and what Madis wrote about the Model 53 were so large, that his chapter on the Model 53 is almost unusable. I still have Madis’s book (and the more portable one), but I keep them not to refer to, but to enjoy as a vintage book on Winchesters. A massive amount of work went into that book, especially considering desktop publishing using computers was not yet invented. I would say that it is time for an entirely new Winchester book, not just an addendum that includes corrections and updates. There is room for substantial improvement in the photos for each model that show more detail and resolution.
I’m thinking of something more akin to the kind of articles Bert Hartman, Rob Kassab, Donald Klancher, Gary White, John Madl and others have been publishing in the WACA journal – all of them top quality articles. I would love to see someone like Bert author, or at least be the editor of a new Winchester book.
April 15, 2005
Online
Kirk Durston said
Madis’s book was the very first volume I purchased when I first started collecting old Winchesters. I almost wore it out. Over time, however, I became aware of the dating problem between Madis’s information and the actual factory records. I was also involved for several years in the Model 53 survey and the discrepencies between the real data and what Madis wrote about the Model 53 were so large, that his chapter on the Model 53 is almost unusable. I still have Madis’s book (and the more portable one), but I keep them not to refer to, but to enjoy as a vintage book on Winchesters. A massive amount of work went into that book, especially considering desktop publishing using computers was not yet invented. I would say that it is time for an entirely new Winchester book, not just an addendum that includes corrections and updates. There is room for substantial improvement in the photos for each model that show more detail and resolution.
I’m thinking of something more akin to the kind of articles Bert Hartman, Rob Kassab, Donald Klancher, Gary White, John Madl and others have been publishing in the WACA journal – all of them top quality articles. I would love to see someone like Bert author, or at least be the editor of a new Winchester book.
That is actually something that I am planning to do. The (yet to be written) 5th edition of the Red Book will be focused on the production information and statistics of the various models versus the value numbers. My plan is to reformat the Red Book by Model (a chapter for each model that I plan to include), and then discuss the production history and statistics for each of the models that will be in the book. I will be relying on several of our WACA Gurus (Bob Reabe, Jeff Abendshein, Lou Luttrell, Michael Puzio, Marc Murphy, Greg Docktor, etc.) to provide some of the necessary details & information for appropriate chapter(s).
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
July 8, 2012
Offline
Can’t wait to see the 5th edition Bert. Thank you for your contributions to this hobby, and thanks to all the survey keepers, and contributors. I have certainly learned a lot over the years from all of your expertise and knowledge.
Al
1 Guest(s)
