Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
I bought this Keystone View Co. slide yesterday and here is a picture of 1/2 of it. The actual image is nicer and I will have to look through a viewer with it someday.
I like the older hunting pictures quite a bit. There is something about this particular one that really interests me as it is right in the time period I like to collect in. I think that’s a nice long barreled 1895 in the foreground, so maybe a 30-40 or .303 if it’s 28". The buck ain’t bad either.
Brad
http://s1226.photobucket.com/user/hurint/media/DSCN4854_zps946f8129.jpg.html
Neat Pic The rear guy has a 94 , but the front guy does look like he has a 95 with the black tip forend
I think he is referring to the rifle closest to the deer. You can see the screw that holds the forearm in place on the bottom of the forearm. 1894’s don’t have that.
Paul
The back rifle very well could be a model 86. Hard to tell as the receiver is a bit blurry in the photo.
Maverick
WACA #8783 - Checkout my Reloading Tool Survey!
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-research-surveys/winchester-reloading-tool-survey/
To me, the back receiver looks a bit too long for an ’86. I’d lean toward a 1894
I wish I could tell on the back gun for sure and I was counting on you guys to know! 
*I’m changing my vote to an 1886.
Another reason I like the picture is it looks like it could have been taken in a lot of the same places I hunt based on the vegetation. Any guesses on the pistol in the holster?
Brad
Just another thought. Could it be an 1893 Marlin? The Marlin only has 1 screw on the left side of the receiver and it is all the way to the rear.
The 86 has a rounded receiver on the bottom and this rifle looks squared off on the bottom of the receiver. Just my thoughts.
[Image Can Not Be Found]
Paul
I think that the rifle in the back is a Model 1894 Rifle. The vertical height of the receiver is too small for a Model 1894.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Model 1884? Typo error?
Even in very bad photos, you can almost always see the top forward screw ( close to the barrel ) on the model 1894 receiver. That is why I was thinking a Marlin. The forearm end cap does looks more like an 1894 than a Marlin. Maybe Brad can look a little closer with a magnifying glass and give us an answer. Anyway, glad that we all agree on the model 95.
Paul
Not to get picky but after 1895, which we can assume when the photo was taken the Marlin 1893 had 2 screws on the left side. The photo you have shown as an example is a very early 1893 without the re-enforcing in the frame which was added in around 1895. Although it could still be an early 1893 in the photo, but I believe like Bert says the angle of the frame near the hammer looks more like 1894 Winchester. 
Brad what did you start here ?. I think a non-gunnut would accuse us of having a screw or 2 loose , and too much time on our hands. Next thing we will be doing is scouring the pawnshops for antique cameras and taking pics of our models in the dark to figure this out!!
Angle of the frame near the hammer.
http://s1224.photobucket.com/user/oldguy67/media/1894%20others/50_zps53350cf9.jpg.html
[Image Can Not Be Found]
http://s1224.photobucket.com/user/oldguy67/media/1894%20others/51_zps9fda9e19.jpg.html
[Image Can Not Be Found]
http://s1224.photobucket.com/user/oldguy67/media/1894%20others/52_zpsda812c63.jpg.html
[Image Can Not Be Found]
http://s1224.photobucket.com/user/oldguy67/media/1894%20others/53_zps789e9bfc.jpg.html
[Image Can Not Be Found]
http://s1224.photobucket.com/user/oldguy67/media/1894%20others/94angle_zps977dec04.jpg.html
[Image Can Not Be Found]
Looks more like a Marlin angle to me.
Look at it through the stereoscope and see what you think! I have a collection of these, although not this particular stereoview, and they are amazingly three dimensional and might provide the answer you are seeking!
I don’t know Marlins but the rear barrel dovetail on the first post by Shorties is way farther down the barrel than the gun in my picture.
I’m one Stereoscope short of having one Stereoscope.
I put one of my 1894s from 1907 along side my 1886 33 WCF Rifle shipped 1905.
Approximate measurements, not exact: Receivers were almost the same length from the front to the curve down ahead of the hammer. Vertical height at the barrel and forearm is about 2" on the 1894 and 2 1/4" on the 1886. Bigger differences were the location of the rear barrel dovetail. On my 33 WCF 1886 it is 4" to the receiver. On my 1894 it is 5" to the receiver. Angle on the back of the receiver is quite sharper ahead of the hammer as it goes down to the upper tang on the 1894. This line on the 1886 receiver is not as sharp and longer to the upper tang. Maybe more hammer visible on the 1886 too.
Just looking at black and white profiles in The Winchester Handbook makes me think it is just too far from the top of the receiver down to the upper tang to be a 1894. Sure looks like the 1886 on page 89. Can’t tell if the rear sight is a standard Sporting Rear. Now, if anyone of you guys starts up with whether it’s a legit or a faked gun….
I still lean towards 1886.
Brad
Looks like a Winchester Model 1894 Rifle to me.
I blew it up to 850% , the rear sight even seems to be in the right place for a Model 1894 and it does have a elevator in it.
"I Would Have Rather Lived Through The Industrial Revaluation"
"Instead of The Space Age"
From
The Twilight Zone
Don’t own an 86 so went back and looked at some on GB. They do have that angle to the receiver near the hammer so, that would also explain the forearm end cap that looks like a Winchester and not a Marlin. I just was sure it was not an 1894.
Paul
Sure hard for me to tell for sure with the glare.
Paul, I thought you had a decent looking 33WCF at one time?
Brad
1 Guest(s)
