Please consider registering

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —

— Match —

— Forum Options —

Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_Print sp_TopicIcon
Model 1890 restored to look just as it did when it left the factory?
March 24, 2016
10:08 pm
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 25
Member Since:
March 31, 2015
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I am looking at what otherwise appears to be a beautifully restored Model 1890 in the 621,000 serial number range that is being touted as having been restored to look just like it did when it left the Winchester factory nearly 100 years ago. However, for the reasons noted below, I question whether the restorer has not mis-marked the stamping on its barrel with the consequence that it has not been restored to look just like it did when it left the factory. I would appreciate your input in this regard.

What troubles me is that in, pertinent part, the left flat of this gun’s barrel is marked: “-MOD.1890.-22 SHORT.”  

Reading Ned Schwing’s book at pp. 104-05 and what he describes as the “sixth barrel marking” and depicts as “barrel marking 90-5” that he says appeared on Model 1890s between as early as serial number 430,000 and as late as serial number 690,000, it appears to me that the barrel marking on this restored 1890 is incorrect and not just like when it left the factory.

Based on my reading of Schwing, the barrel marking error appears to be twofold: (1) a period (“.”) should not appear after “1890”; and (2) “-22 SHORT” should not appear immediately after the period, but much further down the barrel close to the receiver.  

Did someone, after going to all the work of restoring the subject 1890, stamp its barrel incorrectly, or am I  just mistaken in my reading of Schwing and the barrel of this gun is correctly marked? Thanks for your expert input.


Rick Schreiber

March 25, 2016
6:13 pm
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 96
Member Since:
July 9, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

That barrel marking is correct, but just one of the finer details missed in Ned Schwing’s book. Here it is on rifle serial no. 639066.

before and after.

<img alt="" src="http://i1225.photobucket.com/albums/ee394/Rustyjack52/Before%20and%20after%20third%20model%20restored/DSCF0301_zps1b8b1272.jpgImage Enlarger” />

<img alt="" src="http://i1225.photobucket.com/albums/ee394/Rustyjack52/Before%20and%20after%20third%20model%20restored/pix234173855_zpse2773bc7.jpgImage Enlarger” />

<img alt="" src="http://i1225.photobucket.com/albums/ee394/Rustyjack52/Before%20and%20after%20third%20model%20restored/DSCF0292_zps6269eb37.jpgImage Enlarger” />

Forum Timezone: UTC 0

Most Users Ever Online: 628

Currently Online:
42 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Forum Stats:

Groups: 1

Forums: 16

Topics: 9177

Posts: 79012

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 1237

Members: 10629

Moderators: 4

Admins: 3

Top Posters:

1873man: 4927

TXGunNut: 3359

clarence: 3229

Chuck: 2809

twobit: 2717

steve004: 2424

Maverick: 1796

Big Larry: 1631

JWA: 1605

RickC: 1401