
Hi folks. I’m wondering if any of you collectors could tell me a little bit more about what I found.
I have an original October 1893 Winchester Repeating Arms Catalog in pretty great shape. I have photos but can seem to figure out how to post them here.
I tried to do some research myself but there isn’t much out there. Is this scarce or desirable at all? I’m out of familiar waters on this one, so any input would be greatly appreciated.
I’d be happy to email photo’s if anyone wants to take a look.
Original Winchester catalogs have some value based on the condition.
Please send pictures to – [email protected]
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
If you could email me pictures of the 4-5 pages that discuss Winchester Reloading Tools. I would appreciate it for my survey.
Sincerely,
Brady
WACA #8783 - Checkout my Reloading Tool Survey!
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-research-surveys/winchester-reloading-tool-survey/
Check ebay for values. Here’s an 1890 priced at $500. I think that’s grossly excessive, maybe half that if in truly great shape.
I typically find them for $75 – $150, again it depends on the condition and the specific catalog No.
Oddly, I did not find an “October 1893” catalog listed by Winchester.
Winchester February 1893 Repeating Arms Co. Catalog No. 50
Winchester June 1893 Repeating Arms Catalog No. 51
Winchester April 1894 Repeating Arms Catalog No. 52
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Chuck said
I have not seen a documented by Winchester list. The copies that are out there are only the ones they found in good enough condition to copy. This one is not in the 12 volume set. I would love to have it.
Chuck… Winchester did not issue an October 1893 Firearms catalog, which was my point. Winchester did issue an October 1898 catalog No. 62… I highly suspect that is what the OP really has. I am still waiting for pictures of it.
Edit: Apparently Winchester did issue an October 1893 (unnumbered) catalog.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
I went back and looked at Ron Stadt’s list that many of us have been using for years and he does state there was an October 1893.
Clarence. I believe you but I want to see the staples. I have gone through all of the catalogs in the 12 volume set and all of them show who was the original printer and then who printed the copies. I have a few original Winchester catalogs and even one that is a re-print but not in the 12 volume set nor re printed by Cornell.
Yeah that one is one of the ones in Ron Stadt’s list on WRACo catalogs not in the 12 Volume Set.
You can find Ron’s lists in old issues of the Collector Magazine.
https://winchestercollector.org/magazines/198503/26/
The original catalogs were stapled.
It depends on the year / date of the catalogs. Also Salesman’s catalogs were bound in leather with some of them have the salesman name on the front of the catalog.
Sincerely,
Maverick
WACA #8783 - Checkout my Reloading Tool Survey!
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-research-surveys/winchester-reloading-tool-survey/
Chuck said
I have a few original Winchester catalogs and even one that is a re-print but not in the 12 volume set nor re printed by Cornell.
Cornell’s aren’t even printed–they’re run off on a color-copier, sometimes with color not in the original. I detest them, but did buy a couple of rare Stevens cats. But I have no objection to quality reprints, such as a very nicely done 1925, complete with embossed covers; not marked “repro,” & if left for a few weeks in a Greyhound waiting room, might be passed as original, at least to someone inexperienced in handling old paper. Have a couple fairly well-done 1890s repros, not marked “repro” either, but one I consult more frequently than any other is the hardback 1916 reprinted by Castle Books.
I’m surprised that original 1911 on ebay hasn’t yet sold; I didn’t buy it because I already have an original.
What’s surprisingly hard to find are original late ’30s eds, maybe because of Depression; quite common, however, are the “pocket” eds, because cheaper to print, I assume.
1 Guest(s)
