Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
Online
Great story, but where’s the documentation? Also, why would Winchester choose a SRC for a “Match Target” gun? Seems fishy to me. Another example of buy the gun, not the story in my opinion. Also the buff marks on the metal don’t look right to me–possibly refinished?
Don
deerhunter said
Great story, but where’s the documentation? Also, why would Winchester choose a SRC for a “Match Target” gun? Seems fishy to me. Another example of buy the gun, not the story in my opinion. Also the buff marks on the metal don’t look right to me–possibly refinished?Don
That’s what I’m thinking also.
Not as experienced as some of you guys, but it looks pretty crisp to me. Some handling marks and wear on the receiver but overall looked pretty good. The hard part to believe is that it has never been fired! Would be to tempting for me!
Too many nicks on the wood for an unfired gun. Lower tang has wear mark from lever being closed many times. Saddle ring staple banged up from rubbing against something plus faint saddle ring marks on receiver. Might not have been used prior to 1969 but has been since. All those scratches on the buttstock plus dents on the forearm and the seller states the wood is 99.8%??? The area around the magazine ring appears to be pitted.
I have a couple of never fired Winchesters I purchased new in the early 1970’s and they look a lot better that this specimen.
Having said all this, it is still a very nice gun once the hype is removed.
"This is the West, sir. When the legend becomes fact, print the legend."
Way too much wear on the stocks for a “99%” Winchester. In addition to all of the issues pointed out thus far, I noticed that the No. 44 Carbine rear sight has less than 50% of the bluing left o it (picture #10)… that would not be the case on a truly “unfired 99.8% condition” gun.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Hello,
I had seen this rifle and would love to have the SN if anybody has been able to get it so that I can add the gun into my survey. The biggest problem I see on the rifle is the use of the “lightning” style font on the receiver target logo. 1917 seems way early for that style. The much more common block style of print as on the correct tang stamps was the norm.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
As others have mentioned, the buffing marks on the receiver, barrel and magazine tube look a bit odd to me. And as Bert pointed out on a high condition gun the rear sight doesnt have a lot of blue showing. Maybe its just me but the blue on the rear barrel band seems a bit dark. The lightning “Winchester” font is found on cartridge boxes dating to about 1911 to 1913. Has anyone out there seen another rifle or carbine marked “Winchester Match” like this one–I havent come across one before?
1892takedown @sbcglobal.net ......NRA Endowment Life Member.....WACA Member
"God is great.....beer is good.....and people are crazy"... Billy Currington
1892takedown said
As others have mentioned, the buffing marks on the receiver, barrel and magazine tube look a bit odd to me. And as Bert pointed out on a high condition gun the rear sight doesnt have a lot of blue showing. Maybe its just me but the blue on the rear barrel band seems a bit dark. The lightning “Winchester” font is found on cartridge boxes dating to about 1911 to 1913. Has anyone out there seen another rifle or carbine marked “Winchester Match” like this one–I havent come across one before?
You are right Chris. I don’t collect cartridge boxes but was more specifically thinking of the style of fonts used on the gun markings themselves.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
twobit said
Hello,I had seen this rifle and would love to have the SN if anybody has been able to get it so that I can add the gun into my survey. The biggest problem I see on the rifle is the use of the “lightning” style font on the receiver target logo. 1917 seems way early for that style. The much more common block style of print as on the correct tang stamps was the norm.
Michael
Agreed! The engraving “screams” late 1940’s or 1950’s. Not at all typical of the era.
1 Guest(s)
