Log In
April 15, 2005
Offline
Anthony said
Bert H. said
Anthony said
Michael,
For the M-1892 Survey;
Serial number 783, with the standard 24 inch round barrel, and half magazine, in the .25-20 WCF caliber, with a crescent butt.
Anthony
That cannot be the original barrel… way too early for it to be a 25-20 WCF.
The nice older gentleman I am dealing with was able to send me some pictures, and like Bert stated, a replacement barrel, which looks to be a mail order barrel, but for some reason, someone wire wheeled the address off!
It would be nice to see if there we’re any records or proof as to when the mail order barrel was requested, and possibly applied, but I’m sure it’s a case of, “We’ll Never Know”!Anthony
That is not a Model 1892. The receiver frame is a Model 53.
Further, I suspect that the barrel was intentionally altered to remove the “MODEL 53” and illicitly fool a buyer into believing that the rifle is an “Antique” Model 1892.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
March 20, 2009
Offline
Hello,
That is a Model 53 receiver with a replacement barrel on it. The upper tang stamps style is not correct for a first year Model 1892.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
December 9, 2002
Offline
Bert H. said
Anthony said
Bert H. said
Anthony said
Michael,
For the M-1892 Survey;
Serial number 783, with the standard 24 inch round barrel, and half magazine, in the .25-20 WCF caliber, with a crescent butt.
Anthony
That cannot be the original barrel… way too early for it to be a 25-20 WCF.
The nice older gentleman I am dealing with was able to send me some pictures, and like Bert stated, a replacement barrel, which looks to be a mail order barrel, but for some reason, someone wire wheeled the address off!
It would be nice to see if there we’re any records or proof as to when the mail order barrel was requested, and possibly applied, but I’m sure it’s a case of, “We’ll Never Know”!
Anthony
That is not a Model 1892. The receiver frame is a Model 53.
Further, I suspect that the barrel was intentionally altered to remove the “MODEL 53” and illicitly fool a buyer into believing that the rifle is an “Antique” Model 1892.
Bert
twobit said
Hello,
That is a Model 53 receiver with a replacement barrel on it. The upper tang stamps style is not correct for a first year Model 1892.
Michael
Gentlemen,
I most certainly didn’t realize it myself!
Bert, Like you said, it sure looks like it was altered to mi represent a Model 92! The owner paid $100.00 bucks, or something close to that if I remember correctly, as someone before him is the one who in all likely hood got duped!
Michael, You and Bert noticed it right off, as I didn’t even think twice about it!
Anthony
May 11, 2016
Offline
Michael,
I have several model 1892 rifles and carbines that I could probably add to your survey.
The only one that is a little unusual is serial number 497370. Its a solid frame octagon barrel, 25-20 rifle. The somewhat unusual feature that you might want to capture in your survey is the upper tang stamping for which I’ve attached a picture. According to George Madis in the Winchester Book this tang marking is rarely found, and only on those guns intended for export. If you don’t have this rifle in your survey, let me know and I’ll send you a complete set of photos.
March 20, 2009
Offline
Roger Adam said
Michael,
I have several model 1892 rifles and carbines that I could probably add to your survey.
The only one that is a little unusual is serial number 497370. Its a solid frame octagon barrel, 25-20 rifle. The somewhat unusual feature that you might want to capture in your survey is the upper tang stamping for which I’ve attached a picture. According to George Madis in the Winchester Book this tang marking is rarely found, and only on those guns intended for export. If you don’t have this rifle in your survey, let me know and I’ll send you a complete set of photos.
Good morning Roger,
I have seen that rifle for sale twice. First on Gunbroker out of Oyster Bay NY in Mar of 2024 and then on Guns International in Aug of 2025 by RW Outdoors in MT. I REALLY do not agree with Madis on why the tang is marked as such. Here is my take on these rifles:
I do have to disagree that the tang marking has anything to do with export of rifles to Britain. The tang stamp style on your rifle, with or without the small “MOD 1892” stamped across the tang, is found between SN 476000 and 502000. Roughly 25,000 rifles This corresponds to production from 1909 for the Model 1892. The earlier guns with the style do not have any MOD 1892 added to the tang whereas the later examples in this range do have it. Those early gun are indeed lacking any Model designation on them. The majority of the rifle in this range are sporting rifles in 25-20 WCF caliber. I have catalogued right at 200 rifles with this tang stamp style and not a single one has any foreign proof stamps! I know Madis claims the tang style was used for export guns but the data does not support that claim.
It is interesting to note also that during 1909 this identical tang stamp style was begun to be used on the Model 1890 slide action .22 caliber rifles. Those rifles already had the Model designation being applied to the barrel so there were no Model 1890 rifles produced without model designations. This style was used until 1915 for the Model 1890’s. Certainly, Winchester did not intend to export the entirety of 6 years worth of 1890 production.
It is my belief that the use of this tang stamp style on the Model 1892 rifles was a production error. I will be the first to admit that 25,000 rifles with an “error” is a bit hard to believe but the export idea does not make sense either.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
May 11, 2016
Offline
twobit said
Roger Adam said
Michael,
I have several model 1892 rifles and carbines that I could probably add to your survey.
The only one that is a little unusual is serial number 497370. Its a solid frame octagon barrel, 25-20 rifle. The somewhat unusual feature that you might want to capture in your survey is the upper tang stamping for which I’ve attached a picture. According to George Madis in the Winchester Book this tang marking is rarely found, and only on those guns intended for export. If you don’t have this rifle in your survey, let me know and I’ll send you a complete set of photos.
Good morning Roger,
I have seen that rifle for sale twice. First on Gunbroker out of Oyster Bay NY in Mar of 2024 and then on Guns International in Aug of 2025 by RW Outdoors in MT. I REALLY do not agree with Madis on why the tang is marked as such. Here is my take on these rifles:
I do have to disagree that the tang marking has anything to do with export of rifles to Britain. The tang stamp style on your rifle, with or without the small “MOD 1892” stamped across the tang, is found between SN 476000 and 502000. Roughly 25,000 rifles This corresponds to production from 1909 for the Model 1892. The earlier guns with the style do not have any MOD 1892 added to the tang whereas the later examples in this range do have it. Those early gun are indeed lacking any Model designation on them. The majority of the rifle in this range are sporting rifles in 25-20 WCF caliber. I have catalogued right at 200 rifles with this tang stamp style and not a single one has any foreign proof stamps! I know Madis claims the tang style was used for export guns but the data does not support that claim.
It is interesting to note also that during 1909 this identical tang stamp style was begun to be used on the Model 1890 slide action .22 caliber rifles. Those rifles already had the Model designation being applied to the barrel so there were no Model 1890 rifles produced without model designations. This style was used until 1915 for the Model 1890’s. Certainly, Winchester did not intend to export the entirety of 6 years worth of 1890 production.
It is my belief that the use of this tang stamp style on the Model 1892 rifles was a production error. I will be the first to admit that 25,000 rifles with an “error” is a bit hard to believe but the export idea does not make sense either.
Michael
Michael, thanks for the education. I’ve certainly come to appreciate that not all published firearms information stated as fact is necessarly correct! Sometimes an author’s best guess or opinion carries more weight than it deserves. I’d be interested to know if your survey of Model 1892 rifles in this serial number range (476000-502000) all carry this same upper tang marking or if it’s rarely found as Madis suggests.
Thanks
Roger
March 20, 2009
Offline
Roger Adam said
twobit said
Roger Adam said
Michael,
I have several model 1892 rifles and carbines that I could probably add to your survey.
The only one that is a little unusual is serial number 497370. Its a solid frame octagon barrel, 25-20 rifle. The somewhat unusual feature that you might want to capture in your survey is the upper tang stamping for which I’ve attached a picture. According to George Madis in the Winchester Book this tang marking is rarely found, and only on those guns intended for export. If you don’t have this rifle in your survey, let me know and I’ll send you a complete set of photos.
Good morning Roger,
I have seen that rifle for sale twice. First on Gunbroker out of Oyster Bay NY in Mar of 2024 and then on Guns International in Aug of 2025 by RW Outdoors in MT. I REALLY do not agree with Madis on why the tang is marked as such. Here is my take on these rifles:
I do have to disagree that the tang marking has anything to do with export of rifles to Britain. The tang stamp style on your rifle, with or without the small “MOD 1892” stamped across the tang, is found between SN 476000 and 502000. Roughly 25,000 rifles This corresponds to production from 1909 for the Model 1892. The earlier guns with the style do not have any MOD 1892 added to the tang whereas the later examples in this range do have it. Those early gun are indeed lacking any Model designation on them. The majority of the rifle in this range are sporting rifles in 25-20 WCF caliber. I have catalogued right at 200 rifles with this tang stamp style and not a single one has any foreign proof stamps! I know Madis claims the tang style was used for export guns but the data does not support that claim.
It is interesting to note also that during 1909 this identical tang stamp style was begun to be used on the Model 1890 slide action .22 caliber rifles. Those rifles already had the Model designation being applied to the barrel so there were no Model 1890 rifles produced without model designations. This style was used until 1915 for the Model 1890’s. Certainly, Winchester did not intend to export the entirety of 6 years worth of 1890 production.
It is my belief that the use of this tang stamp style on the Model 1892 rifles was a production error. I will be the first to admit that 25,000 rifles with an “error” is a bit hard to believe but the export idea does not make sense either.
Michael
Michael, thanks for the education. I’ve certainly come to appreciate that not all published firearms information stated as fact is necessarly correct! Sometimes an author’s best guess or opinion carries more weight than it deserves. I’d be interested to know if your survey of Model 1892 rifles in this serial number range (476000-502000) all carry this same upper tang marking or if it’s rarely found as Madis suggests.
Thanks
Roger
Hello Roger,
This answer took more than a few minutes of spreadsheet number crunching. Within that serial number range I have 468 rifles documented. Of those I have 405 that I was able to capture the tang stamp style in my data. Within the 405 rifles 23 have the previous tang stamp style #2 and 26 have the next more common style #3. Therefore, you can calculate/extrapolate that some 88% of the rifles within that almost 22,700 SN interval have the same tang stamp as your rifle. I have attached a small portion of my data so that you can visually see the tang stamp dominance in blue and images of the Type 2 (earlier common style) 2A (the Export stamp of Madis) and the Style 3 which is the nest style most commonly found on Model 1892’s.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
May 11, 2016
Offline
Thanks Michael. Sorry to mess up your Saturday answering my question. Your research certainly sheds some new light on this series of rifles. There’s probably an interesting story there still waiting to be discovered.
Roger
March 20, 2009
Offline
Roger Adam said
Thanks Michael. Sorry to mess up your Saturday answering my question. Your research certainly sheds some new light on this series of rifles. There’s probably an interesting story there still waiting to be discovered.
Roger
Not a problem at all. I enjoy the process of learning and presenting new ideas and information. It’s the science/data guy in me!
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
2 Guest(s)
