December 9, 2007
I was reading this:
thinking the weapon looked mint and that it was all original, until I got to the end where it says ". . . appears to be a fine factory re-finish."
That explained why it looked so new. But it raised a question. Is the seller suggesting it might actually be a factory refinish, or merely that it is a refinish that looks like what the factory would do had the factory actually refinished it (but did not)?
The letter doesn't say anything about a return so I assume the latter. And if the latter, then wouldn't $9,500.00 be way too high?
What is it about this weapon that should clue me into the fact that it was refinished, other than it looks so new?
Thanks in advance for your input.
March 20, 2009
The rear sight is positioned backwards and the dovetail is WAY to close to the receiver to be correct for that style of sight. I would be very interested in seeing the barrel address stamp on the gun. I would also expect the hammer and lever to be case colored not nickel finished but I may be wrong on that. (Edit: Gordon does show full plated guns, with the lever and hammer included, on pages 201 & 202 of Vol 1). The letter does not mention the caliber of the gun which is suspicious. By 1883 the gun was available in 3 calibers. The lifter is also plated which does not look correct, nor is it inscribed with the caliber. The barrel also is missing any caliber designation on it.
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
May 2, 2009
The gun looks like its was redone in recent history. I see a lot of buffing marks. Its a 44 caliber according to the frame and the letter. If the letter did not state caliber it was the standard caliber which is 44. Who knows what happened to the caliber marks since its buffed. The sight thats on it is installed like a early reverse carbine sight which are quite rare but were made in reproduction a while back but no telling if its a real one or just a standard carbine sight installed backwards. They don't show a good picture of the sight. I presume it originally had the early flip sight like the 66's had.
WACA Life Member---
NRA Life Member----
Cody Firearms member since 1991
December 9, 2007
Thanks twobit and 1873man. Based upon what you both are saying, it is my opinion this weapon is not worth any where near $9,500.00. In fact, I'd pay more for virgil46's 1873 in the other new thread here, and people are saying his rifle is worth around $1,700.00.
I don't know how much that rear site would add if it was original but it sure couldn't be enough to bring it up to what is being asked.
Just my opinion.
November 2, 2009
I have no clue as to the originality of this nickel plated carbine, but for this serial range the sight is correct. That is, provided the calibrations are on the underside of the flip up leaf. I have several carbines up to the 118xxx serial range that have rear sight dovetails close to the receiver ring with this "reversed" carbine rear sight. I also have several of these "reversed" rear sights in my sight collection that are marked with both the 1873 and 1876 date. It appears that the reversed sight on the 1873 carbine was used until "approximately" serial range 118XXX, according to Jim's book.
Most Users Ever Online: 628
Currently Browsing this Page:
Guest Posters: 1131
Newest Members:email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, Joe Ruggiero, Rick Vanvooren, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, ROSS@OHIOAM.COM, email@example.com