Log In
December 9, 2024
Offline
https://www.gunbroker.com/Item/1192817262
whats your guys opinion on the finishes of this rifle?
I’m by no means a player at this price point but just trying to learn.
April 30, 2023
Offline
I’m going to play “check my skills” and see what the experts think, just to test my own thoughts on it!
January 20, 2023
Offline
Every time I see the word “Grail” in a Gunbroker description I start thinking about who is hiding in the woodpile.
- Bill
WACA # 65205; life member, NRA; member, TGCA; member, TSRA; amateur preservationist
"I have seen wicked men and fools, a great many of both, and I believe they both get paid in the end, but the fools first." -- David Balfour, narrator and protagonist of the novel, Kidnapped, by Robert Louis Stevenson.
February 22, 2024
Offline
I don’t like the way the muzzle looks with the turned rounded corners like a modern barrel. Also with the dings in the wood, the barrel looks unscathed and care free
September 22, 2011
Offline
I’m certain the wood has been refinished in the past. For that kind of money you would at least expect a factory letter.
April 15, 2005
Online
The wood looks like it has been lightly cleaned up (but not refinished), but overall, that rifle looks correct (original). The lightly chamfered corners on the muzzle were normal Winchester practice on the octagon barrels.
The seller does show a CFM research sheet (which is essentially the same thing as a factory letter).
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
September 22, 2011
Offline
Bert H. said
The wood looks like it has been lightly cleaned up (but not refinished), but overall, that rifle looks correct (original). The lightly chamfered corners on the muzzle were normal Winchester practice on the octagon barrels.
The seller does show a CFM research sheet (which is essentially the same thing as a factory letter).
Bert
Yes, I agree, the wood, at the very least, has been cleaned. I suspected a light sanding, but maybe nit.
When I looked at the listing earlier, I did not see the CFM research sheet. It either wasn’t part of the listing at the time I looked at it, or I somehow missed it.
December 9, 2002
Offline
I’ll head out on a limb on this one simply as many have stated, $35,000.00 is a lot to spend on a collectable rifle without physically handling it, or buying it from a reputable WACA member!
I feel this rifle was redone as a very good job, but a few things brought me to this conclusion, and I’ll point them out without re re quoting the other posts.
The wood fit to the crescent metal butt plate is suspect. Besides some other areas of wood to metal fit, as the lower tang behind the serial number, and the screw where the gap in the radius is very evident.
On the top tang, the Block “M”, in model is rarely seen, but I thought a hole for a tang sight was in front of the word, “Model”, on the second model rifle.
I did see some marks or blemishes, below the “M”, in model, possibly from some re work and, in the C.C.H. Not sure about that.
It’s one of the better jobs we’ve seen in a long time, “IF”, it’s not correct and all original!
Tony
March 31, 2009
Offline
I agree with Anthony. The wood to metal fit is not good. Not only the butt plate but along the wrist area to the tang and receiver. The barrel seems too good for the rest of the rifle. It may be me but the lower tang seems to be proud of the wood?
You have heard me say this many times. Don’t buy guns that you have not picked up.
December 9, 2024
Offline
What about that screw in front of the loading port, its the only one thats blue??
April 15, 2005
Online
helidriver72 said
What about that screw in front of the loading port, its the only one thats blue??
Good catch… it is an obvious clue that it has been replaced.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
December 9, 2002
Offline
December 9, 2002
Offline
Makes me wonder if it was done on purpose in relevance to the other two screws on the same side, to show contrast and make it look more attractive!
Beauty being in the eye of the beholder!
Tony
April 30, 2023
Offline
Does any one feel the stampings’ fonts/typeface are just a little…”off”? They seem pretty sharp and new looking but the wood condition (considering I agree it’s had work done or cleaned up) doesn’t match for me. The metal is nice and I like it as “well-cared for,” but something is off for me….
September 29, 1993
Offline
IMHO:
1. the wood has definitely been cleaned
2. the barrel age/condition/finish does not match the wood finish and has either been very professionally refinished or replaced
3. the receiver screw forward of the loading gate is obviously a replacement
4. the barrel chamfer is too pronounced and not Winchester finished
WACA Life Benefactor Member
NRA Life Member
October 29, 2011
Online
Rick got it right–don’t touch it–I own 1 of the 86 takedowns in 50-100-450–it is almost perfect like My 50EX—I need that one in OB CB, not a refinished
piece..Bill
July 14, 2016
Offline
The wood shows only big dings, the lighter scratches and dings have been worked out of it.
The caibre stamping looks very off to me – it is too deep. As does the barrel stamp.
An easy pass, not an honest gun showing honest wear.
Chris
A man can never have too many WINCHESTERS...
November 27, 2013
Offline
I’m in agreement with Rick and Bill.
In addition to having gone through a recent mediocre restoration, retaining 0% original finish and having a new barrel installed, the serial number appears to have been hand stamped with an incorrect font and poor spacing. The 0, 2 and especially the 7 are quite a lot different. Winchester serial numbers from this timeframe were typically much more evenly spaced and aligned. Here’s an example of a serial number from an 1886 from the same timeframe in my collection for comparison:
It certainly raises the question of whether or not this was the original serial number applied to this tang. Mark
September 22, 2011
Offline
Mark Douglas said
I’m in agreement with Rick and Bill.
In addition to having gone through a recent mediocre restoration, retaining 0% original finish and having a new barrel installed, the serial number appears to have been hand stamped with an incorrect font and poor spacing. The 0, 2 and especially the 7 are quite a lot different. Winchester serial numbers from this timeframe were typically much more evenly spaced and aligned. Here’s an example of a serial number from an 1886 from the same timeframe in my collection for comparison:It certainly raises the question of whether or not this was the original serial number applied to this tang. Mark
Now that you point that out…
Makes me suspect the rifle was created to match the letter.
3 Guest(s)
