Avatar
Please consider registering
Guest
Search
Forum Scope




Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
Register Lost password?
sp_Feed sp_PrintTopic sp_TopicIcon
1886 with a couple extras
sp_NewTopic Add Topic
Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 232
Member Since:
September 21, 2016
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
1
September 6, 2023 - 10:29 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

Winchester 1886 chambered in 33 w.c.f.

1902 DOM I do believe

Lyman sights at the front and rear of the barrel and on the receiver. 

24” barrel

2/3? mag

Shotgun butt

Plain grade semi-deluxe stock. 

Nickel steel barrel

Bore/rifling is a 9.5 out of 10

Certainly not mint/collector quality, but I’m always pleased with earlier guns having this type of condition and wear. Not bad for a 120+ year old rifle that clearly wasn’t sat in a closet for life. 

Serial number: 128,494 

She needs a thorough cleaning. 

https://i.postimg.cc/4dZ2v9p4/IMG-6257.jpgImage Enlarger

https://i.postimg.cc/k4c1TgyQ/IMG-6262.jpgImage Enlarger

sp_PlupAttachments Attachments
Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 4108
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
2
September 6, 2023 - 10:50 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Nice.  And a darn early .33 WCF

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 232
Member Since:
September 21, 2016
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
3
September 6, 2023 - 11:15 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

https://i.postimg.cc/28kddqnF/IMG-6259.jpgImage Enlarger
https://i.postimg.cc/hGdV4Vqg/IMG-6265.jpgImage Enlarger
https://i.postimg.cc/Z50rg17W/IMG-6291.jpgImage Enlarger
https://i.postimg.cc/nh5vt0g0/IMG-6298.pngImage Enlarger

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 10641
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
4
September 7, 2023 - 2:10 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

The serial number indicates October 1903 based on several other rifles with CFM letters in that same serial range.  If you get a letter for it from the CFM, I would be interested in learning what the actual DOM is.

It is a very nice looking “semi-deluxe” rifle Cool

Bert

WACA 6571L, Historian & Board of Director Member
High-walls-1-002-C-reduced2.jpg

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1673
Member Since:
September 22, 2011
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online
5
September 7, 2023 - 3:21 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

I might be wrong, but the firearm does not strike me as typical of the Model 1886 (uniform) and is beefier and tapered, like the Model 71.  Also, the checkering pattern doesn’t seen typical of the Model 1886.  Special order or a Model 71 replacement?  The latter seems more likely, but never say never with regards to Winchester.

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 232
Member Since:
September 21, 2016
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
6
September 7, 2023 - 12:13 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Bert H. said
The serial number indicates October 1903 based on several other rifles with CFM letters in that same serial range.  If you get a letter for it from the CFM, I would be interested in learning what the actual DOM is.

It is a very nice looking “semi-deluxe” rifle Cool

Bert

  

Thanks for the more accurate date Bert.

I ran the serial number through the DOM search on this site, so I figured 1902 was close. I will send for a letter on it and be sure to update you when it arrives. 

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 232
Member Since:
September 21, 2016
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
7
September 7, 2023 - 12:19 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

mrcvs said
I might be wrong, but the firearm does not strike me as typical of the Model 1886 (uniform) and is beefier and tapered, like the Model 71.  Also, the checkering pattern doesn’t seen typical of the Model 1886.  Special order or a Model 71 replacement?  The latter seems more likely, but never say never with regards to Winchester.

  

You may be correct. I haven’t compared enough semi-deluxe or deluxe 1886s with each other to have made that initial observation, but have handled a large number of 71s. If the forearm is from a 71, it’s been heavily modified. 

I snapped a couple quick photos of this 1886 beside a 71 Deluxe rifle for comparison:

https://i.postimg.cc/7Z5KkXtH/IMG-6279.jpgImage Enlarger

https://i.postimg.cc/1z6MgXZb/IMG-6280.jpgImage Enlarger

https://i.postimg.cc/nhN0c7Nv/IMG-6301.jpgImage Enlarger 

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1376
Member Since:
July 8, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
8
September 7, 2023 - 12:25 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

jsgwoodsman said

mrcvs said

I might be wrong, but the firearm does not strike me as typical of the Model 1886 (uniform) and is beefier and tapered, like the Model 71.  Also, the checkering pattern doesn’t seen typical of the Model 1886.  Special order or a Model 71 replacement?  The latter seems more likely, but never say never with regards to Winchester.

  

You may be correct. I haven’t compared enough semi-deluxe or deluxe 1886s with each other to have made that initial observation, but have handled a large number of 71s. If the forearm is from a 71, it’s been heavily modified. 

I snapped a couple quick photos of this 1886 beside a 71 Deluxe rifle for comparison:

https://i.postimg.cc/7Z5KkXtH/IMG-6279.jpgImage Enlarger

https://i.postimg.cc/1z6MgXZb/IMG-6280.jpgImage Enlarger

https://i.postimg.cc/nhN0c7Nv/IMG-6301.jpgImage Enlarger 

  

Your model 1886 has the correct Winchester “I” pattern “semi deluxe” checkering. Nice gun, by the way.

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 232
Member Since:
September 21, 2016
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
9
September 7, 2023 - 12:51 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Thanks Tionesta1!

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1673
Member Since:
September 22, 2011
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online
10
September 7, 2023 - 9:06 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

The new photographs you provided seem to now depict an 1886 with a forearm of uniform plane, for lack of a better word.  Is it as such, and likely correct, or tapered like the 71?  I don’t know how that first photograph could create such an optical illusion.

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 232
Member Since:
September 21, 2016
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
11
September 15, 2023 - 6:12 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

mrcvs said
The new photographs you provided seem to now depict an 1886 with a forearm of uniform plane, for lack of a better word.  Is it as such, and likely correct, or tapered like the 71?  I don’t know how that first photograph could create such an optical illusion.

  

It is not tapered like the 71 style forearm, but more of a uniform plane.

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 232
Member Since:
September 21, 2016
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
12
October 19, 2023 - 9:22 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

https://i.imgur.com/J5kOaVe.jpgImage Enlarger

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 232
Member Since:
September 21, 2016
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
13
October 19, 2023 - 9:28 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

The letter arrived today. 
A little disappointed the shorter mag and Lyman sight trifecta wasn’t mentioned in the letter but assume that was what the return in 1908 must’ve been for. 
On the upside, the oil stock mention was a positive. 

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1673
Member Since:
September 22, 2011
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online
14
October 19, 2023 - 9:42 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

jsgwoodsman said
The letter arrived today. 

A little disappointed the shorter mag and Lyman sight trifecta wasn’t mentioned in the letter but assume that was what the return in 1908 must’ve been for. 

On the upside, the oil stock mention was a positive.  

We all like to think that, and maybe that was the reason for the R & R in 1908, but this remains an educated guess and it cannot definitively be proven the current configuration was factory work.

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 10641
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
15
October 19, 2023 - 10:15 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

mrcvs said

We all like to think that, and maybe that was the reason for the R & R in 1908, but this remains an educated guess and it cannot definitively be proven the current configuration was factory work.

That is not necessarily true.

In order to convert that rifle from a Full mag to a 2/3 Mag, both the barrel and magazine would need to have been replaced.  Accordingly, the new (replacement) barrel should have a work order number stamped on the bottom side of it that matches one of the R&R order numbers.  Additionally, I would expect to find a “J.P.P.” stamped near it.

The first thing I would do is remove the magazine tube and forend stock to look for the markings I mentioned.  If you find them, then you will have the definitive proof.

Bert

WACA 6571L, Historian & Board of Director Member
High-walls-1-002-C-reduced2.jpg

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 232
Member Since:
September 21, 2016
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
16
October 19, 2023 - 10:24 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Bert,

 

I was thinking the same thing. The barrel deflection barely shows no signs of having a full length mag. Looks like I’ll be removing a forearm this weekend.

 

Thanks

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 10641
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
17
October 19, 2023 - 10:37 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

jsgwoodsman said
Bert,

I was thinking the same thing. The barrel deflection barely shows no signs of having a full length mag. Looks like I’ll be removing a forearm this weekend.

Thanks  

Joel,

Hopefully you find a matching work order number.  Takes some pictures of it if you do find any markings.

Bert

WACA 6571L, Historian & Board of Director Member
High-walls-1-002-C-reduced2.jpg

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1673
Member Since:
September 22, 2011
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online
18
October 20, 2023 - 12:36 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Bert H. said

mrcvs said

We all like to think that, and maybe that was the reason for the R & R in 1908, but this remains an educated guess and it cannot definitively be proven the current configuration was factory work.

That is not necessarily true.

In order to convert that rifle from a Full mag to a 2/3 Mag, both the barrel and magazine would need to have been replaced.  Accordingly, the new (replacement) barrel should have a work order number stamped on the bottom side of it that matches one of the R&R order numbers.  Additionally, I would expect to find a “J.P.P.” stamped near it.

The first thing I would do is remove the magazine tube and forend stock to look for the markings I mentioned.  If you find them, then you will have the definitive proof.

Bert  

Yes, I stand corrected.  The J.P.P. would solidify the work as being factory.  You pointed this out with regards to a Model 1885 I own—and I forgot that.

So, minus the J.P.P., does that mean the work is not factory or, at least, could not be proven to be factory?

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 10641
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
19
October 20, 2023 - 2:31 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

mrcvs said

Bert H. said

mrcvs said

We all like to think that, and maybe that was the reason for the R & R in 1908, but this remains an educated guess and it cannot definitively be proven the current configuration was factory work.

That is not necessarily true.

In order to convert that rifle from a Full mag to a 2/3 Mag, both the barrel and magazine would need to have been replaced.  Accordingly, the new (replacement) barrel should have a work order number stamped on the bottom side of it that matches one of the R&R order numbers.  Additionally, I would expect to find a “J.P.P.” stamped near it.

The first thing I would do is remove the magazine tube and forend stock to look for the markings I mentioned.  If you find them, then you will have the definitive proof.

Bert  

Yes, I stand corrected.  The J.P.P. would solidify the work as being factory.  You pointed this out with regards to a Model 1885 I own—and I forgot that.

So, minus the J.P.P., does that mean the work is not factory or, at least, could not be proven to be factory?

  

If there is a work order number stamped on the bottom of the barrel that matches one of the two R&R order numbers, the “J.P.P.” marking is not necessary to prove who did the barrel replacement work.

WACA 6571L, Historian & Board of Director Member
High-walls-1-002-C-reduced2.jpg

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1673
Member Since:
September 22, 2011
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online
20
October 20, 2023 - 7:24 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

Bert H. said

mrcvs said

Bert H. said

mrcvs said

We all like to think that, and maybe that was the reason for the R & R in 1908, but this remains an educated guess and it cannot definitively be proven the current configuration was factory work.

That is not necessarily true.

In order to convert that rifle from a Full mag to a 2/3 Mag, both the barrel and magazine would need to have been replaced.  Accordingly, the new (replacement) barrel should have a work order number stamped on the bottom side of it that matches one of the R&R order numbers.  Additionally, I would expect to find a “J.P.P.” stamped near it.

The first thing I would do is remove the magazine tube and forend stock to look for the markings I mentioned.  If you find them, then you will have the definitive proof.

Bert  

Yes, I stand corrected.  The J.P.P. would solidify the work as being factory.  You pointed this out with regards to a Model 1885 I own—and I forgot that.

So, minus the J.P.P., does that mean the work is not factory or, at least, could not be proven to be factory?

  

If there is a work order number stamped on the bottom of the barrel that matches one of the two R&R order numbers, the “J.P.P.” marking is not necessary to prove who did the barrel replacement work.

  

Bert,

Thank you for this response.  So, with numerous work order numbers in the letter, the one stamped on the rifle would then pinpoint the exact date when the configuration was changed.  Very interesting.

I am learning a lot lately about the R & Rs from this forum alone, which makes it invaluable.  As you recall, with my rifle, much less to “learn” as we determined the work is much less likely to be factory work.

Once again, your knowledge base is impressive!

Forum Timezone: UTC 0
Most Users Ever Online: 778
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
clarence: 6168
TXGunNut: 4889
Chuck: 4528
1873man: 4270
steve004: 4108
Big Larry: 2297
twobit: 2284
TR: 1699
mrcvs: 1673
Forum Stats:
Groups: 1
Forums: 17
Topics: 12526
Posts: 108827

 

Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 1731
Members: 8738
Moderators: 4
Admins: 3
Navigation