Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Here is an 1892 25/20 serial number 352047
Everything I'm posting is for sale
Good morning,
Based on the serial number your Model 1892 sporting rifle was manufactured during 1906 as indicated on the Cody information sheet. The rear sight does not appear to be original but a better photo of it would help. The wood has been lightly sanded and refinished. Examples in similar condition will typically sell in the +/- $1400 range on Gunbroker.com
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
Online
For the most part I can agree with Michael. If you look at the stock on the right side, and zooming in on the picture indicates a lot of what he is saying, besides the other pictures of the wood on this particular rifle. Probably another good candidate for Tulsa. IMHO! Understand the model 1892 are a different breed in themselves, as I’m opening myself up for several arguments with that statement. What I’m saying is in this model, with a little over approximately, 1 million mfg. and being in the 25-20 caliber, as all Winchesters, Condition is everything. I think Michael gives you a good starting point or asking price to put on a table to sell, but I wouldn’t hesitate to come down a bit with an honest offer. IMHO!
Anthony
Good morning, Michael and Anthony. May I ask both of you a couple of questions for my own enlightenment?
I think I understand the 25WCF is not a popular Model 92 chambering among collectors and refinished wood further depresses the price.
1. Even though octagonal barrels were an added-cost option, I’ve seen far fewer “standard” round barrels for sale over the decades and wonder if they would slightly increase or decrease market value in an original condition, say 90% gun?
2. The OP hasn’t asserted bore condition. Would that affect price for this particular piece in its present condition?
Thanks,
Bill
- 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.
Bill poses a good question, and this is my view on it.
Octagon barrels were actually standard (as were Round barrel) as listed in the Winchester catalogs. The octagon (and 1/2 octagon) barrels were a listed as a higher cost item versus the round barrel, but were apparently more frequently ordered. I suspect that Michael can give us a close approximation of the production ratio based on his long running research survey.
In regard to the question about value difference between an octagon barreled rifle versus a round barreled rifle, the same value differential (ratio) applies today just as it did when they were new rifles. They cost more when new, and they have a higher value today.
The numerical value difference (expressed as a %) when new was .923 for a round barreled rifle. If that same percentage is applied today, two identical configuration & condition rifles with the first with having an octagon barrel and the second with a round barrel would be valued like this…
Octagon Bbl Rifle = $5,000
Round Bbl Rifle = $4615
Based on my experience, the lesser value numbers today for a round barrel are the same as they were when new.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
I just yesterday ran across a Winchester ad. carbine $22, round barrel rifle $25, octagon barrel rifle $27.
Hello all,
The round barrel configuration makes up roughly 1/3rd of the sporting rifle population. Regarding pricing, From what I have seen a POS condition, or replaced barrel, or cut down rifle, or any other abomination that you can pretty much think of still sells in the $600 to $700 range at auction. And then some of those show up in dealers sites with 40% markups that someone else buys.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
Bert H. said
Bill poses a good question, and this is my view on it.Octagon barrels were actually standard (as were Round barrel) as listed in the Winchester catalogs. The octagon (and 1/2 octagon) barrels were a listed as a higher cost item versus the round barrel, but were apparently more frequently ordered. I suspect that Michael can give us a close approximation of the production ratio based on his long running research survey.
In regard to the question about value difference between an octagon barreled rifle versus a round barreled rifle, the same value differential (ratio) applies today just as it did when they were new rifles. They cost more when new, and they have a higher value today.
The numerical value difference (expressed as a %) when new was .923 for a round barreled rifle. If that same percentage is applied today, two identical configuration & condition rifles with the first with having an octagon barrel and the second with a round barrel would be valued like this…
Octagon Bbl Rifle = $5,000
Round Bbl Rifle = $4615
Based on my experience, the lesser value numbers today for a round barrel are the same as they were when new.
Bert
In all the years I was actively collecting, for both the 92 and 94, collectors would always seek and be willing to pay more for a full octagon or half octagon compared to a round barrel. I personally prefer them and would pay substantially more if everything else is equal. But, the beauty of being a collector is that you can buy and collect what you want (if you can find it).
November 7, 2015
Offline
Aside from the slightly higher value I’ve observed that more collectors are interested in the octagon barrels than the round. I enjoy shooting the round or half round barrel rifles and I sometimes find the heavier octagon barrels a bit awkward. I suppose that doesn’t matter much as I almost always sit at a bench and plink these days. I generally don’t have a preference, I’m more interested in condition or caliber or other configuration details.
Mike
TXGunNut said
Aside from the slightly higher value I’ve observed that more collectors are interested in the octagon barrels than the round. I enjoy shooting the round or half round barrel rifles and I sometimes find the heavier octagon barrels a bit awkward. I suppose that doesn’t matter much as I almost always sit at a bench and plink these days. I generally don’t have a preference, I’m more interested in condition or caliber or other configuration details.
Mike
Mike –
I feel the same. I like the feel and balance for the round barrel. I’m sure it all stems back to my first association with rifles – as a child who grew up in a hunting family – a modestly sized group of hunters for whom there was little interest in the collector aspect of a rifle. To show up with a .33 WCF with round barrel and half magazine was considered tops. To show up with an 1886 with an octagon barrel and full magazine would receive puzzled looks. A lot of our hunting involved winding through heavy brush and a shorter, lighter weight rifle made a big difference in how your day went. I know everyone knows this, the point I’m making is that even though my hunting days are over and like you, most of my shooting is done sitting at a bench, this attitude and perspective still runs deep in me – illogical to the last many decades where my main focus has been that of a collector.
Writing the above brought back a hunting memory from my late teens. One season I carried a M1892 .44/40 with 24 inch octagon barrel and full magazine. I have very fond memories of how well that rifle handled and carried. It was not of course a very heavy rifle. I think what I liked best was how trim the receiver is and how well my hand wrapped around the it. I recall carrying it at the mid-point, it balanced extremely well. A pleasant memory 
steve004 said
TXGunNut said
Aside from the slightly higher value I’ve observed that more collectors are interested in the octagon barrels than the round. I enjoy shooting the round or half round barrel rifles and I sometimes find the heavier octagon barrels a bit awkward. I suppose that doesn’t matter much as I almost always sit at a bench and plink these days. I generally don’t have a preference, I’m more interested in condition or caliber or other configuration details.
Mike
Mike –
I feel the same. I like the feel and balance for the round barrel. I’m sure it all stems back to my first association with rifles – as a child who grew up in a hunting family – a modestly sized group of hunters for whom there was little interest in the collector aspect of a rifle. To show up with a .33 WCF with round barrel and half magazine was considered tops. To show up with an 1886 with an octagon barrel and full magazine would receive puzzled looks. A lot of our hunting involved winding through heavy brush and a shorter, lighter weight rifle made a big difference in how your day went. I know everyone knows this, the point I’m making is that even though my hunting days are over and like you, most of my shooting is done sitting at a bench, this attitude and perspective still runs deep in me – illogical to the last many decades where my main focus has been that of a collector.
Writing the above brought back a hunting memory from my late teens. One season I carried a M1892 .44/40 with 24 inch octagon barrel and full magazine. I have very fond memories of how well that rifle handled and carried. It was not of course a very heavy rifle. I think what I liked best was how trim the receiver is and how well my hand wrapped around the it. I recall carrying it at the mid-point, it balanced extremely well. A pleasant memory
And this is why the vast majority of late production Winchester 1886 rifles are round barrel ELW rifles with half magazine in .33 Winchester.
mrcvs said
steve004 said
TXGunNut said
Aside from the slightly higher value I’ve observed that more collectors are interested in the octagon barrels than the round. I enjoy shooting the round or half round barrel rifles and I sometimes find the heavier octagon barrels a bit awkward. I suppose that doesn’t matter much as I almost always sit at a bench and plink these days. I generally don’t have a preference, I’m more interested in condition or caliber or other configuration details.
Mike
Mike –
I feel the same. I like the feel and balance for the round barrel. I’m sure it all stems back to my first association with rifles – as a child who grew up in a hunting family – a modestly sized group of hunters for whom there was little interest in the collector aspect of a rifle. To show up with a .33 WCF with round barrel and half magazine was considered tops. To show up with an 1886 with an octagon barrel and full magazine would receive puzzled looks. A lot of our hunting involved winding through heavy brush and a shorter, lighter weight rifle made a big difference in how your day went. I know everyone knows this, the point I’m making is that even though my hunting days are over and like you, most of my shooting is done sitting at a bench, this attitude and perspective still runs deep in me – illogical to the last many decades where my main focus has been that of a collector.
Writing the above brought back a hunting memory from my late teens. One season I carried a M1892 .44/40 with 24 inch octagon barrel and full magazine. I have very fond memories of how well that rifle handled and carried. It was not of course a very heavy rifle. I think what I liked best was how trim the receiver is and how well my hand wrapped around the it. I recall carrying it at the mid-point, it balanced extremely well. A pleasant memory
And this is why the vast majority of late production Winchester 1886 rifles are round barrel ELW rifles with half magazine in .33 Winchester.
Yes, I’m sure that was part of the appeal of the Model 1886 .33 WCF – the 24 inch round barrel they put on it made for a lighter and better handling rifle. However, let’s remember that Winchester made a very small number of .33 ELW rifles. In my c.1916 Winchester catalog, the .33 rifle is there but is not referred to as a lightweight rifle or having a light barrel. They did mention the M1886 ELW was available as a cataloged item, but they are clear .45-70 only However, we know they made some. I can think of at least one member here who has one. Correct me if I’m wrong, but unless a .33 WCF has either a 20 inch or 22 inch barrel, it’s not an ELW.
steve004 said
mrcvs said
steve004 said
TXGunNut said
Aside from the slightly higher value I’ve observed that more collectors are interested in the octagon barrels than the round. I enjoy shooting the round or half round barrel rifles and I sometimes find the heavier octagon barrels a bit awkward. I suppose that doesn’t matter much as I almost always sit at a bench and plink these days. I generally don’t have a preference, I’m more interested in condition or caliber or other configuration details.
Mike
Mike –
I feel the same. I like the feel and balance for the round barrel. I’m sure it all stems back to my first association with rifles – as a child who grew up in a hunting family – a modestly sized group of hunters for whom there was little interest in the collector aspect of a rifle. To show up with a .33 WCF with round barrel and half magazine was considered tops. To show up with an 1886 with an octagon barrel and full magazine would receive puzzled looks. A lot of our hunting involved winding through heavy brush and a shorter, lighter weight rifle made a big difference in how your day went. I know everyone knows this, the point I’m making is that even though my hunting days are over and like you, most of my shooting is done sitting at a bench, this attitude and perspective still runs deep in me – illogical to the last many decades where my main focus has been that of a collector.
Writing the above brought back a hunting memory from my late teens. One season I carried a M1892 .44/40 with 24 inch octagon barrel and full magazine. I have very fond memories of how well that rifle handled and carried. It was not of course a very heavy rifle. I think what I liked best was how trim the receiver is and how well my hand wrapped around the it. I recall carrying it at the mid-point, it balanced extremely well. A pleasant memory
And this is why the vast majority of late production Winchester 1886 rifles are round barrel ELW rifles with half magazine in .33 Winchester.
Yes, I’m sure that was part of the appeal of the Model 1886 .33 WCF – the 24 inch round barrel they put on it made for a lighter and better handling rifle. However, let’s remember that Winchester made a very small number of .33 ELW rifles. In my c.1916 Winchester catalog, the .33 rifle is there but is not referred to as a lightweight rifle or having a light barrel. They did mention the M1886 ELW was available as a cataloged item, but they are clear .45-70 only However, we know they made some. I can think of at least one member here who has one. Correct me if I’m wrong, but unless a .33 WCF has either a 20 inch or 22 inch barrel, it’s not an ELW.
Correct… a 22-inch barrel would make it an ELW. The 24-inch barrel was the standard weight rifle.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Zebulon said
Good morning, Michael and Anthony. May I ask both of you a couple of questions for my own enlightenment?I think I understand the 25WCF is not a popular Model 92 chambering among collectors and refinished wood further depresses the price.
1. Even though octagonal barrels were an added-cost option, I’ve seen far fewer “standard” round barrels for sale over the decades and wonder if they would slightly increase or decrease market value in an original condition, say 90% gun?
2. The OP hasn’t asserted bore condition. Would that affect price for this particular piece in its present condition?
Thanks,
Bill
Bill,
I wasn’t ignoring you, or you’re question as other members, have responded and added some very good comments also. For me, I think it would be nice if the bore matched the gun, showing and proving to me originality, and matching condition to the outside of the rifle. I feel there’s different levels of collectors, where if the gun is a nice representative, some wouldn’t worry about the bore condition, and others would. As far as the barrel configuration, it would depend on the model I was looking at, but since we’re talking about the model 92 here, I would consider any and all barrel configurations, based on condition being first and foremost. I think it was Steve004 who said in a past post thread, that he can remember when you almost couldn’t give a 25-20 caliber rifle 92 away. I also remember that. Many of us collectors are finicky, and again, I feel there’s different levels of collectors.
Anthony
Zebulon said
I think I understand the 25WCF is not a popular Model 92 chambering among collectors and refinished wood further depresses the price.
I quite like the 25-20, a good compromise of speed and power for small game. Most of the rifles I look at though have worn rifling even if the bore is nice. It seems a lot of that caliber suffer the same fate as 22lr barrels, they just get shot out. I wish the ammo were still prevalent!
Thanks, Anthony. I agree with you and elucidating the various “levels” [I prefer “types” or perhaps “stages”] of Winchester collectors would be an interesting writing project.
Jeremy, I count myself lucky to have run across my tub toy-grade 1929 Model 92 at a local gun show, decades ago. Although it had been cosmetically desecrated, the “29” stamped barrel has a bright, near pristine bore that shoots lead or jacketed bullets accurately, probably because it had never been made to digest corrosive primers. Thus, it was worthy of restoration. Scott did a beautiful, albeit not historically correct, job — after filling and accurately reshaping the receiver, he hot salt blued all but the barrel, which he rust blued; nothing was case colored. New screws and pins, new wood. Repro Lyman tang sight came with the rifle. Nice trigger..
Another piece of luck happened when old Nix decided to close up shop and I bought his remaining inventory of boxed Winchester 25 WCF unprimed brass. 86 grain lead and either SR4759 or Unique have made for more than one Rio Grande gobbler’s lifetime worst blind date.
- 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.
Anthony said
Zebulon said
Good morning, Michael and Anthony. May I ask both of you a couple of questions for my own enlightenment?
I think I understand the 25WCF is not a popular Model 92 chambering among collectors and refinished wood further depresses the price.
1. Even though octagonal barrels were an added-cost option, I’ve seen far fewer “standard” round barrels for sale over the decades and wonder if they would slightly increase or decrease market value in an original condition, say 90% gun?
2. The OP hasn’t asserted bore condition. Would that affect price for this particular piece in its present condition?
Thanks,
Bill
Bill,
I wasn’t ignoring you, or you’re question as other members, have responded and added some very good comments also. For me, I think it would be nice if the bore matched the gun, showing and proving to me originality, and matching condition to the outside of the rifle. I feel there’s different levels of collectors, where if the gun is a nice representative, some wouldn’t worry about the bore condition, and others would. As far as the barrel configuration, it would depend on the model I was looking at, but since we’re talking about the model 92 here, I would consider any and all barrel configurations, based on condition being first and foremost. I think it was Steve004 who said in a past post thread, that he can remember when you almost couldn’t give a 25-20 caliber rifle 92 away. I also remember that. Many of us collectors are finicky, and again, I feel there’s different levels of collectors.
Anthony
Tony – and it didn’t matter if it had an octagon or round barrel!
Interest in the .25-20 had changed of course. I like .25-20’s. I have owned plenty – Winchesters, Marlins even a couple Remington M25 slide actions.
I recall growing up, there was no interest in the .25-20. Mainly because it wasn’t enough to kill a deer with. Small game was taken with a .22 or a shotgun. Add in a deer rifle and nothing else was needed.
Steve, I can agree with you, as I also liked them in both barrel configurations. I think many of us would love the older style early octagon barrel, especially an old cowboy style rifle that screams old west heritage. I don’t have you’re experience, or others, with the 25-20, as far as shooting it, as like you if it wasn’t a deer caliber, we wouldn’t mainly go after it. I just recently traded a model 92, round barrel, in 25-20 as part of a trade deal for a nice 73, I had been looking for, and even though it was in nice condition, and showing some normal receiver bluing flaking, I just never could warm up to that rifle. I had it a pretty long while, and never did find time to shoot it. We would always use the other calibers for varmints and such.
Tony
Where I live , in Southern Ontario, We have a .27 caliber restriction for guns in the field. This has been the case since the days after W.W.2 and all the, ($6.00) 303 Enfields being sold, which were deemed to dangerous for the more densly populated areas. So You can use Your .270 or .243 for varmints, but not Your 32-20 or 44-40, and shotgun only for deer, a (common sense?)
, political solution. So if You want to use Your old Lever Winchester it better be a 25-20 or a ’94, 25-35, which don’t hurt My feelings any anyways.
W.A.C.A. life member, Marlin Collectors Assn. charter and life member, C,S.S.A. member and general gun nut.
Personally I think all of these “invented” calibers over the years to make the most minute of ballistic adjustment is silly. These crazy invented calibers exist to sell, period, a bunch of marketing wank…
Everytime I hear about a new cartridge being debuted I just laugh…..guess we can sell you a matching gun too! I’m just happy that 22lr, 9mm, etc. have all had enough staying power to make it easy for us to continue to shoot and not go obsolete. It’s the reason the military sticks with a weapons platform for so long….
1 Guest(s)
