Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
The seller indicated in the description possibly the barrel has been replaced since the condition of the rifling is good. I suspect it is unusual for an antique carbine to have good bore condition but I’m not seeing any indication of the barrel having been replaced. Am I missing it?
https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1072444883
Darrin
The original barrel had all of the factory markings located on the top of the barrel (12 o’clock position). The markings were moved to the left side (10 o’clock position) sometime after 1907. The patent date was added to the barrel after it was removed from the upper tang.
In addition to the sanded and refinished stocks, the receiver frame has been refinished (albeit a long time ago).
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Hello from Houston,
And it is not one of my rifles! On the Model 1892’s the caliber stamp was commonly placed on the left side of the barrel during 1908. It was 2 years later in 1910 that you find the barrel address stamp also located on the left side.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
Who needs Google when I have the WACA forum experts.
Thanks guys!
Darrin
The best of both worlds: antique status but with a great bore so one can shoot it!
BRP
The serial number on the receiver and the caliber stamping on the barrel look “Faked” to me. Or at the least re-stamped by a non-factory stamp. However, one wants to look at it. The serial numbers should be aligned in a row and not off like they are.
Just my humble opinion.
Sincerely,
Maverick
WACA #8783 - Checkout my Reloading Tool Survey!
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-research-surveys/winchester-reloading-tool-survey/
November 7, 2015
Offline
Blue Ridge Parson said
The best of both worlds: antique status but with a great bore so one can shoot it!BRP
Agreed, even though antique status is not a big deal with me. The discerning collector will never be happy with the replacement barrel or refinished surfaces even though these repairs could have been performed any time in the last 100 years or so, and I’m betting it wasn’t within the last several decades. I don’t need any more shooters but this would make a great one!
Mike
Maverick said
The serial number on the receiver and the caliber stamping on the barrel look “Faked” to me. Or at the least re-stamped by a non-factory stamp. However, one wants to look at it. The serial numbers should be aligned in a row and not off like they are.Just my humble opinion.
Sincerely,
Maverick
The “4” and “2” have been restamped and are in the wrong font/script. Not good no good photos of the first and last digits, but the “7” is correct, the alignment/spacing doesnt bother me that much.
If the bore is good, make a good shooter.
1892takedown @sbcglobal.net ......NRA Endowment Life Member.....WACA Member
"God is great.....beer is good.....and people are crazy"... Billy Currington
1892takedown said
Maverick said
The serial number on the receiver and the caliber stamping on the barrel look “Faked” to me. Or at the least re-stamped by a non-factory stamp. However, one wants to look at it. The serial numbers should be aligned in a row and not off like they are.
Just my humble opinion.
Sincerely,
Maverick
The “4” and “2” have been re-stamped and are in the wrong font/script. Not good no good photos of the first and last digits, but the “7” is correct, the alignment/spacing doesn’t bother me that much.
If the bore is good, make a good shooter.
The 4 looks OK but the 2 is definitely not correct.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
twobit said
1892takedown said
Maverick said
The serial number on the receiver and the caliber stamping on the barrel look “Faked” to me. Or at the least re-stamped by a non-factory stamp. However, one wants to look at it. The serial numbers should be aligned in a row and not off like they are.
Just my humble opinion.
Sincerely,
Maverick
The “4” and “2” have been re-stamped and are in the wrong font/script. Not good no good photos of the first and last digits, but the “7” is correct, the alignment/spacing doesn’t bother me that much.
If the bore is good, make a good shooter.
The 4 looks OK but the 2 is definitely not correct.
Michael
I thought the “4” was questionable because I couldn’t make out the bar at its base. Poor photo go go off of.
1892takedown @sbcglobal.net ......NRA Endowment Life Member.....WACA Member
"God is great.....beer is good.....and people are crazy"... Billy Currington
1 Guest(s)
