Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
I have a 1892 rifle in 44 WCF . It dates 1904 by the serial number. However the barrel, a 24 inch octagon is marked with the later model 92 barrel marking. Looks to me like it was rebarreled factory by the wear patterns on the rear of the gun. Barrel, forend (looks slightly thicker in cross section) , forend cap, mag tube and plug all look brand new. Barrel dated 31 on the bottom flat, no circle P on top of barrel, so not a mail order barrel just WP in the cicle like factory barrels are marked. Will post pics if it helps.
It’s one of two things, either a factory rebarrel or the later barrel was taken from another gun and installed. Not sure if the rifle will letter but if it does Cody should have a R&R in the ledger if it was done at the factory.
Erin
The “R&R” entries found in the original ledger book records end in the early 1920s (1921 is that latest date that I have observed). The original ledger books were retired in the 1907 – 1910 timeframe (depending on the specific model), and in the early 1920s, they were removed from the factory and sent to the Winchester Museum for safe keeping (Edwin Pugsley was the impetus). Because of his insight, we still have those records today. Unfortunately, that means that any factory rework that occurred after 1921 cannot be validated in the factory ledger records.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Thanks for the reply. Personally I am leaning towards a factory job due to the fact that the rifle is about 98 percent condition from the receiver forward and the rest of the rifle shows significant wear. Seems to me the forends used on the model 55 and 64 were slightly wider than the original 1894 forends. At least to me the original 1894’s seemed more streamlined. The Barrel dating 1931 would make me inclined to believe a forend from the same period was used. And further I guess the 31 just indicates the year barrel was produced? Or is it the year of install?
mike webb said
Thanks for the reply. Personally I am leaning towards a factory job due to the fact that the rifle is about 98 percent condition from the receiver forward and the rest of the rifle shows significant wear. Seems to me the forends used on the model 55 and 64 were slightly wider than the original 1894 forends. At least to me the original 1894’s seemed more streamlined. The Barrel dating 1931 would make me inclined to believe a forend from the same period was used. And further I guess the 31 just indicates the year barrel was produced? Or is it the year of install?
Mike,
If the wear on the forward end of the gun does not match the aft end, it is highly unlikely that Winchester did the work. If the rifle had actually been sent back to Winchester for a new barrel and forend assembly, they would have cleaned up (refinished) the rest of the gun as well. The “31” stamped on the barrel is the year the barrel was manufactured.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Good morning Mike,
Could you post some images of the rifle? I agree with Bert’s comments. What is the SN of the rifle? I would like to add it into my survey.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
Thanks Bert. I will post pics when it stops raining here. Monsoons have struck.
Mike
Serial is 221688. If someone could send me their email I could send them pics to post. Can’t seem to manage being technologically retarded. The old receiver has been hammered some for whatever reason. You will see what I mean if I can get pics up. I misspoke earlier, actually dates 1903 so no WP proof on receiver.
mike webb said
Serial is 221688. If someone could send me their email I could send them pics to post. Can’t seem to manage being technologically retarded. The old receiver has been hammered some for whatever reason. You will see what I mean if I can get pics up. I misspoke earlier, actually dates 1903 so no WP proof on receiver.
Hello Mike,
You can send to me at [email protected]
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
Here are the images of Mikes rifle. Because only the barrel is proofed and not the receiver also it appears that this is in fact not a factory job. Both would have been proofed if the barrel were replaced by Winchester when the rifle was fully re-assembled again and test fired.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
Thanks for posting pics, Michael. Mystery solved anyway. Still have a good shooter as the bore is mint. I just wondered as every 92 or 94 I’ve seen in my neck of the woods that appeared rebarreled had the circle P stamp indicating a mail orederd barrel, I believe. I’ve seen several older 1894 rifles with Winchester model 64 barrels marked circle P.
November 7, 2015
Offline
Mike-
The absence of the circle P stamp could indicate the barrel came from another rifle, not as a replacement barrel from Winchester.
Mike
I was under the impression the circle P indicated the barrel was a mail order replacement from Winchester installed by someone other than a Winchester employee. All the replacement barrels I have seen had the WP proof as well as the circle P proof. Barrel is obviously newer manufacture than the 1903 serial number on the action owing to the newer style barrel markings. It’s possible someone robbed a barrel from a newer rifle, hard to imagine why due to condition of receiver it is now sitting in. Who knows, I guess. Whoever did it may be long gone.
I will just shoot it and not worry about its origins.
1 Guest(s)
