Log In
March 20, 2009
Offline
You don’t see one of these every day!!
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=442593150
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
January 26, 2011
Offline
Michael,
I was watching this same gun the first time it was listed. Once again, too bad the records don’t go out this far, I wonder if the sling eyes would letter?
I have a 22" OB short rifle with a 3/4 mag I got from another member but its not a takedown. It has the mag tube cap notched into the barrel. The takedown version you are showing looks like the mag tube is just hanging out in space. There’s something kind of cool about it, for sure.
I was curious if anyone has any thoughts on this gun? Seems legit to me.
~Gary~
May 24, 2012
Offline
I’ve seen it listed before as well. If anyone one is interested in checking it out further, let me know and I’ll see if one of GB’s members who lives in Burnet will take a look at it for them.
James
April 15, 2005
Offline
I do not like it (something smells funny) 😕
The magazine tube is longer that 3/4 length (it is closer to being a 7/8 length). I do not believe that Winchester would leave it unsupported for that length. Instead, a mag tube hanger would have been installed within a few inches of the end of the mag tube.
Other issues that I see are; (1) the lightly sanded and refinished stocks, (2) a number of the screws heads have damaged slots, (3) the rear sight is not original for a 1909 vintage Model 1894. I am 50/50 on the sling eyes, but am leaning towards "not" original.
My instincts are telling me that it is an "enhanced" Winchester for the sole purpose of adding value.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
January 26, 2011
Offline
The description does say that the tube is not screwed in all the way in the pictures, and by the marks where they usually rub a little on the fore end cap it looks like it might go in another inch or so. Still, its floating out there a long ways.
~Gary~
January 19, 2013
Offline
That’s some interesting damage on the hammer. Almost looks like it was beat on with a tiny hammer. And I agree no way that magazine would hang out that far with no support.
April 30, 2006
Offline
3/4 mag tubes are rare because they were prone to damage – they were NOT usually supported by a ring. The reason is not known for sure. Full tubes are always supported and extra length barrels often have two rings. This gun appears to be a 2/3ds magazine that has not been screwed in particularly to make it appear as a 3/4. He does give the disclaimer that it is "not screwed in all the way" but does not actually say it is 3/4 – he calls it 1/2 mag!!! – The 1/2 mag designation is usually, in reality, a 2/3ds +- mag. 2/3ds tubes are almost always unsupported except in the very rare cases of a 2/3ds tube on a very long barreled specimen. However, I have never been made aware of such a configuration that could be verified. Mag tubes were also (rare) ordered for a specific number of cartridges and then would not accurately fit any fractional designation. Button mags are usually designated as such, but are also occasionally called 1/2 mags which would only be (semi)accurate on an 18" gun.
Cheers!
March 20, 2009
Offline
Check pages 73 and 77 in Bob’s 2nd edition book for photos of longer than button magazines which do not have retaining bands on them.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
1 Guest(s)
