Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
Thanks 1892takedown. In the book “Winchester 94: A Century of Craftsmanship” , it says Winchester moved the caliber marking down on the side of the barrel to avoid interference with the matting. This book also shows the wavy style barrel matting shown on your pictures and my rifle.
Jim
Jim,
Winchester moved the caliber marking to the left side of the barrel on all Model 1894s in the year 1907, regardless of barrel matting. The proof mark stayed on the top of the barrel though, and was only moved if the barrel was matted.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Just an observation and maybe this will bear out or vary by the models…. the wavy line matting style is found on round barrels, the checked matting style on octagon barrels.
1892takedown @sbcglobal.net ......NRA Endowment Life Member.....WACA Member
"God is great.....beer is good.....and people are crazy"... Billy Currington
I have seen that as well that the round barrels had the wavy line type the the octagon had the checkered style.
Bob
WACA Life Member--- NRA Life Member---- Cody Firearms member since 1991 Researching the Winchester 1873's
Email: [email protected]
Bert,
Have you seen Winchester factory records or letters listing options as “etc.” like mine does? I wonder how often that happened.
Jim
Chris,
Good point, and thanks for jogging my memory… I do believe that you are correct.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert H. said
Jim,
Winchester moved the caliber marking to the left side of the barrel on all Model 1894s in the year 1907, regardless of barrel matting. The proof mark stayed on the top of the barrel though, and was only moved if the barrel was matted.
Bert
Thanks Bert, My rifle was made in 1903. So I am guessing Winchester moved the caliber marking on my rifle to the side of the barrel because of the matting.
Jim
Jim:
It is looking better as correct. Since it was not entered in the ledger, (etc) it would not have shown in the ARMAX study either. I would like to enter your rifle in another survey I have been working on but, I would want the full serial number if you will share it. I have the rest of the info from your first post.
Paul
[email protected] or PM if you don’t want it shown on the forum.
Jim, this is a learning Forum and we have no Gun Police here. No police organizations care about your old 112 year old M1894. I like to do research as many do here and XXX’s and incomplete serial numbers don’t help. Thanks, Big Larry
There is a model 1894 on Gunbroker that letters with a matted octagon barrel. # 529679965
To me it looks the same as the round barrel in this thread.
That is a very nice old Winchester… tons of options and special order features!
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=529679965
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert,
How do you feel about the asking price? About right for that gun?
Thanks,
Al
tionesta1 said
Bert,
How do you feel about the asking price? About right for that gun?
Thanks,
Al
Al,
I think it is conservatively priced considering that it ELW in 38-55, and it letters perfectly.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
My observations regarding the rifle that is the topic of this post vs the gunbroker rifle are, as follows:
1) the rifle of this post appears to have much coarser matting than the gunbroker rifle. It could be just the lighting?
2) the gunbroker rifle correctly has the matting running up to the front sight on both sides of the sight. The rifle of this post contains matting that stops prior to the front sight, on both sides. I am not saying this is not correct, just that I have never noticed to be the case amongst the very few Winchesters with matted barrels I have ever seen.
Just an observation, seems that it would be very difficult, if not impossible to run the matting right up to the integral front sight ramp on the rifle in this post and that it would not be that difficult to run the matting right up to a dovetail on the rifle in the auction.
Hi,
I have a ’94 ELW Semi Deluxe from 1903 threaded for a Maxim silencer. It looks factory to me , but no R@R on the Cody Search. Only 1 ’94 will letter with this. The cap is there. What does this do to the value?
Walter Blake
Tedk said
Just an observation, seems that it would be very difficult, if not impossible to run the matting right up to the integral front sight ramp on the rifle in this post and that it would not be that difficult to run the matting right up to a dovetail on the rifle in the auction.
I do not believe that the front ramp is integral… it is most likely silver soldered to the barrel, and I too have never seen matting that was not full length. On the factory matted barrels, they appear to have been matted, then the dovetail slots cut for the sights.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
mrcvs said
My observations regarding the rifle that is the topic of this post vs the gunbroker rifle are, as follows:
1) the rifle of this post appears to have much coarser matting than the gunbroker rifle. It could be just the lighting?
2) the gunbroker rifle correctly has the matting running up to the front sight on both sides of the sight. The rifle of this post contains matting that stops prior to the front sight, on both sides. I am not saying this is not correct, just that I have never noticed to be the case amongst the very few Winchesters with matted barrels I have ever seen.
I too saw the same thing as you have, and that is what prompted my comment about the matting not appearing to be original… that stated, I could be completely out in left field.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert H. said
mrcvs said
My observations regarding the rifle that is the topic of this post vs the gunbroker rifle are, as follows:
1) the rifle of this post appears to have much coarser matting than the gunbroker rifle. It could be just the lighting?
2) the gunbroker rifle correctly has the matting running up to the front sight on both sides of the sight. The rifle of this post contains matting that stops prior to the front sight, on both sides. I am not saying this is not correct, just that I have never noticed to be the case amongst the very few Winchesters with matted barrels I have ever seen.
I too saw the same thing as you have, and that is what prompted my comment about the matting not appearing to be original… that stated, I could be completely out in left field.
Bert
No, you are not out in left field. What made me initially think it was not original was the coarseness of the matting. Factory originals that I have seen are finer. Not that this example is obviously much coarser than an original, as it is not, but just not as refined as those I have seen. I did not even think about ‘how’ the matting would originally have been applied, but your comment makes much sense. Yes, OF COURSE they applied the matting first, and then performed the dovetail for the front sight. It makes the most sense to do this at the factory. The one that is the topic of this post stops prior to the dovetail, and this reason alone makes it highly unlikely to be factory original in that regard alone! The person recreating factory matting either was not aware that originals contained matting than ran up to the dovetail, OR was aware of this but took the easy way out and applied the matting without removing the front sight, thereby making it impossible to go all the way to the dovetail. This fact alone makes it 99% improbable that this matting on this firearm is factory original.
1 Guest(s)
