Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Hi,
New member here. I recently made an impulse purchase of a Winchester 1894 saddle ring carbine. As I’ve only owned modern guns until now, this is something entirely out of my wheelhouse. Such being the case, it’s difficult for me to assess the real value of the gun. The fact that the rear sight is not original and the stock features one of the previous owners’ very inexpert attempt at checkering, I assume that they are significant detractors – particularly the rear sight.
Would appreciate if one of the experts here could give me a rough idea of its value.
Serial # is 189185. The gun is chambered in .32-40.
November 7, 2015
Offline
Welcome!
Hard to say without clear pics because the added checkering is a huge wild card. It likely destroys much of the collector value but if the rest of the gun is good it may be worthwhile to hunt down some suitable wood. As is it has some value as a “shooter” but that depends again on the checkering and how objectionable a buyer finds it. If the checkering was believed to have been done early in the last century some may consider your carbine a desirable piece of Americana. In any case it’s a pretty cool carbine in an interesting chambering.
Mike
November 7, 2015
Offline
I understand completely why you bought this carbine. It’s a good, honest gun with a truckload of character. I like it but I’m a sucker for a gun that has obviously been there, done that.
Mike
saerto said The fact that the rear sight is not original and the stock features one of the previous owners’ very inexpert attempt at checkering, I assume that they are significant detractors – particularly the rear sight.
You’re right–the rear sight queers the whole gun; but that’s easily correctable. Evidently the would-be checkerer had brains enough to call it quits before he made too much of a mess, so I don’t find that hugely objectionable on a piece in this cond. But on a carbine, the Marbles sight is like a slap in the face. (Actually, it’s a nice sight you should have no trouble selling on ebay, to help pay for the proper one.)
clarence said
saerto said The fact that the rear sight is not original and the stock features one of the previous owners’ very inexpert attempt at checkering, I assume that they are significant detractors – particularly the rear sight.
You’re right–the rear sight queers the whole gun; but that’s easily correctable. Evidently the would-be checkerer had brains enough to call it quits before he made too much of a mess, so I don’t find that hugely objectionable on a piece in this cond. But on a carbine, the Marbles sight is like a slap in the face. (Actually, it’s a nice sight you should have no trouble selling on ebay, to help pay for the proper one.)
That is precisely what I’d like to do – return the carbine to its period correct configuration with an appropriate rear sight. This may be a question with a very obvious answer, but where would I source the part? Moreover, how would I go about finding a competent gunsmith to install one?
saerto said This may be a question with a very obvious answer, but where would I source the part? Moreover, how would I go about finding a competent gunsmith to install one?
EBAY!!! Do you have a brass punch? Then YOU are competent to install it.
What you need at a decent BIN price: https://www.ebay.com/itm/265313278952?hash=item3dc5e75be8:g:0EUAAOSwT2lhQNhd
No, it isn’t in the best cond., but neither is your carbine; it would look “right” on your gun, as a better one would not.
clarence said
What you need at a decent BIN price: https://www.ebay.com/itm/265313278952?hash=item3dc5e75be8:g:0EUAAOSwT2lhQNhdNo, it isn’t in the best cond., but neither is your carbine; it would look “right” on your gun, as a better one would not.
Thanks, Clarence – this is very helpful.
clarence said
What you need at a decent BIN price: https://www.ebay.com/itm/265313278952?hash=item3dc5e75be8:g:0EUAAOSwT2lhQNhdNo, it isn’t in the best cond., but neither is your carbine; it would look “right” on your gun, as a better one would not.
Better than the marbles but t’s not period correct. His serial number would’ve had a V notch rear 44.
RickC said
Better than the marbles but t’s not period correct. His serial number would’ve had a V notch rear 44.
Here’s another–but a lot more money.
1 Guest(s)
