I just bought this rifle. It appears to have been refinished at some point. The stocks are gorgeous but I don’t know if they are original to the gun. The serial number puts it as a 1911 manufacture. I would like some input from folks more knowledgeable than I about this rifle. Please let me know what you think of it. Thank you.
I surveyed this SRC several years ago, and at that time it still wore its original gumwood stocks. Accordingly, the fancy walnut stocks on it now are not factory original, the front sight blade is replacement item, and the serial number identifies it as an August 1912 production gun.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
November 7, 2015
Welcome! Wood sure dresses that SRC up nicely!
Mike
Bert H. said
I surveyed this SRC several years ago, and at that time it still wore its original gumwood stocks. Accordingly, the fancy walnut stocks on it now are not factory original, the front sight blade is replacement item, and the serial number identifies it as an August 1912 production gun.Bert
Bert, was it a legit SRC when you looked at it? Or does this appear to be cobbled together from various parts?
Thank you
Dave
Shark Bait said
Bert H. said
I surveyed this SRC several years ago, and at that time it still wore its original gumwood stocks. Accordingly, the fancy walnut stocks on it now are not factory original, the front sight blade is replacement item, and the serial number identifies it as an August 1912 production gun.
Bert
Bert, was it a legit SRC when you looked at it? Or does this appear to be cobbled together from various parts?
Thank you
Dave
It was a legit SRC, with hard worn gumwood stocks.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert H. said
Shark Bait said
Bert H. said
I surveyed this SRC several years ago, and at that time it still wore its original gumwood stocks. Accordingly, the fancy walnut stocks on it now are not factory original, the front sight blade is replacement item, and the serial number identifies it as an August 1912 production gun.
Bert
Bert, was it a legit SRC when you looked at it? Or does this appear to be cobbled together from various parts?
Thank you
Dave
It was a legit SRC, with hard worn gumwood stocks.
Good, I feel better about it. Looks like someone breathed some new life into it and I get to benefit from it. Thank you.
For those that might not be aware, for the past 20-years, I have been surveying all Winchester Model 1894 (94) rifles & carbines that are in the 354000 – 2600011 serial number range. Currently, I have 26,934 of them documented, and I am averaging 4.35 new entries every single day, with 1,209 ytd.
I encourage all to contact me if you would like to contribute to the survey, please contact me via email or a PM, or post your information here – Model 1894 Research Survey | Winchester Research Surveys | Forum | Winchester CollectorWinchester Collector
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Shark Bait said
I just bought this rifle. It appears to have been refinished at some point. The stocks are gorgeous but I don’t know if they are original to the gun. The serial number puts it as a 1911 manufacture. I would like some input from folks more knowledgeable than I about this rifle. Please let me know what you think of it. Thank you.
1st off, it is a carbine, not a rifle. A SRC, sling ring carbine if you will. I am in total agreement with the other posters. They are fairly scarce in 38-55 and a bit more valuable than a 30-30, and maybe on par with a 32-40 SRC. I have one that is beginning to flake like a lot of M1894’s. It has the Gumwood stocks. I have never fired mine. Big Larry
As I have mentioned in the past, Model 1894 SRC’s in 38-55 are not what I would refer to as “fairly scarce”. While they are not nearly as common as those in 30 WCF or 32 WS, substantial numbers of them were manufactured. Currently, I have (280) of them documented in my research survey (May 1907 through May 1932). When I extrapolate the numbers, approximately 20,750 SRCs were made in the 38-55 caliber.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
November 7, 2015
Big Larry said
Ya but, where are they today? Big Larry
I know where one is. At least I hope I do!
Yes, Bert, it’s in your survey. You were there when I bought it in Cody a couple of years ago.
Mike
Bert H. said
As I have mentioned in the past, Model 1894 SRC’s in 38-55 are not what I would refer to as “fairly scarce”. While they are not nearly as common as those in 30 WCF or 32 WS, substantial numbers of them were manufactured. Currently, I have (280) of them documented in my research survey (May 1907 through May 1932). When I extrapolate the numbers, approximately 20,750 SRCs were made in the 38-55 caliber.Bert
I have pondered this for awhile and maybe it’s time someone set the record straight with some definitive explanation on the definition of the categories of rarity. Such as the term “rare” or scarce or uncommon, or not often seen. Seems to me that at this point a glossary of terms would be warranted. I mean I have an 86 with 9 special order features is that rare? uncommon? not often seen? Or run of the mill? Or how about an 86 with a 36″ barrel, only 73 ever made, Rare, fairly rare, or ehh so so. Just have to ask.
Each of the many different adjectives that are used to delineate production numbers are subjective. That stated, this is a numerical representation of how I use the following terms;
Single digit serial numbers are “rare” (only nine exist for each model).
2-digit serial numbers are “scarce” (only ninety exist for each model).
3-digit serial numbers are “uncommon” (only nine-hundred exist).
4-digit serial numbers are “common” (nine thousand exist)
I use this same numerical analogy for other features such as caliber, barrel lengths, magazine lengths, etc.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
1 Guest(s)