Log In
July 14, 2016
Offline
That front sight tells the story pretty well in my book. Look at how it is mounted on the barrel. That is not Winchester work.
The barrel has vice marks or stillson marks that continue under the fore end wood.
Hopefully you did not pay too much for it.
A man can never have too many WINCHESTERS...
April 15, 2005
Offline
Gunsnfishin said
Henry Mero said
Not sayin’ Yours is wrong, but both of My 16″ “trappers” have the 8 1/8″ forearms, same as the 15″&14″. My 18″ has the 9 1/8 forearm.
I checked my 20” barrel gun and it matches this 16” barrel – the end of the barrel doesn’t look to be cut and the sight doesn’t look to be welded on
Can you post better pictures of the front sight base? Side view both sides, and a rear base view.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
December 7, 2025
Offline
June 26, 2013
Offline
I agree with Chris that the front sight is not Winchester work. The barrel has been shortened and the front sight crudely reattached. Sorry for the bad news. Hope you didn’t pay too much for it.
Don
December 7, 2025
Offline
First pic is a 20” barrel gun – 2nd 16” – fourth is 20” on top 26” on bottom – sights are exactly same distance from tip on both guns – it does look like the blade was changed in sight as it’s in better condition than rest of gun – marbles
June 26, 2013
Offline
Additionally, looking at photo #4, notice the poor fit of the barrel band.
Don
April 15, 2005
Offline
What is the measured diameter of the barrel at the muzzle on the 16″ gun? Measure the diameter of the 20″ barrel at the 16″ mark… what is the diameter?
Put the two barrels side by side with the factory roll markings in view and take a picture.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
December 7, 2025
Offline
The 20” barrel is 2 1/4 at 16” both guns 2” at ends -accuracy plus or minus a 1/16 th
April 15, 2005
Offline
Gunsnfishin said
The 20” barrel is 2 1/4 at 16” both guns 2” at ends -accuracy plus or minus a 1/16 th
It is not possible for the muzzle diameter to be “2” on either of your Carbines. The actual diameters will be something significantly less then 1.0″ (something in the .6″ – .7″ range). What are you using to measure them? Do you have micrometer?
Based on the position of the factory roll markings on the barrel of the 16-inch gun, it very much appears that it is indeed a cut-down 20-inch barrel.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
December 7, 2025
Offline
Sorry that was diameter
20” – 5/8- 20/32 at end and at 16” mark
16” – 21/32 at end
April 15, 2005
Offline
Gunsnfishin said
Sorry that was diameter
20” – 5/8- 20/32 at end and at 16” mark
16” – 21/32 at end
Your measurements are confirming a shorted (cut down) barrel on the 16-inch Carbine.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
July 14, 2016
Offline
The muzzle has been re-crowned when the barrel was cut down. and I agree with Bert about the position of the roll markings. The roll markings have been obscured by the rear sight dove tail now.
It can always be helpful posting pictures on here prior to buying, as I stated in Decemeber last year when you first asked about value.
A man can never have too many WINCHESTERS...
December 7, 2025
Offline
I compared the roll markings of both my 20” and 16” – the 20” being 1911 the 16” 1908- the markings on the 16” being 3/16” higher from the forearm than the 20” – the sight is in the exact position on the 16” and 20” – when held side to side – the sight closer to the roll markings would have had to been factory – wouldn’t of matter what length the barrel the sight would have crowded the roll marking I only had another to compare to as most of my collection are older and octogan – looked at several pics online – for some reason this roll mark is higher than most – I got a better micrometer and diameter of barrel end on the 16” is within 1/64 of barrel end of 20” and the diameter of the the 20” barrel at 16” mark is 1/32 bigger than the end of the 16” – I have no idea of the tolerances they had over 100 years ago – front sight on both guns is identical distance from tip if anything a1/64 difference – if someone soldered a new sight base they 
were the cleanest solder I have ever seen as there are no markings where they would have cleaned up the solder – the marks I think are someone had a vise on to remove pin to the replace the blade – magazine tube 1/8” shorter- and pics are hard to tell but in person I can see no visual difference in the solder on both guns – I am going find a expert to ship gun to to put my mind to rest either way – if this gun was cut it was done many many years ago as nothing on gun looks not original is the marbles blade in the front sight – base matches rest of gun patina – so my question is if this was cut it someone went to great efforts to match Winchester specs – the only reason I could foresee to do this is to fake gun for value – if you just wanted a 16” barrel would you have cared to mimic the exact positions of factory ? And what’s everyone’s opinion on time frame when people started looking at these guns for collector value over a usable firearm ? I’m not arguing with people that know a lot more than I do – but someone went to great lengths to fake this if it is and I have over 60 guns and ones I know to be cut are as obvious as can be – please educate me – would someone had sent a gun out to a gunsmith which I believe would have had to happen to put that sight on – 50-60 years ago and had it cut and matched to Winchester specs to mimic ?
October 27, 2012
Offline
The manufactored roll stamping on the 1894 on most trappers or barrel lengh with the short forarm should be in front of the barrel band . The forarm should measure 7 7/8 long and the end of barrel should mic at .605 to .610 . When you lay the two carbine side by side they look the same because the both left the factory as 20 carbine . I own 16 trappers and my 16 inch 94 is a 25-35 bought a amoskeag last spring.
June 26, 2013
Offline
Zooming in on the photo of the front sight, the red circled area is absolutely not Winchester factory work. You can see where the sight was welded back onto the barrel and then ground down and filed smooth. Winchester work is not this sloppy looking.
Don
November 19, 2006
Offline
James Fenderson said
The manufactored roll stamping on the 1894 on most trappers or barrel lengh with the short forarm should be in front of the barrel band . The forarm should measure 7 7/8 long and the end of barrel should mic at .605 to .610 . When you lay the two carbine side by side they look the same because the both left the factory as 20 carbine . I own 16 trappers and my 16 inch 94 is a 25-35 bought a amoskeag last spring.
Welcome!
Seems like a guy who owns 16 trappers would fit in very well here 
