Avatar
Search
Forum Scope




Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
Lost password?
Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 202
Member Since:
August 6, 2008
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
1
December 24, 2013 - 7:41 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

My buddy, who I bought my 3 digit 92 from, called today to ask me about a gun he was looking at. Serial number 1,803,???. Everything was in pretty good condition all the way down to the ramp front sight. The barrel is properly marked with the proofs and no refinish. The issue was that the barrel was 16" long. I told him they did not make a trapper in that time frame. I also told him to compare the front sight and muzzle area to his other 1950’s gun and he would see the difference(crown, front ramp not "part of" the barrel basically, barrel band and sight location,etc…)in the modified trapper. He called back after an hour and said theres no reblue definitely and that his 1953 gun is 100% identical all the way down to the muzzle micrometer readings??? Now I am confused. I looked in Bobs book and the last 16" trapper was 1943ish. The first ramp style front sights were around 1930 and this gun is around 1951. Could the barrel be a leftover trapper barrel from the 30’s-40’s time frame that someone installed? If so wouldn’t it be marked on the bottom of the barrel with the date? This guy has no computer so pictures are a no-no. Any ideas?

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 10723
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
2
December 24, 2013 - 9:32 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Mike,

The highest serial numbered authentic Trapper I have found this far is 1330740 (April 1942), an only (4) total after 1933. I would most certainly be very cautious about one with a serial number in the 1.8-million serial number range.

In regards to the barrel, it should have the 2-digit year number on it whether is is a 30s, 40s, or 50s vintage part.

Bert

WACA 6571L, Historian & Board of Director Member
High-walls-1-002-C-reduced2.jpg

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 348
Member Since:
January 24, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
3
December 25, 2013 - 5:14 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Mike

As Burt stated, it’s very difficult to evaluate the authenticity of a firearm without holding or seeing it.

There was a period that short trapper barrels could be had for little to nothing on the secondary market. Winchester sold many of these barrels off as scrap to companies such as Gun Parts Corp.

I have two 14 inch 1892 trapper barrels that were never installed.
During the 40s-70 folks often purchased these barrels and installed them on old Winchesters.

I’m not say that this is the case, but it is a possibility
V/R

Mike

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 853
Member Since:
June 11, 2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
4
December 25, 2013 - 5:49 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Do these Gun Parts barrels have the normal Winchester factory proofs?

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 348
Member Since:
January 24, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
5
December 25, 2013 - 8:15 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

I’m not going out to the shop today, it is Christmas after all.

Off the top of my head, they had all the standard Winchester markings. I know for sure that they do not have the “outside fitted proofs”.

Made in the late 20s; think one is stamped 27 and the other stamped 28.
I have seen quite a few trappers manufactured in the late 20s and early 30s. I suspect that gun companies were very well in tune back then as today as to what was happening in Washington.

The National Firearm Act of 1934 was due in great part to Congress trying to control/prevent the gangster type shootouts that were occurring during the prohibition, think Chicago and Al Capone.

I imagine both Winchester and Marlin tried to sell as many of the trapper models that they could before the law took effect. After 1934 the barrels became worthless, and were sold as scrap, primarily to companies such as Numrich Arms (Now Gun Parts Corp), and Stoger (which was a large supplier of gun parts).

During the 40s-70s these barrels could be had relatively inexpensively, mostly sold as novelty items, as they could not legally be installed on a receiver.

Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 40
Member Since:
October 19, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
6
December 25, 2013 - 11:18 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Mike Hunter: I am new to this site but I have followed for the last year
or so I am kinda new to the world of Winchesters as I have spent many
years collecting marlins and the history of the said co. but in my quest to
learn more I ventured off in the Winchester world and it has been of great
help and has got me hooked on the history of the old Winchesters. I have
a question on the Winchester trapper barrels as to the contour were
the trapper barrels different than the standard 20 " carbine also I hope
everyone is having a good Christmas

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 348
Member Since:
January 24, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
7
December 25, 2013 - 12:28 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Jim
Yes, the contours are the same just in different locations. With that said, it probably needs an explanation.
The 1886, 1892 and 1894 carbine barrels have 3 distinct tapers; unlike the 1866, 1873 and 1876 carbine barrels which have a straight taper.
On the 1892 and 1894 barrels, there is one taper at the breech end, which transitions to a second taper past the rear sigh dovetail and continues to the rear band location. From here you have a third taper that continues to the muzzle.
If these tapers are not correct, the bands will not fit properly (flush with the barrel), and you will notice a gap there. The muzzles of all 92/94 carbines were the same dia .603 +/- .005.
On barrels with the shorter forend wood, Winchester had machined specific rear bands to accommodate the larger barrel dia. These rear bands look identical to the standard bands except that the screw hole is .030 lower. Very hard to tell without measuring a trapper band against a standard band.
I have measured quite a few 14,15 and 16 inch trapper barrels, the dovetail cuts, front sight size band screw relief cut depth all remain consistent with the 20 inch carbine barrels, with the exception of the 15 inch carbine barrel, where the front band location is slightly further forward.

Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 40
Member Since:
October 19, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
8
December 25, 2013 - 5:55 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

thanks for the reply mike . it is very interesting in the comparing what
marlin was doing compared to Winchester. the factory short barreled
carbines with the 15" barrel have a muzzle dia. of .595 the 20" will
vary from .612-.630 this makes for a problem for swapping out barrels
or at least this is what I have found. I have seen a few examples of the
latter model 93’s with a 15" barrels that were sent to the ATF for clearance
and cleared that IMHO would be suspect but they brought a very hefty
price. there are only 83 of the 4000 or so model 1893/93 that will letter with a barrel under 16"

Forum Timezone: UTC 0
Most Users Ever Online: 778
Currently Online: tsillik, cranky2, TR, gene66
Guest(s) 144
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
clarence: 6280
TXGunNut: 4969
Chuck: 4571
1873man: 4281
steve004: 4160
Big Larry: 2323
twobit: 2291
TR: 1710
mrcvs: 1706
Forum Stats:
Groups: 1
Forums: 17
Topics: 12648
Posts: 109979

 

Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 1745
Members: 8791
Moderators: 4
Admins: 3
Navigation