Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Hi, Can I have some comments on the condition of this old rifle and maybe a value. I am questioning the buttstock checkering, the fit of the buttstock at the receiver,the frt sight, and the weird shaped hole above, and forward of the loading gate. Thanks, Peter
http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=331294934
Online
The checkering pattern on the butt stock does not appear to be an original Winchester pattern, and it certainly does not match the I-pattern checkering on the plain grained forend stock. In my opinion, the butt stock is not original to the rest of the rifle.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert, I don’t own the Madis book, but did look through Renneberg’s book and did not see this checkering pattern on the buttstock in his book. What period was this pattern available if you know? For some reason, I am thinking it is a much newer pattern than the gun is, or, it is for a different model??? I am certainly no expert. I certainly agree that the type (grade) wood on the buttstock and the forarm don’t match. Thanks, Peter
Offline
I’d be a little nervous about the fit of the buttstock to the receiver. It does not look tight, which would fit with Bert’s opinion that the buttstock is not original to the rifle.
Also, something that was pointed out to me by another member…in picture #6…the checkering on the buttstock has no border like the forend checkering does. You can also see in the middle arrow, along the top line, that the semi vertical lines in the checkering are over-cut a bit and go out into the wood outside the checkering pattern. Is that normal for the checkering not to have a border and for it to be over-cut like that? I am just trying to learn how to spot something that is not correct so I don’t get stung in the future. Thanks
I would venture to guess that the wood is the original wood to the rifle but the checking was added—or, at least the checking on the buttstock was embellished from its original "I" style pattern.
1892takedown @sbcglobal.net ......NRA Endowment Life Member.....WACA Member
"God is great.....beer is good.....and people are crazy"... Billy Currington
Nope, changed my mind. While the buttstock and forearm could go together, it could not have started out with an "I" or "H" style checking on the buttstock as the check pattern would carry through closer to the receiver. Back to square one–either the buttstock was replaced or the checking was added to an unchecked rifle. Wish you could see the forearm checking better to confirm if that is indeed original.
1892takedown @sbcglobal.net ......NRA Endowment Life Member.....WACA Member
"God is great.....beer is good.....and people are crazy"... Billy Currington
Peter
The receiver sight and drilled and tapped receivers for it are not original to the 1906 period. The Lyman receiver sight of the period was the 21 or 38 for the Model 1894.
Front sight is hard to tell, kinda looks like a Lyman 31, 37 or 39. As cataloged by Lyman at the time if that’s what it is.
Brad
Peter , You are also correct about the hole above the loading gate. Supposed to be a small , smooth hole. I have seen ’94’s that people have enlarged and threaded this hole. I suppose in some attempt to mount a sight ? When this hole gets enlarged and threaded , it looks like a screw has fallen out. Looks like the case with this one , except it appears to have a set screw in it as a filler..I also agree that the stock seems to be rounded off where it meets the receiver. Good eye.
pday said
Bert, I don’t own the Madis book, but did look through Renneberg’s book and did not see this checkering pattern on the buttstock in his book. What period was this pattern available if you know? For some reason, I am thinking it is a much newer pattern than the gun is, or, it is for a different model??? I am certainly no expert. I certainly agree that the type (grade) wood on the buttstock and the forarm don’t match. Thanks, Peter
The checkering pattern on the butt stock of that rifle was not ever used by Winchester to the best of my knowledge.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert,
You need to edit your first comment in this thread. It contradicts this statement:
Bert wrote:
The checkering pattern on the butt stock of that rifle was not ever used by Winchester to the best of my knowledge.
Bert wrote:
The checkering pattern on the butt stock does appear to be an original Winchester pattern,
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
Must be Bert’s "other" personality talking 
The fit of the rear buttstock is poor, and it could certainly be a replacement.
I am not sure about that checkering pattern. I think I have seen it on a Marlin once, but cannot recall 100%. The "I pattern checking appears original, it is hard to say.
Matt
The butt stock checkering is Marlin’s B style checkering with a slight variation.
Here is an example ;
Im confused about % Blue call. Obviously it will vary a fair bit, but some of the calls seem crazy to me. I would think that 100% would be N.I.B, or is an age handicap factored in ? (Im sure it is in some sellers minds)
Now this 94 has nice blueing for sure , but to call it 98% I would think is crazy as there is 0 % in a fairly large area at the carry position at the takedown joint, and probably on the entire underside of receiver, looks like 0% on top of bolt
And the thinning. Wouldnt you deduct some % for that?
I have seen guns on the net that claim high % where the Receiver looks entirely Patina, It could be partly the lighting , but if there is any blue left it is extremely thin
It is increasingly more common to be able to view gun on the Net thankfully, but just using a % description must have been often extremely disappointing for many buyers without pics
98% Oh the humanity!!!!! The rear sight appears to have the quick set knob and that didn’t come out until after 1947. Whoever bid this rifle up to over $3,000 needs to learn a little more about his collecting field. A rifle that has been Swiss Cheesed, is no longer collectable, and not worth putting good $$$ into. Parts is Parts, so they say. Big Larry
Simply put its been either restocked and poorly checkered with a non-winchester pattern. Or someone did a poor checkering job on a original deluxe wood non-checkered stock set. Only way to determine either situation is to dissemble the stocks from the gun.
Therefore its stocks are no longer in original configuration and the price/value goes way down!
Other than the stocks and hole its not a bad looking gun.
Maverick
WACA #8783 - Checkout my Reloading Tool Survey!
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-research-surveys/winchester-reloading-tool-survey/
I do want to mention that I communicated several times with the seller about the authenticity of this old rifle, and, after receiving a rather rude reply from the seller, he calmed down and realized what he had here and returned the gun to the owner, who had consigned it for sale. It is amazing to me how much someone will bid for an item like this, but shill bidding could be involved also. The gun was a mess in my opinion. Peter
1 Guest(s)
