Avatar
Search
Forum Scope




Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
Lost password?
sp_Feed sp_PrintTopic sp_TopicIcon
Winchester 22 rifles
Avatar
Guest
Guests
1
April 23, 2013 - 3:36 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print

I am looking at the old Winchester 22 rifles and have found one that is in pretty good shape. It is a model 90, serial # 848096, and has "MODEL 90" on the barrel. The thing that bothers me a bit is that it DOES NOT have the "WINCHESTER" logo stamped in the top tang. Seller says they came both ways. Would that be correct? I have seen some very early 62’s with the "WINCHESTER" logo on their top tangs, but have not seen a model 90 without the logo. Thanks, Peter

Avatar
twobit
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2504
Member Since:
March 20, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
2
April 23, 2013 - 4:42 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print

For that serial number range the upper tang should have the tang stamp that is pictured below.
http://s265.photobucket.com/user/bigoils/media/G-3.jpg.html

G-3.jpgImage Enlarger


Michael

Signature-Pic.jpg

 

Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation

Avatar
"road king"
Guest
Guests
3
April 23, 2013 - 4:45 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print

The Madis Winchester Handbook, explains this out very well and I think that it is accurate.

Avatar
Bert H.
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 12976
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online
4
April 23, 2013 - 6:13 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print

The serial number indicates that the receiver was manufactured in 1935, making it a parts clean-up production rifle. As a result, almost anything was/is possible, but like Michael mentioned, I would have expected it to have a marked upper tang.

Bert

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

Avatar
Guest
Guests
5
April 23, 2013 - 2:13 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print

Thanks for that info. So would this gun with no tang markings, if it were correct, be worth more than one that is stamped as mentioned? P

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=337852660

Avatar
twobit
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2504
Member Since:
March 20, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
6
April 23, 2013 - 3:40 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print

I hate people who take garbage photos which are poorly focused, with the flash on the camera, loaded with glare, and expect folks to spend money. According the Schwing (p. 107) the barrel address should read MADE IN U.S.A. on the top line instead of MANUFACTURED BY….

It would be nice to have a decent photo or two which are in focus of the upper tang. I doubt the inscription has been buffed off since the proof stamps are still clear.

Michael

Signature-Pic.jpg

 

Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation

Avatar
jwm94
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 1118
Member Since:
May 24, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
7
April 23, 2013 - 5:06 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print

pday said
Thanks for that info. So would this gun with no tang markings, if it were correct, be worth more than one that is stamped as mentioned? P

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.aspx?Item=337852660

Yes, if the gun is all correct it would be more valuable to some collectors due to no tang markings, since that is the one thing that makes it a rare specimen. The .22 caliber LR 1890 is scarce, IMO, not rare.

Also, the Model 1890 in .22 LR caliber was introduced in 1919.

James

Forum Timezone: UTC 0
Most Users Ever Online: 4623
Currently Online: Bert H., 1873man, Henry Mero, TXGunNut, markone1966, Zebulon, Jeremy P
Guest(s) 646
Top Posters:
clarence: 7119
TXGunNut: 6444
Chuck: 5856
steve004: 5209
1873man: 4702
deerhunter: 2711
Big Larry: 2554
twobit: 2504
mrcvs: 2210
Maverick: 2042
Newest Members:
Peter Cipollini
Jhark
Oldtimer52
parkerposy
rayhobbs
WebleyScott
Task1
1886
Jerome Stevens
Forum Stats:
Groups: 1
Forums: 18
Topics: 14805
Posts: 132472

 

Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 2057
Members: 10044
Moderators: 3
Admins: 4
Administrators: Mike Hager, Bert H., JWA, SethJ
Moderators: Rob Kassab, Brad Dunbar, Heather
Navigation