Avatar
Please consider registering
Guest
Search
Forum Scope




Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
Register Lost password?
sp_Feed sp_PrintTopic sp_TopicIcon
Barrel swapped on this model 94 carbine?
sp_NewTopic Add Topic
Avatar
Troutdale, OR
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1514
Member Since:
June 26, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
1
January 22, 2023 - 4:05 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

It looks to me that the barrel is much earlier than the rest of this carbine.  Address stamp is on the top of the barrel and no model designation either.  Front sight has been hammered on a bit too.  Thoughts?

https://www.gunsinternational.com/guns-for-sale-online/rifles/winchester-rifles-model-1894-pre-64/very-rare-winchester-src-with-a-special-order-pistol-grip-stock-cal-25-35.cfm?gun_id=102189310#sm-16

Don

Avatar
NY
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 4912
Member Since:
November 1, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
2
January 22, 2023 - 4:20 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

Outdated parts were never thrown away if they were still usable.  So it’s possible an “old” brl can wind up on a newer rcvr. 

Front sight is a replacement, but that doesn’t prove anything one way or another.

Avatar
Troutdale, OR
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1514
Member Since:
June 26, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
3
January 22, 2023 - 4:29 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

clarence said
Outdated parts were never thrown away if they were still usable.  So it’s possible an “old” brl can wind up on a newer rcvr. 

Front sight is a replacement, but that doesn’t prove anything one way or another.

  

Do you think Winchester would have let this out the door with no model designation anywhere whatsoever on this carbine?  Seems odd/unlikely, but I’m no expert either…

Don

Avatar
NY
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 4912
Member Since:
November 1, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
4
January 22, 2023 - 6:25 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

deerhunter said   
Do you think Winchester would have let this out the door with no model designation anywhere whatsoever on this carbine?  Seems odd/unlikely, but I’m no expert either…

Don

  

Yes, it’s an anomaly for sure;  the result of changing the model marking from the upper tang, where it was at the time this brl was made.  Maybe that’s why Leroy has it priced so low.

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 13255
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
5
January 22, 2023 - 7:00 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

The receiver was manufactured in June 1937. Winchester changed the barrels from Nickel Steel to Proof Steel in April/May 1932. Based on the factory markings on that barrel, it was manufactured before 1923. The 44A rear sight was discontinued in early 1932, and the saddle ring was discontinued in 1931. The fact that there is zero rub wear on the receiver from the saddle ring tells me that it was added in very recent times. The odds of that Model 94 being factory original are less than .01%

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

Avatar
Troutdale, OR
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1514
Member Since:
June 26, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
6
January 22, 2023 - 8:19 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Bert H. said
The receiver was manufactured in June 1937. Winchester changed the barrels from Nickel Steel to Proof Steel in April/May 1932. Based on the factory markings on that barrel, it was manufactured before 1923. The 44A rear sight was discontinued in early 1932, and the saddle ring was discontinued in 1931. The fact that there is zero rub wear on the receiver from the saddle ring tells me that it was added in very recent times. The odds of that Model 94 being factory original are less than .01%

  

Wow!  Very impressive bit of BUYER BEWARE facts there. Thanks again Bert.

Don

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 360
Member Since:
February 17, 2022
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
7
January 22, 2023 - 1:59 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Bert H. said
The receiver was manufactured in June 1937. Winchester changed the barrels from Nickel Steel to Proof Steel in April/May 1932. Based on the factory markings on that barrel, it was manufactured before 1923. The 44A rear sight was discontinued in early 1932, and the saddle ring was discontinued in 1931. The fact that there is zero rub wear on the receiver from the saddle ring tells me that it was added in very recent times. The odds of that Model 94 being factory original are less than .01%

  

And all that for the low low price of $11500.00. Shamful.

Avatar
NY
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 4912
Member Since:
November 1, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
8
January 22, 2023 - 2:34 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

oldcrankyyankee said
And all that for the low low price of $11500.00. Shamful.

  

Would be interesting to hear Leroy’s explication of all these anomalies, esp. the SR; suspect he’d say it was still available on a special order, which is probably true.  But it seems odd that a customer with the good taste to order the SG buttplate would also request an option so utterly useless as the SR.

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2911
Member Since:
March 20, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
9
January 22, 2023 - 3:27 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Good morning,

In my work on the Model 1892 it is not uncommon to find “earlier” barrels (those marked with early address stamps) used MUCH later during production than when they were the dominant form.  The Type 3 address stamp as found on the Model 94 carbine was THE stamp used on the 1892’s and located on the TOP of the barrel until early 1910 when the position was moved to the left side.  This stamp was used until 1926 when the Model designation was applied to the left side of the barrel.  But…  between 1910 and 1926 barrels with the top location commonly pop up in the data.  And…  After 1926 there are even barrels with the Type 3 stamp on the left side can be found as late as 1930, some four years after its common usage.  It is interesting that in these cases the Model 92 designation is found on the right side of the barrel since the tang stamp style at the time had no designation within it.  For me it is not out of the question that the barrel could in fact be original to the gun especially since it is in 25-35 and the inventory may have not as robust and the other 94 calibers.  Just my opinion.

Michael

Signature-Pic.jpg

 

Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 237
Member Since:
March 14, 2022
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
10
January 22, 2023 - 3:41 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Correct or not, it’s an $11,500 story… Only lettered guns for me at those prices when it’s that uncommon!

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2911
Member Since:
March 20, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
11
January 22, 2023 - 3:42 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

RickC said
Correct or not, it’s an $11,500 story… Only lettered guns for me at those prices when it’s that uncommon!

  

I have no argument there at all.  It is quite pricey at $11,500!

Michael

Signature-Pic.jpg

 

Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 3468
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
12
January 22, 2023 - 4:35 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

It’s an attractive configuration.  I like the uncheckered pistol grip stock.  I was going to say it’s a lot of money for story/speculation but there isn’t even any provided!

Avatar
NY
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 4912
Member Since:
November 1, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
13
January 22, 2023 - 5:07 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

steve004 said
I was going to say it’s a lot of money for story/speculation but there isn’t even any provided!

  

For many customers, nothing more is needed when Leroy speaks.

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 237
Member Since:
March 14, 2022
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
14
January 22, 2023 - 5:32 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Bert H. said
The odds of that Model 94 being factory original are less than .01%

And that’s good enough for some folks! Imagine. 

Avatar
NY
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 4912
Member Since:
November 1, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
15
January 22, 2023 - 6:02 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

RickC said

Bert H. said

The odds of that Model 94 being factory original are less than .01%

And that’s good enough for some folks! Imagine. 

  

Not exactly that–Leroy’s endorsement, that’s what’s good enough “for some folks.”  And he’s wise not to “explain” any of the discrepancies, which would only sow doubt in the minds of prospective customers who otherwise had none.  If someone calls to ask, that’s the time to explain.  What I’d tell them is,  “Winchester wasn’t making collector’s items, but commercial products.  The customer knew what model he was ordering, so didn’t have to have the model number stamped on the gun.”

Avatar
South Texas
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1230
Member Since:
March 20, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
16
January 22, 2023 - 6:31 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Possibly not just the barrel swapped as others have indicated, but also look at the fit and finishes of the lower tang/receiver, and fit of the wood in the upper tang. Its also surprising to have that late of a receiver that is not flaked, when you consider the finishes on the lower tang and floor plate.  The WP stamps on the receiver and barrel are different (the “P” has a larger vs smaller loop in the P). 

 

The “halo” from the saddle ring we are accustomed to seeing on some of these guns is very faint on the receiver, but it doesnt take much to rub that saddle ring around a bit till you get the worn finish pattern in the receiver you want.  Some of these SRC’s that have higher finish remaining and a very pronounced saddle ring “halo” are also questionable and sometimes appear to be enhanced compared to actual SRC’s that were used that have finish remaining. 

DSC_0245-Copy-3.JPG

1892takedown @sbcglobal.net ......NRA Endowment Life Member.....WACA Member

"God is great.....beer is good.....and people are crazy"... Billy Currington

Avatar
Wisconsin
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 5353
Member Since:
May 2, 2009
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online
17
January 22, 2023 - 7:38 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Chris,

That was the first thing I looked at was the fit of the  lower tang.

Bob

WACA Life Member---
NRA Life Member----
Cody Firearms member since 1991

73_86cutaway.jpg

Email: [email protected]

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 237
Member Since:
March 14, 2022
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
18
January 22, 2023 - 7:43 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

1892takedown said
Possibly not just the barrel swapped as others have indicated, but also look at the fit and finishes of the lower tang/receiver, and fit of the wood in the upper tang. Its also surprising to have that late of a receiver that is not flaked, when you consider the finishes on the lower tang and floor plate.  The WP stamps on the receiver and barrel are different (the “P” has a larger vs smaller loop in the P). 

 

The “halo” from the saddle ring we are accustomed to seeing on some of these guns is very faint on the receiver, but it doesnt take much to rub that saddle ring around a bit till you get the worn finish pattern in the receiver you want.  Some of these SRC’s that have higher finish remaining and a very pronounced saddle ring “halo” are also questionable and sometimes appear to be enhanced compared to actual SRC’s that were used that have finish remaining. 

  

Considering those added observations, the very best guaranteed story 🙄, shouldn’t do it, but…

Avatar
Wyoming - Gods Country
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1292
Member Since:
January 26, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
19
January 22, 2023 - 8:35 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

1873man said
Chris,

That was the first thing I looked at was the fit of the  lower tang.

Bob

  

I agree Bob. The lower tang does not fit the receiver properly and had a different wear to it. What’s needed to convert a straight grip into a pistol grip? …….. a curved lower tang from another gun. A great configuration and caliber but probably something pieced together with the perfect recipe of parts. 

                                                                               ~Gary~

                                                                                                                                                                              94-SRR.jpg

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 237
Member Since:
March 14, 2022
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
20
January 23, 2023 - 12:13 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

Not what I would expect from such a noted & established Winchester purveyor. 

Forum Timezone: UTC 0
Most Users Ever Online: 778
Currently Online: cj57, 1873man, Jim McKee, Tedk, Bill Hanzel, KingCobb, Will Dougan, DB
Guest(s) 57
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
1873man: 5353
clarence: 4911
TXGunNut: 4099
Chuck: 3844
steve004: 3468
twobit: 2911
Maverick: 2058
JWA: 1928
Big Larry: 1899
Forum Stats:
Groups: 1
Forums: 16
Topics: 10974
Posts: 94738

 

Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 1517
Members: 11927
Moderators: 3
Admins: 3
Navigation