Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Alan,
Thanks for the added clarification. What is your current total for the DCP marked Model 1894 Carbines? I have a total of (16) in my survey so far, all in the 727536 – 749975 serial number range (January – March 1915).
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
I only have 13 serial numbers, 727536 to 747355.
I will send you an e-mail to get an update of the 3 serial numbers I do not have if that OK.
Regards
Alan
Alan,
Got them, and added four new numbers to your list. I added one new number to my list.
Thanks!
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
November 7, 2015
Offline
Bert H. said
Mike,
A friendly warning… that might become a very large list of reading projects!
Bert
Was able to access the archives today and read the above referenced article…..and more than a few others. Wow! Could get lost for weeks in there!
Feel pretty sure I’ve seen one of these rifles somewhere. Wish I’d taken a closer look at it.
Bert:
Why do you use 2400 for the French contract?
I am going to nit pick again and I didn’t invent a time machine to help me.All I did is read page 180 in “Winchester Repeating Arms Company Its History & Development from 1865 to 1981” by Herbert G. House.
The Republic of France ordered 15,000 model 1894 carbines and 1,500,000 rounds of 30WCF ammunition 22 Sep. 1914.Deleveries began 13 Oct and was complete 6 April 1915 at a cost of $347,300.
This order was for the French merchant marine.
You should get this book and read it , a lot of good accurate information in it.
podufa said
Bert:Why do you use 2400 for the French contract?
I am going to nit pick again and I didn’t invent a time machine to help me.All I did is read page 180 in “Winchester Repeating Arms Company Its History & Development from 1865 to 1981” by Herbert G. House.
The Republic of France ordered 15,000 model 1894 carbines and 1,500,000 rounds of 30WCF ammunition 22 Sep. 1914.Deleveries began 13 Oct and was complete 6 April 1915 at a cost of $347,300.
This order was for the French merchant marine.
You should get this book and read it , a lot of good accurate information in it.
I used the 2,400 number because you specifically brought it up.
“I have read the Michael Carrick article and also a shorter one by a different author a little later. I emailed Michael Carrick a few times about them. He did a lot of research on them, found a contract in France with Winchester for 2400. House only found a 15100 contract with France. Wonder if there were two contracts or if only one was filled.”
As for your presumptuous recommendation to me, I have been fully aware of the 15,100 number that Herb mentions in his book for a very long time. I have owned a hardbound copy of the subject book for more than 20-years, and I have extensively read through it many times in the past number of years. I agree with you… it is a great reference source, with a lot of very good information. That stated, I have not committed my research on this topic to using either number as the “gospel”. Hopefully a verified number can be found someday in the future that will resolve the question. Until then, I will keep both numbers in my research notes.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
November 7, 2015
Offline
Survey does seem to support the 2400 figure unless France made a concerted effort at some time after the war to gather up the 94’s and destroy or mothball them. It’s conceivable they could have been lost in the Atlantic enroute to France. There was a war going on, ships got sunk. I’m thinking I saw one of these guns at the Cody show but like many of the guns I saw I had no idea what I was looking at.
Another little writeup in spring 2011 of “The Winchester Collector”
I don’t think it adds much. They say the contract was 15,100 carbines and 15.1 million rounds of ammo, seems like a lot of ammo.
podufa said
Another little writeup in spring 2011 of “The Winchester Collector”I don’t think it adds much. They say the contract was 15,100 carbines and 15.1 million rounds of ammo, seems like a lot of ammo.
That would only be 1,000 rounds per gun ordered… not an unrealistic number in my opinion.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert H. said
That would only be 1,000 rounds per gun ordered… not an unrealistic number in my opinion.
Bert
Seems a reasonable # in my opinion as well, I generally keep about a 1,000 rounds of 9mm on hand. 
Winchester Model 1873 44-40 circa 1886
When the British placed an order with Winchester for 9,000 Model 1892 SRC’s in 44WCF (part of a total 20,000 that were eventually ordered), they also ordered 9,000,000 rounds to go with them, it seems to be a standard figure for rifles. Pistols would be ordered with a much small amount and MG’s much more of course.
Regards and Merry Christmas
AlanD
Sydney
I noticed a reference to model 1892s mentioned above, also having Belgium Proofs.
I have an 1892 carbine 44 WCF ser. #681410 with the Belgium Proofs mentioned and pictured in the 2009 Collector article.
Also , in the proof stamps, a stamp that looks like a capital “B” back to back. I haven’t been able to identify this proof stamp.
The carbine also has “DRESEL” stamped twice on the left side of the receiver and twice on the right side of the stock.
I have learned that ‘DRESEL’ is an importer in Belgium from the late 1800s to date.
Anyone have any information on this oddity?
Thanks.
R
The DCP marked 1894 and 1892 carbines were not Canadian purchases. The were purchased by the Royal Navy and inspected in the U.S. by Canadian inspectors. The rifles were then shipped to Halifax and picked up by Royal Navy vessels. Following the war the rifles were sold off as surplus by the Royal Navy to the Dominions. Many saw use in Canadian prisons following WW1. I have seen copies of the Royal Navy requisitions on line as part of research done by a guy in Australia.
Roger Baker said
I noticed a reference to model 1892s mentioned above, also having Belgium Proofs.I have an 1892 carbine 44 WCF ser. #681410 with the Belgium Proofs mentioned and pictured in the 2009 Collector article.
Also , in the proof stamps, a stamp that looks like a capital “B” back to back. I haven’t been able to identify this proof stamp.
The carbine also has “DRESEL” stamped twice on the left side of the receiver and twice on the right side of the stock.
I have learned that ‘DRESEL’ is an importer in Belgium from the late 1800s to date.
Anyone have any information on this oddity?
Thanks.
R
Hello Roger,
The serial number of your rifle corresponds to production from 1912. The rifle could have been imported, and marked with Belgian proofs any time after that. Could you please send me a series of photos of the rifle and the areas of stamped writing on it so I can enter the rifle into my survey of the 1892’s? Is the upper tang marked exactly like the attached photo?
Thanks
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
mike webb said
The DCP marked 1894 and 1892 carbines were not Canadian purchases. The were purchased by the Royal Navy and inspected in the U.S. by Canadian inspectors. The rifles were then shipped to Halifax and picked up by Royal Navy vessels. Following the war the rifles were sold off as surplus by the Royal Navy to the Dominions. Many saw use in Canadian prisons following WW1. I have seen copies of the Royal Navy requisitions on line as part of research done by a guy in Australia.
Mike,
The “guy in Australia” is actually AlanD in Sydney, who has replied several times in this thread.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
Michael,
The tang stamp is identical.
I will take some pictures and email them to you, as I still haven’t mastered loading them onto the Forum.
As a note, the carbine has sling eyes and a sling.
The sling has been repaired, but appears original. Has the correct buckle anyway.
R
Roger Baker said
Michael,
The tang stamp is identical.
I will take some pictures and email them to you, as I still haven’t mastered loading them onto the Forum.
As a note, the carbine has sling eyes and a sling.
The sling has been repaired, but appears original. Has the correct buckle anyway.
R
Roger Baker said
Michael,
The tang stamp is identical.
I will take some pictures and email them to you, as I still haven’t mastered loading them onto the Forum.
As a note, the carbine has sling eyes and a sling.
The sling has been repaired, but appears original. Has the correct buckle anyway.
R
twobit said
Mike,
The “guy in Australia” is actually AlanD in Sydney, who has replied several times in this thread.
Michael
Thanks Michael. I didn’t realize he was the same person.
1 Guest(s)
