Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
Yes, I’m new to Winchester collector grade rifles so my knowledge is limited… I actually wanted a shooter but committed to buy this rifle from an online retailer… seems puzzling because the numbers just don’t seem to add up… I googled & found y’all & info about fake rifles.. so I’ll post what I know.. gun hasn’t arrived yet, I’m sure in a few days…
it’s listed as an 1892 16.5” short rifle in .357 mag… whole serial number not sent but told it’s a 6 digit serial.. this rifle doesn’t look like it was made in 1895 & .357 cartridges not invented till the 35+ years later… im guessing the : model is wrong, 2-wrong serial, 3- fake rifle… guess I’ll know soon enough.
Online
Hello Clint,
Without the specific details about the gun, we cannot provide comments about it. What we can tell you is that Winchester did not ever manufacture an original Model 1892 (92) for the .357 Magnum cartridge. In recent times, there have been Model 92 clones (reproductions) made in .357 Mag. I suspect that the gun you purchased is one of the later made clones.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Thanks Bert, new to your forum but not the internet… can’t add photo… I’ll figure it out… lol…
Clint Retherford said
Thanks, new to your forum but not the internet… can’t add photo… I’ll figure it out… lol
As a Guest on the WACA website, you cannot directly upload pictures. You can post a URL to a photo hosting website where you have your pictures stored. You can also send them to me and I can post them.
Bert – [email protected]
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Thanks Bert, ha. That explains it… it’s now my Avatar tho & I sent you an email… no miracles expected… I’m just curious about whether to take delivery or not…
Clint, Many .38-40 ’92s were converted to fire .357; a big thing at one time. Hurts collector value, but far easier to find .357 ammo than .38-40s today.
clarence said
Clint, Many .38-40 ’92s were converted to fire .357; a big thing at one time. Hurts collector value, but far easier to find .357 ammo than .38-40s today.
Thanks Clarence… I’ll consider that as an option, just don’t see how the receiver can be that old…it looks proper & official, did Winchester do the conversion or local gunsmiths? perhaps Bert can share the photos I sent him earlier… maybe that will help…
clarence said
Clint, Many .38-40 ’92s were converted to fire .357; a big thing at one time. Hurts collector value, but far easier to find .357 ammo than .38-40s today.
Actually, it was/is the 32 WCF (32-20) that were most often converted to .357 Mag & 38 Special. The .401 bore on the 38 WCF is too large. 32 WCF barrels can readily be rebored to .357.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Here are the pictures;
Grossly polished and refinished, barrel & magazine tube chopped, stocks harshly sanded and refinished… a total “fantasy” built gun. Value… maybe $500. if it cycles and shoots good.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Clint, is the original caliber marking still visible, or was it polished out?
Bert H. said
Here are the pictures;Grossly polished and refinished, barrel & magazine tube chopped, stocks harshly sanded and refinished… a total “fantasy” built gun. Value… maybe $500. if it cycles and shoots good.
Bert
I’d like to shoot that though! 
OK can’t get more pictures yet it’ll be another day or two. We paused the purchase till we’re more sure…. it does have 1892 on the tang so it is a converted rifle. He will send me the full serial and some photos of the stamps he acts like, the barrel is stamped 357 and the barrel is a Winchester barrel‘s. So I guess I have to decide. Is there a cool factor in it because it certainly appears there’s no collectible value, so is this rifle worth $1500 I don’t think so, but what would be a fair offer if it shoots in cycles. It seems it would matter on who did the conversion/restoration because the receiver looks like it’s 40 years old not 130 and is a receiver that old even safe to shoot anymore? Thanks for the help guys. Will obviously share more pictures as soon as I get them off the tank and the barrel stamp.
clint
I 30 years ago bought a 1892 38-40 with the caliber markings x’ed out and 357 marked. It was a clean 50% gun, it feed and fired, and fun to shoot. But I soon got tired of it and sold it for a small loss. I think when you get tired of this gun you will take a sizable loss on your $1500.
The refinish alone would be a huge turn off to me. T/R
TR said
I 30 years ago bought a 1892 38-40 with the caliber markings x’ed out and 357 marked. It was a clean 50% gun, it feed and fired, and fun to shoot. But I soon got tired of it and sold it for a small loss. I think when you get tired of this gun you will take a sizable loss on your $1500.The refinish alone would be a huge turn off to me. T/R
That sums it up for me!
It seems i misread the manufacturer date… I was checking dates for different models … the 6 digit # range for what was partially given for an 1892 is 1899 not 1895…
TR said
I 30 years ago bought a 1892 38-40 with the caliber markings x’ed out and 357 marked.
TR, your memory must be faulty; Bert just explained conversion from .38-40 wouldn’t work.
So the rep at Winchester advised me to call the museum in Cody and they would have the old records and the ability to look up the serial to determine if they themselves actually did the conversion. That seems possible yes? Would it make a difference if the conversion was done by Winchester?
clarence said
TR said
I 30 years ago bought a 1892 38-40 with the caliber markings x’ed out and 357 marked.
TR, your memory must be faulty; Bert just explained conversion from .38-40 wouldn’t work.
It was 32-20, and you are right. Stand corrected. I would prefer using the term cloudy not faulty. At 74 you do mix things up. Thanks for the correction. T/R
Clint Retherford said
So the rep at Winchester advised me to call the museum in Cody and they would have the old records and the ability to look up the serial to determine if they themselves actually did the conversion. That seems possible yes? Would it make a difference if the conversion was done by Winchester?
Clint, rest assured conversion was NOT done by Win. No free ser. no. info., either; you could pay for a factory letter, but for this travesty, it ain’t worth the cost.
Clint Retherford said
So the rep at Winchester advised me to call the museum in Cody and they would have the old records and the ability to look up the serial to determine if they themselves actually did the conversion. That seems possible yes? Would it make a difference if the conversion was done by Winchester?
Clint,
Winchester positively did not convert that old Model 1892 into the gun it is today. The quality of the refinish on that rifle is horribly deficient. If that rifle had been sent back to Winchester, they would have replaced the barrel instead of cutting it down and reboring it.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
1 Guest(s)
