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
Buying old Winchester unsure what I’m getting
sp_NewTopic Add Topic
Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 8
Member Since:
February 5, 2024
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
1
February 5, 2024 - 6:06 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

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.

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 10639
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online
2
February 5, 2024 - 6:15 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

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

Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 8
Member Since:
February 5, 2024
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
3
February 5, 2024 - 6:18 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

Thanks Bert, new to your forum but not the internet… can’t add photo… I’ll figure it out… lol… 

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 10639
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online
4
February 5, 2024 - 6:22 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

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

Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 8
Member Since:
February 5, 2024
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
5
February 5, 2024 - 6:29 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

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… 

Avatar
NY
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 6168
Member Since:
November 1, 2013
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online
6
February 5, 2024 - 7:15 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

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.

Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 8
Member Since:
February 5, 2024
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
7
February 5, 2024 - 7:34 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

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… 

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 10639
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online
8
February 5, 2024 - 8:03 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

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

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 10639
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online
9
February 5, 2024 - 8:10 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

Here are the pictures;

thumbnail_image0.jpgImage Enlargerthumbnail_image1.jpgImage Enlargerthumbnail_image2.jpgImage Enlargerthumbnail_image3.jpgImage Enlargerthumbnail_image4.jpgImage Enlargerthumbnail_image5.jpgImage Enlargerthumbnail_image6.jpgImage Enlarger

 

 

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

Avatar
NY
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 6168
Member Since:
November 1, 2013
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online
10
February 5, 2024 - 9:16 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Clint, is the original caliber marking still visible, or was it polished out?

Avatar
North D/FW
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 157
Member Since:
April 30, 2023
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
11
February 5, 2024 - 9:23 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

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! Laugh

Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 8
Member Since:
February 5, 2024
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
12
February 5, 2024 - 9:53 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

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

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1698
Member Since:
June 4, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
13
February 5, 2024 - 10:40 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

  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

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 4108
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
14
February 5, 2024 - 10:45 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

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!

Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 8
Member Since:
February 5, 2024
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
15
February 5, 2024 - 11:23 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

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… 

Avatar
NY
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 6168
Member Since:
November 1, 2013
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online
16
February 5, 2024 - 11:28 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

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.

Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 8
Member Since:
February 5, 2024
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
17
February 5, 2024 - 11:34 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

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?

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1698
Member Since:
June 4, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
18
February 5, 2024 - 11:42 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

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

Avatar
NY
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 6168
Member Since:
November 1, 2013
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online
19
February 6, 2024 - 12:10 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

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.

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 10639
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online
20
February 6, 2024 - 1:03 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

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

Forum Timezone: UTC 0
Most Users Ever Online: 778
Currently Online: Bert H., 1873man, antler1, clarence, Antonio, Blueliner, Tim Adair
Guest(s) 38
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
clarence: 6168
TXGunNut: 4889
Chuck: 4528
1873man: 4269
steve004: 4108
Big Larry: 2297
twobit: 2284
TR: 1698
mrcvs: 1672
Forum Stats:
Groups: 1
Forums: 17
Topics: 12526
Posts: 108816

 

Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 1731
Members: 8737
Moderators: 4
Admins: 3
Navigation