Log In
November 19, 2006
Offline
… here’s a .32 Special 
It letters
Plus, half octagon barrel, pistol grip, checkered – for me, the only thing missing is the shotgun butt 😉
I like the condition. I would not freshen the checkering – I’m wonder who here would be in favor of doing that?
November 1, 2013
Offline
steve004 said
I would not freshen the checkering – I’m wonder who here would be in favor of doing that?
Doug Turnbull’s customers.
May 26, 2017
Offline
Not me, I Like to leave things as they are. It’s only original once.
June 26, 2013
Offline
The only thing I would do is swap out the hammer with a correct one. Leave everything else original as it is.
Don
March 21, 2016
Offline
I’d leave it alone, for sure. Fresh checkering would look totally out of place.
Winchester Model 1873 44-40 circa 1886
November 7, 2015
Offline
Almost missed the checkering, nice configuration other than an unfortunate choice in chambering. 
Mike
September 22, 2011
Offline
TXGunNut said
…nice configuration other than an unfortunate choice in chambering.
I have never understood why there is such a prejudice against .32 Special.
November 19, 2006
Offline
mrcvs said
TXGunNut said
…nice configuration other than an unfortunate choice in chambering.I have never understood why there is such a prejudice against .32 Special.
And as many here know, I would have no qualification to do the explaining of that point
March 31, 2009
Offline
mrcvs said
TXGunNut said
…nice configuration other than an unfortunate choice in chambering.I have never understood why there is such a prejudice against .32 Special.
In my case I wouldn’t call it prejudice, it’s just not an antique caliber and I collect antique Winchesters. I’m sure it is a fine cartridge but I don’t have the gun for it.
November 7, 2015
Offline
I was just poking a little fun at Steve. I have an unexplainable attraction to 94’s in 32 Special and he’s well aware of it as he’s quite fond of the cartridge as well. Funny thing, I haven’t really found a load they like but I enjoy dragging them out to the range to continue the quest.
Mike
April 2, 2016
Offline
I purchased this rifle and will not change anything exceopt maybe the hammer. I am a little reluctant to remove the stock as it is so easy to break of a ear of the stock up next to the receiver. As of this writing I have not actually received the rifle and as we all know pictures do not always tell the full story.
November 7, 2015
Offline
Congrats on a nice rifle, Jerry.
Mike
November 19, 2006
Offline
That rifle has a lot going for it. Congratulations on ending up on top. Assuming appropriate care is used (which I am sure you will) I wouldn’t worry too much about removing the buttstock. I say that because Austin mentions in the description that he had the buttstock off. Yes, I do worry when a stock has never been off a rifle in 100 years – sometimes they can be stuck on pretty good. However, if the stock has recently been removed, you should be fine.
March 31, 2009
Offline
Removing the stock takes patience. Don’t move it side to side to loosen it, just up and down then straight back once loose.
April 2, 2016
Offline
Thanks folks, I will keep you posted as to what I decide to do. I did read where Austin said he removed the butt stock but kind of forgot it when I was thinking of replacing the hammer. I have seen a lot of old rifles with the corners broken off the butt stock. I purcased a few in my early days of collecting before I found out it takes more than just finding a good butt stock.
April 2, 2016
Offline
Not sure why but I have found a number of 32 WS that have really bad bore wear. Perhaps that would be why some folks prefer the 30 30. My son hunts a lot more than I do and usually carries the 32 ws.
March 15, 2020
Offline
My 1885 which letters 7/15/1904 (serial no applied) has the same weak checkering as this one. The fore-stock checkering is almost gone. The butt stock is no. 19371. My rifle has many special features and has the same CF on the lower tang as does this 1894. A previous reply showed 3 rifles with CF on lower tang and was believed to mean custom features or fittings. I am now convinced that is correct. Bert has info on my gun which is SN 97274. Don
November 19, 2006
Offline
jerry thomas said
Not sure why but I have found a number of 32 WS that have really bad bore wear. Perhaps that would be why some folks prefer the 30 30. My son hunts a lot more than I do and usually carries the 32 ws.
Of course! Because they were so darn effective, they got used 
