Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Online
What impact do the English proofs have on the value of a rifle like this?
Don
November 7, 2015
Offline
Sweet 1894. Since the proofs were a requirement of the place and time I wouldn’t hold it against a rifle I wanted. Opinions vary. One concern is that our friends across the pond are quite adept at refinishing firearms and wouldn’t hesitate to “update” a rifle as beautiful as this one. If you’re interested I’d ask Leroy or Mark how they feel about it. It looks good to me but they’ve handled it. That is one beautiful 94!
Mike
Thanks Mike. You and I share the same thoughts. It’s a beautiful rifle and would love to own it but it’s a bit out of my price range right now. I was wondering what the fellow collectors thought about the English proofs. It seems the proofs negatively affect the desirability of some models like the 1873’s and 1886’s more than others. Haven’t seen too many English proofed 1894’s so was looking for opinions/education.
Don
January 26, 2011
Offline
Don
Although its a nice looking specimen in a great caliber, all the extra markings bother me a bit. I’m not sure why, and I cant really quantify how much it might detract, but it just seems excessive to me. It would play into any offer I might consider. If by some miracle there were two identical rifles prices the same and one had these marks, I would choose the one without the proofs.
As a side note, extra marks from shops here in the states (like Sheard or similar) are of interest to me and I might pay a bit more for those, just because I find them unique.
~Gary~
Don,
The British markings on that rifle are much more recent than the age of the rifle. Specifically I am referring to the “NOT ENGLISH MAKE” marking on the receiver frame and on the barrel. I am not of the opinion that it was originally exported to the UK when it shipped out of the warehouse in February 1905. Additionally of concern to me is the fact that it was shipped with a Lyman No. 1 tang sight which is now missing. The 3-leaf barrel mounted sight was undoubtedly installed during its time in the UK. All of that stated, it appears to have its original factory finish on it, and it is a great configuration/variation.
I personally have no issues with a Winchester that was ordered & shipped to the UK, and has the appropriate proof markings stamped on it. This rifle does not fit that description.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
The earlier guns with export markings affect the values more than later guns since the collectors of early Winchester like the guns that went West and British proofs don’t fit their collecting philosophy. I do know if your had that gun next to another of the same configuration and condition without proofs, the one without proofs will sell quicker and for more money but I never looked at British proofed guns enough to figure out how much it will affect it. I always wanted a 73 with a 7 leaf sight and most of them were exported and proofed but I did find one.
Bob
WACA Life Member--- NRA Life Member---- Cody Firearms member since 1991 Researching the Winchester 1873's
Email: [email protected]
I have no problem owning a British shipped 1873 or 1886 and if the proofs lessen my purchase price, all the better, but it MUST have condition!
I looked at that piece of Leroy’s, and it is a beautiful ’94, but I am in the middle of a couple other large endeavors right now, a Win. 1886 musket and a Colt “Texas Patterson”, and I had to let it pass. Congats Don on a acquiring a fine Winchester. We’ve had this discussion before , about non U.S. proofs etc., and I am still of the same opinion that, for Me , anyway, being Canadian and all, the British proof marks would not affect the value of this or any other gun to Me. In fact I find them being a little more desireable, having known where they’ve been. By the way I now have My display of all the production, pre 1900 Winchesters lever guns, in standard configuration, carbine, rifle and musket, from the Henry to the ,95 put together, 29 guns, and it will be displayed at the first available opportunity here. I will post some pics later when I get the background worked out.
W.A.C.A. life member, Marlin Collectors Assn. charter and life member, C,S.S.A. member and general gun nut.
Thanks for the input everyone. It sounds like the consensus is there is no real consensus. I guess it comes down to buy what you like and like what you buy. I like this gun and if I had the money I would buy it.
Don
Bert H. said
Don,The British markings on that rifle are much more recent than the age of the rifle. Specifically I am referring to the “NOT ENGLISH MAKE” marking on the receiver frame and on the barrel. I am not of the opinion that it was originally exported to the UK when it shipped out of the warehouse in February 1905. Additionally of concern to me is the fact that it was shipped with a Lyman No. 1 tang sight which is now missing. The 3-leaf barrel mounted sight was undoubtedly installed during its time in the UK. All of that stated, it appears to have its original factory finish on it, and it is a great configuration/variation.
I personally have no issues with a Winchester that was ordered & shipped to the UK, and has the appropriate proof markings stamped on it. This rifle does not fit that description.
Bert
That’s interesting Bert. Do you see old Engish markings as well as later applied markings? Or all from the same timeframe? Any reason that it could have gone through the proof house twice at different timeframes? Any idea what date range the “NOT ENGLISH MAKE” could have been applied? Interesting gun and I don’t expect you to have all the answers, but just wondering in case you do.
Don
Don,
I believe (not 100% sure though) that the “Not English Make” was a WW II era or post WW II marking. I do not have the requisite knowledge to put a reference date on the other markings. That stated, I do not believe that the gun went through the UK’s proof house more than once… there would be no reason for that to have transpired. The person you might ask about the markings on the subject Model 1894 is Alan David (he is the fellow conducting the survey on the “DCP” marked Winchesters). I am sure that he can provide a detailed answer in regards to the British markings on this rifle.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
pdog72 said
DonAlthough its a nice looking specimen in a great caliber, all the extra markings bother me a bit. I’m not sure why, and I cant really quantify how much it might detract, but it just seems excessive to me. It would play into any offer I might consider. If by some miracle there were two identical rifles prices the same and one had these marks, I would choose the one without the proofs.
As a side note, extra marks from shops here in the states (like Sheard or similar) are of interest to me and I might pay a bit more for those, just because I find them unique.
I find myself feeling the same – that’s a lot of extra marks.
that peticular mark “not English make” was used between 1925-1954
Jeremy Scott.
WACA LIFE MEMBER, CFM MEMBER, ABKA MEMBER, JSSC MEMBER, MNO HISTORIAN
JEREMY S. said
that peticular mark “not English make” was used between 1925-1954
Thank you for the info. I’m sure this rifle would have an interesting story to tell.
As Jermy S says the the NOT ENGLISH MAKE, was applied to ‘foreign’ guns from 1925 to 1954.
All the markings are London proof house marks. I think it has been proofed twice, once when it arrived in the UK, pre 1925 and again at some point between 1925 ans 1954.
I think the CORDITE & MAX markings were applied between 1925 and 1954 but were not used for the whole of this period as far as I can see. I did contact both proof houses in the UK about this Cordite marking with one of them acknowledging they did not know the period of time it was used in!
I could be wrong and the CORDITE marking was in use from 1904 to 1925, but more research is needed to be sure.
Regards
Alan
aland said
As Jermy S says the the NOT ENGLISH MAKE, was applied to ‘foreign’ guns from 1925 to 1954.
All the markings are London proof house marks. I think it has been proofed twice, once when it arrived in the UK, pre 1925 and again at some point between 1925 ans 1954.
I think the CORDITE & MAX markings were applied between 1925 and 1954 but were not used for the whole of this period as far as I can see. I did contact both proof houses in the UK about this Cordite marking with one of them acknowledging they did not know the period of time it was used in!
I could be wrong and the CORDITE marking was in use from 1904 to 1925, but more research is needed to be sure.
Regards
Alan
That’s interesting Alan that it could have gone through the proof house twice. I wonder why?
Don
May 3, 2020
Offline
Any work on a pressure bearing part and the rifle is supposed to be reproofed.
BASC member
All those proofs are very distracting.
“If you can’t convince them, confuse them”
President Harry S. Truman
1 Guest(s)
