Again, in this case, the year of manufacture (i.e. being off by one year) is not relevant.  As was stated by someone else, old Winchesters are not old cars (where I am aware the year is very relevant).  The main scenario where the year is relevant is when it determines antique status.  Actually, quite a few Winchesters are sold that are advertised as antique status, when they’re really not.  This is largely because some of the reference books out there list incorrect manufacture dates for many Winchesters.  Antique status usually has a significant impact on value. 

With regard to my collection (which is insured), my insurer has no interest in the year my Winchesters were made.  The exception would be those that have antique status as they can be assessed at a higher value.  

As nearly everyone else here has said, the difference between 1906 and 1907 is a non- issue.  In other words, so what?  Others here have tried to explain to you that different reference books give different dates.  Apparently you don’t understand that or don’t want to except it.  You seem to want to compare this with buying old mussel cars.  Vintage cars and vintage  Winchesters are NOT the same thing.  If it has a good bore, I think you bought a nice shooter grade carbine for a reasonable price.  The fact that he has misplaced the saddle ring is a non-issue as far as I’m concerned.  Any Winchester saddle ring will do just fine.  If it happens to be a reproduction, buy it and remove the blued finish.  It will match the rest of the carbine and no one will care.  

Okay, “The year dosen’t matter” at least not in this case.  Remember one thing, no one here called you a “dummy”.  You made that call yourself.  Truth is, I doubt that anyone here thought you were a dummy.  But personally, I  think you’re way off the mark by thinking the seller cheated you, by not being correct on the date.

I’m sorry this transaction has been difficult for you, Eddie. I don’t feel the seller intentionally misrepresented the 1892 but that does happen. One of the principles of gun collecting is caveat emptor, or buyer beware. Even honest sellers make mistakes or simply don’t have the knowledge a serious collector may have. I’ve bought Winchesters that were not what I thought they were. Usually it was my fault, sometimes it wasn’t. I’ve learned from those mistakes. We’ve all made them. Making mistakes doesn’t make you a dummy, it proves you’re human. In any case it’s a likely a solid shooter and we all need those in our stables. Some of us (OK, ME!) probably have a few too many but it’s hard to beat taking an old Winchester to the range or the field knowing you won’t hurt the value. OTOH I’ve bought guns I wasn’t sure about and the seller was even more in the dark than I was. Some of those have turned out quite well and if you let this transaction sour you I can guarantee you’ll miss the opportunity collectors study reference books for and dream about. 

Mike

Eddie,

You come across as a raving lunatic.  Why should 1906 vs 1907 really matter?  It looks like you are looking for any excuse to cancel the sale, and that is obvious.

With regards to ONE year’s difference, unless there are specific changes in a model, which there were not with regards to the Model 1892 from 1906 to 1907, one should only be concerned if a Winchester is pre 1899 or not, for antique status, or if it is pre 1964 or not, when there were significant changes to the quality of production.  As the Model 1892 was discontinued long before then, this would not even be applicable.

first off everyone makes mistake when learning, I can tell you that. Second I don’t think your allowing yourself to hear what everyone that HAS experience is trying to tell you….. there is no difference in this rifle weather it’s 06 or 07, now if it was advertised as an 06 and it was a 66, there is a difference the seller might have used a book which has information that was correct at the time of print, but he hasn’t purchased the new book with more accurate and proven info- I just thought I take a stab at trying to help you see you didn’t get bamboozled the way you think you did. Either way I hope you take what the other collectors are trying to tell you

I haven’t read this entire Thread and don’t want to! My words here are NOT legal advice and apply only to a hypothetical person with ‘perhaps’ similar circumstances to our seller and buyer here! References to “buyer” and “seller” terms herein are thus HYPOTHETICAL ONLY.

First, in considering principles of law, we’re not considering such as “soil mechanics” where such as the Leaning Tower of Pizza results in modern building context. Big stakes controversies are another world. Here KISS, literally practical law application in “keep it simple stupid” is applicable to all of us and Courts which tend to be unimpressed with elaborate legal theories. So just classic principles of general law.

Where a seller makes certain representations in a sale, the buyer is entitled to rely. The question of “materiality” concerning the matter doesn’t descend to issues of “equivalency”. Rather, where the seller offers a specific representation, the fact of him/her choosing to mention, presumptively it is “relevant”! The buyer should not be required to ‘defend’ any such issue of “relevance.” The fact that it might not be relevant to another person, is not material nor defense. Also, offhand gab one matter, listing in context of “sale inducement”, quite another. The old saying “put it in writing” where sale literature, charged against the seller’s interests!

Next, where it is possible from available information to determine, or put into question, a particular seller assertion, the buyer is not required to investigate. He may reasonably rely on seller representation! If a buyer does factually recognize there may be some seller error, the seller may be able to charge the buyer with “inquiry notice”, a ‘red flag’ term where the seller may be able to defend, charging buyer reasonable responsibility to “inquire”. If a 23 Buick is being sold and a Playboy centerfold inadvertently substituted in the photos, there may well be an “inquiry notice” case there. Yet “nuances” typically fall to the seller’s liability.

The ultimate question is of party seller or party buyer, who should equitably be liable for a misrepresentation. For most of us, a seller who makes a representation is expected to stand behind it. The fact of a nitpicking buyer, or even one who might be said to be raising the issue in terms of “buyer’s remorse”; generally also immaterial. Seller’s mistake also opening such doors and his negligence/inadvertence/whatever; still creating the circumstance. Here, again, only ‘general principles of law’ among the innumerable nuances of buyer/seller transaction relationships.

Well, this isn’t a “Contract law” clase nor intended! But such law does rely heavily upon common sense. And with that message, the practical matter of such as a “winnable” legal case, inevitably… The issue of ‘to collect!’ If parties are in different States, “diversity of jurisdiction & possible conflicts of laws”, etc. Typically Federal District Court jurisdiction… Oh my! Totally impractical unless very well healed plaintiff and him/her totally “pi**ed”!

The realistic necessity of buyer-seller “workout” or… Punt!
NEITHER LEGAL ADVICE OFFERED, NOR TO BE TAKEN PLEASE!
Best & stay safe!
John

eddie_albert said
Ouch!   I came here for a little technical advice about a saddle ring now I’m a raving lunatic.  Kinda feels like I’m in a conversation with my ex-wife whom I affectionately call “the beast”.   

As Joe Friday would say, “ Just the facts Ma’am”  

Regarding the saddle ring, it seems that you think the original rings were solid pieces and had to be cut to be removed.  They are not solid and can be opened and removed and reinstalled.  It may be difficult to get them to close tightly but there’s probably a trick to doing that. 

The thread has been interesting.