Avatar
Search
Forum Scope




Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
Lost password?
sp_Feed sp_PrintTopic sp_TopicIcon
Grading and valuation of model 1886 in 45-90 WCFwith British proofs
sp_NewTopic Add Topic
Avatar
Troutdale, OR
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2514
Member Since:
June 26, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
1
January 21, 2025 - 10:07 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

This model 1886 was handed down to me from my late father’s collection.  I’m pretty comfortable grading the condition of blued Winchesters, but when it comes to grading CCH Winchesters, not so much.  In this example, the receiver is pretty much silvered out except in protected areas as seen in the photos.  The sling swivels appear to be a period add-on, but very tastefully done in my opinion.  The forward swivel is mounted on the magazine cap and swivels, which I had never seen before.  Rifle also has British proofs on the barrel and receiver, and also appears to have some kind of rack number (19506) on the underside of the receiver near the bottom tang.  The bore is excellent–bright and shiny with slight wear–I would rate a good 8/9 out of 10.  The stocks have some bumps and bruises, but match the overall appearance of a well-used, but cared for rifle.  Anyway, I was wondering what kind of percentage condition this rifle would rate overall and an approximate value considering all features of the gun as it currently sits.  All opinions and evaluations welcome.  Not looking to ever sell, but just wanting to expand my knowledge.

Thanks,

Don

P1090684.JPGImage EnlargerP1090685.JPGImage EnlargerP1090686.JPGImage EnlargerP1090688.JPGImage EnlargerP1090689.JPGImage EnlargerP1090690.JPGImage EnlargerP1090691.JPGImage EnlargerP1090692.JPGImage EnlargerP1090693.JPGImage EnlargerP1090694.JPGImage EnlargerP1090695.JPGImage EnlargerP1090696.JPGImage EnlargerP1090697.JPGImage EnlargerP1090698.JPGImage EnlargerP1090699.JPGImage EnlargerP1090700.JPGImage EnlargerP1090701.JPGImage EnlargerP1090702.JPGImage EnlargerP1090703.JPGImage EnlargerP1090704.JPGImage EnlargerP1090705.JPGImage EnlargerP1090706.JPGImage EnlargerP1090707.JPGImage EnlargerP1090708.JPGImage EnlargerP1090709.JPGImage EnlargerP1090711.JPGImage EnlargerP1090713.JPGImage EnlargerP1090710.JPGImage Enlarger

sp_PlupAttachments Attachments
Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1813
Member Since:
May 23, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
2
January 21, 2025 - 10:40 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

I’ve never seen a front swivel installed in such a manner. It looks like it would be in a difficult position for the sling hook to attach to the sling eye ring. I don’t see how it could be factory and in my opinion detracts some from the overall value. Otherwise, It looks to be a very nice rifle. No idea about the number on the stock. I like the proof marks, but are you certain that they are of British origin?

It is somewhat interesting to me that it has Express Sights but is chambered in 45-90 WCF.  Its a nice Antique Winchester.

Sincerely,

Maverick

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1838
Member Since:
June 4, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
3
January 21, 2025 - 11:12 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

 Your pictures are on a light background and over exposed. You see thru the blue and case, I bet your gun looks a lot nicer in hand than in these pictures. T/R

Avatar
Troutdale, OR
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2514
Member Since:
June 26, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
4
January 21, 2025 - 11:16 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Thanks Maverick.  I figured the aftermarket sling swivels would detract from the overall value, but am thankful they are the period correct style and not a modern-style swivel stud.  I honestly do not know if the proof marks are of British origin, it was just an assumption.  Coincidentally, I picked up a copy of the below book at a gun show a few weeks ago, but have not had a chance to dig into it yet.  Taking a look at it now.

https://www.abebooks.com/9780517538487/Gunmarks-David-Byron-0517538482/plp

Don

Avatar
Troutdale, OR
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2514
Member Since:
June 26, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
5
January 21, 2025 - 11:19 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

TR said
 Your pictures are on a light background and over exposed. You see thru the blue and case, I bet your gun looks a lot nicer in hand than in these pictures. T/R

  

You are correct.  Lighting conditions were not ideal and was fighting the sunlight and reflections.  Would have been better if it were a cloudy day.  Gun does look better in-person than the photos.

Don

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2055
Member Since:
September 22, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
6
January 21, 2025 - 11:40 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Valuation based on the photographs alone, as presented:

Plusses, antique, .45-90, letters with express sights, and tang sight as well.

Detractors:  Round barrel, British proofmarks, sling eyes

Maybe a plus, maybe a minus:  Shotgun butt

$3800 to $4200, may increase with better photographs 

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 385
Member Since:
November 9, 2008
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
7
January 22, 2025 - 1:23 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Nice looking 86, a few things, it letters with Winchester express sights, not the combo front, not bad, but not correct, and no mention, of Lyman tang. The eyelet in the cap hurts. Overall a good looking 86, I’d say 3-4k 

I believe the 45-90 was considered an express cartridge as it was rifled to shoot the lighter bullets

Avatar
Troutdale, OR
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2514
Member Since:
June 26, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
8
January 22, 2025 - 1:23 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

mrcvs said
Valuation based on the photographs alone, as presented:

Plusses, antique, .45-90, letters with express sights, and tang sight as well.

Detractors:  Round barrel, British proofmarks, sling eyes

Maybe a plus, maybe a minus:  Shotgun butt

$3800 to $4200, may increase with better photographs 

  

Thanks Ian.  Appreciate your assessment.  Agree with your plusses and detractors.  I was with dad when he bought this gun from Mr. Blakley (as stated on the Cody letter) about 8-10 years ago.  He only paid $1,500 for it back then–sights and Cody letter included.  He did well.  When I have time I’ll take / post better photos with better light conditions.

Don

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 815
Member Since:
February 17, 2022
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
9
January 22, 2025 - 1:38 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Here I go, I like the configuration including the foreign proofs. Like the letter and that it has a metal SG but. Really like the caliber. What Im not sure of is the Lyman #5 front sight. Seems like it was a replacement. Could be wrong. Sling eyes look totally wrong tho. Definitely not factory as a “fish hook” would not work well there. I would suggest it was a “tiger gun”. 

Avatar
Troutdale, OR
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2514
Member Since:
June 26, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
10
January 22, 2025 - 1:59 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Not having much luck identifying the foreign proofs.  Can’t find any matches in the Gunmarks book.  Anyone here on the forum have any idea?

Don

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 385
Member Since:
November 9, 2008
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
11
January 22, 2025 - 2:04 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Don, I have one similar to yours, minus the express sights IMG_3064.jpegImage Enlarger

sp_PlupAttachments Attachments
Avatar
Troutdale, OR
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2514
Member Since:
June 26, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
12
January 22, 2025 - 2:26 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

cj57 said
Don, I have one similar to yours, minus the express sights IMG_3064.jpegImage Enlarger

  

I like it–thanks for posting.  Does it have British proofs too or no?  Do you have a Cody letter?  If so you should check the order number.  Per my rifle’s letter, it shipped “With 2 other arms per order number 3254.”  Wouldn’t that be a cool coincidence?!

Don

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 385
Member Since:
November 9, 2008
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
13
January 22, 2025 - 2:55 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

I do not have a letter, it doesn’t have proof marks. It’s a little earlier then yours #91065 1894, has early sporting rear and Lyman #4 hunting front 

Avatar
Troutdale, OR
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2514
Member Since:
June 26, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
14
January 22, 2025 - 3:06 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

cj57 said
I do not have a letter, it doesn’t have proof marks. It’s a little earlier then yours #91065 1894, has early sporting rear and Lyman #4 hunting front 

  

Probably not related then.  Would have really been something if they were.

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 385
Member Since:
November 9, 2008
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
15
January 22, 2025 - 3:31 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

deerhunter said

cj57 said

I do not have a letter, it doesn’t have proof marks. It’s a little earlier then yours #91065 1894, has early sporting rear and Lyman #4 hunting front 

  

Probably not related then.  Would have really been something if they were.

  

The round barrel, half magazine and shotgun, but were popular options in Great Britain and India, as well as here. I like them And also the lightweight octagon barrel with half mag (button mag)

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2055
Member Since:
September 22, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
16
January 22, 2025 - 3:54 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

deerhunter said

mrcvs said

Valuation based on the photographs alone, as presented:

Plusses, antique, .45-90, letters with express sights, and tang sight as well.

Detractors:  Round barrel, British proofmarks, sling eyes

Maybe a plus, maybe a minus:  Shotgun butt

$3800 to $4200, may increase with better photographs 

  

Thanks Ian.  Appreciate your assessment.  Agree with your plusses and detractors.  I was with dad when he bought this gun from Mr. Blakley (as stated on the Cody letter) about 8-10 years ago.  He only paid $1,500 for it back then–sights and Cody letter included.  He did well.  When I have time I’ll take / post better photos with better light conditions.

Don  

Slight correction.  I did not realize the sights are not the express sights described in the letter.  And so, this is a detraction as well, but the sights on it aren’t bad.  $3250 to $3750 might be more appropriate, but still a respectable increase over the $1500 paid for it a decade ago or less.

Avatar
Troutdale, OR
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2514
Member Since:
June 26, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
17
January 22, 2025 - 4:34 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

mrcvs said

deerhunter said

mrcvs said

Valuation based on the photographs alone, as presented:

Plusses, antique, .45-90, letters with express sights, and tang sight as well.

Detractors:  Round barrel, British proofmarks, sling eyes

Maybe a plus, maybe a minus:  Shotgun butt

$3800 to $4200, may increase with better photographs 

  

Thanks Ian.  Appreciate your assessment.  Agree with your plusses and detractors.  I was with dad when he bought this gun from Mr. Blakley (as stated on the Cody letter) about 8-10 years ago.  He only paid $1,500 for it back then–sights and Cody letter included.  He did well.  When I have time I’ll take / post better photos with better light conditions.

Don  

Slight correction.  I did not realize the sights are not the express sights described in the letter.  And so, this is a detraction as well, but the sights on it aren’t bad.  $3250 to $3750 might be more appropriate, but still a respectable increase over the $1500 paid for it a decade ago or less.

  

What would be the correct express sights described in the letter?  I may try to hunt them down if I knew exactly what they look like.

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1813
Member Since:
May 23, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
18
January 22, 2025 - 4:44 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

mrcvs said Slight correction.  I did not realize the sights are not the express sights described in the letter. 

  I’m no sight expert, but the rear barrel sight looks like a ’34B’ sight to me and was the standard rear barrel sight for Model 86s chambered in 50-100-450 and 50-110 Express calibers. So what about it doesn’t make the rear sight an Express Sight?

I don’t consider the 45-90 WCF an Express caliber, hence my comment about it being in said caliber and lettering with Express Sights. 

Sincerely,

Maverick

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 385
Member Since:
November 9, 2008
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
19
January 22, 2025 - 4:55 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

The rear is the correct express sight, the front combination site is incorrect. I didn’t say the rear wasn’t an express in my comment #7

IMG_8256.jpegImage Enlarger

sp_PlupAttachments Attachments
Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2055
Member Since:
September 22, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
20
January 22, 2025 - 5:13 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

cj57 said
Nice looking 86, a few things, it letters with Winchester express sights, not the combo front, not bad, but not correct, and no mention, of Lyman tang. The eyelet in the cap hurts. Overall a good looking 86, I’d say 3-4k 

I believe the 45-90 was considered an express cartridge as it was rifled to shoot the lighter bullets  

I misinterpreted this post.  Yes, it doesn’t quite match the letter but the rear express sight but the front sight does not letter and so this detracts to some degree.  But it letters with Express sightS and not just as an Express sight.  So what should the front sight be then? Presumably the 50 cent front sight in the diagram.from Post # 19–which isn’t on the rifle.  And my valuation included a bit extra for the tang sight which it’s assumed was added later as it’s not in the letter.

Forum Timezone: UTC 0
Most Users Ever Online: 4623
Currently Online: Anthony, tsbccut, Steven Gabrielli, Heather Martin
Guest(s) 29
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
clarence: 7119
TXGunNut: 5929
Chuck: 5348
steve004: 4874
1873man: 4568
Big Larry: 2475
twobit: 2417
mrcvs: 2055
TR: 1838
Forum Stats:
Groups: 1
Forums: 18
Topics: 14060
Posts: 124366

 

Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 1977
Members: 9595
Moderators: 4
Admins: 3
Navigation