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
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
WACA #8783 - Checkout my Reloading Tool Survey!
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-research-surveys/winchester-reloading-tool-survey/
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
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
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
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
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
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”.
cj57 said
Don, I have one similar to yours, minus the express sights
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
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)
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.
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.
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
WACA #8783 - Checkout my Reloading Tool Survey!
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-research-surveys/winchester-reloading-tool-survey/
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 3-4kI 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.
1 Guest(s)
