Log In
April 15, 2005
Online
deerhunter said
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
Can you post a larger (and clearer) picture of the foreign proof marks? I have several different reference books that cover almost every foreign proof mark.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
June 26, 2013
Offline
mrcvs said
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.
Thanks guys, that makes sense. I’ll be looking for an express front sight like the one in cj57’s post #19.
Don
May 23, 2009
Offline
mrcvs said 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.
The 23C, which looks like what is pictured in post #19, was the standard front sight form the 86 chambered in 50-100-450 & 50-110 Express calibers.
All that said, if memory serves and I recall correctly, I’ve seen several Winchesters in Express calibers that had a Beaches Folding front sight while also having British proofs. But I’m not sure for certain if they were on the Model 1876 or Model 1886.
I personally wouldn’t get in much of a huge hurry to take the sights off of it. Especially if they don’t appear to have ever been removed before.
Sincerely,
Maverick
WACA #8783 - Checkout my Reloading Tool Survey!
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-research-surveys/winchester-reloading-tool-survey/
June 26, 2013
Offline
Bert H. said
deerhunter said
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
Can you post a larger (and clearer) picture of the foreign proof marks? I have several different reference books that cover almost every foreign proof mark.
Bert
Hi Bert,
Those marks are so small that it was a bit of a challenge, especially with artificial light (dark outside now). Anyway, these are about the best I could do. I appreciate you taking a look and comparing to your reference books. The last photo looks about the best.
Thanks,
Don
June 26, 2013
Offline
Maverick said
mrcvs said 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.
The 23C, which looks like what is pictured in post #19, was the standard front sight form the 86 chambered in 50-100-450 & 50-110 Express calibers.
All that said, if memory serves and I recall correctly, I’ve seen several Winchesters in Express calibers that had a Beaches Folding front sight while also having British proofs. But I’m not sure for certain if they were on the Model 1876 or Model 1886.
I personally wouldn’t get in much of a huge hurry to take the sights off of it. Especially if they don’t appear to have ever been removed before.
Sincerely,
Maverick
You have a good point, might be best just to leave as-is. Same as it was when it was in dad’s hands. To me, swapped sights are just a minor alteration that in many cases, can be remedied if one so desires. Just depends on the rarity of the sight I suppose.
Don
December 9, 2002
Offline
Don,
Doesn’t look like British proof marks to me. With the crossed swords, and the crown on top, pointing towards the muzzle end. The “V”, at the bottom, under the crossed swords, looks to me to possibly be from, Liege Belgium. At least the receiver proof stamp , and the barrel proof stamp, right of the 52 stamp, looks the same to me, and what I’m referring to.
My two cents worth anyway.
Anthony
September 22, 2011
Offline
This is still a nice rifle, but can you post photographs in natural lighting on an overcast day so we can see what the case colouring and bluing really look like, as my valuations were based on what it looks like now with a bit of a bump as it’s assumed bluing and case colouring are washed out due to sunlight. However, when I looked at the sights more closely last evening, the barrel has less bluing and more patina than I originally thought, which could be real or from the sunlight.
While the front sight doesn’t match the letter and it hurts this rifle as far as valuation a bit, it’s obviously been there a very long time and I would be inclined just to leave it alone, since it’s not the only problem with this rifle. And I hate to use the word “problem” here, better with the word detractors, these being sling swivel eyes, proofmarks, and possible true condition.
November 20, 2019
Offline
The proof marks are british, Birmingham proof house 1887 tp 1896 or 1904.
the 52 means 52 gauge, which translates into .45 caliber, crossed lances with V and Crown.
I will try ton import a copy of my file on British proof marks (don’t hold your breath… )
Gilles
November 20, 2019
Offline
June 26, 2013
Offline
mrcvs said
This is still a nice rifle, but can you post photographs in natural lighting on an overcast day so we can see what the case colouring and bluing really look like, as my valuations were based on what it looks like now with a bit of a bump as it’s assumed bluing and case colouring are washed out due to sunlight. However, when I looked at the sights more closely last evening, the barrel has less bluing and more patina than I originally thought, which could be real or from the sunlight.While the front sight doesn’t match the letter and it hurts this rifle as far as valuation a bit, it’s obviously been there a very long time and I would be inclined just to leave it alone, since it’s not the only problem with this rifle. And I hate to use the word “problem” here, better with the word detractors, these being sling swivel eyes, proofmarks, and possible true condition.
Hi Ian,
Took some more photos this morning and look a bit better than the previous ones. The ones taken on the concrete turned out the best. I normally don’t curse the sun, but…
June 26, 2013
Offline
freebird1968 said
Wow–thanks Gilles! I think you are spot-on. Took me a few minutes looking at your chart and comparing to my photo side-by-side. I totally see the match after rotating the below photo to the right 90 degrees.
April 15, 2005
Online
freebird1968 said
Gilles beat me to it.
I have a copy of “The Standard Directory of Proof Marks” by Gerhard Wirnsberger. It contains information for all of the European countries and the associated proof marks.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
June 26, 2013
Offline
Bert H. said
freebird1968 said
Gilles beat me to it.
I have a copy of “The Standard Directory of Proof Marks” by Gerhard Wirnsberger. It contains information for all of the European countries and the associated proof marks.
Bert
Looks like a great reference book and reasonably priced as well. Might need to pick up a copy!
https://www.abebooks.com/Standard-Directory-Proof-Marks-Wirnsberger-Gerhard/31797596937/bd
Don
June 4, 2017
Offline
Like your pictures and they show a gun of higher value, maybe $6,000.T/R
April 15, 2005
Online
deerhunter said
Bert H. said
freebird1968 said
Gilles beat me to it.
I have a copy of “The Standard Directory of Proof Marks” by Gerhard Wirnsberger. It contains information for all of the European countries and the associated proof marks.
Bert
Looks like a great reference book and reasonably priced as well. Might need to pick up a copy!
https://www.abebooks.com/Standard-Directory-Proof-Marks-Wirnsberger-Gerhard/31797596937/bd
Don
You can never have too many reference books in the library… my library has become quite large over the years, and at current prices, worth a substantial sum of $$$$ 
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
November 9, 2008
Offline
Those pics are much better! Your dad knew how to pick-em, I liked it with the first pics.
December 9, 2002
Offline
Gilles,
Nice job as I was incorrect on my assumption, and I like the chart you posted.
Anthony
June 26, 2013
Offline
TR said
Like your pictures and they show a gun of higher value, maybe $6,000.T/R
Thanks Tom! I sense Dad grinning from ear-to-ear right now. He sure loved his Winchesters and I’m honored to be the next caretaker. Brings a joyful tear to my eye. My son will be next in line when the time comes for me to meet up with dad at that perpetual gun show in the sky.
Don
September 22, 2011
Offline
deerhunter said
mrcvs said
This is still a nice rifle, but can you post photographs in natural lighting on an overcast day so we can see what the case colouring and bluing really look like, as my valuations were based on what it looks like now with a bit of a bump as it’s assumed bluing and case colouring are washed out due to sunlight. However, when I looked at the sights more closely last evening, the barrel has less bluing and more patina than I originally thought, which could be real or from the sunlight.
While the front sight doesn’t match the letter and it hurts this rifle as far as valuation a bit, it’s obviously been there a very long time and I would be inclined just to leave it alone, since it’s not the only problem with this rifle. And I hate to use the word “problem” here, better with the word detractors, these being sling swivel eyes, proofmarks, and possible true condition.
Hi Ian,
Took some more photos this morning and look a bit better than the previous ones. The ones taken on the concrete turned out the best. I normally don’t curse the sun, but…
MUCH better photographs. I now stand more by my first valuation before I downgraded due to the sights. Yes, it’s not a high condition rifle, but not that bad, either. I think $3800 to $4200 seems right. TR valued it at $6000. That seems a bit high based on condition and the sling swivel eyes.
But I really like the British proofed rifles with round barrels, button magazines, and shotgun butts with the steel buttplate. Some others might not care for that nearly as much, and others might like this as much as I do.
June 26, 2013
Offline
mrcvs said
deerhunter said
mrcvs said
This is still a nice rifle, but can you post photographs in natural lighting on an overcast day so we can see what the case colouring and bluing really look like, as my valuations were based on what it looks like now with a bit of a bump as it’s assumed bluing and case colouring are washed out due to sunlight. However, when I looked at the sights more closely last evening, the barrel has less bluing and more patina than I originally thought, which could be real or from the sunlight.
While the front sight doesn’t match the letter and it hurts this rifle as far as valuation a bit, it’s obviously been there a very long time and I would be inclined just to leave it alone, since it’s not the only problem with this rifle. And I hate to use the word “problem” here, better with the word detractors, these being sling swivel eyes, proofmarks, and possible true condition.
Hi Ian,
Took some more photos this morning and look a bit better than the previous ones. The ones taken on the concrete turned out the best. I normally don’t curse the sun, but…
MUCH better photographs. I now stand more by my first valuation before I downgraded due to the sights. Yes, it’s not a high condition rifle, but not that bad, either. I think $3800 to $4200 seems right. TR valued it at $6000. That seems a bit high based on condition and the sling swivel eyes.
But I really like the British proofed rifles with round barrels, button magazines, and shotgun butts with the steel buttplate. Some others might not care for that nearly as much, and others might like this as much as I do.
Thanks for your assessment as well Ian. I never intend on selling this rifle since it belonged to my Dad, so overall value is secondary. It’s just icing on the cake that it has a substantial value to it. It’s cool that it’s “been there and done that” since the vast majority of my collection are “safe-queens.” Most of my other Winchesters don’t have near the stories this one could tell–I swear those are tiger scratches on the butt-stock… 
Don
1 Guest(s)
