Collectors Firearns says it has, but I’m thinking not.
https://www.collectorsfirearms.com/products/159524-winchester-1892-44-40-win-r30741.html
Don
I think that maybe they’re possibly looking at Madis DOMs, which may put the 92 earlier than 1906. But on the WACA website when you enter the serial the DOM is 1906, which the barrel has both the proof mark on the barrel and receiver. On the barrels its ahead of the rear sight, but makes sense because its a Carbine. So I’d venture its the original barrel and the folks at Collectors are confused on how the proof marks work or were implemented.
I’d buy it, but not at that price. The condition doesn’t warrant it and the Saddle Ring has been removed and the holes filled with screws. I’d be concerned about the buttstock being original as well.
Is the gun in the letterable range? That may help clear up a lot.
Sincerely,
Maverick
WACA #8783 - Checkout my Reloading Tool Survey!
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-research-surveys/winchester-reloading-tool-survey/
Hello all,
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder! The barrel is most likely original to the gun. There was a large batch of identical, sans butt stock, of carbines made at this time and they are all marked exactly like this one. SN 335407 was built in 38 WCF, half mag, and has a shotgun butt with a hard rubber plate on it.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
twobit said
Hello all,Beauty is in the eye of the beholder! The barrel is most likely original to the gun. There was a large batch of identical, sans butt stock, of carbines made at this time and they are all marked exactly like this one. SN 335407 was built in 38 WCF, half mag, and has a shotgun butt with a hard rubber plate on it.
Michael
Michael – it’s great to have someone who knows more than me weigh-in. Very interesting and informative.
1 Guest(s)