Log In
September 22, 2011
Offline
This should be a good learning exercise as I’m not confident in my answer. Spotted on a Winchester 1894 rifle full magazine, takedown, in .30WCF, octagon barrel, crescent butt, looks much earlier than what was typically manufactured by 1927. Lettering on the barrel is correct for the era.
1. All original, especially sine markings on barrel are correct for the era. Different wear patterns, receiver vs forearm takedown metal.
2. Same as above, but reblued forearm metal. Too much of a contrast between forearm metal and frame.
3. Mismatched firearm. Fit isn’t particularly great to begin with.
April 15, 2005
Offline
What is the serial number on this rifle? I would like to see pictures showing the rest of the rifle.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
April 30, 2023
Offline
I’m also curious for Bert’s and others’ reply, I see he’s reading this right now, but I’ve seen a lot of takedowns from the 1920s where the halves don’t quite “match” and would consider it normal….same for non takedowns too of that era. That “flakey” bluing is pretty common too.
September 22, 2011
Offline
Bert H. said
What is the serial number on this rifle? I would like to see pictures showing the rest of the rifle.
Here’s the best I could do. Not my rifle, spotted at a gun show. Magazine band looked darker than the magazine but may be correct.
September 22, 2011
Offline
Jeremy P said
I’m also curious for Bert’s and others’ reply, I see he’s reading this right now, but I’ve seen a lot of takedowns from the 1920s where the halves don’t quite “match” and would consider it normal….same for non takedowns too of that era. That “flakey” bluing is pretty common too.
It very well may be normal and correct, but the contrast is striking.
August 27, 2014
Offline
All original
“If you can’t convince them, confuse them”
President Harry S. Truman
September 22, 2011
Offline
So is the verdict all original?
November 19, 2006
Offline
I’ll weigh-in and say the blue on the Evans looks all original 
September 22, 2011
Offline
steve004 said
I’ll weigh-in and say the blue on the Evans looks all original
The Evans was astounding! If there was anything to take home on that table (and there was), that was it! I thought it a little pricy in the mid four figures. $5500 or $5750 I think.
September 22, 2011
Offline
What ended up being the general consensus with regards to this rifle?
I value further input, especially Bert’s.
The barrel is appropriate for the age of the rifle. It doesn’t rule out a correct replacement, but this seems unlikely. I would expect a tighter fit amongst these components, but I still think it’s not a mated rifle.
Scratches on the forearm iron not on the adjacent frame suggest these weren’t originally paired together, but I think it’s really a case where these scratches mostly occurred when in a disassembled state.
The contrast between the frame and forearmi iron tells me this really has to be reblued, although by 1927 bluing did look more black than earlier decades, as this one surely is.
November 7, 2015
Offline
Original or not it’s a gun that will require an explanation or theorizing and I prefer a gun that speaks for itself.
Mike
April 15, 2005
Offline
mrcvs said
What ended up being the general consensus with regards to this rifle?I value further input, especially Bert’s.
The barrel is appropriate for the age of the rifle. It doesn’t rule out a correct replacement, but this seems unlikely. I would expect a tighter fit amongst these components, but I still think it’s not a mated rifle.
Scratches on the forearm iron not on the adjacent frame suggest these weren’t originally paired together, but I think it’s really a case where these scratches mostly occurred when in a disassembled state.
The contrast between the frame and forearmi iron tells me this really has to be reblued, although by 1927 bluing did look more black than earlier decades, as this one surely is.
The pictures do not provide me with enough detail to make a definitive conclusion about the legitimacy of that rifle. It is something that I would need to have in my hands to evaluate it accurately.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
March 20, 2010
Offline
Definitely questionable. As others have mentioned, more photos would be better. The blue on the TD ring appears original and has typical blue flaking pattern, whereas the receiver does not have the corresponding condition of the TD ring. Most TD examples Ive seen in this SN range, the blue flaking pattern/coverage is consistent on the frame and TD ring, but with the TD rings seem to retaining blue longer in some cases. The scratches on the right side of the TD ring and receiver appear to match up as several carry over from TD ring to frame. Not sure I like the fit of the TD ring against the receiver, and on each side of the receiver face, there are dents in the edge of the frame with no corresponding dent or mar on the TD ring (could have happened if disassembled perhaps. Looks like the wood has an old coat of varnish.
1892takedown @sbcglobal.net ......NRA Endowment Life Member.....WACA Member
"God is great.....beer is good.....and people are crazy"... Billy Currington
1 Guest(s)
