Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
Unless my eyes are playing tricks on me, the forearm looks like gumwood but the buttstock looks like walnut. That’s evidence of a wood swap outside of the factory–am I correct? Would be a very nice/desirable carbine in a great caliber otherwise.
https://wardscollectibles.com/viewitem.php?item=4048
Don
Don,
Both stocks look like Gumwood to me. The fit of the butt stock is factory work.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Thanks Bert. The buttstock has more figure/coarse grain than other gumwood stocks I’ve seen. Most are pretty beat up as well.
Don
deerhunter said
Thanks Bert. The buttstock has more figure/coarse grain than other gumwood stocks I’ve seen. Most are pretty beat up as well.Don
That carbine would look good in my safe along with my 38-55 SRC with Gumwood stocks. Big Larry
Was the wood on standard guns cut from the same piece of wood like the special order stocks?
Chuck said
Was the wood on standard guns cut from the same piece of wood like the special order stocks?
I don not believe that your question can be answered with any certainty, but if I had to choose between “yes” or “no”, I would say that most of the time it was “yes”.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
The stocks on this carbine look matching to me. On the general topic, it seems on 94 carbines, I’ve seen examples where the stocks have been mismatched at the factory (e.g. walnut buttstock, gumwood forend). I have the vague memory of seeing this documented somewhere.
steve004 said
The stocks on this carbine look matching to me. On the general topic, it seems on 94 carbines, I’ve seen examples where the stocks have been mismatched at the factory (e.g. walnut buttstock, gumwood forend). I have the vague memory of seeing this documented somewhere.
Steve,
Winchester did not mis-match the stocks on any model. If you find a Model 1894 Carbine with a Walnut & Gumwood combination of stocks, somebody (other than Winchester) swapped one of the stocks. I suspect that any written documentation to the contrary was somebody trying to explain away mis-matched wood on a gun they were trying to sell.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert H. said
Steve,
Winchester did not mis-match the stocks on any model. If you find a Model 1894 Carbine with a Walnut & Gumwood combination of stocks, somebody (other than Winchester) swapped one of the stocks. I suspect that any written documentation to the contrary was somebody trying to explain away mis-matched wood on a gun they were trying to sell.
This has gnawed at me today. I ended up finding the reference I was thinking of. On page 115 of Madis’ The Winchester Handbook, he shows a M1892 SRC #154317. He states, “Some carbines in the 1892 and 1894 have stocks and forends of gumwood, in an attempt to reduce weight and costs. This carbine, as found with a few others, has a gumwood stock and a walnut forend. Mixed woods will be seen on a few other 92 and 94 carbines.”
Not all references and authorities are correct.
I would find it hard to believe that a Winchester would have a combination of stocks and forearms being walnut and gumwood unless after market modified.
mrcvs said
Not all references and authorities are correct.
You’ve got that right on a number of fronts, everyone is fallible. Is mixed wood a possibility, why not, but maybe not that likely. The time honored lesson when it comes to Winchester is to “never say never”.
1892takedown @sbcglobal.net ......NRA Endowment Life Member.....WACA Member
"God is great.....beer is good.....and people are crazy"... Billy Currington
1892takedown said
mrcvs said
Not all references and authorities are correct.You’ve got that right on a number of fronts, everyone is fallible. Is mixed wood a possibility, why not, but maybe not that likely. The time honored lesson when it comes to Winchester is to “never say never”.
There was a huge number of 1892/92 and 1894/94 made by Winchester back in the day – the claim was a small number were sent out this way.
Again, any Model 1892 or 1894 Carbine with mis-matched wood should be considered an aftermarket altered gun. Next to swapped (upgraded) sights, swapped stocks are the next most common event to encounter. I have surveyed several thousand Model 1894 SRCs with gumwood stocks, and not a single one with mixed wood that looked like it was factory original.
In regards to the Model 1892 with S/N 154317, it should have Walnut stocks based on its date of manufacture (in the year 1900). Winchester did not begin using Gumwood until 1906.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert H. said
Again, any Model 1892 or 1894 Carbine with mis-matched wood should be considered an aftermarket altered gun. Next to swapped (upgraded) sights, swapped stocks are the next most common event to encounter. I have surveyed several thousand Model 1894 SRCs with gumwood stocks, and not a single one with mixed wood that looked like it was factory original.
In regards to the Model 1892 with S/N 154317, it should have Walnut stocks based on its date of manufacture (in the year 1900). Winchester did not begin using Gumwood until 1906.
Bert – I can’t disagree with your conclusion.
Matt74 said
That’s a good looking carbine.Matt
Particularly appealing given it is a .38-55.
The stock and forearm wood looks fine to me, I’d be more concerned about the barrel and mag blueing. Doesn’t look 95% and 90% to me from the photos.
But then Ward’s photos typically leave a lot to be desired.
Winchester Model 1873 44-40 circa 1886
Bert H. said
I don not believe that your question can be answered with any certainty, but if I had to choose between “yes” or “no”, I would say that most of the time it was “yes”.
I believe that the wood was hand selected and not necessarily from the same piece of wood.
Kevin Jones said
The stock and forearm wood looks fine to me, I’d be more concerned about the barrel and mag blueing. Doesn’t look 95% and 90% to me from the photos.But then Ward’s photos typically leave a lot to be desired.
I don’t like percentages. Each have their own opinions. This is a lightly used gun and I think their estimate is a little high for a non antique.
1 Guest(s)
