Avatar

Please consider registering
guest

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —






— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters




sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_Print sp_TopicIcon
Mis-matched wood on this 1894 SRC?
May 6, 2021
4:48 pm
Avatar
Troutdale, OR
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1169
Member Since:
June 26, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall 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

May 6, 2021
4:57 pm
Avatar
Kingston, WA
Forum Posts: 11776
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Don,

Both stocks look like Gumwood to me.  The fit of the butt stock is factory work.

WACA 6571L, Historian & Board of Director Member
High-walls-1-002-C-reduced2.jpg

May 6, 2021
7:00 pm
Avatar
Troutdale, OR
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1169
Member Since:
June 26, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Thanks Bert.  The buttstock has more figure/coarse grain than other gumwood stocks I’ve seen.  Most are pretty beat up as well.

Don

May 6, 2021
9:51 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1629
Member Since:
December 31, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

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

May 7, 2021
5:14 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2727
Member Since:
March 31, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Was the wood on standard guns cut from the same piece of wood like the special order stocks?

May 7, 2021
6:32 pm
Avatar
Kingston, WA
Forum Posts: 11776
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

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 6571L, Historian & Board of Director Member
High-walls-1-002-C-reduced2.jpg

May 8, 2021
3:46 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2363
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

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.  

May 8, 2021
5:26 pm
Avatar
Kingston, WA
Forum Posts: 11776
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

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 6571L, Historian & Board of Director Member
High-walls-1-002-C-reduced2.jpg

May 8, 2021
7:57 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2363
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

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.”

May 8, 2021
10:57 pm
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 970
Member Since:
September 22, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

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.

May 9, 2021
12:00 am
Avatar
South Texas
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1092
Member Since:
March 20, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

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”. 

DSC_0245-Copy-3.JPG1892takedown @sbcglobal.net ......NRA Endowment Life Member.....WACA Member

"God is great.....beer is good.....and people are crazy"... Billy Currington

May 9, 2021
12:48 am
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2363
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

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.  

May 9, 2021
2:06 am
Avatar
Kingston, WA
Forum Posts: 11776
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

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 6571L, Historian & Board of Director Member
High-walls-1-002-C-reduced2.jpg

May 9, 2021
2:09 am
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2363
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

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.  

May 10, 2021
12:03 am
Avatar
Aylmer, Quebec, Canada
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 894
Member Since:
March 23, 2007
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

That’s a good looking carbine.

Matt

May 10, 2021
12:09 am
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2363
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Matt74 said
That’s a good looking carbine.

Matt  

Particularly appealing given it is a .38-55.

May 10, 2021
12:18 am
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 485
Member Since:
March 21, 2016
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

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. 

IMG_0805-Copy-Copy-Copy.JPG

Winchester Model 1873 44-40 circa 1886

May 10, 2021
12:55 am
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2727
Member Since:
March 31, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

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.

May 10, 2021
12:57 am
Avatar
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2727
Member Since:
March 31, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

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.

Forum Timezone: UTC 0

Most Users Ever Online: 628

Currently Online: Big Mac
61 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)


Forum Stats:

Groups: 1

Forums: 16

Topics: 9057

Posts: 78041


Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 1216

Members: 10562

Moderators: 4

Admins: 3


Top Posters:

1873man: 4897

TXGunNut: 3278

clarence: 3150

Chuck: 2727

twobit: 2697

steve004: 2363

Maverick: 1774

Big Larry: 1629

JWA: 1605

RickC: 1336