Log In
January 3, 2014
Offline
Hey All,
Thanks for al the help on the 55, have a ’94 that I could use help on.
Need a starting price, this rifle is for sale.
Again, thanks in advance for your input. It is most welcome.
Kenny
July 8, 2012
Offline
Hello Kenny,
Nice rifle, and interesting rear sight. Do you have a Cody letter for it?
Al
January 3, 2014
Offline
tionesta1 said
Hello Kenny,Nice rifle, and interesting rear sight. Do you have a Cody letter for it?
Al
Hi Al,
Yes, I have a letter.
Kenny
June 26, 2013
Offline
Kenny Blacksmith said
Hi Al,
Yes, I have a letter.
Kenny
Any chance you can post a copy if the letter? In addition to the unusual rear sight, the barrel stamps are different than any I’ve seen before (the single line patent date in particular).
Don
January 3, 2014
Offline
July 8, 2012
Offline
Kenny Blacksmith said
thanks Kenny, I agree with Don concerning the barrel stamps. From what I can make out from your picture, it looks like it’s a type 1A barrel address which were used in the earlier model 1894’s up to serial number 150,000 according to Robert Rennebergs book on the model 1894. These didn’t have the patent date, because the early rifles had the patent date on the upper tang. Your upper tang markings look correct for the serial number range and do not have the patent date, so it’s my opinion that they pulled an older barrel and needed to stamp the patent date on it somewhere. Can you post a better picture of the upper barrel stamp?
Al
January 3, 2014
Offline
Hope this helps.
June 26, 2013
Offline
Very nice and interesting rifle and in a great caliber. I agree with Al on his assessment of the barrel markings. Interesting rear sight too–I’ve never seen one like that on an 1894 before. How wide is the dovetail cut for that rear sight?
Don
July 8, 2012
Offline
Kenny,
Yes the pictures help. Maybe someone else will be along with their theory on the early barrel address, and out of the ordinary patent date, but like I said before, I think Winchester just used this earlier barrel. Stamped a patent date, and proof marks on it and assembled the gun. I have a model 1892 carbine with the same type of out of the ordinary patent date.
As for the sight, I haven’t seen one like it before on a model 1894. Again, maybe others will be along with some ideas. I know you are after an estimated value. I’d like to see what others have to say concerning the barrel address, patent date, and rear sight.
Al
January 3, 2014
Offline
Thank you Sir, your input is most welcome.
November 1, 2013
Offline
I’ve seen that 2-leaf express sight before, can’t remember where, but it’s not a catalogued Winchester sight as far as I can find; British? No rub mark left by the elevator of an ordinary sporting sight, suggesting it’s original to barrel. Very puzzling.
December 21, 2006
Offline
See p. m.
W.A.C.A. life member, Marlin Collectors Assn. charter and life member, C,S.S.A. member and general gun nut.
March 23, 2007
Offline
Al,
I would tend to agree with the assessment on the barrel and address. However, as to the sight being original, that is hard to say. I do see there is a notch in the barrel at both the front and rear of the sight, that someone notched trying to centre the sight. I’ve seen that done many times over the years when people swap out rear sights on rifles, and try to line it up. Can’t say it is original though, or not, may never know. Replaced rear sights aren’t too big a deal, except in this case where maybe the rear dovetail has been possibly widened. Yes, I think I have seen that sight on British guns. I have also seen a couple other deluxe 25-35 ELW TD rifles a few years ago, HRSB, etc, and both I forgot I recall, had British proofs. This gun doesn’t though. Very nice, interesting rifle.
Matt
May 24, 2012
Offline
Please send me a PM as well.
Thanks,
James
January 27, 1992
Offline
Regarding the barrel stamp in front of barrel sight: I have a 25-35 take down short rifle, serial #307292 that has the same stamp. Rifle letters. Roger
January 3, 2014
Offline
rogertherelic said
Regarding the barrel stamp in front of barrel sight: I have a 25-35 take down short rifle, serial #307292 that has the same stamp. Rifle letters. Roger
Fantastic Carbine, love that configuration !
Thanks for the help.
Kenny B.
March 20, 2009
Offline
tionesta1 said
Kenny,Yes the pictures help. Maybe someone else will be along with their theory on the early barrel address, and out of the ordinary patent date, but like I said before, I think Winchester just used this earlier barrel. Stamped a patent date, and proof marks on it and assembled the gun. I have a model 1892 carbine with the same type of out of the ordinary patent date.
As for the sight, I haven’t seen one like it before on a model 1894. Again, maybe others will be along with some ideas. I know you are after an estimated value. I’d like to see what others have to say concerning the barrel address, patent date, and rear sight.
Al
I have cataloged a small number of Model 1892 rifles which have a similar “unique” patent date stamped on the barrel. Most of these occur on rifles manufactured during 1904 and 1905 and have Style 2 tang stamps with no patent date on them. Additionally, they have barrels with earlier style barrel address stamps which do not have the Oct 1884 patent date included in the stamp. Therefore, Winchester inserted the unique patent stamp onto the barrel. So far I have only come across 12 Model 1892 rifles marked like this.
I suspect these are a case of older barrel being used in the assembly of a later rifle and thus necessitating the insertion of the patent date on the barrel.
Tang stamp without any patent date.
Early barrel address stamp styles used on these rifles.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
