Avatar
Please consider registering
Guest
Search
Forum Scope




Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
Register Lost password?
sp_Feed sp_PrintTopic sp_TopicIcon
Model 92 / 53 hybrid rifle
sp_NewTopic Add Topic
Avatar
Troutdale, OR
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1843
Member Since:
June 26, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
1
December 13, 2022 - 8:54 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

I’ve never seen one if these before.  Is it legit?  I’m always a fan of the unusual as long as they are factory original, such as the 94/95 hybrid carbines.

https://www.gunsinternational.com/guns-for-sale-online/rifles/winchester-rifles-lever-pre-64/winchester-model-92-53-transition-44-cal.cfm?gun_id=102136661

Don

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 395
Member Since:
November 8, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
2
December 14, 2022 - 12:17 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

The barrel markings look odd.   I have a 92 from this time frame and it has markings on both sides of the barrel.  This one doesn’t have markings on the loading gate side.

It doesn’t look right to me

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 4097
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
3
December 14, 2022 - 12:25 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

It doesn’t look right to me either.  And, I’ve never heard of anything like this.  But, maybe someone who knows more than me will have a different answer.

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 10609
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
4
December 14, 2022 - 2:47 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Don,

What makes you think that this is a Model 92/53 hybrid? It appears to just be a late production Model 92 Take Down Sporting rifle that was assembled using a 1920s serial numbered Model 53 TD receiver frame.  No parts were modified or altered to put it together (unlike the 94/95 hybrids that required altering both the barrel and magazine tube).

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

Avatar
Troutdale, OR
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1843
Member Since:
June 26, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
5
December 14, 2022 - 3:16 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Hi Bert,

The fact that a serialized model 53 receiver was mated with a late production model 92 octagon barrel had me thinking of a hybrid model 92 /53.  Maybe “hybrid” was the wrong term to use.  Maybe “transitional” model is a better term? Do you believe this to be a factory original? Have you seen any others?

Don

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 10609
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
6
December 14, 2022 - 3:44 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Don,

Yes, a very small number of Model 92s have been found with a Model 53 receiver frame.  That stated, it is not known if it as factory work, or someone piecing it together.  For several reasons I have my suspicions about the gun in question, but I cannot rule it out as either a legitimate or a fake Model 92.

Bert

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

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 4097
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
7
December 14, 2022 - 2:38 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

If it was sent out from the factory that way (if) could it best be described as a late production parts clean-up rifle?

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1375
Member Since:
July 8, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
8
December 14, 2022 - 6:27 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

What are the differences between a model 92, and model 53 receiver?

Avatar
Troutdale, OR
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1843
Member Since:
June 26, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
9
December 14, 2022 - 6:49 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

tionesta1 said
What are the differences between a model 92, and model 53 receiver?

  

I believe they are the same, except for the serial number sequence.

Don

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 10609
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
10
December 14, 2022 - 9:21 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

tionesta1 said
What are the differences between a model 92, and model 53 receiver?

  

Al,

None.  The early production Model 53 receivers were serialized in their own number range (1 – 10874), then in September of 1927, the serial numbers were merged with the Model 92 (at or very near S/N 962000) continuing to the end of production in the very high 999900 range.

Bert

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

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 4097
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
11
December 14, 2022 - 11:53 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Bert H. said

tionesta1 said

What are the differences between a model 92, and model 53 receiver?

  

Al,

None.  The early production Model 53 receivers were serialized in their own number range (1 – 10874), then in September of 1927, the serial numbers were merged with the Model 92 (at or very near S/N 962000) continuing to the end of production in the very high 999900 range.

Bert

  

So can we assume that had this receiver happened to have been serialized with the M1892 numbers, this rifle would not give any reason to assume it wasn’t a straightforward M1892?  (Other than perhaps some after factory modifications that may have been done to it).

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 10609
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
12
December 15, 2022 - 12:56 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

steve004 said

Bert H. said

tionesta1 said

What are the differences between a model 92, and model 53 receiver?

Al,

None.  The early production Model 53 receivers were serialized in their own number range (1 – 10874), then in September of 1927, the serial numbers were merged with the Model 92 (at or very near S/N 962000) continuing to the end of production in the very high 999900 range.

Bert 

So can we assume that had this receiver happened to have been serialized with the M1892 numbers, this rifle would not give any reason to assume it wasn’t a straightforward M1892?  (Other than perhaps some after factory modifications that may have been done to it).  

Yes, that is a true assumption.

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

Forum Timezone: UTC 0
Most Users Ever Online: 778
Currently Online: JC
Guest(s) 100
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
clarence: 6150
TXGunNut: 4864
Chuck: 4517
1873man: 4259
steve004: 4097
Big Larry: 2290
twobit: 2283
TR: 1690
mrcvs: 1656
Forum Stats:
Groups: 1
Forums: 17
Topics: 12499
Posts: 108509

 

Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 1727
Members: 8716
Moderators: 4
Admins: 3
Navigation