Avatar
Search
Forum Scope




Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
Lost password?
sp_Feed sp_PrintTopic sp_TopicIcon
Model 92 question
Avatar
oldcrankyyankee
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 954
Member Since:
February 17, 2022
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
1
August 31, 2025 - 12:46 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print

Looking at a 92 src from 1926, yes I checked our dating tool here. The model is stamped in the barrel with the caliber. However it is also model stamped in the tang. Is this correct? 

Avatar
Bert H.
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 13095
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
2
August 31, 2025 - 4:50 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print

Tom,

It sounds fishy… can you post a picture of the tang marking?

Based on what I have observed, a 1926 production Model 92 should have a Type 6 UT marking…

Type-6-1024624.jpgImage Enlarger

Just to double check, a 1926 production Model 92 should have a serial number in the 938034 – 955600 range.

Bert

sp_PlupAttachments Attachments

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

Avatar
oldcrankyyankee
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 954
Member Since:
February 17, 2022
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
Avatar
Bert H.
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 13095
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
4
August 31, 2025 - 6:34 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print

oldcrankyyankee said
Bert, this is the gun
https://auctions.morphyauctions.com/_C__HIGH_CONDITION_WINCHESTER_MODEL_92__44_40_SADD-LOT642751.aspx
  

Hopefully Michael (2bit) checks in on this topic and provides his educated input.  I certainly would not expect to find that UT marking on a late 1926 production Model 92, but stranger things exist.

Bert

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

Avatar
steve004
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 5237
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
5
September 1, 2025 - 1:26 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print

Tom –

But it’s not a .33 or a .45-90… Confused

Avatar
Jeremy P
The Great State
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 935
Member Since:
April 30, 2023
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
6
September 1, 2025 - 2:53 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory

Going to post this simply so I’ll remember to come back see the answer….I vaguely remember reading somewhere about some of these “double model stamped” crossovers, can’t for the life of me remember where right now… all hail 2bit!

Avatar
oldcrankyyankee
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 954
Member Since:
February 17, 2022
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
7
September 1, 2025 - 5:16 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory

steve004 said
Tom –
But it’s not a .33 or a .45-90…
  

Well Steve it is a big bore! Beside some times you just have to expand your horizons. Plus they are legal to hunt deer with in these shotgun only zone here in NH. Can’t quite get the F&G convinced that 45-90 is only a 45 colt with a magnum charge. LMAO!

Oh and don’t get me started on the 33wcf. You know where that will go.Laugh

Avatar
twobit
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2513
Member Since:
March 20, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
8
September 4, 2025 - 8:31 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print

Hello,

I was traveling for a week without my computer and I am trying to get caught up.  That Model 92 is absolutely correct.  And pretty nice looking.  The Model 92 upper tangs were consistently stamped with the Type 5 style right up until the Model 53 rifles began being numbered in the Model 92 serial number sequence (right at the end of 1927) at which point they pretty abruptly begin to use the Type 6 style.  But then in 1928 you can find batches of Model 92’s with Type 5, 6, and 7 upper tang stamps.  It is a mess in that year! 

Michael

Type-5.JPGImage Enlarger

Type-6.jpgImage Enlarger
Type-7.jpgImage Enlarger

sp_PlupAttachments Attachments

Signature-Pic.jpg

 

Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation

Avatar
Anthony
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1073
Member Since:
December 9, 2002
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
9
September 5, 2025 - 3:34 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print

Michael,

We understand you’re busy schedule, as most of us collectors seem to try to burn it at both ends! Laugh

That’s great information that you posted and updated, us with.

Thanks!

 

Anthony

Avatar
steve004
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 5237
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
10
September 5, 2025 - 6:22 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print

I agree with Anthony – I always appreciate it when Michael takes time to increase our level of knowledge.  

You are a great resource Michael and you have my gratitude!

Avatar
twobit
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2513
Member Since:
March 20, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
11
September 5, 2025 - 7:00 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print

steve004 said
I agree with Anthony – I always appreciate it when Michael takes time to increase our level of knowledge.  
You are a great resource Michael and you have my gratitude!
  

I am always happy to help.  As others have done with me when I started out.  Just passing it along.

Michael

Signature-Pic.jpg

 

Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation

Forum Timezone: UTC 0
Most Users Ever Online: 4920
Currently Online: Rat Rod Mac, tim tomlinson, Nevada Paul, Steven Gabrielli
Guest(s) 602
Top Posters:
clarence: 7119
TXGunNut: 6567
Chuck: 5939
steve004: 5237
1873man: 4715
deerhunter: 2717
Big Larry: 2567
twobit: 2513
mrcvs: 2216
Maverick: 2043
Newest Members:
rifleman
Surfertim
6564yankees
Fox Creek
kellswater
Gary
Harper 1886
Plmggod
Doncarp
navy_ndi
Forum Stats:
Groups: 1
Forums: 18
Topics: 14879
Posts: 133390

 

Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 2057
Members: 10110
Moderators: 3
Admins: 4
Administrators: Mike Hager, Bert H., JWA, SethJ
Moderators: Rob Kassab, Brad Dunbar, Heather
Navigation