Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
I was looking thru Morphy’s upcoming auction and noticed lot #1220, An 86 Winchester in 33 wcf. But the dates for a 33 are all wrong. States 1896 as applied date. Asked Cody for a sns, got the that back today and says it was a 33 with matted barrel, which it does not have and, drum roll please, with an interchangeable 50-100 octagon barrel with fancy checkered forearm. Also listed with factory sling and swivels. States serial number applied on June 2, 1896. Left warehouse October 10, 1903. With the shipped date as 1903, could this have been a 50-100 then converted to 33 wcf. but yet still doesn’t have a matted barrel. Seems a bit odd to me. Btw it does not have screw eyes either. Everything else seems correct including the close coupled set trigger. Not sure where I am going with this, but it’s got me a little freaked out and curious at the same time.
oldcrankyyankee said Not sure where I am going with this, but it’s got me a little freaked out and curious at the same time.
Just buy it & sort out these minor discrepancies later. Don’t let some smart guy beat you out of it.
November 7, 2015
Offline
Looks correct but isn’t. Good eye!
Mike
Tom –
I’d be interested in buying it, but it all depends on price. The problem these days is a person is up against other bidders who don’t factor the, “phony gun” aspect into their bidding. If this rifle looks right – not reblued, etc – and it is very pleasing and enjoyable to the eye – and the only way it can be noticed that it is not right is the factory ledger material – it is a rifle worth owning in my book. It’s an ’86, with other special features. It’s sounding like this rifle is all Winchester, nothing has been faked, it’s just that these parts haven’t all been together since the beginning. I realize that doesn’t completely absolve the rifle and if you’re a purist, it’s not the rifle for you. And when it comes time to sell the rifle, don’t look for a purist to be interested.
Given the rifle is a .33, the bidding should be fairly contained. It is intriguing that it not only originally had a .50 barrel with it, but if I read your post correctly, it was a .50-100 and not a .50-110? That would be super cool. It sure would be something to find that barrel!
To me, it’s a fairly decent and appealing .33 – which is exactly why the majority of guys around here wouldn’t be interested in it 
oldcrankyyankee said
I was looking thru Morphy’s upcoming auction and noticed lot #1220, An 86 Winchester in 33 wcf. But the dates for a 33 are all wrong. States 1896 as applied date. Asked Cody for a sns, got the that back today and says it was a 33 with matted barrel, which it does not have and, drum roll please, with an interchangeable 50-100 octagon barrel with fancy checkered forearm. Also listed with factory sling and swivels. States serial number applied on June 2, 1896. Left warehouse October 10, 1903. With the shipped date as 1903, could this have been a 50-100 then converted to 33 wcf. but yet still doesn’t have a matted barrel. Seems a bit odd to me. Btw it does not have screw eyes either. Everything else seems correct including the close coupled set trigger. Not sure where I am going with this, but it’s got me a little freaked out and curious at the same time.
Tom – pretty cool – a .33 WCF that dates to 1896. For anyone who will only purchase antique status firearms, this is a rare opportunity to add a .33 to their collection.
steve004 said
oldcrankyyankee said
I was looking thru Morphy’s upcoming auction and noticed lot #1220, An 86 Winchester in 33 wcf. But the dates for a 33 are all wrong. States 1896 as applied date. Asked Cody for a sns, got the that back today and says it was a 33 with matted barrel, which it does not have and, drum roll please, with an interchangeable 50-100 octagon barrel with fancy checkered forearm. Also listed with factory sling and swivels. States serial number applied on June 2, 1896. Left warehouse October 10, 1903. With the shipped date as 1903, could this have been a 50-100 then converted to 33 wcf. but yet still doesn’t have a matted barrel. Seems a bit odd to me. Btw it does not have screw eyes either. Everything else seems correct including the close coupled set trigger. Not sure where I am going with this, but it’s got me a little freaked out and curious at the same time.
Tom – pretty cool – a .33 WCF that dates to 1896. For anyone who will only purchase antique status firearms, this is a rare opportunity to add a .33 to their collection.
But 33 wcf didn’t arrive until 1902 i think. so how can it be.
oldcrankyyankee said
But 33 wcf didn’t arrive until 1902 i think. so how can it be.
Antique status determined by rcvr DOM, which a replacement brl wouldn’t change.
clarence said
oldcrankyyankee said
But 33 wcf didn’t arrive until 1902 i think. so how can it be.
Antique status determined by rcvr DOM, which a replacement brl wouldn’t change.
And as your records check revealed, a .33 barrel was installed on it in 1903. But not the .33 barrel that on it now 
It is one of those I’d want a copy of the ledger page to see how it’s written up. Nice 33 WCF Model 86 with a foggy pedigree for sure. One of these that sat around for 7 years before leaving that always seem to baffle us today.
Seeing how it doesn’t have the matching 50-100 barrel to go with it, I wouldn’t put much value on that being mentioned in the letter.
Nice piece, but maybe not the most collector grade of a Winchester.
Sincerely,
Maverick
WACA #8783 - Checkout my Reloading Tool Survey!
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-research-surveys/winchester-reloading-tool-survey/
Well at this point the only thing right about this rifle is receiver and stock. I have no interest in it , never did, as it will never be correct. You would have too find or send to a restorer and have not one but two new barrel sets made to match. Now for some one with the big bucks that’s easily doable, just not in my budget. Only reason I called Cody was DOM vs the 33 wcf chambering. BTW, Steve I know 33 is one of your favorites and I rate them tied for 1st with my 45-90’s. I am actually working on a very nice one, if I get it I’ll send pics.
It’s a problematic shooter grade firearm. All it has going for it is a few extra features and the option of avoiding an FFL transfer. I suppose if you had a criminal record and a burning desire to have a .33 WCF rifle, that might prove useful. Other than that…pay what it is worth as is!
oldcrankyyankee said
Well at this point the only thing right about this rifle is receiver and stock. I have no interest in it , never did, as it will never be correct. You would have too find or send to a restorer and have not one but two new barrel sets made to match. Now for some one with the big bucks that’s easily doable, just not in my budget. Only reason I called Cody was DOM vs the 33 wcf chambering. BTW, Steve I know 33 is one of your favorites and I rate them tied for 1st with my 45-90’s. I am actually working on a very nice one, if I get it I’ll send pics.
I think I would rather have it as it is, rather than send it to a restorer. At least as it is, it is all original parts. I will acknowledge however that the receiver has basically no blue – it’s to the point that it loses quite a bit of appeal for me. In fact, to me, it looks like the receiver was cleaned at one time. That would be a point in favor of a restoration. The basic question – why would someone remove original finish from a rifle and replace it with a refinish… well, if there is no original finish…. And, if the rifle were restored to fit the ledger information, it would surely be a one of a kind piece. I think of the many restorations out there where the rifle starts out as complete in every way – and still gets a new barrel!
Tom – glad you are pursuing a nice .33. By the way, I too, like the .45-90 and one of my favorite shooters is a .45-90 with SGB, half magazine, Lyman receiver sight and deluxe straight grip wood. If I had the big bucks, I’d have been pursuing the .50 caliber M86’s for the past many years. Particularly the .50-100-450’s. I wish I could have purchased every (original) .50-100 I encountered over the last 50 years. Playing the Monday morning quarterback, in hindsight, I wish had devoted almost every dollar I spent on firearms over the past 50 years – into just 86’s in .50 caliber. Well… there would be at least one .33 
Back to this .33, a draw for me was the wood. I don’t have a single .33 with deluxe wood 
1896 manufacture Steve, no blue on that receiver, case colored. But as you stated none of that either.
oldcrankyyankee said
1896 manufacture Steve, no blue on that receiver, case colored. But as you stated none of that either.
The residual blue on the receiver – more remaining on the right side – around the loading gate – led me to believe the receiver was blued.
I agree with the comments above – don’t pay more than it’s worth – which would be a shooter grade price. The rarity outlined in the factory ledger does not help the value of the rifle.
steve004 said
oldcrankyyankee said
1896 manufacture Steve, no blue on that receiver, case colored. But as you stated none of that either.
The residual blue on the receiver – more remaining on the right side – around the loading gate – led me to believe the receiver was blued.
I agree with the comments above – don’t pay more than it’s worth – which would be a shooter grade price. The rarity outlined in the factory ledger does not help the value of the rifle.
Being a takedown, the receiver would have been blued irrespective of date of manufacture.
mrcvs said
Being a takedown, the receiver would have been blued irrespective of date of manufacture.
100% correct!
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
mrcvs said
steve004 said
oldcrankyyankee said
1896 manufacture Steve, no blue on that receiver, case colored. But as you stated none of that either.
The residual blue on the receiver – more remaining on the right side – around the loading gate – led me to believe the receiver was blued.
I agree with the comments above – don’t pay more than it’s worth – which would be a shooter grade price. The rarity outlined in the factory ledger does not help the value of the rifle.
Being a takedown, the receiver would have been blued irrespective of date of manufacture.
Of course, I stand corrected. Forgot what I was talking about.
oldcrankyyankee said
mrcvs said
steve004 said
oldcrankyyankee said
1896 manufacture Steve, no blue on that receiver, case colored. But as you stated none of that either.
The residual blue on the receiver – more remaining on the right side – around the loading gate – led me to believe the receiver was blued.
I agree with the comments above – don’t pay more than it’s worth – which would be a shooter grade price. The rarity outlined in the factory ledger does not help the value of the rifle.
Being a takedown, the receiver would have been blued irrespective of date of manufacture.
Of course, I stand corrected. Forgot what I was talking about.
Tom – that skipped my mind too. Knowing something is only useful if I remember it 
However, I was confident I saw remnants of blue on the receiver and fairly confident that wear wasn’t all natural.
Steve you are so right , it should be blued. I to forget things, mostly my name in the morning and why I need to get up!
1 Guest(s)
