Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
AG : Nope i’ve had eastern carbines(no saddlering) with a standard carbine stock, actually there’s a picture of one in B.Rennenberg’s book 2nd ed’ P 145
W.A.C.A. life member, Marlin Collectors Assn. charter and life member, C,S.S.A. member and general gun nut.
Thanks Henry that’s what I thought and was miffed when I read this in Pirkles book. Has anyone seen or have an original eastern carbine(DOM June 1929 through April 1932) with the crescent rifle buttstock?
I assume it was a special order and not what Pirkle says that defines it as being an eastern carbine.
AG
AG said
Thanks Henry that’s what I thought and was miffed when I read this in Pirkles book. Has anyone seen or have an original eastern carbine(DOM June 1929 through April 1932) with the crescent rifle buttstock?
I assume it was a special order and not what Pirkle says that defines it as being an eastern carbine.AG
I have an eastern carbine from 1916 that was ordered without saddle ring, but with a crescent butt and rifle sights. Below is a link with photos in another forum thread.
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/whats-new/unusual-1894-carbine/
Don
Just looked at it. Unique gun Don. Thanks for replying.
AG
AG said
Pirkle says “A number of 1894 carbines were manufactured with rifle style crescent buttplates installed and are referred to by collectors as Eastern carbines. These will almost always lack the saddle ring”.So the way I read this is an eastern carbine always has a crescent buttplate ?
AG
Absolutely not true. While there were some Eastern Carbines made with a crescent butt plate, they were more frequently manufactured with a shotgun butt plate. In my survey of the Model 1894/94, I have (571) Eastern Carbines as follows;
1907 – 1927 Statistics;
Eastern Carbines = 176
Hard Rubber Shotgun butt plate = 89
Smooth Steel Shotgun butt plate = 15
Serrated Steel Shotgun butt plate = 8
Other Shotgun butt plates = 2
Standard Carbine butt plate = 19
Crescent Rifle butt plate = 39
1928 – May 1932 Statistics;
Eastern Carbines = 395
Standard Carbine butt plate = 329
Hard Rubber Shotgun butt plate = 25
Serrated Steel Shotgun butt plate = 38
Other Shotgun butt plate = 1
Crescent Rifle butt plate = 2
The totals by butt plate type are as follows;
Standard Carbine butt plate = 348
Hard Rubber Shotgun butt plate = 114
Serrated Steel Shotgun butt plate = 46
Smooth Steel Shotgun butt plate = 15
Other Shotgun butt plate = 3
Crescent Rifle butt plate = 41
As can be seen, Shotgun style butt plates were more common in the majority of the production years, but overall, the standard Carbine butt plate was the most common type.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
I can’t ask or expect more info than that. Thank you Bert as always for your input and detail not to mention the time you & others put into all this for us.
AG
If you go back to when the 1866 was born, the American Frontier required a mobile weapon compatible with horse and foot travel. The size, fire power, and dependability of the 66 carbine fit the bill, hence the perfect assault weapon was introduced by Winchester. Was the 66, 73, 92, and the 94 carbine the AR-15 of it’s day? I think so! People liked them then and I like them now. Feel the history. T/R
TR said
If you go back to when the 1866 was born, the American Frontier required a mobile weapon compatible with horse and foot travel. The size, fire power, and dependability of the 66 carbine fit the bill, hence the perfect assault weapon was introduced by Winchester. Was the 66, 73, 92, and the 94 carbine the AR-15 of it’s day? I think so! People liked them then and I like them now. Feel the history. T/R
Like the carbine as well. After some time apart, we are back together.
Never seemed to work that way with my ex wives ?
AG
I like the Winchester rifles over the carbines, although I no longer own any of the lever action rifles. Rifles were not to be seen in the environment that I grew up in other than those appearing in the movies. I like the crescent buttplate and see it as functional and attractive – two things that many of the long guns of an earlier America seemed to have going for them, but that was back in the day of master craftsmen and their creations. The long guns have gone the way of the long scopes and craftsmanship. And, the carbines with the crescent buttplate appears to be an indication of this passing toward greater mobility/shorter guns, and a spray and pray mentality.
James
I’ve followed this thread with interest. Not surprising that there are differing opinions.
For background, my collection is heavily skewed toward the 1892 ( I love them) with a smattering of 94’s and other lever actions.
I view many of these examples as ‘works of art’ due to their aesthetic beauty, clean lines and functionality. As with any ‘art’ or piece of engineering, opinions on attractiveness will vary with individual tastes.
When I consider my 1892’s, I think the rifles are much more attractive and stately. As a ‘work of art’ the rifle certainly outshines the carbine. But the carbines were designed to meet a different need and function (light weight, compact, maneuverable) and they met that need very well, while retaining the functionality of the rifle. For these reasons, the carbines have their own aesthetic beauty.
My collection is pretty evenly balanced between carbines and rifles. I would not want to be without any of them.
Nevada Paul
Life Member NRA
Online
Interesting topic that I had never given any thought to. Looking over the pre-64 records, seems as though I am evenly split! 5:5 ratio with the model 94s, 92s, and 55s. I don’t consider myself a collector but more of a selective accumulator at this point and time. I just buy what I like and until now never gave any thought to preference of rifle or carbine. I guess that shows. Neat topic; Thanks!
Technically, the glass is always full; half liquid, half air....
WACA #10293
I always thought, when referring to Model 94’s, “Eastern Carbine” simply referred to no sling ring.
I like them all. However, I have been particularly drawn to carbines since the beginning. I grew up hunting in the deep woods and the carbine has much greater maneuverability. They are lighter too, and that makes a difference when it spends the entire day in your hand. My M1892 .44-40 SRC with gum wood stocks handles like a wand in my hand. I have the same carbine but with a 2/3rd magazine and that’s even lighter. Let me add, I love special order features on a carbine. I suppose that’s because such features are more rare on a carbine vs. a rifle. I have a particular affinity for pistol grip carbines. And particularly when the standard carbine butt is present. My next preference is a shotgun butt. The cresent butt is my least desired choice. This holds true for rifles as well. I realize they are considered more desirable and have a more, “classic” look. It’s not my preference however. In fact, I have a M1873 SRC with a rifle butt – that letters! I like it for the rarity factor but aesthetically it has far less appeal than a standard carbine butt.
In the M1886, the SRC is my favorite. I’ve only owned one but that isn’t for lack of interest or trying. In my experience they have always been expensive and anything with decent condition usually receives a lot of competition among buyers. And, if I’m going to spend the money on one, it’s not going to be in .38-56 or .40-65. I will however take one in .33 WCF 😉
It’s amusing to read about and ponder all the different preferences and tastes we have.
steve004 said
I always thought, when referring to Model 94’s, “Eastern Carbine” simply referred to no sling ring.
Generally speaking, that would be correct… for the pre-1932 production Model 94 Carbines.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
steve004 said
I always thought, when referring to Model 94’s, “Eastern Carbine” simply referred to no sling ring.
Just for clarity & others, can you describe what you mean by sling ring, so not to be confused with saddle ring.
AG
AG said
Just for clarity & others, can you describe what you mean by sling ring, so not to be confused with saddle ring.
AG
Although I often depart from it, I also often make an attempt to use the terminology Winchester used. In this case, I believe Winchester would have said, “sling ring on frame.” I’m not recalling an example (e.g. in a catalog description or the factory ledgers) where Winchester used the term, “saddle ring.” That said, my memory isn’t what it once was.
Winchester used the term “Sling Ring” for the saddle ring, “Sling Swivel” for the sling strap loops on the forearm cap and stock and “Sling Eye” for the sling strap using the hook in the 73’s
Bob
WACA Life Member--- NRA Life Member---- Cody Firearms member since 1991 Researching the Winchester 1873's
Email: [email protected]
steve004 said
Although I often depart from it, I also often make an attempt to use the terminology Winchester used. In this case, I believe Winchester would have said, “sling ring on frame.” I’m not recalling an example (e.g. in a catalog description or the factory ledgers) where Winchester used the term, “saddle ring.” That said, my memory isn’t what it once was.
1873man said
Winchester used the term “Sling Ring” for the saddle ring, “Sling Swivel” for the sling strap loops on the forearm cap and stock and “Sling Eye” for the sling strap using the hook in the 73’sBob
I learn something everyday about the wonderful works of Winchester. Appreciate your replies Bob & steve004
I was just paging through my 1916 Winchester catalog. Models 1873, 1886, 1892, 1894 and 1895 were the lever guns offered for that year. All were offered in rifle, carbine and musket versions (with the exception of the M1894 which was not offered in musket version). Anyway, that I could see, there is no reference to a ring on any of the carbines with one exception: the M1895 carbine. They state, “sling ring on frame” in the catalog description. For all the other carbine models, there is no reference to a ring. A catalog drawing is shown of every variation. Nearly all of these drawings show the right side of the receiver and there is not one example where the left side of a carbine is shown. Other than past experience and knowledge, I don’t know how (with the exception of the M1895) a buyer would know his carbine would be shipped with a ring. There is no mention of the option to order the carbine without a ring. Also, in the listing of, “Extras for Winchester Rifles” there is no reference to a ring. However, in the extras, there is the, “Sling Strap” for $1.35, the, “Sling Strap with Screw Eyes, Swivel Hook and Button” for $2.25″ and, “Sling Strap N. R. A. Style” also for $2.25.
… “Button” – I don’t recall seeing that term anywhere else. I do tend to believe a Winchester catalog however. 😉
If a carbine came standard with the Sling Ring it would not mentioned.
Bob
WACA Life Member--- NRA Life Member---- Cody Firearms member since 1991 Researching the Winchester 1873's
Email: [email protected]
1 Guest(s)
