Winchester’s Sporting Front Sight is also known as No. 21 with various letter suffixes which denote the sight’s original height (before being filed down, as so many have been). Some have plain bases and some have a set screw in the base. As best as I can determine, Winchester didn’t start using the set screw base until 1910. With that in mind, I have seen an awful lot of pre-1910 Winchesters with the Sporting Front Sight that has the set screw.
I have several pre-1899 Winchesters that have the No. 21 sight without a set screw. A couple of years ago I bought a collectible grade 1892 made in 1895 that had a No. 21 sight with the set screw. The sight looks original to the rifle and it was purchased from a well known elderly collector who has a formidable reputation. He insisted the rifle is 100% original and he had owned it for over 50 years.
My question is: why are there so many pre-1899 Winchesters out there with the Sporting Front Sight with a set screw? Or better yet, when did this sight actually start being installed with the set screw? Or have all the pre-1910 rifles with the sight that has a set screw been retrofitted?
"This is the West, sir. When the legend becomes fact, print the legend."
The Sight Book shows 12/20/10 as the date they added the screw. I would think that sights did get replaced early on and they would of used the current replacement sight at the time. Just like it you bought a rifle 10 years ago and it need a new sight today, you wouldn’t think twice about finding the exact replacement it came with, you would go to a gun store and get the current replacement. The screw was added for a reason and it wouldn’t take much convincing for a gunsmith to sell the new improved sight to a customer.
Bob
WACA Life Member--- NRA Life Member---- Cody Firearms member since 1991 Researching the Winchester 1873's
Email: [email protected]
For the information on Model 1894 sights that I’ve been collecting I’ve received pictures and data from guns in the US, Canada and Europe. Who knows where the guns were before they were in collections. Off the top of my head only a handful have front sights without a set screw and those were very early production guns and some ELW rifles with ramps. I’ll probably never be done collecting data or learning but nonetheless I strongly believe a 1910 date for a cut off is not what happened in reality. Perhaps Winchester was using the set screw in the sight for awhile before it was recorded somewhere as being “standard”.
There are so many pre-1910 1894 rifles currently with the set screw in the front sight that I just can’t believe they’d all be replacements. If they were replaced I also think more of them would have had a completely different sight put on.
Could some have been replaced? Sure. All of them? Very unlikely in my opinion.
My current belief on the Model 1894 is that there is a transition somewhere in the late 1890s to Sporting Front Sights with the screw. Non-screw Sporting Front Sights are still seen but not as often and perhaps have special applications.
I don’t know how this crosses over to other models.
Brad
I have had several old Winchesters from the late 1800’s or turn of the century that had filed down front sights, a couple where filed way down and I wondered what sort of shooting the original owner did …. 200 yard shooting? Anyway, it would not surprise me if in the early 1900’s a new owner bought a new front sight to replace an earlier sight that was filed down too much or in a way not to his liking.
Now, that’s where I was heading, Hedley. My interests are primarily the 1885, 1886 and 1892, though I’m into all the models. I’ve seen too many of these three models, plus the 1873, from before 1910 and in excellent condition, with the set screw version of the Sporting Sight installed. I just can’t believe that all these guns had the original factory sight removed and replaced with another factory original sight with a set screw. These are sturdy sights and the only damage one ever sees is that caused by an owner who filed the top down or filed the sides to make the sight slimmer.
What I think is that both types of sights were on hand in the factory parts bin, possibly coming from different suppliers. The assembler probably just reached for one and whatever he grabbed ended up on the rifle. Or possibly, one assembler preferred one type and another assembler preferred the other type. It is entirely possible that the 1910 date is when the factory officially discontinued the Sporting Front Sight without a set screw for efficiency of inventory control or for uniformity or for some other reason.
This could be an important issue for collectors of pricey samples who insist on unaltered rifles. If a Sporting Sight has been replaced then the rifle is no longer in original condition.
"This is the West, sir. When the legend becomes fact, print the legend."
I have had several old Winchesters from the late 1800’s or turn of the century that had filed down front sights, a couple where filed way down and I wondered what sort of shooting the original owner did …. 200 yard shooting? Anyway, it would not surprise me if in the early 1900’s a new owner bought a new front sight to replace an earlier sight that was filed down too much or in a way not to his liking.
I have often found in looking at the rifles that the front sights generally got taller as ammunition velocities increased and sometimes the standard sporting rear sight notches are filed lower. I believe this was an effort to keep using the old rear sights as long as possible. I see a lot of sporting front sight blades filed into a bead also. I think sights got changed often too.
I also included several examples of custom modifications to sights throughout the 1894 Sight Project so far.
Brad
Wincacher said
Now, that’s where I was heading, Hedley. My interests are primarily the 1885, 1886 and 1892, though I’m into all the models. I’ve seen too many of these three models, plus the 1873, from before 1910 and in excellent condition, with the set screw version of the Sporting Sight installed. I just can’t believe that all these guns had the original factory sight removed and replaced with another factory original sight with a set screw. These are sturdy sights and the only damage one ever sees is that caused by an owner who filed the top down or filed the sides to make the sight slimmer.
What I think is that both types of sights were on hand in the factory parts bin, possibly coming from different suppliers. The assembler probably just reached for one and whatever he grabbed ended up on the rifle. Or possibly, one assembler preferred one type and another assembler preferred the other type. It is entirely possible that the 1910 date is when the factory officially discontinued the Sporting Front Sight without a set screw for efficiency of inventory control or for uniformity or for some other reason.
This could be an important issue for collectors of pricey samples who insist on unaltered rifles. If a Sporting Sight has been replaced then the rifle is no longer in original condition.
In many ways this sums up why I got interested in recording sight information to begin with. I was often being told things that contradicted what I was seeing. Many of the guns I included in the sight project information belong to guys that are pretty serious 1894 collectors. Often the guns in their collections are 80-90%+ original finish examples. They weren’t used hard and I think it’s unlikely that the original sights would have been damaged and needed replacing. I’m always looking for more examples for The 1894 Sight Project and would love to include some more 1894 rifles with Sporting Front Sights that do not have set screws.
The best we can do is evaluate what we see and what we know to be period correct and determine the likelihood that any given sight is original to the gun. Hopefully recording this sight information will continue to narrow down what is period correct.
I don’t mind as much if the patina on the sight matches the age of the rifle … an indication that it was done shortly after the time the rifle was purchased. If it is well done and old, I can handle that, although I always prefer an untouched sight over one that was shaped or filed back in the day.
win38-55 said
I don’t mind as much if the patina on the sight matches the age of the rifle … an indication that it was done shortly after the time the rifle was purchased. If it is well done and old, I can handle that, although I always prefer an untouched sight over one that was shaped or filed back in the day.
Another example of that for me would be a period Lyman 21 or 38 put on a rifle, especially a Model 1895, post factory. If it was done later but well done and looked “old” that would not bother me very much. If I had a Model 1895 back then I’d want an aperture sight. I’d probably be more concerned about what the rear barrel dovetail looked like in that event.
Brad
Hi guys,
As part of my Model 1892 survey I just happen to have noticed long ago shortly after I had started that some guns has the set screw and others did not. Because I did not start this data column right from the start of the survey the data is not as accurate as I would like. Getting good photos of the front sights is not something that is common in auction listings and the sight has to be viewed from above and from the right hand side of the muzzle. The large majority of Model 1892 sporting rifles manufactured before 1894 have the front sight without the set screw. After 1894 the set screw sight dominate the data. I hope this helps s bit.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
Wincacher
I can’t see in your picture, but does that front sight have anything stamped on top and is there a glob of solder on it for a bead?
Thanks,
Brad
1 Guest(s)
