Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Particularly when it letters. And particularly when it’s on a M1876. Helps that it is a deluxe. This rifle has me drooling. By the way, I find it interesting that the serial number dates to 1886 yet it wasn’t shipped until 1897. I wonder what the story is behind that? Too bad a factory worker didn’t take a nail and scratch the explanation in the buttstock… “receiver found behind a bin.” 
Steve,
I think I am detecting just a bit of cynicism coming from your direction this morning…
The rifle is beautiful with the exception of the front sight not being original. It is a Lyman No. 8, and it is installed backwards in the dovetail. The windage adjusted is supposed to be on the right-hand side as pointed down range. This rifle would be perfect with a correct Beach Combination front sight put back on it.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert H. said
Steve,
I think I am detecting just a bit of cynicism coming from your direction this morning…
The rifle is beautiful with the exception of the front sight not being original. It is a Lyman No. 8, and it is installed backwards in the dovetail. The windage adjusted is supposed to be on the right-hand side as pointed down range. This rifle would be perfect with a correct Beach Combination front sight put back on it.
Bert
Good morning Bert. If I were to acquire this Model 1876, I would surely spend the money for the correct Beach front sight. I wasn’t trying to be cynical this morning. However, I really don’t have to try as I usually have plenty of cynicism to spare.
I do find myself frustrated that many mysteries and enigmas related to the collecting we do are rarely solved. We never will find why a receiver made in 1886 didn’t get used until 1897. We never will find out why, rifles shipped as engraved or shipped with 1 of 1000 markings, were never logged to that effect in the ledger. I know many of us avoid pursuing a specific rifle because we dread the idea of having to pull the, “story” out when we show it to someone or it comes time to sell. And then comes the dreaded question: “ok, how much for the rifle and how much for the story?” I collect several genre’s of antique and vintage rifles for which no factory records exist. Sometimes that is simpler with less complication.
steve004 said
Particularly when it letters. And particularly when it’s on a M1876. Helps that it is a deluxe. This rifle has me drooling. By the way, I find it interesting that the serial number dates to 1886 yet it wasn’t shipped until 1897. I wonder what the story is behind that? Too bad a factory worker didn’t take a nail and scratch the explanation in the buttstock… “receiver found behind a bin.”
Steve,
I was just “yanking your chain” with the cynicism comment. As for the frustration with the mysteries… that is part of what makes it so darn interesting to collect old Winchesters! If everything was “crystal clear” and nothing to question, this hobby would be boring.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert H. said
Steve,
I was just “yanking your chain” with the cynicism comment. As for the frustration with the mysteries… that is part of what makes it so darn interesting to collect old Winchesters! If everything was “crystal clear” and nothing to question, this hobby would be boring.
Bert
I’m not sure about the Beech sight being incorrect #? But the fact that it letters with a shotgun butt bothers me a lot. It may be correct but it surely will cause a lot of negative comments.
Chuck said
I’m not sure about the Beech sight being incorrect #? But the fact that it letters with a shotgun butt bothers me a lot.
Chuck,
The front sight currently on that rifle is a Lyman No. 8 Windgauge Combination sight… it is not a Beach sight. Furthermore, the Lyman No. 8 was not introduced yet when that rifle was built.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
My mistake. I was hung up on the story about the stock. So what else has been changed?
Chuck said
My mistake. I was hung up on the story about the stock. So what else has been changed?
I do not believe that anything else (including the butt stock) has been swapped. With the assembly numbers matching on the stock and lower tang, and the precise fit & finish of the butt stock, I suspect that either the ledger entry was misinterpreted, or it is in error.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
steve004 said
If I were to acquire this Model 1876, I would surely spend the money for the correct Beach front sight.
You wouldn’t have to, as you could sell the #8 for enough to buy the Beach with enough left over for a fifth of Wild Turkey.
Steve00, et all
My 1876 SN is 59xxx and this too dates to 1886, but the factory letter says it was changed in 1888 at the factory from 50-95 to 45-60 and shipped 2 days later.
I wondered why a 50-95 with 22” barrel, button mag, and shotgun butt would sit on a shelf and two years later get reconfigured to a 45-60 and change the barrel to meet a sale. I would have thought these were not stockpiled in the factory. Mine is on the journey back to its 50-95 configuration. But a mystery as to why it sat so long. It’s also absent from Houze’s book, it’s not one of the 50-95’s listed as changed at the factory. Professor Madl tells me he too has one that has lettered as one changed but not in the book, and a ship/reconfigure date years different from SN date range. Maybe a thing with later 50’s when other more powerful rifles and rounds put a dent in anticipated sales. All of these odd date rifles 50-95’s seem to be after main production ended and odd sales continued. But just an uneducated guess.
steve004 said
I know many of us avoid pursuing a specific rifle because we dread the idea of having to pull the, “story” out when we show it to someone or it comes time to sell. And then comes the dreaded question: “ok, how much for the rifle and how much for the story?”
I’m like that, too, Steve…especially when the serial number is filed off!!! 
James
Bert H. said
I do not believe that anything else (including the butt stock) has been swapped. With the assembly numbers matching on the stock and lower tang, and the precise fit & finish of the butt stock, I suspect that either the ledger entry was misinterpreted, or it is in error.
I think it looks OK too but it still has the story to deal with.
Chuck said
I’m not sure about the Beech sight being incorrect #? But the fact that it letters with a shotgun butt bothers me a lot. It may be correct but it surely will cause a lot of negative comments.
It would bother me, too, so much that I doubt I would purchase it had I the money and any desire to do so.
James
November 7, 2015
Offline
Pretty sweet rifle but quite a bit beyond my budget these days. Thanks for the eye candy link, always enjoy seeing a spectacular piece of walnut.
Mike
TXGunNut said
Pretty sweet rifle but quite a bit beyond my budget these days. Thanks for the eye candy link, always enjoy seeing a spectacular piece of walnut.
Mike
Mike –
You never know, it might go cheap. Lots of us fussy collectors are hung up on it lettering with a shotgun but. Even though I think most of us believe it is completely correct 
1 Guest(s)
