Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
Gents: Would appreciate some thoughts on the value of this 1886 45-60 assuming the photos are high enough quality. SN 31716. Factory letter says s/n applied, and rifle received and shipped from warehouse all in July 1889. It’s got a Browning Brothers Ogden Utah stamp on the barrel in addition to the Winchester Repeating Arms. I am aware of the Browning patent for the 86, but I am no authority on the history of the 86. Is that stamp unusual? Otherwise, the gun seems to be in pretty good shape. Some dings in the metal, pits in the wood, and not much bluing, but smooth action and a good bore. Thanks. Terry
Terry,
The Browning Brothers marking on the barrel indicates that it was originally shipped to Odgen Utah as partial payment to John Browning for the patent that Winchester purchased from him. The early Patent payments usually consisted of both cash and firearms. The firearms that were received in Odgen from Winchester were then marked and sold from the Browning Brothers shop. While the marking is unusual, it is not “rare”. It does add a small premium value in the collector market, as it positively identifies the rifle has having been shipped, sold, and used in the western half of the U.S.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Terry,
It’s a nice representative of the times, as many of us like the old antique, and not fussed with rifles.
I was wondering where you got it from, and how long that you had it.
A well used rifle with good honest wear in most cases. Looks like the bottom of the but plate is dented in, possibly bent on purpose, a long time ago, by hand to accommodate, a prior accident and pointed but stock. It’s nice to see the rear sight with that much blue on it, and the model designation stamped on it. It’s evident the rear sight was replaced a long time ago, as the old sight marks, on top of the barrel, are very evident. Doesn’t bother me. The wood on top around the tang has some suspect voids around it, as that would make sense, as it could have been removed years ago and refreshed and possibly over sanded, causing this. The wood has that old refinished look to it on top next to the tang. IMO! Even with the dark over oiled gun metal that soaked into the wood. The front sight looks to be correct also. The Octagon barrel is a huge plus, IMO, as it looks to be a standard barrel, on the rifle with a full loading tube. Having the Browning Bros. Stamp on the barrel looks correct to me also, as this looks to be one of the guns that John Moses Browning and Winchester used in their, well documented bartering deal, for the patent on the model 1886 rifle. The bore should show some corrosion from the black powder ammunition, that was used at the time, to match the rifle. As collectors, we like good honest guns, but we also like high condition good honest guns. You’re model 1886 has some desirable rarity with the Browning Bros. stamp. I would think that an auction house would command a higher dollar as the gun has very little if any original finish left on it at all. I have a few numbers in my head, but will refrain until other members weigh in.
Thanks for sharing.
Anthony
40-65 is a good cartridge and one of the few RCBS still makes dies for.
Just realized my typo on the caliber! Sorry about that.
Bert, thanks for the background on the Browning stamp. Very interesting. I have done a little research and kept my eyes open when I have managed to get to a gun show for a similar stamp but have yet to find another one marked like that or gotten as detailed of an answer as you just gave. I guess I should have just come here sooner and asked.
Anthony, you have some good eyes! Thanks for your observations. To answer to your question: I purchased it probably a decade ago from a guy in Sandpoint, ID who I was fairly close to before he passed. I had previously bought an 86 (45-70) off of him and decided I wanted a second one but didn’t want to spend too much. I liked their feel. Heavy, packing some punch, yet smooth action. Anyway, at the time, I was going overseas on a 3-year tour and asked him to look around for me while I was gone with a $$ number in mind. He found it at the Cody Show for what he thought was a pretty good price. At the time, he noted that the Browning stamp was unusual but 86s were not really his thing. He was into Volcanics, Henrys, 66s, 73s, and 76s. I have been overseas a lot over the past decade so my small collection has been in storage for the most part (and mostly out of mind). However, I am preparing to sell a chunk of the collection so I have been getting some formal appraisals and some informal opinions/thoughts, as well as making sure I have the right info on details like the Browning stamp on the 1886. That was a bit long-winded, but there you have it.
Respectfully,
Terry
VA Guy said
Bert, thanks for the background on the Browning stamp. Very interesting. I have done a little research and kept my eyes open when I have managed to get to a gun show for a similar stamp but have yet to find another one marked like that or gotten as detailed of an answer as you just gave. I guess I should have just come here sooner and asked.
Respectfully,
Terry
Terry,
I own two Single Shot rifles and one Model 1873 rifle with the exact same marking. Over the past 45-years I have seen and handled at least (100) Winchester rifles with the same marking. Most people miss seeing the Browning marking due to its small font size and depth of the lettering.
The fact that the rifle you have came out of Idaho is no surprise.
This is the marking on my Model 1873 rifle;
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Anthony, I think the butt plate is correct. I believe that the earlier model 86 had what has been called big wood that had the 2 curve butt plate and the “small wood” made later has only one curve, ie the small bent toe.
.
oldcrankyyankee said
Anthony, I think the butt plate is correct. I believe that the earlier model 86 had what has been called big wood that had the 2 curve butt plate and the “small wood” made later has only one curve, ie the small bent toe.
.
You could be correct on that. It looked funny to me in the picture. Like it wasn’t a factory bend, or offset in the metal. Just my thoughts. I guess better pictures of it could help. I appreciate you pointing that out.
Bert and I were typing at the same time, otherwise I would have held back a bit.
Anthony
1 Guest(s)
