Avatar
Search
Forum Scope




Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
Lost password?
sp_Feed sp_PrintTopic sp_TopicIcon
Trying to figure out what I saw yesterday... model 1892 or Model 53?
sp_NewTopic Add Topic
Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 26
Member Since:
November 7, 2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
1
December 23, 2016 - 3:29 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

I was at a shop yesterday shipping a rifle out to my uncle back east and I had to wait my turn (CA gun shops are crowded due to another stupid law change) and I took a closer look at a Rifle on the used gun rack.  This one has a tag saying it is a model 53 and they want $3800 on consignment!!

So I am looking closer and I notice that it has a nice pistol grip and it is a takedown… all good… then I look at the serial and it is 19XX as in only 4 digit serial.  I find it confusing as I was thinking a 53 would have a much higher number?  Then I look at the barrel stamps and it sure does say Model 53 on it.  Then I realize the front half sure doesn’t match the rear… so now I am wondering… could this be an early Model 1892 Deluxe back end connected to a Model 53 front end?

If it is something interesting I can go take pictures of it.  I do recall it had some checkering on the forend that did not look factory, and it has a shorter mag tube (Is that called a button mag?) as the tube only sticks out far enough from the wood to allow for the takedown mechanism.

Any help would be appreciated.

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 10726
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
2
December 23, 2016 - 3:53 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Brian,

The first 10,874 Model 53 rifles were serialized in their own serial number sequence beginning with serial “1”. Later in production the serial number were in the Model 92 range. Many of the early Model 53 rifles were Take Downs. The pistol grip is the only odd part of your description, as that would have been a special order.

Which caliber was it? Take a look at the factory marking on the upper tang. If the rear half of the rifle is a Model 1892, it will be marked accordingly on the upper tang along with the patent date. If it does not have the model number and patent date, it is more than likely a correct Model 53. Pictures would be nice.

Bert

WACA 6571L, Historian & Board of Director Member
High-walls-1-002-C-reduced2.jpg

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2291
Member Since:
March 20, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
3
December 23, 2016 - 4:08 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

Hello,

A Model 1892 with a serial number in the 1900 range would have been manufactured during the first year of production, 1892.  The takedown feature was not patented until 1893 which is why the lever on these rifles has that date stamped on it.  Therefore the gun almost has to be a Model 53 as Bert pointed out which was serialized in its own unique SN sequence and manufactured during late 1924.  The Model 53 would have a Type 6 tang stamp on it when they were first produced as in the first attached photo.  The Model 1892’s at that time (1924) would have a Type 3 or 4 tang stamp as in the second and third images.  Please do take and post the photos of the rifle and include all the stamped writing on it.

 1892-Type-6.jpgImage Enlarger1892-Type-3.JPGImage Enlarger1892-Type-4.jpgImage Enlarger

 

Thanks

Michael

sp_PlupAttachments Attachments

Signature-Pic.jpg

 

Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2324
Member Since:
December 31, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
4
December 23, 2016 - 4:24 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

 I have a very low numbered M53 and it has the #6 marked tang. Plane Jane rifle, but it is a 44-40. The values of these rifles differ considerably with the caliber. This rifle may be quite rare. Again, what caliber is it?  Big LarryM53-507.jpgImage Enlarger

sp_PlupAttachments Attachments
Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 26
Member Since:
November 7, 2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
5
December 23, 2016 - 10:31 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

I apologize in advance here for giving inaccurate info… I seem to get dazzled when I see a rifle for the first time and then I can’t remember what features it had and then when I see it again I really wonder what the heck I was thinking???

I went back over there today and took another look.  The reason I was mixed up is the tag says “WINCHESTER MODEL 53 DELUXE” but it’s clearly not a deluxe rifle.  It IS a takedown, and it is a correct 53 with the type 6 tang stamp mentioned above, as it has Winchester Trademark on it.

It is chambered in 32-20 and I did not see the bore.  The shop is so slammed right now they don’t have time to deal with everyone who is waiting to buy a black plastic rifle!!  It’s pretty obvious to see the checkering is not original, so it sure does ruin the collector value.

Here are the pics:

http://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q295/Flyin_Brian/Win/Model%2053%20HLS/20161223_115734_zps4102rkzi.jpgImage Enlarger 

http://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q295/Flyin_Brian/Win/Model%2053%20HLS/20161223_115716_zpsp2uvgcoq.jpgImage Enlarger

http://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q295/Flyin_Brian/Win/Model%2053%20HLS/20161223_115705_zpsju5jotsm.jpgImage Enlarger

http://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q295/Flyin_Brian/Win/Model%2053%20HLS/20161223_1156411_zps3zyvy1ds.jpgImage Enlarger

http://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q295/Flyin_Brian/Win/Model%2053%20HLS/20161223_115813_zpszqw41oy7.jpgImage Enlarger

http://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q295/Flyin_Brian/Win/Model%2053%20HLS/20161223_115753_zpsk3dek8o1.jpgImage Enlarger

http://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q295/Flyin_Brian/Win/Model%2053%20HLS/20161223_115747_zps5fkknu83.jpgImage Enlarger

http://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q295/Flyin_Brian/Win/Model%2053%20HLS/20161223_115742_zpssibneetp.jpgImage Enlarger

Avatar
Iowa
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 80
Member Since:
June 24, 2015
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
6
December 24, 2016 - 1:53 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

You are correct. The checkering is not factory original, but much better quality than most added checkering. The pattern is very similar to factory checkering. 

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2291
Member Since:
March 20, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
7
December 24, 2016 - 12:03 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

Good morning Brian,

What is the full serial number of that rifle?  One of our members is compiling data on the Model 53’s and I am sure that he will want to add the gun into his work.

Michael

Signature-Pic.jpg

 

Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 853
Member Since:
June 11, 2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
8
December 24, 2016 - 5:27 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

I just saw this thread this morning. It looks like everything has been properly sorted out; the low serial number coupled with the type-6 tang is proper for the early production Model 53’s. Too bad about the after-factory checkering; that reduces the value substantially below the dealer’s asking price. I am the person mentioned above, building a survey of Model 53’s. Each rifle is recorded by serial number and I would be grateful if you could let me know the serial number of this rifle so that I can add it to my survey.

Avatar
NE OREGON
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 535
Member Since:
July 8, 2016
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
9
December 24, 2016 - 6:24 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Brian Mathews said
I was at a shop yesterday shipping a rifle out to my uncle back east and I had to wait my turn (CA gun shops are crowded due to another stupid law change) and I took a closer look at a Rifle on the used gun rack.  This one has a tag saying it is a model 53 and they want $3800 on consignment!!

So I am looking closer and I notice that it has a nice pistol grip and it is a takedown… all good… then I look at the serial and it is 19XX as in only 4 digit serial.  I find it confusing as I was thinking a 53 would have a much higher number?  Then I look at the barrel stamps and it sure does say Model 53 on it.  Then I realize the front half sure doesn’t match the rear… so now I am wondering… could this be an early Model 1892 Deluxe back end connected to a Model 53 front end?

If it is something interesting I can go take pictures of it.  I do recall it had some checkering on the forend that did not look factory, and it has a shorter mag tube (Is that called a button mag?) as the tube only sticks out far enough from the wood to allow for the takedown mechanism.

Any help would be appreciated.  

Hey Michael, You sure about the serial #. It differs from what the OP said originally, and also yours does not start with “1” as Bert said they should. Maybe I’m missing something here.  Peter

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2291
Member Since:
March 20, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
10
December 24, 2016 - 6:56 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Peter,

I got a wrong PM associated with this post.  It was for a different Model 53.  I will edit my earlier post.

Michael

Signature-Pic.jpg

 

Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 10726
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
11
December 24, 2016 - 8:06 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Brian,

Please provide the complete serial number of this rifle.

Bert

WACA 6571L, Historian & Board of Director Member
High-walls-1-002-C-reduced2.jpg

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 853
Member Since:
June 11, 2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
12
December 24, 2016 - 8:50 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

Just for a bit more information on early Model 53’s … from June 18th, 1924 to September 21, 1927, Model 53’s were serial numbered in their own range, from 1 to 10874. After that date, the same receivers and Model 92 serial numbers were used to build both Model 92’s and Model 53’s. If anyone ever finds a Model 92 with a serial number lower than 10895 AND with a Type 6 or Type 7 upper tang stamp, that is a Model 53 receiver that was used to build a Model 92. Two such have surfaced and are included in my survey. The OP’s, however, is a legit Model 53, serial numbered in the early Model 53 range, and with a Type 6 upper tang stamp.

As I mentioned earlier, I would be grateful for the full serial number in the OP’s post, in order to include it in my survey.

Avatar
Northern edge of the D/FW Metromess
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 4970
Member Since:
November 7, 2015
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
13
December 24, 2016 - 9:15 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Nice enough gun, price seems way out of line all things considered. With correct wood and a decent bore I’d be interested. Couldn’t help but notice some interesting guns in that rack, looks like a good shop to keep an eye on.

Life Member TSRA, Endowment Member NRA
BBHC Member, TGCA Member
Smokeless powder is a passing fad! -Steve Garbe
I hate rude behavior in a man. I won't tolerate it. -Woodrow F. Call, Lonesome Dove
Some of my favorite recipes start out with a handful of depleted counterbalance devices.-TXGunNut
Presbyopia be damned, I'm going to shoot this thing! -TXGunNut
Avatar
Member
WACA Guest
Forum Posts: 26
Member Since:
November 7, 2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
14
December 25, 2016 - 5:02 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

win38-55 said
I just saw this thread this morning. It looks like everything has been properly sorted out; the low serial number coupled with the type-6 tang is proper for the early production Model 53’s. Too bad about the after-factory checkering; that reduces the value substantially below the dealer’s asking price. I am the person mentioned above, building a survey of Model 53’s. Each rifle is recorded by serial number and I would be grateful if you could let me know the serial number of this rifle so that I can add it to my survey.  

The serial is 1925 on this one, if I remember correctly.

Avatar
fjruple
Guest
WACA Guest
15
March 19, 2018 - 9:56 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Wow!!  I am glad that I found this Winchester 53 thread.  As I have this strange duck, that I found in a local gun shop for $750.00.  The Winchester appears to be well used and initially it was thought to be a fake as the date of the SN 1532 did not match any of the Winchester 1892 records.  I thought the rifle was sent back to Winchester to be upgraded to a take-down with a new Model 92 .44WCF octagonal 24″ inch barrel.

The rifle itself is a rifle with a 24 inch octagonal barrel in .44WCF and appears to be a replacement barrel probably done some time after 1927 as the rear sight has a patent date of Feb. 22:27.  The barrel itself in marked Model 92 – Winchester and there is a patent date of October 14, 1884.  The front sight is an adjustable windage is a locking screw and has a patent date of Nov 4, 02. 

The magazine is I believe to be a half takedown magazine tube with the take-down lever.  On the top of the receiver and barrel are stamped with the Winchester proof marks.  The patina on most of the rifle matches except for the barrel and part of the magazine tube is blued and probably replaced at a later date.  Next to the serial number on the receiver and locking part of the barrel are indexing marks to align both the barrel assembly and receiver to lock of the rifle by screwing in the magazine tube.  Parts of the sides of the receiver shows wear marks that leads me to believe the rifle was kept in a rack that moved a lot to put a surface damage on the bottom left and right side of the receiver.  The buttstock is the crescent type and there are marks that would indicate that someone in the past had put sling swivels on the front handguard and buttstock but did a poor job of the installation as the front handguard was split and repaired and the swivel holes on the buttstock are not center on the stock and they have been filled in as well.

Thanks

Frank

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 10726
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
16
March 19, 2018 - 2:53 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Frank,

What exactly is marked on the upper tang behind the hammer ? I suspect that what you have is an aftermarket reworked Model 53 that is now a “Frankenchester”.

Bert

WACA 6571L, Historian & Board of Director Member
High-walls-1-002-C-reduced2.jpg

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 347
Member Since:
February 18, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
17
March 20, 2018 - 3:13 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Big Larry said
 I have a very low numbered M53 and it has the #6 marked tang. Plane Jane rifle, but it is a 44-40. The values of these rifles differ considerably with the caliber. This rifle may be quite rare. Again, what caliber is it?  Big Larryhttps://winchestercollector.org/wp-content/sp-resources/forum-image-uploads/themarine60yahoo-com/2016/12/M53-507.jpgImage Enlarger  

PLAY IT AGAIN SAM!!!
Just on the heels of my last Model 53 post some minutes ago, bit of further Googling coming up with – still confusing to me – this Thread, that of my moments ago post & above photos. My 53 tang exactly as in the number “6”, upper left location. Looking even a twin for condition; it could be mine! IF I now interpret matters correctly. Simply the standard-correct tang nomenclature within Model 53 numbers under 11K serial range.
So… Presumably, SIGNALS OFF!
I suppose at least the positive. My model 53 without ‘gender’ crisis!
So, NEVER MIND & good evening all!
A ‘who’s on First’ episode… 🙂 🙂 🙂
My take

Forum Timezone: UTC 0
Most Users Ever Online: 778
Currently Online: gobblerforge, bhutch, tsbccut
Guest(s) 40
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
clarence: 6281
TXGunNut: 4970
Chuck: 4571
1873man: 4282
steve004: 4160
Big Larry: 2324
twobit: 2291
TR: 1710
mrcvs: 1706
Forum Stats:
Groups: 1
Forums: 17
Topics: 12650
Posts: 109996

 

Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 1745
Members: 8792
Moderators: 4
Admins: 3
Navigation