Log In
November 19, 2006
Offline
Not me but I know many collectors have considered the .33 a chambering not worth collecting when it comes to collecting M1886’s. Anyway, here is one that sold very recently and brought a darn good price. Plus, it is simply a fabulous rifle. Seriously, anyone here have a ho-hum reaction to this rifle?
https://www.gunbroker.com/item/763753122
And on the topic of .33’s, here is a deluxe that is currently up for sale. Good grief, but look at that deluxe wood. A little blue loss on the receiver but what a rifle:
https://www.gunbroker.com/item/766191514
June 24, 2015
Offline
Nice rifles. The butt stock on the 2nd one has been replaced though. Obliterated/covered up assembly numbers in the upper tang channel – re applied matching #’s to match the lower tang. This is the reason for the sub-par fit to the metal.
April 15, 2005
Offline
Steve,
I agree with you… both are very nice Model 1886 Rifles !1
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
February 18, 2011
Offline
[POSTQUOTE]steve004 said
Not me but I know many collectors have considered the .33 a chambering not worth collecting when it comes to collecting M1886’s. Anyway, here is one that sold very recently and brought a darn good price. Plus, it is simply a fabulous rifle. Seriously, anyone here have a ho-hum reaction to this rifle?
Ostensibly, 33 chambered ’86 were (perhaps yet) lesser value. Likely what allowed me to ‘budget-in’ several, years ago. Similar, a recent comment on another forum, concerning how Marlin levers have never achieved such values as the Winchesters. Well, many reasons of course. But my point: I was the guy buying at those sleeper prices. Others’ lament… My ‘opportunity! The ’86s in .33 and classic Marlins in most chamberings, great guns! ‘Making lemonade’ a specialty!
Couple really beautiful guns in that link! But far better for me, guns I can shoot without fear of depreciated value. Ie: ‘no sweat – fieldable’ guns.
Just my take
January 11, 2018
Offline
Austin said
Nice rifles. The butt stock on the 2nd one has been replaced though. Obliterated/covered up assembly numbers in the upper tang channel – re applied matching #’s to match the lower tang. This is the reason for the sub-par fit to the metal.
Austin, are you talking about the 3 square’ish spots to the left of the number that are shown in photo 10? Are factory-applied numbers generally in that location as compared to closer to the tang screw hole? Thanks, Matt
November 7, 2015
Offline
Tough call. The 33WCF is an intriguing cartridge but I don’t load or cast for it (at this time). If I had, say, $5000 to spend on an 1886 I’d be able to buy a much nicer rifle if the 33WCF chambering didn’t bother me. OTOH it sometimes costs a small fortune to get set up for a new cartridge when brass, dies and moulds are a (non-recoverable) part of the acquisition costs. Quite honestly I’m just enough of a contrarian to buy an 1886 in 33WCF, especially one as nice as either of these two.
Mike
November 19, 2006
Offline
TXGunNut said
Tough call. The 33WCF is an intriguing cartridge but I don’t load or cast for it (at this time). If I had, say, $5000 to spend on an 1886 I’d be able to buy a much nicer rifle if the 33WCF chambering didn’t bother me. OTOH it sometimes costs a small fortune to get set up for a new cartridge when brass, dies and moulds are a (non-recoverable) part of the acquisition costs. Quite honestly I’m just enough of a contrarian to buy an 1886 in 33WCF, especially one as nice as either of these two.
Mike
Mike – I enjoyed your thoughts. As I mull over what you are saying, being, “contrarian” might just explain a lot of what I do 
1 Guest(s)
