Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
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
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.
Steve,
I agree with you… both are very nice Model 1886 Rifles !1
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
[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
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
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)
