Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Sir I have a model 1892 receiver SN30836 with a model 53 44-40 W.C.F barrel. I have a certificate from the Cody Firearm museum stating that the 1892 was made as a 38 Cal not 44-40 in the late 1890s. Just trying to figure out the history of this gun, and correct configuration of this gun. Very confused on the model. Hope you can help. Thanks
Offline
Hello Jerry,
As the factory letter from the CFM records office indicates, you have a Model 1892 that was originally manufactured as a 38 WCF in the year 1894. The Model 53 rifle was not introduced until 1924 (30-years later). Your Model 1892 was originally made for black powder cartridges, and apparently sometime after 1924, the then owner of your rifle decided to rebarrel it and upgrade it to a Nickel Steel smokeless powder 44 WCF barrel. The logical choice was to purchase and have a Model 53 barrel installed. I suspect that the barrel has double proof mark stamps on it… a superposed “WP” in an oval, and a “P” in an oval. Both markings will be stamped on the top of the barrel right next to the receiver frame ring. You can determine the estimated conversion date by checking the 2-digit year number stamped on the bottom of the barrel. To see the date, you will need to remove the forend cap, magazine tube, and forend stock. The date will be in the milled concave section of the barrel next to the receiver frame.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert,
Yes, who ever did the conversion to the 1892 did a really good job, does the Winchester Fire Arm company do this? The gun looks exactly like a model 53, how due you put a value on a gun like this that has been modified and is in great condition? Thanks You
Jerry,
In my opinion, it is very unlikely that Winchester would have installed a Model 53 barrel on an original Model 1892 receiver frame. Instead, they most likely would have installed a Model 92 marked barrel. Because of the mismatched barrel and receiver, the “collector” value of the rifle is minimal as compared to a verified 100% factory original rifle. That stated, and because it is a 44 WCF, it is value as a “shooter” or “hunting” rifle for those who like the 44 WCF cartridge. How much value is up to the interest of the buyer. My guess is that it should bring at least $750.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
It would be interesting to get the barrel date off the underside of the barrel, just forward of the receiver. I would also be interested to see a photo of your rifle to see if the proper Model 53 buttstock was installed on the re-build. Like Bert said, I very much doubt that the Winchester factory would install a Model 53 barrel on a receiver that is marked Model 1892 on the upper tang. I should also mention that I once owned a Model 1892 rifle that had a first year serial number, but had been completely re-built as a carbine by Winchester sometime in the 1930’s judging from the ramp front sight (wish I had checked the barrel for the date). There were proper Winchester proof marks on the barrel and the receiver, with no “P’ in an oval. The barrel was marked ‘Model 92’. The point is that if Winchester had rebuilt your Model 1892, I would expect it to have proof marks on both the barrel and the receiver, and I would expect it to have a barrel marked ‘Model 92’, not a barrel marked ‘Model 53’, which would conflict with the tang marking.
Question: Does your rifle have a proof mark on the top front of the receiver? What sort of proof marks are on the top of the barrel just forward of the receiver?
Sir, can not figure out how to add photos(attachments)
Jerry,
You need to be a WACA member to directly post pictures. As a guest, you will need to use a photo hosting website, and then provide the URL to it. You can also send the pictures directly to Kirk at [email protected]
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
If it looks like a 53, my guess is that someone built this gun from available parts some time after the 53 was introduced. It’s likely that your receiver was just a part at the time and the gun was assembled around this. This was not uncommon at the time.
Bert, I was wrong the barrel is a 92 44 WCF not model 53, I sent you pictures on the email address that you gave me. Thanks
Jerry,
As of this time, I have not yet received your pictures. Make sure that you put “Model 92” in the subject line.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert,
I sent the pictures to [email protected], is that correct.thanks
You sent the to Kirk, he is the fellow that is surveying the Model 53. Send the pictures to [email protected]
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
1 Guest(s)
