Log In
July 19, 2013
Offline
I have a Win. 92 Trapper, mfg. 1929. I’ve been advised it should have a 44A sight, and the sight on it is a M94 sight, type ?
Anybody know what sight is on the gun ? is it possibly ok due to manufacture date, and is the 44A the correct sight for the gun ?
Is the value of the current sight equal to an original 44A sight. If it’s wrong on the gun, I’ll swap it out, but don’t know values.
Any help appreciated.
Bill
December 30, 2011
Offline
Bill
I would consider leaving that sight on there or at least investigating further.
Here is an 1894 rifle serialized in 1929 from my survey provided by 1892takedown:
We know at least the sight on your carbine was available then. I also notice the dovetail on your two carbines are located differently. I’m afraid I know very little about exactly where rear sight dovetails should be on ’92 trappers* and I can only guess if that would have anything to do with the standard rifle sight.
According to the Madis Sight Book, that type of elevator had “production authorized” on 2/16/27. It looks like there would not be enough room for the earlier, longer elevator.
Do you see any evidence around the sight or under it that indicates to you that there has been something else on there?
Brad
*edited this
December 30, 2011
Offline
I forgot to mention that the rear sight with the set screw and patent date is the 22E Sporting Rear Sight. If it is of any further interest to you, the information in the Madis Sight Book also lists it as being available to the Model 1892 Rifle and Carbine in barrel lengths of 14″-24″ during the time period of 4/11/25 through 10/27/31. Somebody like twobit who has looked at tons of Model 1892s would probably know if he’s seen this before.
Brad
March 20, 2009
Offline
Hello Bill and Brad,
Your trapper is a 1929 vintage gun. As I had mentioned earlier at around SN 952000 (late 1926) Winchester moved the rear sight dovetail further forward on the carbine barrel so that a longer buckhorn style rear sight could be used on the guns instead of just a typical carbine sight. I have definitely seen numerous saddle ring carbines, not necessarily “trapper” styles with similar rear sights on them as opposed to a standard carbine folding sight. I find no reason to suspect the sight is not original to the gun.
I do not have a copy of Stroebel’s boos so I can not comment on his designations. In the small Madis Sight Book yours rear sight definitely does not match the 22F designation on that page 79. The elevator is absolutely a 3C but the sight base is different. The “name” of each attached photo is the serial number of the rifle.
I am sorry that I can not be more definitive regarding the actual sight style. If you or others will post all the possible base styles images from the various books I will be glad to take a further look.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
December 30, 2011
Offline
Michael
I believe it is a 22E as mentioned, not a 22F. Same page 79 but on the top. I don’t believe a 22F would be appropriate either.
Brad
December 30, 2011
Offline
As I had mentioned earlier at around SN 952000 (late 1926) Winchester moved the rear sight dovetail further forward on the carbine barrel so that a longer buckhorn style rear sight could be used on the guns instead of just a typical carbine sight.
I was wondering if you had a link to where you mentioned this. I’m not real familiar with 1892s at all and I’d like to read it also.
Thanks,
Brad
December 31, 2012
Offline
hedley lamarr said
Michael
I believe it is a 22E as mentioned, not a 22F. Same page 79 but on the top. I don’t believe a 22F would be appropriate either.
Brad
Definitely a 22-E for sure. Big Larry
March 20, 2009
Offline
hedley lamarr said
As I had mentioned earlier at around SN 952000 (late 1926) Winchester moved the rear sight dovetail further forward on the carbine barrel so that a longer buckhorn style rear sight could be used on the guns instead of just a typical carbine sight.
I was wondering if you had a link to where you mentioned this. I’m not real familiar with 1892s at all and I’d like to read it also.
Thanks,
Brad
Brad,
I can not find the reply where I had talked about this. It went off with the Easter bunny apparently. Let me know if you have a specific question and I will attempt to answer and not loose the reply!!
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
March 20, 2009
Offline
Big Larry said
hedley lamarr said
Michael
I believe it is a 22E as mentioned, not a 22F. Same page 79 but on the top. I don’t believe a 22F would be appropriate either.
Brad
Definitely a 22-E for sure. Big Larry
Big Larry,
I would tend to agree on the 22-E designation but I have also seen the 22-F used on some rifles. It is hard to be certain all the time due to the quality(?) of the photos that folks pass on but the difference in the portion of the sight forward of the dovetail is fairly easily identified.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
July 19, 2013
Offline
Better pictures I hope….sorry.
December 30, 2011
Offline
Sorry if my saying “I don’t believe a 22F would be appropriate either” has caused any confusion.
It would have been better for me to say that I do not believe the sight on blueliner’s pictures is a 22F.
Brad
