Perhaps I made back my loss on that 1886 with this one, but maybe not.  Perhaps it is only a $2500 firearm, or at least was in March 2025 when purchased off of Gunbroker.

https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-swap-meet/model-1894-and-one-model-1892-house-cleaning/#p160179

steve004 said
Bert and Bob -
I agree with you and found your comments reassuring.  However, I think Ian is on to something as, like he has, I've observed some market price drops that seem like a trend.  Maybe not.  I hope they are just anomalies.  
  

I hope so as well, but it seems to be a trend.  I’ll use this rifle as an example.  Multiple folks thought the $5800 price to be fair, it’s an 85% rifle, I negotiated down a bit from the asking price.  This was about a year and a half ago.  I found something I liked better, and decided to let this one go, thinking, at auction, it would do quite well and I might make perhaps 10% on it as I negotiated my terms downward as to what I might have to pay.  

https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-swap-meet/886-ex-lt-c-1909-for-sale/

Morphy’s is a well respected auction house, but I probably should have let it go at Rock Island.  The key points here are I bought it before the Election of 2024 and sold it after the election, when this sort of stuff tumbled 10 to 33%.  If I had known how poorly it would fare, I never would have gotten rid of it.  I didn’t dislike it, just thought it would do well, thinking $7500 at auction wasn’t a stretch.

And here’s how it fared:

https://auctions.morphyauctions.com/_C__HIGH_CONDITION_WINCHESTER_MODEL_1886_EXTRA_LIG-LOT628826.aspx

I get it this is one example, but  I’ve found other such examples and this rifle shouldn’t have fared so poorly.

I agree with you and found your comments reassuring.  However, I think Ian is on to something as, like he has, I've observed some market price drops that seem like a trend.  Maybe not.  I hope they are just anomalies.  

Bob

mrcvs said
Hands down, you are better off with a pristine piece, 98 to 100%, except when you have doubters who believe that it might be refinished.  85 to 97% used to be a good place to be, but not anymore.  I think there’s a stronger demand, and possible valuation on a refinished piece than something in the 75 to 95 or 97% range, as long as well done and in the lower percentages of this range.
  

I disagree.  In my personal opinion, Winchester firearms that are in the 80 - 95% condition range will always be very desirable collector's pieces, and very easy to sell without losing any money on them.  There are simply way too many of the guns in the alleged 96 - 100% range that are not what they are advertised to be.  I will stick to buying guns that wear their age appropriately.

Bert

I guess sometimes "stuff" (excrement) happens...

As for barrel markings, M70 barrels were polished three (!!!) times with successively finer grit AFTER the exposed roll marks were applied.  This usually removed any/all "cratering" of the steel from the die application.  Proofs were applied to finished (blued) barrels, hence there shouldn't be blue finish in the proof marks and they shouldn't be polished over.

Best,

Lou

mrcvs said
Hands down, you are better off with a pristine piece, 98 to 100%, except when you have doubters who believe that it might be refinished.  85 to 97% used to be a good place to be, but not anymore.  I think there’s a stronger demand, and possible valuation on a refinished piece than something in the 75 to 95 or 97% range, as long as well done and in the lower percentages of this range.
  

I too, have seen evidence of trends in this direction.  This doesn't fit well with me, finding that the place I am in, is no longer that, "good place to be."  Even though many of my pieces may be worth less than they used to be worth, I don't like them any less.  And I'm not going to switch to refinished or restored rifles.  

While my focus is on original pieces, I do see an enormous distinction between a poor restoration (such as the topic rifle of this thread) vs. a top notch restoration such as Wyoming Armory or Turnbull turns out. In fact, anything short of a Wyoming Armory or Turnbull quality restoration, is in my book, a "poor restoration." Top restored pieces can sell for big dollars, but that doesn't mean the sellers are making money on them.  The cost of a quality restoration easily takes my breath away.  

It probably means the barrels were milled, cut to length, rifled, threaded, chambered, polished - and then fitted temporarily to some sort of universal receiver that could be triggered from behind a wall, then fired for proof and stamped. 

You wouldn't proof-stamp before polishing. Or roll-mark either, I would think. From what i have seen, most models' barrels were blued after proof-stamping. For some reason, the Model 71 barrels' proof marks appear to have been applied through the bluing. [Bert H. has published substantial evidence of this, although some dispute it. I don't. ]

Which begs the question when were the barrels of completed rifles proofed?  It's hard to imagine separate and different steps and sequences. 

My understanding is that the "WP" definitive proofs were not stamped until after the fully finished and assembled rifle was proof tested.  Ditto application of the electropenciled bolt serial number.  That's why those two markings are the only ones on a M70 that should be "rough", i.e. never polished over.

The interesting thing (to me) is that the M70 barrels I've seen bearing the "circle P" mail order proof ALSO have the definitive "WP" proof.  One gets the idea that those barrels were proof tested and given the mail order proof simply to denote that the factory did not fit it to whatever action it might now be attached to (no guarantee of correct headspace)... 

This picture is typical IMHO... Another barrel of Ted's that's currently at my house for photos.  This one's a real oddity, in that it's a '39 date M70 barrel that in addition to the mail order proof is hand stamped "54" (for Model 54) in the exposed roll marking.  Apparently someone ordered a replacement barrel for their M54 in 1939 and Winchester didn't have one handy, so they took a current production M70 barrel (lacking "70" stamp) and stamped it "54"...

Like Bob said, I have on occasion seen intact and apparently original (assembled) M70s lacking one (or both) definitive proofs.  Whether they were the result of a factory oversight or "lunchbox" guns is something I don't know...  If there's no definitive proof on a loose barrel, either there never was one or there was one that's been removed, e.g. polished out during a refinish. 

As far as Ted's 358 WIN barrel, it looks like a genuine 358 WIN barrel to me (as opposed to a rebored/remarked 308 WIN barrel).  Winchester stopped providing mail order barrels well before they developed the 358 WIN, so it's not surprising (to me) that there's no mail order proof stamp.  I do not like to comment on the blue finish (original or reblued) from photos.  This one has undisturbed blue on the barrel threads and muzzle crown (probably the rifling as well), suggesting it hasn't been on a gun/fired since it was blued.  That (along with the absence of a definitive proof) would argue against it being a "take off" barrel.  So IMHO it's either an original "NOS" barrel or one that's had the proof polished off...  

I don't know...

Lou

I think I recall seeing a Winchester publicity photograph showing an employee firing a rack of Garand M1 rifles for proof. Perhaps that was a function check and not for proof. 

However,  firing blue pills in a complete rifle to see if the barrel will rupture  doesn't sound like a desirable job or sound procedure. 

I would be happy to learn the truth from anyone with actual knowledge. 

And a long slide WJS that reminds me of a Great Dane servicing a Chihuahua. But I digress...

I'm getting to the point of discrediting any auction in which the description uses the word "collectible" as an adjective.