The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The North Corral > Curios and Relics

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old December 19, 2012, 01:17 AM   #1
SawtoothGrin
Junior Member
 
Join Date: December 19, 2012
Posts: 2
Model 1892???

Hello all! Brand new member today. Already have been reading posts for the last 3 hours. I love my firearm addiction!

I was given, by my father, a Winchester Model 1892. According to Winchester it was manufactured in 1896. It is in immaculate condition! No rust, not a single ding in the stock, foregrip or any of the metal parts (completely original and well oiled). Has octagonal barrel and chambered in 44 WCF. I definitely am not looking at selling it, but am curious as to what they go for. Any and all information on value or history is appreciated.
SawtoothGrin is offline  
Old December 19, 2012, 08:44 AM   #2
jtb1967
Junior member
 
Join Date: September 29, 2004
Location: WV
Posts: 454
$300 or so, but I'd probably give you $350 if you decided to sell it Actually looking at Gunbroker or some of the other auction sites will give you the best idea of current market values.
jtb1967 is offline  
Old December 19, 2012, 11:33 AM   #3
tahunua001
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 21, 2011
Location: Idaho
Posts: 6,002
I would say well over $1,000 if it is genuine but I would be very careful. the condition you describe does not fit what you would expect from a 116 year old gun, even with the best of care I could not imagine anything going that long without at least superficial rust, blueing wearing off, stock scratches, and other cosmetic blemishes. it sounds to me as if it has either been refurbished or it is a convincing fake. either way I doubt you could get more than $500 out of it. my brother in law had a 1895 winchester from 1904 that had all of the wear you would expect from a gun that old but still very good condition, it was appraised this year at $900 and he ended up selling for $700 just because of the times. if it is indeed as perfect as you say it would probably be worth thousands, but finding a collector that is not quite as suspicious as I and finding someone willing to pay it's full worth are going to be major hurdles if you should ever try to sell it.
__________________
ignore my complete lack of capitalization. I still have no problem correcting your grammar.
I never said half the crap people said I did-Albert Einstein
You can't believe everything you read on the internet-Benjamin Franklin
Bean counters told me I couldn't fire a man for being in a wheelchair, did it anyway. Ramps are expensive.-Cave Johnson.
tahunua001 is online now  
Old December 19, 2012, 12:05 PM   #4
James K
Staff
 
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 19,338
I will buy them all day at $1000. A Model 1892 rifle in .44-40 in near 100% condition will easily bring $4000, maybe $5000 to the right person.

Tahunua is right, though. Folks do tend to overestimate condition, which is why pictures are so important in doing an evaluation, even an informal one. Still, there are old rifles that have been perfectly preserved and they do turn up from time to time, so I never assume that "it is too good to be true."

Jim
__________________
Jim K
James K is offline  
Old December 19, 2012, 01:05 PM   #5
PetahW
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 19, 2008
Posts: 4,679
Yep, original Winchester Model 1892 big bore's in primo condition bring big bucks - $4K minimum sounds about right.



.
PetahW is offline  
Old December 19, 2012, 02:10 PM   #6
Winchester_73
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 20, 2008
Location: Pittsburgh PA
Posts: 2,859
Well part of the reason it would be as valuable or even more valuable than the above estimates, is because of how rare such a gun is in stated condition. Occasionally a gun in such condition is refinished, and possibly very well, to where it fools some people. No refinished 1892 is worth the above estimates.

Another question here is what type of features does the gun have? Special order features such as non-standard barrel lengths, rear sights, half magazine, half round/half octagon barrel, all effect the value. Some 1892s were "trapper" models meaning 18 in barrel or shorter, which are more sought after and more valuable but may be subject to NFA rules. Occasionally an 1892 and the like will have a cut down barrel which severely decreases the value. Antique (before 1899 production) 1892s are also generally worth more. Occasionally such a gun will be re-chambered to 44wcf because it was a popular caliber at the time. Model 1892s were also in 32wcf, 38wcf and 25-20. A 38-40 could use AFAIK all of the same parts except barrel. Original chambering would need verified before any serious value estimate can be given.

In short, much more info is needed. Considering the info given, a value estimate is premature and ambiguous.
__________________
Winchester 73, the TFL user that won the west

Last edited by Winchester_73; December 19, 2012 at 08:30 PM.
Winchester_73 is offline  
Old December 19, 2012, 07:33 PM   #7
James K
Staff
 
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 19,338
AFAIK changing a .38-40 to .44-40 would involve only a barrel change. Changing a .32-20 or .25-20 to one of the larger calilbers might be possible but it wouldn't be feasible.

Jim
__________________
Jim K
James K is offline  
Old December 19, 2012, 10:41 PM   #8
Buzzcook
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 29, 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 5,619
Quote:
Some 1892s were "trapper" models meaning 18 in barrel or shorter, which are more sought after and more valuable but may be subject to NFA rules.
It is my understanding that early short barrel "trapper" models that qualify as C&R are specifically exempted from NFA regulation.
Buzzcook is offline  
Old December 19, 2012, 11:31 PM   #9
SawtoothGrin
Junior Member
 
Join Date: December 19, 2012
Posts: 2
Thanks for the replies. After close inspection it does appear to have possibly been re-blued and re-varnished. If it is refurbished all the more reason to keep it. The tube magazine is protruding past the barrel about a 1/4 inch. Seems to be escaping from where it should be attached near the receiver. this doesn't look right, but my smithing skills are only for my invaluable weapons. So, I don't dare mess with it. Would any of you like to see pics anyways?
SawtoothGrin is offline  
Old December 19, 2012, 11:54 PM   #10
tahunua001
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 21, 2011
Location: Idaho
Posts: 6,002
pictures would help us give a more accurate appraisal of the cosmetic condition of the gun in question.
__________________
ignore my complete lack of capitalization. I still have no problem correcting your grammar.
I never said half the crap people said I did-Albert Einstein
You can't believe everything you read on the internet-Benjamin Franklin
Bean counters told me I couldn't fire a man for being in a wheelchair, did it anyway. Ramps are expensive.-Cave Johnson.
tahunua001 is online now  
Old December 20, 2012, 10:02 AM   #11
PetahW
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 19, 2008
Posts: 4,679
FWIW, most refinished guns usually carry a 50% or more devaluation, depending upon what the refinish did to the original stock lines & metal stampings/lettering, from another in completely original condition.


.
PetahW is offline  
Old December 20, 2012, 03:12 PM   #12
tahunua001
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 21, 2011
Location: Idaho
Posts: 6,002
what Petah said but there are some things you can do that does little to hurt the value of a gun, for instance an old military rifle with an oiled stock that's heavily scratched and dinged. you can take super fine sand paper to it to t get rid of the top layer of oil and dirt/crud, superficial scratches, and make the more serious ones less visible and then using the same type of oil originally used such as linseed oil and it will do very little to nothing to hurt value while on the other hand completely sanding down to get rid on all scratches and gauges, restaining the wood and then giving it a clear coat finish will severely injure the value.
__________________
ignore my complete lack of capitalization. I still have no problem correcting your grammar.
I never said half the crap people said I did-Albert Einstein
You can't believe everything you read on the internet-Benjamin Franklin
Bean counters told me I couldn't fire a man for being in a wheelchair, did it anyway. Ramps are expensive.-Cave Johnson.
tahunua001 is online now  
Old December 20, 2012, 08:47 PM   #13
James K
Staff
 
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 19,338
The magazine tube on a 92 rifle is not attached to the receiver, it just sits in a hole. It is kept from moving forward by a crosspin through the magazine ring and a lip on the magazine plug fitting into a slot in the bottom of the barrel at the muzzle.

Note that if removing the magazine tube on those guns, you first remove the magazine plug (careful the spring doesn't kink), then drive out the cross pin in the magazine ring. The tube can then be pulled forward. To remove the magazine ring, use a rod the size of the magazine tube to turn it; it is curved and trying to drive it out like a dovetail will damage it and the barrel.

Jim
__________________
Jim K
James K is offline  
Old December 20, 2012, 09:27 PM   #14
Gbro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 20, 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,056
Quote:
Occasionally an 1892 and the like will have a cut down barrel which severely decreases the value. Antique (before 1899 production) 1892s are also generally worth more. Occasionally such a gun will be re-chambered to 44wcf because it was a popular caliber at the time. Model 1892s were also in 32wcf, 38wcf and 25-20. A 38-40 could use AFAIK all of the same parts except barrel. Original chambering would need verified before any serious value estimate can be given.

In short, much more info is needed. Considering the info given, a value estimate is premature and ambiguous.
__________________
Winchester 73, the TFL user that won the west
Last edited by Winchester_73; Yesterday at 09:30 PM.
Another rechambering that is possible is changing the .44WCF to a .44Rem. Mag
And, your rifle started out as a black powder cartridge and back then corrosive primers were used so how does your bore look?
__________________
Gbro
CGVS
For the message of the Cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, But to us who are being saved, It Is The Power Of God. 1Corinthians 1-18
Gbro is offline  
Old December 21, 2012, 03:41 PM   #15
James K
Staff
 
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 19,338
Some dimensional differences aside, I would stongly recommend against firing the .44 Magnum in an original Winchester 92 or 73. Those guns were just not made for that kind of pressure.

Jim
__________________
Jim K
James K is offline  
Old December 21, 2012, 04:33 PM   #16
Slamfire
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 27, 2007
Posts: 4,054
There has been a great deal of improvement in steels, whether they be ordinary soft steels or various forms of nickel steel. No attempt with be made here to describe steels, as the subject would require and entire book. Thirty years ago, very little was known about heat treatment..

If you had a Winchester Model 1892 manufactured in 1905 and an identical model manufactured in 1935, assuming the original gun to be in perfect condition inside and out, you might place them side by side and notice absolutely no difference at first glance. Careful study, however, will reveal that the later gun is manufactured better, with a minimum of tolerance, slap, looseness or whatever you may choose to call it. That, however, is the minor part of the of the whole thing. There will be little laboratory resemblance between the material of which the two gun are manufactured. Changes and improvements are being made constantly, and where changes in the quality of steel or the strengthening of certain parts through heat treatment are made, the factory rarely, if ever, makes any announcement. If these same Model 92 rifles were fired with a Magnum .38/40 load, it is quite possible that the earlier gun might go to pieces, while the later one would be perfectly safe. These facts must always be considered in handloading.



Complete Guide to Handloading by Philip B Sharpe. First Edition 1937, Chapter XXX, Magnum Handgun and Rifle Possibilities. Mr Sharpe was born in 1903, died 1961.
__________________
If I'm not shooting, I'm reloading.
Slamfire is offline  
Old December 21, 2012, 06:55 PM   #17
Gbro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 20, 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,056
Sir,
You should not include the '73 & the '92 in the same sentence.
The only action weaker than the 1873 Winchester would be the Smith IMO,
And that would be the rubber cased Smith.
I am of the opinion that the 1892 action is stronger than the 1894 and have shot a 1892 that was reamed out to .44Rem Mag.
I would include that one should stick non-jacket bullets.
__________________
Gbro
CGVS
For the message of the Cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, But to us who are being saved, It Is The Power Of God. 1Corinthians 1-18
Gbro is offline  
Old December 22, 2012, 05:10 PM   #18
James K
Staff
 
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 19,338
My only comment is that YOU can shoot all the .44 Magnums you want out of a '92 Winchester.

Jim
__________________
Jim K
James K is offline  
Old December 23, 2012, 10:39 AM   #19
PetahW
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 19, 2008
Posts: 4,679
Yep, I'm with Jim: YOU can (but I won't).

Especially an original/early Winchester Model 1892, besides the later Winchester Model 92 with somewhat better steel(s).

FWIW, in the 1960's & 70's, a popular mail-order option was a .44 Mag barrel "kit", to upgrade .38-40 or .44-40 Model 1892/92 Winchesters to .44 Mag (about $29.95, IIRC).
AFAIK, most of those rifles so converted soon failed in one way or another, simply because the strength required to contain .44 Mag pressures required more than just a barrel of modern steel - the inferior action, bolt & locking lug strengths will soon come into play.

No, they didn't usually fail on the 1st shot, and maybe not on the 100th - but fail they did, sooner or later.

I elect to not be behind the trigger of something destined for failure - YMMV.


.
PetahW is offline  
Old December 23, 2012, 02:14 PM   #20
Gbro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 20, 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,056
I entered this thread to bring into it the possibility of a 1892 Win being converted either with a reamed chamber and now I learn, a replacement barrel in .44Rem Mag.
That it isn't safe is good advice to all. But that certainly doesn't remove the possibility that a '92 hasn't been so changed.
The one I know about was reamed out back in the '70s and it wasn't done by the owner. He took it to a LGS that had been doing this.
I do know who now inherited this old rifle and I do not know the serial range but the family was informed as to the value of this rifle and it was in fine condition and a saddle ring also. I will certainly try and forward this information to them.
I did a google and found a little on this here.
http://castboolits.gunloads.com/arch...p/t-43210.html
The old neighbor that owned the 92 also had a Ruger carbine in 44mag and that's probably a big reason he had the 92 converted, anyway he had Remington ammunition that was loaded back then for rifle only and so stated on the packaging.
__________________
Gbro
CGVS
For the message of the Cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, But to us who are being saved, It Is The Power Of God. 1Corinthians 1-18

Last edited by Gbro; December 23, 2012 at 02:36 PM.
Gbro is offline  
Old December 24, 2012, 12:32 AM   #21
James K
Staff
 
Join Date: March 17, 1999
Posts: 19,338
Just because some conversions were done does not mean they were either practical or advisable. In most cases, the problem will not be a sudden "blow up" but rather a battering and pounding over time that will eventually destroy the gun or create a condition, like excess headspace, that will lead to destruction. So gunsmiths could do a conversion, test fire the gun, and the customer might use it for hunting for a long time, firing two or three shots a year. But eventually trouble will come looking for a place to happen.

Those looking at older guns sometimes misunderstand case hardening of breech blocks, locking lugs, etc. Case hardening does a good job of reducing/preventing wear from the friction of moving parts. But it does NOT prevent the battering of parts, like locking lugs, which still have a soft inner core under the case hardening.

Jim
__________________
Jim K
James K is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:37 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.12444 seconds with 9 queries