View Full Version : guns may father left me not sure what to keep

October 6, 2004, 01:29 PM
hi my father left me some guns i will give the information i have and perhaps someone could give me there oppinion as to value and which ones to keep?
1-cooey model 750 22 bolt action
2-cooey model 39 22 bolt action
3-stevens pump action model 820b 12 gauge
9- j stevens arms co. 12 gauge cant find model #
10- remington revolver 57mm cant find any model # but it is prohibited
11- winchester model 9432 ws lever action special adition
12 winchester model 06 22 pump action
Thank you

There is also a single shot hinge brake 410 with no marks on it how do I find out anything about it?

Jim Watson
October 6, 2004, 02:01 PM
All the Cooeys I have seen were ordinary hunting and junior target rifles.
Stevens shotguns are ordinary hunting guns.
Neither are worth more money than any other common rifle or shotgun.

"Special edition" Winchesters are not worth more than standard unless absolutely new, unfired, unoperated, in the original box. If used at all, it is just another deer rifle.

The 06 Winchester pump is a nice little rifle. Dollar value depends strongly on condition.

Canada, minimum handgun barrel length 4"/100mm, right?
Remington has not made a revolver that I can find since 1894. Could you get it in as an antique in spite of the short barrel?

I don't think you have anything rare or valuable, unless that 06 is in superb conditon or the Remington is something unusual, but I would consider any gun left to me by my father to be a family heirloom.

October 6, 2004, 02:13 PM
thanks the 06 is in great condition. The remington hand gun was my grandfathers he used it in the war. I cant find any markings other than a serial number which is hard to read. Thank you for all you information I know nothing about guns.

Jim Watson
October 6, 2004, 04:41 PM
"remington revolver 57mm"

"The remington hand gun was my grandfathers he used it in the war. I cant find any markings other than a serial number which is hard to read."

Something does not jibe, here.
No markings. How do you know it is a Remington?
Does 57 mm refer to barrel length? What calibre?
The last revolver Remington made was in 1894 and it had a 140mm barrel. A 57 mm barrel would have been on an earlier model yet, not later than 1888.

Neither were used by any military I know of, unless it were emergency issue to a coast watcher in the Battle of Britain.

Need a picture.

October 6, 2004, 04:46 PM
] 57mm was on registration but not barrel length I will get a picture and post it and will see if I can find anything else on the gun. thanks for your help

Jim Watson
October 6, 2004, 04:49 PM
OK, I will be watching for it.
Could be about anything, who knows what a registration clerk may have written down in a hurry to get to lunch.

October 6, 2004, 07:44 PM
Here are some pictures hope some one can tell me what it is?

October 6, 2004, 08:56 PM
You have a genuine **VALUABLE** antique revolver.

You have a Remington revolver, either a Model 1875, or possibly a Model 1890.

The Model 1875 was made from 1875 to 1889 with about 25,000 made. These had 7.5 inch barrels, and were chambered in 44-40 or 45 Colt caliber.

A 1875 Model in excellent condition is worth around $5000.00. In fair condition about $800.00.

The 1890 was made from 1891 to 1894 with ONLY 2000 or so made.
These had 5.5" or 7.5" barrels.
The 1890 models are RARE, and extremely valuable.

Both the 1875 and the 1890 should be stamped on the top of the barrel "Remington Arms Co. Ilion, NY".

Again, if you have a 1890 Model, these are worth up to $9000.00 dollars or so in excellent condition.
One in Poor condition is worth $2000.00.

Jim Watson
October 6, 2004, 10:23 PM
The illustrated revolver is an 1875 Remington, not the rarer 1890 which does not have the web under the barrel. Most likely caliber .44 Remington, which is not the same as .44 Colt or .44 Winchester (.44-40), .45s were not common. Still a darn nice old piece, Blue Book value US$1000 or so; but who knows how the collector market is these days. I don't find one similar on the auction sites or Gun List to get a current market price.

Serial number in the 20,000s indicates it was made pretty late in the production run of 25,000 made through 1888.

I don't see what war Grandpa could have carried it in, though. But if he owned it, that still makes it a real family heirloom to be proud of.

October 7, 2004, 10:52 AM
The photos are pretty fuzzy, and I dunno squat about 1875 Rem's, but curiousity got to me, and I found this for $2500:


Ya better look quick, it's an old auction and bound to disappear.

October 7, 2004, 10:59 AM
Neat gun, gravenhurst! Sorry about your father's passing.

October 8, 2004, 06:29 AM
thankyou all your information was a great help to me. As you can tell I nothing about guns. You have been very nice to use your time to help me.

October 13, 2004, 10:19 AM
The Winchester 06 is a classic .22, hang onto it.

Johnny Guest
October 13, 2004, 01:34 PM
gravenhurst62000 - -
Is that Remington revolver a conversion to .22 rimfire or some other caliber?

I ask because it appears that there is some sort of plate inserted at the rear of the cylinder and also between rear cylinder face and loading gate. This may be something attached to rear cylinder face. I also notice what appears to be a transverse pin in the upper front of the frame - - This might be to hold a barrel sleeve pin place.

I really don't know what effect this would have on collectors' valuation.

You mention that this revolver is prohibited - - Does Canadian law make any provision for you to sell this item to a licensed collector or international dealer? I'm sure there are a lot of US collectors who would like to pay a fair price for such an item. It is not a "military firearm" or otherwise "evil" by any stretch of the imagination, and should, with some red tape, be importable into the USA. Whups! It must be "evil" to some extent, if your government forbids ownership of such. Please accept my sincere commiserations on that point.

Again, condolences for the passing of your dad.


October 13, 2004, 09:55 PM
For general info, here's a 2002 opinion explaining the prohibition:When the prohibition was first brought up for short barrel handguns the reason given was that the firearms in this category had no legitimate sporting purpose and were too easily concealable. They also referred to them as "Saturday Night Specials". The cutoff was 105mm which meant that all the nominal 4" revolvers became prohibited as they measured a revolver from the muzzle to the end of the forcing cone at the barrel just ahead of the cylinder. Somehow, I don't think anyone knowledgable in firearms would refer to a Ruger GP series in 4" as a "Saturday Night Special".

Now, stay with me on this one, they measure the barrel on a semi automatic pistol from the muzzle to the rear of the chamber, slide closed. This is the same method used in measuring rifle barrels.

Now for those who are still following this, the overall length of the 4" barrelled revolver is greater, generally, than the overall length of a 5" barrelled pistol. This means that the sight radius, generally is about the same and the inherent accurracy would be at least as good. Keeping all this in mind, their justification for the prohibition is nothing more than Political BS.

I know that industry has traditionally measured the revolver barrel without chamber. The reason the Government choose to do it the same way was to enable them to prohibit as "short barrelled" all those 4" revolvers that are out there. They had estimates, done by their own people, that it covered over 50% of all handguns in Canada.

Had their goal actually been as stated, to go after firearms that were too easily concealled, they would have gone with a minimum overall length. Most of us know it is far easier to conceal a legal 5" Government Model 1911 than it is to conceal a prohibited 4" N frame S&W.