Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NEW Winchester Model 1892........Quality Question...?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Malamute
    replied
    Actually, they all have the fore end recessed into the receiver, you just can't see it. After 64, Winchester went to a recess that was a round area indexed off of the magazine tube hole, the fore end fits into that area, instead of the whole area of the front of the receiver being milled out with a thin rim or lip all the way around. It bothered me some before, but doesn't now. I think most of the modern manufacturers do it that way, it probably saves a lot of machine time and fitting of the wood.

    I've used late fore ends on early guns, they work, but leave a small gap at the sides of the barrel. Doesnt look the best if you look for it (most would probably not notice), but allowed me to get a gun or two up and running when that's the parts I had on hand.

    Yes, somewhere in the early 1900's I believe the changed the firing pin tip size to a smaller one. Some gunsmiths bushed the bolt face and turned the pin down a little when making up guns in modern calibers. I don't know if the heat treat changed any in that period, tho it probably got better over time later. I think it would be tough to hurt one in any event. The 1886's were better hardened in later guns, but the main problem with early guns was the barrel, they are the weak link. Some early 86's were rebarreled to 348 and 33 Win. They did fine, and Winchester even did some of the barrel swaps. If you look at traditional type lever gun blow ups, its always the barrel that lets go first, I haven't seen any pics of an action that let go so far as lockup, it's the barrel going that makes them come apart. The actions can get so stretched and sloppy loose from overloads that they won't function, but they just dont seem to "blow up" like many seem to think they would.

    Leave a comment:


  • tvfinak
    replied
    Neat

    Nice looking rifle - thanks for the picture!

    Does it have the receiver recessed for the fore end? That was one big gripe I had with a number of reproductions.

    I'll have to take a look at my 92 again. It has a nice clean action and major with strong markings and no pitting action parts except I need the loading gate and some internal parts. I bought it for a $100 off of a junk rack at a local gun store so I can afford to put a few dollars in it.

    If I recall there were also some changes when Winchester went from black to smokeless powders. I think WInchester changed the firing pin size and perhaps hardened some of the psrts.


    Originally posted by Malamute View Post

    The actions of the 25-20's and 32-20's are smaller actions than the 38-40's and 44-40's (the outside dimensions are the same but the internals are all different). I think a small type could be made to function with larger rounds, but would take a lot of work. The magazine tube hole in the frame is different, the bolt face is differrent, and the cartridge guides and stop are different. The smaller actions were used in years past to build 357's, the larger calibered 92's were used to build 44 mags. A 357 would be a nice smaller game/protection/truck gun. There's a guy that does restoration work that can make a barrel with original style markings on it in whatever caliber you want. Would be a cool 92. Could be a special order type gun, like a short rifle, or short carbine etc.


    If you want a functional shooter, any decent quality 92 copy will do. Some of us like the clean lines and quality of fit and finish of the Miroku Winchesters and Brownings. They are getting better at doing the lines and finish on the Rossi's etc, but they still don't have the level of fit and finish of the Miroku guns. Looking around can turn up the Miroku guns for reasonable prices. CDNN has had them for less then common wholesale after the production run is done. I bought this high grade Winchester/Miroku 92 for less than most Rossi's retail for. It was used, and had a tiny mark in the blue on the barrel. I found Browning 92 hammer, trigger, mainspring and related parts to do away with the rebound hammer. It's also getting a Lyman tang sight, which will cover the tang safety nicely. I'm happy with it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Malamute
    replied
    Originally posted by rbuck351 View Post
    Yep, you can unload the chamber without loading another round, but there is a fine line. Just as soon as the extracted round clears the chamber, stop and it can be done....
    Doesn't have to be a fine line. You can run the lever all the way, raising the carrier, then just push the carrier (lifter) back down with your little finger and close the action. I do it all the time, and feel its one of the main functional advantages of the Winchester type action over the Marlins. I use small game loads in mine, leaving the magazine loaded with full power rounds. Some later guns are a bit sticky doing this, but you can take the lever out and polish the front edge where the brass marks are where its pushing the round back into the mag tube. All my older Winchesters are slick as can be doing this, newer ones (94's) need a little polish once in a while. A little carefull wiggling of the lever can get the round to move back forward, but dont overdo it. The Miroku 92's work slick in this regard.


    The actions of the 25-20's and 32-20's are smaller actions than the 38-40's and 44-40's (the outside dimensions are the same but the internals are all different). I think a small type could be made to function with larger rounds, but would take a lot of work. The magazine tube hole in the frame is different, the bolt face is differrent, and the cartridge guides and stop are different. The smaller actions were used in years past to build 357's, the larger calibered 92's were used to build 44 mags. A 357 would be a nice smaller game/protection/truck gun. There's a guy that does restoration work that can make a barrel with original style markings on it in whatever caliber you want. Would be a cool 92. Could be a special order type gun, like a short rifle, or short carbine etc.


    If you want a functional shooter, any decent quality 92 copy will do. Some of us like the clean lines and quality of fit and finish of the Miroku Winchesters and Brownings. They are getting better at doing the lines and finish on the Rossi's etc, but they still don't have the level of fit and finish of the Miroku guns. Looking around can turn up the Miroku guns for reasonable prices. CDNN has had them for less then common wholesale after the production run is done. I bought this high grade Winchester/Miroku 92 for less than most Rossi's retail for. It was used, and had a tiny mark in the blue on the barrel. I found Browning 92 hammer, trigger, mainspring and related parts to do away with the rebound hammer. It's also getting a Lyman tang sight, which will cover the tang safety nicely. I'm happy with it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Smitty of the North
    replied
    Thanks rbuck351:

    I'll give it a shot. OOPS, I mean I'll TRY IT.

    Smitty of the North

    Leave a comment:


  • tvfinak
    replied
    I haven't looked at the new 92s but some of the reproductions lack some of the quality touches of the orginals like the forearms inletted into the front of the action. They are also hot blued and the finish just doesn't look right to those familar with the orginals. On the postive side they are very well made and have better steel and heat treating than the orginals.

    I've got a nice orginal 92 action I've got to restore - I think it is a .25-20 now but the barrel isn't that good. Anybody know if the actions are the same for all cartridges? I know they have inserts or rails to handle the different cartridges.

    Any body remember the surplus "El Tiger" carbine imported years ago? I think they werein .44-40, Spanish and made by Astra but Ii sold mine many years ago.

    Leave a comment:


  • pinehavensredrocket
    replied
    hi smitty; times have changed concerning how we percieve safety.....in my law enforcement career i carried a "cocked & locked" .45 goldcup. the safety(s) didn't seem difficult to master. of course we carried all our firearms ( rifle, shotgun, subgun, pistol ) loaded. once a person asked me. " isn't that dangerous?". i replied. "you **** right!". hahaha true story though.

    your puma is a nice little rifle, with a great lockup and smooth action. good shooter too!

    this "new" winchester is in a different league with quality wood, metal, and finishing unlike what has come before. for those who want to spend the money, it is a great value.

    Leave a comment:


  • rbuck351
    replied
    Yep, you can unload the chamber without loading another round, but there is a fine line. Just as soon as the extracted round clears the chamber, stop and it can be done. I'm not sure I would want a round in the chamber in a scabbard but you can do as you wish. It just doesn't take long to chamber a round as your bringing the gun up to your shoulder. Although I have a 92 in 25/20, if someone made one in 256Win or maybe a 454 case necked to 28 or 30 cal it would be my next gun.

    Leave a comment:


  • Smitty of the North
    replied
    Originally posted by pinehavensredrocket View Post
    a lot of folks seem to DETEST an additional safety on these rifles, but to me they are added insurance while in the scabbard, and so i like them
    Like I said, I don't use the safety on my PUMA, under normal circumstances anyway, but I don't mind it being there. Suppose, I chamber a round, and then DON'T SHOOT. i might wanna use the safety then. I'll hafta see if I can UNchamber a round without puttin a nother'n in.

    I sure do hate the cross-bolt type safety, on a Marlin, for example. It'll be ON and you won't know it, UNTIL,,,,

    It just seems like, if you have time to take it outta the scabbard, you'd have time to throw the lever.

    I spose, it's what you've become used to.

    Smitty of the North

    Leave a comment:


  • Wildalaska
    replied
    Originally posted by AGL4now View Post
    You need to change your name from "Kid" to "The'triggerman". Yes, I loath any safety on a lever firearm. I think I'll have you guy's shorten the barrel on my .32 Special M-94 that Ken has someplace in your firearms Brothel.
    He hath been dubbed the Kid and shall be such until he is in diapers again. I wont touch the brothel remark, except to say the next time you are in town, I shall wear my Hello Kitty thong and Pikachu high heeled sandals for you. Out there by yourself, you need some excitement

    Leave a comment:


  • BrownBear
    replied
    I got to handle one a couple of weeks ago. I gotta say if they made it in 25-20 I'd own one right now, expensive or not. They seem very well put together, but the calibers are pretty humdrum to me when I've got other levers in the same calibers. Of course, I've got Marlins in 25-20 and 32-20, but that doesn't stop me from wanting a 92 in 25-20!

    Leave a comment:


  • pinehavensredrocket
    replied
    i currently own two miroku made winchester lever rifles....... and personally think even in it's heyday winchester didn't make a rifle this good! this fit, function, and finish make it as close to "perfect" as is possible.

    a lot of folks seem to DETEST an additional safety on these rifles, but to me they are added insurance while in the scabbard, and so i like them.

    Leave a comment:


  • AGL4now
    replied
    Originally posted by The Kid View Post
    I have handled a few of them in the last few months, and I must say, if I could dig up the extra scratch I'd own one by now. The only thing I see wrong with them is the tang safety, but at least it's more conveinently placed than the Marlin crossbolt. One of them needed a triggerjob but I fixed that for the guy. All in all I think they're pretty darn neat, maybe someday I'll get one in 44 mag so my 1886 will have a little brother.
    You need to change your name from "Kid" to "The'triggerman". Yes, I loath any safety on a lever firearm. I think I'll have you guy's shorten the barrel on my .32 Special M-94 that Ken has someplace in your firearms Brothel.

    Leave a comment:


  • ADfields
    replied
    Originally posted by jim in anchorage View Post
    surely you mistype?
    You'd be correct Jim, I did mistype. 1886/45-70 ....... the 94 does come in 38-55 though.
    Click image for larger version

Name:	Model-1886-Short-Rifle-MID-534175-l.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	14.9 KB
ID:	2479379

    Leave a comment:


  • rbuck351
    replied
    I have 2 of the old (about 1920) Win 92s (25/20 and 32/20) and a Puma in 454 but haven't had a chance to use one of the new Win 92s. The Puma is a well built gun and I can't imagine the Win being twice the gun even though it is twice the price. My Puma had the safety until I replaced it with a ghost ring sight. Now it doesn't have the funky safety and it does have a decent rear sight.
    If someone were to make a 92 in 256Win, I would probably have to get one regardless of the brand.

    Leave a comment:


  • Smitty of the North
    replied
    Originally posted by AGL4now View Post
    I am developing carnal feeling for the New Winchester Model 1892, which is painfully expensive.
    Anyone have one, fondled one, read a valid report on one......????
    I have a PUMA (Mdl 92 Replica) (357 Magnum)

    It too, is very well made, as good as any Winchester I've seen, so far, but MUCH cheaper.

    I dunno, but the Winchester is probably made overseas too. In any case, why pay double for the Winchester Name?

    It's got a small safety on top of the action, but it doesn't bother me in the least. It's easy to see if it's on Safe.

    I just don't use it, and it's not gone on Safe by accident. Yit, anyway.

    Smitty of the North

    Leave a comment:

Footer Adsense

Collapse
Working...
X