Winny 1892 in 25-20 - EEK, IT'S BEEN REFINISHED!

[RodTheWrench]

Hey all, I'll cut to the chase.

Trying to help value a gun from a friend-of-a-friend's estate.

Link to pictures: https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B8TImhLbos5PQ0RONWo2d2dDQU0&usp=sharing

From the Serial # this rifle was built in 1910. Saddle-ring carbine.

Note the tube being smashed up against the barrel a bit. Still feeds fine, may not take as many rounds in the tube as factory?

Looks like the rear sight is missing a piece.

Rifling looks decent, about 80%. No pitting noticeable. Mechanically everything works as designed, not sloppy, trigger is good. No real bluing left on the gun, but is in good shape for the age.

I did not fire the gun.

The GLARING PROBLEM though - whoever thought it was a good idea to sand down the stock, woodburn it, then rattle-can some semi-gloss clear over it?!?

That's the big issue. The range for these guns - comparing online and bluebook when in similar condition but NOT having been refinished is maybe 900-1300. How much does that crappy refinish job affect value?

What else am I missing?

 

[Jimro]

There doesn't seem to be a hard and fast rule about this in my experience. I generally cut the estimated value in half for a bad refinish job or a mixed part repair for an older rifle with collector value. That would put the value of the rifle your friend is interested in into the 450 to 650 range. Since it is possible to get unaltered wood later (I wouldn't count on it though) to restore the rifle to "as original" it doesn't seem a bad deal in the upper end of that range.

For something in production I just go with whatever the used price for a model is then try to talk the seller down more for being less than pristine for the used price.

Jimro

 

[Nitescout]

X2 on what Jimro said...If it`s been messed with, It can cut the value in half.

Collectors want original condition ...no obvious signs of repair or refinish..

The model `92s are popular and in demand by cowboy action shooters, so it still has value as a shooter, as is.

 

[RodTheWrench]

I haven't seen where 25-20 is particularly MORE or LESS desirable over other calibers. Is it? It seems to me to be not good for much other than plinking and small game.

 

[Nitescout]

I agree...the 38-40, and 44-40 are much more in demand...I don`t know what it would cost to rebarrel.

 

[Jim Watson]

Not really practicable to go from .25-20 to .44-40 anyhow.

It would be a nice CAS carbine for a handloader who wanted low recoil.

Surely there is a way to kill the gloss on the stock varnish job.

I can't guess a dollar resale value, but will point out that a foreign copy will be well up in Jimro's range. An Italian copy will be $1000.

 

[eastbank]

if mine, it would get a mag tube(used better) get elevation slider and stop screw for the rear sight and get rid of the shiny finish for a oil finish and then shoot it. as is 400-500. eastbank.

 

[Mike Irwin]

Abused stock, bend magazine, obsolete cartridge...

I'll give your buddy fiddy cent for it...

Ah, I'm feeling generous. A buck fiddy. If he covers shipping.

 

[RodTheWrench]

Feeling saucy today, eh Mr. Irwin?

When we pulled it out of the case my heart sank when I saw that finish. Poor wittle gun!

 

[Scorch]

For what it's worth, many, many firearms in "ranch country" were working guns until relatively recently, and the way they were maintained and repaired varied from creative to astonishing. I started gunsmithing in Reno, NV, and we would see the ranch guns, the buckaroo guns, the sheepherder's guns, and all of them had one thing in common: they were poorly maintained and repaired rather haphazardly. Stocks held on with wire or a bent nail was common, repairs done with pliers and hammers were common, and as long as they still worked, they were "just fine", but when they quit working, they came to town for a little TLC. So, you have a ranch gun, not a collectible, quit acting like it's some priceless antiquity that someone vandalized.

As far as value, that one would fetch about $400 at a gun show, no reason to pay more than that for it. No collector would want it anyway.

 

[Gunplummer]

Ah, the voice of reason.

 

[JT-AR-MG42]

RW,

You are saying the stock has been sanded?
The photo of the tang and for-end do not look sanded to me. Just
cannot judge the butt-stock at the plate.

Someone did remove the stock stain for sure.

The gumwood stocks had a tendency to absorb oil and such and
it does dent easily, but it does not look burned to me.

I think Scorch has a closer ballpark number than you mentioned.
I could see that carbine move at 450 or 500.

JT

 

[MJFlores]

I dont mean this as an insult, But I would give $400 for that rifle. For that barrel to get dents like that, it must have been used to wack in metal fence posts. It was definitely a "tool" that was used hard for all it's life, which is pretty cool but...wow that thing has been abused. It's days of fetching a premium for being original are LONG gone. Realistically, I'd keep the receiver, bolt and lever, and scrap everything else. Then after replacing mag tube wood, and barrel you'd have a nice working mans rifle but not a high value 92. Still, I'd like to own it as a project gun for the right price... but it would have to be inexpensive. Again, not trying to insult you or the rifle...it is a neat old gun that has it's battle scars.

 

[eastbank]

i don,t think the barrel will need replaced, the mag tube yes. i have seen barrels with worse bumps and dints and gouges on the out side and still shoot alright. go shoot it the way it is will be the only way to know for sure, pop 3-4 rounds from a good rest at 25 yrds to see what kind of a group you get. eastbank.

 

[hartcreek]

I picked up a 100 year old 94 in 25=35 that some fool had gold plated some parts and chromed others for cowboy tom foolery.....I use it as is for my hunting rifle so my better one will not get more dinged up. What you have is a shooter........makes no sence to leak money on it just use it.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy

Looks to me like the magazine is a replacement at some point, it has much more blue than the barrel. Not uncommon with old Winchesters.

I have a couple of original '92 and '73s. Yes, 44-40 and 38-40 are more desirable and command better prices.

This one looks like it was rode hard and put away wet. Frankly, I would pass it by and would not buy it at all, unless I could get it as a project rifle really, really cheap. Like $200 cheap. Otherwise I would put it back on the rack shaking my head at how badly it was treated.

 

[FrankenMauser]

As long as it's sound and shows promise of being a "shooter" I'd give up to $350 for it. That's on the low side of market value, most likely, but that's what it would be worth to me. ...And I need a .25-20 that's in shooting condition - collector's value and looks don't matter much.

The biggest faults here are the magazine, missing part(s), spray-on finish on the stock, and overall condition indicating years of neglect, misuse, and/or abuse.

Some other parties might - might - be willing to go to $500 or $600, but they'd be fools and it may take a while to get it. That one was a working gun. It's out of the collectors' market now.

 

[RodTheWrench]

Thank you all for your input. Some great points that really drilled down to the nitty-gritty. That's exactly what I needed!