Skip to main content
Help Center Community Shop

1892 pictures

Comments

6 comments

  • givette
    "This is my first time posting pictures on this forum, so please let me know how they turned out"

    Closeups out of focus. Here's how to prevent bad photos from appearing on the forums:

    When you wish to post something, a blank window appears for you to type, etc. On the bottom will be a "preview" button. By pressing it, you will be able to see the finished product, without having to submit it to the forums, and can delete bad photos, etc.

    As to the rifle, I'll let others cast an "expert eye", and submit their eval. Best, Joe
    0
  • Bert H.
    Hello Doug,

    The pictures were good enough to allow me to identify exactly what you have, and get a feel for the graded condition. Unfortunately, the news is not all that great.

    What you have is a SRC (Saddle Ring Carbine) that is in "Fair" condition at best. It is missing its saddle ring, has a non-factory sling installed in the butt stock, and it has very little original finish remaining. The stocks have considerable bumps, bruises, and wear. If the bore condition is comensurate to the rest of the gun, it is at the very bottom of the collectability spectrum.
    0
  • dandak1
    Bert is right speaking as a collector, HOWEVER, if the bore is okay and the rest of the gun checks out okay by a qualified gunsmith as being safe to shoot, you will find that you have a really cool gun. I dont own a carbine '92 (yet) but shoot my Dads '92 rifle in 44-40 a great deal. Very pleasant gun, very nice cartridge. Again, if it checks out as safe by a gunsmith, go ahead and enjoy what you have.
    0
  • Lutheran Krieger
    Thanks to all for your input/eval of my 1892. The bore is in great shape, action works smothly and it fires perfectly. This being a family heirloom, I have no interest in selling it, just trying to gather some historical information to pass on to my nephew, who will get the weapon. I reviewed the Cody info posted here and they do not have any ser#'s listed as high as mine- 632987. I would like to find out DOM and anything else about this firearm, if possible. I appreciate all your efforts here.

    Doug
    0
  • dandak1
    According to Pirkle, DOM of 632987 is 1911. 1911 was #586997 to 643483 so yours was towards the end of the year. From your pictures the gun sure looks like it is all as it should be, except yours is missing the saddle ring that went on the saddle ring staple. I think I can see the circular wear mark on the left side of the receiver that the ring made when it was still there. Kind of common on SRC's. My Dads 1981 vintage model 94 SRC is starting to show the same wear mark.
    0
  • Bert H.
    quote:Originally posted by dandak1
    According to Pirkle, DOM of 632987 is 1911. 1911 was #586997 to 643483 so yours was towards the end of the year.

    Pirkle derived his serial number information from Madis' published serial number listing, and as such, it is not accurate[V]. During my next trip to Cody, I will create a accurate Model 1892 serial number list from the Polishing Room Serialization Record Books (PRSRBs). The PRSRBs are not accessible to the general public, or to CFM members unless you visit the musuem in person.

    What I can positively tell you at this momemnt, is that Madis (and Pirkle, and every other known reference source) was off by quite a large margin as of December 31st, 1898. The last serial number that actually qualifies as "Antique" listed in the PRSRB is 103328 versus 165431 as listed by Madis. This serial number error increased in size for several years after the year 1898.
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Recent Activity