Special Interests - Groups & Societies > The Winchester Model 1892
Why the 1892?
treebeard:
I have been in love with 1892's since I was a kid and now that I am an old man I've been able to acquire several. They are light and handy and I find them very smooth. I am not a speed demon so I have not had the jamming problems I heard about. My two favorite ones are a 24 inch rifle 1st year production now in 44-40 and a late production 25-20 SRC. Neither are what collectors look for . The SRC has zero finish but an excellent bore and smooth action and costs pennies to reload. The rifle was a rust bucket that when received would not even open for all the crud in the action. I did a total strip and clean and it now functions as designed but lots of patina. The 38-40 bore was hopeless so I had Bobby Hoyt rebore to 44-40 and it is now shoots excellent groups when I do my part.
I have prettier 92's but none more fun than these two.
PJ Hardtack:
If the '92 was good enough for John Wayne, It's good enough for me. He's the guy that made it famous even if it wasn't the right rifle for the era of the movie.
Then there was Chuck Connors in the "Rifleman", Steve McQueen and how many others .... ?
Isom:
I'm not that much in love with the 92 ,,,,,,,,,, I just like a "good" deal. I've 3, 32-20,, 38-40 ,,, 44-40, originals. One Rossi SRC in 44-40. They are great rifles, but to me, they're a pain to take apart and put together. I can do a cursory strip to clean but I'm not going much past that. All are rifles, 24'', the 44-40 is round barrel, the other two have octagon barrels. The 38-40 I got from a guy that was carrying it around in a gun show. Asked what caliber, we talked price ,,,,,,, great price. I was so happy with it, I forgot I was on my motorcycle. I'm thinking if I can find a cheap scabbard and some rope, I'll be good to go. Luckily my friend came by and he took it home for me. They're all good shooters, and the barrels are good. Foul a little, but no big deal. I only shoot smokeless in them. They're all good for smokeless. Well, that's my 92 story.
Shoot safe,
Isom
Advertising:
amzn_assoc_placement = "adunit0";
amzn_assoc_search_bar = "true";
amzn_assoc_tracking_id = "cascityinassociw";
amzn_assoc_ad_mode = "manual";
amzn_assoc_ad_type = "smart";
amzn_assoc_marketplace = "amazon";
amzn_assoc_region = "US";
amzn_assoc_title = "My Amazon Picks";
amzn_assoc_linkid = "e1151a28516e5a854211a2c6e0e85add";
amzn_assoc_asins = "B0C27CJTNW,B0BF12N3V9,B08BH4BD2J,B004UR76K6";
Blair:
I don't care much for the '92's.
This is not to say they are not good firearms, it is to say they were over used in most movies and films. I grew to dislike them for this reason.
They came about very late within the Cowboy time period considering the other options of the historically firearms correct for the day.
Remove the forearm, and a little yellow paint on the receiver and you could call it a Henry, even if the time period was set in 1843!
My best,
Blair
Isom:
Blair,
I call it a 1892 Henry :)
Isom
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version