My "new Winchester"

Chase · February 19, 2011, 11:14:04 AM

Just picked up a "new" gun at a local gun show.
An 1892 Winchester in 25-20 and with a half magazine and Rocky Mountain front sight. The rifle has been refinished but the lettering is still pretty clear. Based on serial number, manufacture date was 1902. I have never been a big fan of the smaller calibers or the half magazine, but hey, sometimes it's nice to ride a different horse or to take that proverbial path less traveled!

Anyway, can't wait to shoot it. Tried to download photo but to no avail.

Dr. Bob · February 19, 2011, 01:19:26 PM

Congrats. Great find!

Tascosa Joe · February 19, 2011, 04:46:16 PM

Rocky Mountain front site!! That is Awesome.

River City John · February 19, 2011, 05:55:05 PM

Quote from: Tascosa Joe on February 19, 2011, 04:46:16 PM
Rocky Mountain front site!! That is Awesome.

Pics!

RCJ

Chase · February 19, 2011, 11:56:19 PM

My 92

Chase · February 20, 2011, 12:13:02 AM

A couple more pics

Major 2 · February 20, 2011, 06:46:51 AM

This brings to my mind a question about the Rocky Mountain front sight...

I've seen this mounted with highest part of the blade to the rear, the point forward.
I've also seen it mounted low to the rear and ramping up to the muzzle.

Was it personal preference ? Or is there cut & dry reason ?

Chase · February 20, 2011, 08:41:33 AM

Major 2--I'm with you. Looking at my front sight, it now looks like someone put in on "backwards" with the high part to the rear. Looking at a diagram of one in the Madis book, it looks like the high side is on the front. Either way, my sight looks somewhat worn.

Montana Slim · February 20, 2011, 03:35:31 PM

Methinks the high side of the sight should be at the rear.
One possible explanation is that the gradual taper will not snag as easily on brush as you move forward in the woods.

Regards,
Slim

Sir Charles deMouton-Black · February 20, 2011, 06:50:14 PM

I totally agree with Slim. High part to the rear. Too much glare in odd places the other way, IMO.

Will Ketchum · February 20, 2011, 07:34:54 PM

On muzzle loaders I have always seen the high part to the rear. My brother in law, who builds high end custom muzzle loaders, put the high end to the front on his first rifle and was nearly laughed out of camp.

I worked for Tedd Cash who made thousands of the sights and told me the high end went to the rear.

Will Ketchum

Chase · February 20, 2011, 10:07:00 PM

Thanks guys. I appreciate the input.

Irish Dave · February 21, 2011, 09:36:05 AM

Looks like a neat piece. You'll have to bring 'er by sometime.

Chase · February 21, 2011, 03:42:48 PM

Will try to stop in next week. Engraving a Vaquero, looking like I will have it finished next week and I'll bring it along too!

Irish Dave · February 22, 2011, 09:21:09 AM

Cool.

Steel Horse Bailey · February 25, 2011, 12:46:14 PM

Quote from: Chase on February 20, 2011, 08:41:33 AM
Major 2--I'm with you. Looking at my front sight, it now looks like someone put in on "backwards" with the high part to the rear. Looking at a diagram of one in the Madis book, it looks like the high side is on the front. Either way, my sight looks somewhat worn.

I have a rifle with the exact (looking) sight. It's also placed with the highest point to the rear. It gives less "shine" in bright light than it would turned 180 degrees.

Texas Lawdog · February 25, 2011, 12:53:58 PM

I would like to buy a 1873 Winchester replica in 45 colt to go with my 45 colt revolver. An outfit in Abilene (CDNN) had some in their catalog a while back.

Major 2 · February 25, 2011, 02:29:52 PM

I just grabed 73 Short Rifle in 44 Spl. it has a Globe sight , I have the Rocky Mountain sight to replace it with
but it's to lose in the dovetail. I need to make a shim.