Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Winchester Collectors Another 1894 25-35 question

Looked at another 25-35 today, to my uneducated self seemed like an odd configuration and was hoping to maybe get some clarification of what I’m looking at.

Serial number had it to be 1911/1912, had a crescent butt plate, saddle ring, barrel band and button magazine. I can’t find any pictures of another one like it anywhere, wondering if it’s likely been put together/modified or something either uncommon or atleast something I could t find any information on. Thank you!

Either a Special Order gun or a Frankenchester

Did the stocks match?

Best advice is to let someone else get stuck with that puzzle…

Stocks did match. The more I think and look online this evening it seems the only real odd thing is the butt stock not being carbine style? I wasn’t sure enough of it to buy it and I’ve been wanting a 25-35 for a while.

The barrel band forend and a button magazine doesn’t go together. Sounds more like a “Frankenchester” to me

I know of two Special Order SRC’s with barrel bands, button mags and Whelen comb stocks with shotgun butt plates.

You're right Pocono, I shouldn't generalize. With Winchester, and other manufacturers of the time, special order could get you anything. LeRoy Merz has a .25-35 SRC on GunsInternational with a button magazine, although he doesn't claim it as original or special order, the only way to know for sure would be to letter it.

Don't the 1892 and 1894 "Eastern Carbines" have the combination of a barrel band and a button magazine?

Ok I was seeing some src’s with button magazine and barrel band, but then again I really don’t know what I’m looking at and the crescent butt stock still wouldn’t be right.

That is exactly what it looks like but with a crescent butt stock instead of carbine type.

Contacted Bert Hartman WACA Historian and learned that to date he has documented seven (7) M1894 SRC’s with button mags and crescent stocks in his survey.
A factory letter would not be available for a M1894 that was serialized in 1911/12. A matching stock set and also evaluating wood to metal fit of the butt stock to the tang/receiver are criteria that would weigh heavily in determining whether or not to purchase the gun although this examination could never be considered definitive.

Very interesting, wood to metal fit seemed very convincing, I did look at that very close. It’s at a bass pro and 2 gun department employee’s and 1 manager all refused to remove the lock and let me cycle the action and view the bore. They insist that’s a strict policy and there’s no way they will let me look at it, that’s really what kept me from trying it. It could be bought for $1199 and everything that is visible without working the action appeared to be in good and original condition. I just want a 25-35 to hunt with and haven’t found the right thing, not even at Tulsa last weekend. I may be just as well off with my 30-30s.

I had a very similar experience at my local Cabelas. I ordered, and paid for, a rifle to be shipped in from another store and when I went in to pick it up they wouldn't remove the lock to let me inspect the bore or internals. After much fuss the manager unlocked it and allowed me to look down the bore and inspect the action as long as he had control of the rifle. You might try that tact if you're still interested in the rifle. That's not a bad price for a .25-35 as I'm sure you've found out.

For Pocono:

Thanks Joe

Not a 25-35 W.C.F. with crescent stock, but an all original Special Order .30 W.C.F. SRC with button mag, 44A ladder sight, Whelen lightweight stock and steel shotgun butt plate.

Lots of different calibers and configurations out there.

On the regular full magazine carbines there is a notch on the bottom of the barrel where the front band screw goes through. Are SRCs the same? I've never owned or inspected one close enough to tell. If so it would be an easy way to tell if was an original short magazine SRC.

Lots of conversions made over the years. I wasooming for a Model 64 Winchester. One listed had a circa 1900 serial number receiver, straight stock, but Model 64 barrel and half tube mag.
It pays to research as you are doing.

I'd not consider the O/P's Model 1894 specimen as genuine. Not the expert some of you here nor Bret over at WCA is, but that Carbine butt as I see it being, wasn't intro'd until 1932 and only lasted five or six years. The wrap-over stock heel, as appears, is distinctive! Much of the problem with any analysis is the singular pix. That noted, hat I can see, probably such several or more pix, would only further establish a case for non-originality! Also just the notion to me in collector context, "mostly original" is like "mostly pregnant!" I can and do truly appreciate many guns for 'what they are'. Just not "collector specimens".

Also the point as confirming Bert over at WCA is a true "expert's expert", his documenting 'like configured rifles" doesn't make them "Factory as documented." Such only speaks to "commonness" qne in sufficient numbers, the 'stats' may begin to suggest "production". If you have one documented specimen, then a basis for "suggesting" greater likelihood of Factory production. Otherwise, no "absolutes proven"! Were such statistical rules of originality the case, one helluva lot of fifties era mauser specimens such as "G33/50" creative reworks could be assumed "rare originals."

Last, simply my belief that early 20th Century era rifle usage didn't favour minimal capacity magazines. Bearing a rifle around, the slight dimensional & weight larger magazines were small price for optional increased firepower option as desired!. Just an 'opine'!

Best!
John

I've been following this thread with great interest. A lot of good and interesting posts. This reminds me of a great YouTube video from the Cinnabar,(Mark Douglas), titled "Saved by the Winchester Arms Collectors association" as many of us know as WACA as John and others were referring to. I wish I was better at posting a link as I still haven't taken the time to learn it here. This configuration can be assumed to be different, for sure as it is, and unfortunately can't be lettered. I understand the point being made of the crescent but vs. the carbine style butt plate. As it was stated earlier about the wood to metal fit, as that's most certainly one very important thing to look for. In Madis book, he states, on top of the barrel where the caliber designation is, the proof mark would be on the side of the barrel. Without having several detailed pictures of the exact rifle, it's very hard to verify for any of us, but I'm still not convinced it was or wasn't possibly special ordered. I have to disagree with iskra as I can understand someone trying to lighten the weight a bit with a shorter magazine reducing cartridge loads ans a little weight, when carrying in the back country. Mark Douglas states in the Cinnabar video about several comparisons to this story, which is strictly speculation at this point, about the tenon for the nose cap, that isn't there. Also referencing to the barrel band, by comparison. Madis also states how Winchester would use Rifle barrels for Carbines. Hence explaining to me the tenon's on some of these Carbines that seem to be out of place.

My point here is with Winchester, to "Never say Never'.

HS 58