Winchester 1892"Limited" Deluxe Take Down, opinions?

[Canuck Bob]

Here is a picture of the Gun I'm describing. One of the Japanese 92's.

http://www.cabelas.com/gun-inventory--- ... -bud.shtml

Does anyone own one or handled one? I may have tracked down a used copy here and would like some opinions.

It has the rebound hammer and tang safety and the one I'm hunting down is a 32-20 with the 24" tube.

I can really use the Take Down feature and the pistol grip.

[Pete44ru]

Another levergunner member, jdad IIRC, bought one of those last month, and has recently sold it via classifieds - but I don't know why.........

.

[Nate Kiowa Jones]

Another levergunner member, jdad IIRC, bought one of those last month, and has recently sold it via classifieds - but I don't know why.........

.

May have been the excessive use of liability parts.

[jdad]

This was mine that I just sold, for $1200, after 60 rounds. I paid $1400 OTD, but this has the 24" barrel and is chambered in 32-20.
http://www.auctionarms.com/search/displ ... &oh=216543

Beautiful rifle, well balanced for offhand shooting, and shot extremely tight groups at 100m.

So why did I get rid of it?
It is equiped with the "angle eject" system. I spent more time hunting for spent brass than shooting. It really PO'd other competitors up to 3 shooting stations away when the brass hit them while they were trying to focus on their targets.

[Malamute]

I don't believe the 92's are "angle eject". The shells may indeed come out at an angle, since they were designed to eject them slightly to the side, but it isnt the same as the 94 angle eject's. It sounds like it had a very energetic ejector spring, and could have been tuned not to throw them so far, but other than at a range, it would seem like a plus.

[Grizz]

IMO the 1892 is the finest Winchester repeater for pistol caliber ammo. The Miroku guns are just about flawless. The lawyer stuff can be healed, but shoot it first, you might not care.

Grizz

[Cimarron Red]

Canuck Bob,

I bought one of these deluxe 1892's last January. Mine is like jdad's -- a 24 inch octagon barrelled .32-20 from one of Davidson's limited runs. I shoot it in lever action silhouettes. Unlike jdad, I stop the cases on their way out with my thumb. Even so the ejector spring was too strong, and it would slam the cases into the top of the chamber and deform them when I did allow them to eject naturally. So I bought one of NKJ's reduced power ejector springs. That took care of that problem. I also eliminated the rebounding hammer feature, and installed a reduced power hammer spring. Then I installed a tang sight and a Lyman 17A front sight. I love these rifles. At the last pistol cartridge lever gun match I shot at the Golden (Colorado) Gun Club, I whacked 35 silhouettes out of 40. I think I'll keep the gun!

[Canuck Bob]

I've told my gun dealer to get me o solid price on the gun and will order it once I know for sure my costs.

I'll contact NKJ once I have it and research the work needed. But first I'll shoot it a bunch before doing any warranty altering tuning. This is exciting. It would not be happening if it weren't for these internet communities. McLuhan was right, it really is becoming a global village.

Thanks to everyone, I'll keep you posted.

[Canuck Bob]

Amazing how much "gun dealer" sounds like "drug dealer", hmmm.

[jdad]

Canuck Bob,

I bought one of these deluxe 1892's last January. Mine is like jdad's -- a 24 inch octagon barrelled .32-20 from one of Davidson's limited runs. I shoot it in lever action silhouettes. Unlike jdad, I stop the cases on their way out with my thumb. Even so the ejector spring was too strong, and it would slam the cases into the top of the chamber and deform them when I did allow them to eject naturally. So I bought one of NKJ's reduced power ejector springs. That took care of that problem. I also eliminated the rebounding hammer feature, and installed a reduced power hammer spring. Then I installed a tang sight and a Lyman 17A front sight. I love these rifles. At the last pistol cartridge lever gun match I shot at the Golden (Colorado) Gun Club, I whacked 35 silhouettes out of 40. I think I'll keep the gun!

I just didn't want to put a couple hundred dollars, in parts and sights, to make it shoot right. Just frustration, not buyers remorse. You shouldn't have to, for the price I paid. It's not like a 10/22 that you know you have to put money in to it, to make it shoot right.

[Cimarron Red]

jdad,

Here's what I have in this rifle:

Rifle, lightly used -- $1075
Shipping and transfer -- $60
Eliminate rebounding portion of the hammer strut -- five minutes with a hacksaw
Reduced power hammer spring -- left over from an action job I did on a Ruger Vaquero
NKJ's reduced power ejector spring -- under $10, as I recall
Marbles tang sight -- $125
Lyman 17A front sight -- $29

The sights, of course, are optional. If you can use the original open sights, save the tang and globe sight money. For me, no factory lever gun, regardless of price, comes with sights suitable for silhouette competition.

[BenT]

Davidson's has them on sale right now for I beleive $1099. You can buy it on line and have it sent to a participating FFL dealer. Go to there site and check it out, under Davidson exclusives.

[Canuck Bob]

Just ordered a Davidson model to Canada. My dealer found it and it is landing here at a reasonable price. Still expensive but it has the take down feature and lands in my lap cheaper than the Italian Take Down clone. Technically it is a Winchester at least in name, not birth.

[Cimarron Red]

That is a fine rifle, Canuck Bob, and you'll love it!

[Nate Kiowa Jones]

Canuck Bob,

I bought one of these deluxe 1892's last January. Mine is like jdad's -- a 24 inch octagon barrelled .32-20 from one of Davidson's limited runs. I shoot it in lever action silhouettes. Unlike jdad, I stop the cases on their way out with my thumb. Even so the ejector spring was too strong, and it would slam the cases into the top of the chamber and deform them when I did allow them to eject naturally. So I bought one of NKJ's reduced power ejector springs. That took care of that problem. I also eliminated the rebounding hammer feature, and installed a reduced power hammer spring. Then I installed a tang sight and a Lyman 17A front sight. I love these rifles. At the last pistol cartridge lever gun match I shot at the Golden (Colorado) Gun Club, I whacked 35 silhouettes out of 40. I think I'll keep the gun!

I just didn't want to put a couple hundred dollars, in parts and sights, to make it shoot right. Just frustration, not buyers remorse. You shouldn't have to, for the price I paid. It's not like a 10/22 that you know you have to put money in to it, to make it shoot right.

I feel the same way but it has more to do with the several add-on liability parts. I do think the Miroku made 92's from Browning were the very best of the old and new technology. They were made from modern steels on modern CNC machines and they didn't have any non- historically correct liability parts added.

The Winchester version has the rebounding hammer, inertia firing pin, a lever activated trigger block with some tiny little coil springs that aren't going to hold up for long and the ugly tang mounted safety. All these parts can be changed to tradition style parts but why would you want to pay $12-$1400 for the gun then put another $3-400 back in it.

Also, some of the Win/Miruko 92's had weak carrier detent springs. If it tends to stovepipe too easy that will be your problem.

[Canuck Bob]

Canuck Bob,

I feel the same way but it has more to do with the several add-on liability parts. I do think the Miroku made 92's from Browning were the very best of the old and new technology. They were made from modern steels on modern CNC machines and they didn't have any non- historically correct liability parts added.

The Winchester version has the rebounding hammer, inertia firing pin, a lever activated trigger block with some tiny little coil springs that aren't going to hold up for long and the ugly tang mounted safety. All these parts can be changed to tradition style parts but why would you want to pay $12-$1400 for the gun then put another $3-400 back in it.

Also, some of the Win/Miruko 92's had weak carrier detent springs. If it tends to stovepipe too easy that will be your problem.

Can some of these features be simply removed without harming the guns dependability? The safety is sad but it is not an issue, I knew I wasn't buying an historically accurate gun. The lever trigger block, can it be fixed with a hacksaw and files?

What is stove pipe?

[Cimarron Red]

don't see that you need spend $300 to $400 to make a serviceable rifle out of the new 1892's. Also, new Marlins have a safety, a trigger block and a two-piece firing pin that the 1894 has had since modifications were made to the 1889. Original Winchester 1894's have a lever-activated trigger block. Rossis have a conspicuous and unseemly bolt-mounted safety. I compare the $1100 I spent on a new, deluxe take-down model 1892 not to the crop of other currently available pistol cartridge rifles but to original 1892's. And in that light I find the new guns to be good values.

[Canuck Bob]

My process may add something here.

The Rossi would have met my needs and fiddling with a new gun is an important part of making it mine so adding parts and sights is just part of the deal for me.

What moved me to the 1892 I ordered was the take down fearture. It fits my lifestyle to a tee as I'm a travelling salesman and the take down will go in my suitcase for invisibility and security.

I also find the pistol grip important for an arthritic wrist and I much prefer the look and handling.

[SAAJim]

Canuck Bob,
This web page might be of some use to you: http://home.roadrunner.com/~jimstags/win1892/index.htm

Jim

Canuck Bob,

I feel the same way but it has more to do with the several add-on liability parts. I do think the Miroku made 92's from Browning were the very best of the old and new technology. They were made from modern steels on modern CNC machines and they didn't have any non- historically correct liability parts added.

The Winchester version has the rebounding hammer, inertia firing pin, a lever activated trigger block with some tiny little coil springs that aren't going to hold up for long and the ugly tang mounted safety. All these parts can be changed to tradition style parts but why would you want to pay $12-$1400 for the gun then put another $3-400 back in it.

Also, some of the Win/Miruko 92's had weak carrier detent springs. If it tends to stovepipe too easy that will be your problem.

Can some of these features be simply removed without harming the guns dependability? The safety is sad but it is not an issue, I knew I wasn't buying an historically accurate gun. The lever trigger block, can it be fixed with a hacksaw and files?

What is stove pipe?