My thoughts as well.

The .375 was a Super Grade. I never thought I would let it go, but that '73 changed my mind. I was fascinated by it. Actually, that trade shifted my focus away from the pre-64 Model 70s onto the old leverguns.

The collection is awesome!

Great collection, congrats.

Excellent. I have one, the 1892 in 32-20. Fun to shoot. Was the 1866 originally black powder?

Yes. The .44 Rimfire cartridge was the original cartridge for New Haven Arms’ Henry rifle. It used 28 grains of black powder.

Winchester bought New Haven Arms in 1866, and the 1866 “Yellow Boy” rifle was the first Winchester - basically the original Henry rifle with some improvements, but still chambered for the .44 Rimfire cartridge.

GREAT Collection!

Just need the 1887 Lever shotgun!

Very nice NP!

Some side view photos showing the differences in the models would be very interesting and informative.

Do you use any of them to hunt?

Is ammo still made for all of them?

Yes, and purists would also include the 1895. Truthfully, (unlike Teddy Roosevelt) I am not a big fan of the ‘95 due to its aesthetics. I like the traditional levers. Besides, I’m out of slots on my rack.

I’ll be happy to post those - probably tomorrow as I’ve an engagement tonight. I have not used any (yet) to hunt, but may do so in the future.

Yes you can get ammo for all, but must be careful to use loads with the same “black powder” equivalent charge of vintage loads in the earlier models.

The .44 Rimfire, .32-20, and .25-20 in particular are pretty anemic by today’s standards. The others can hold their own for medium (or even larger) game at moderate ranges.

Very nice, NP!!! I like your display, too. My FIL is a big Winchester collector and has taught me a lot about them. I'm with you on the 95s...Teddy can have them. The half-tube 55s and 64s are my favorites. SEXY!!!

That collection would be that much better if you went out and killed at least one critter with each one. Really, how cool would that be?

That's an awesome collection! Definitely a project to be proud of.

Very nice.

May do that with all but the ‘66. I’m a little leery of that old dude.

That's a beauty of a collection.

I would do it for sure, if not you're gonna be too old to before you know it. I would shoot a pig, at least, with every one of those rifles. Then clean them & talk about later, IMO. Anyway, that is an awesome collection of rifles.

Here’s some side photos for comparison Jeff.

First, the 1866 with its iconic brass receiver from its Henry lineage. The good thing about these is the receivers hold up well from a condition standpoint compared to later blued guns. A shiny receiver is a sure sign a rifle has been polished, which is not good from a collector standpoint. A basic unpolished “butterscotch” appearance is what you want.



Next, the 1873 and 1876. The 1876 is basically the same rifle as the 1873 with a larger, more sturdy frame and receiver for the larger cartridges the frontiersmen demanded. These rifles were a giant leap forward in design - the first truly powerful repeating rifles.



Next is the 1886 - another big leap forward in design - basically the same lever action design used today. This rifle fit the demand for ever more powerful cartridges. It is large, heavy, and solid. Carbine versions are rare, as it takes a long barrel to balance these big rifles properly.



Finally, the 1892 and the 1894. These rifles represent demand going the other direction - the desire for the 1886 design in smaller calibers. And, although they look similar to the 1886 - the internal design was much improved. The 1892 was first, followed by the now-iconic 1894. Obviously, the 1894 hit the “sweet spot” perfectly, as over 3 million have been sold!

Thanks for posting the photos, NP. I'm surprised that the '66 brass receivers have held up better than the blued. I know with recent manufacture BP revolvers you need to go easy on brass framed guns because the brass has a tendency to stretch under heavier recoiling loads. What an incredible collect. However, I do think you have to get the '95. They are ugly as sin but they do have a place in Winchester history.

Very interesting and beautiful rifles, obviously years of work to find examples in such nice condition.

Thank you for sharing NP.

Yes I was speaking mostly from a condition standpoint on that. Brass receivers from a durability standpoint are less than optimal. A big reason the 1873 and later rifles were able to move beyond less powerful rounds like the .44 rimfire into the much larger calibers.
You are probably right on the 1895.

Thanks Jeff, yes a lot of patience and searching for the right rifle, right condition, and right price for each model over several years. The funny thing is the final two (the 1866 and 1876) were acquired unexpectedly over the last month - as you’ve got to also “strike while the iron’s hot” when the right one comes along. I was expecting at least another year or two to finish the collection.

very impressive collection.

And it will only set you back $3500-4000 for a decent Deluxe.

OOOORRRRR... for the same money, he could buy a set of one each 55 and 64 for ME!!! Then, I'll let NP take my picture holding them, and he could hang it right below the Winchester sign. That would make his collection complete.

Very nice representations, NP!!!