I have an 1889 Stevens Favorite in .32 rim fire. 7 o'clock extractor, "Favorite" indicated only on the butt plate, no visible serial number, no caliber markings, but it does chamber the .32. de Haas indicates in his chapter on the Favorites that he had never seen an 1889 in .32 but assumed they existed. Mine is in excellent original condition, seems to have been very little used.  I fired 3 rounds of Canuck .32 rim fire, and all three spent cartridges would not extract. Had to tap them out with a cleaning rod. My questions: How scarce is it? What might be a value range? Thanks.

Sorta like a Johnny Cash Cadillac?
de Haas pp. 105-106 says "There were no caliber markings anywhere on the rifle. One specimen had no serial number, while others had this number stamped on the lower tang. The only other markings were on the hard rubber butt plate which has the words Stevens Favorite imprinted across it." Mine has this in 2 lines.

de Haas also describes on the top flat of the barrel, in 3 lines: J. Stevens A. & T. Co. / Chicopee Falls, Mass. / Pat. Oct 29 89  Mine has this in 2 lines, bracketed by "bow ties." 

He further says, "Specimens of the early Stevens Favorites are quite rare, and although I have not seen one in the .32 rimfire caliber I would assume they were also made in that caliber."

Well, Redsetter, de Haas clearly indicates in his description of the 1889s, the earliest Favorites, a "hard rubber" butt plate. As for the extraction issue, the brass swells and gets stuck - I wondered if the Canuck [1950s-60s] ammo might be a bit "hotter" than the 19th century ammo, or some other issue with it. I know, for example, that modern 7mm Mauser ammo is slightly different than the 18th century version. It allows a bit of blow back when fired in, for example, my 1901 Remington rolling block. 

As to "little used" in my neck of the woods, farm country, most of these old guns have in the past put a lot of rabbits on the table, and taken a lot of varmits. When they show up they are often quite beat up and worn out.The one I own, not so much.

As to the profile: I looked at a number of images on the web and found some I think are what you refer to - flat surface behind the hammer? These were 1915 models. Mine is curved, top and bottom.

tornadobelt wrote on Mar 24^th, 2018 at 10:10am:


He was mistaken about that.

Quote:


Maybe, but I've shot plenty of Canuck .32s without extraction problems.

Quote:


No, not the 1915 model.  Hard to describe, but when the first variation rcvrs are looked at from the side, the bottom of the barrel shank is clearly visible. 

tornadobelt wrote on Mar 24^th, 2018 at 12:32pm:


Excellent!  Look at photo B, p. 11, Boys' SS Rifles.

To know what Redsetter was talking about the early square cut, Favorites, look up pictures of the Stevens 107 or 108. They are the 44's early, "square cut" frames and will mirror the Favorite.

Frank

uscra112 wrote on Mar 24^th, 2018 at 2:16pm:


Appears there was some overlap in use of barrels with the '89 date even after the '94 date began to be used--merely the common practice of continuing to use older parts even after newer ones were in production. Gun in question is a case in point--not an early production rcvr, but has the early production barrel.  Even less surprising if it was put together outside of a normal production run.

Hmmm.   That's definitely not a "square cutout" receiver, but something later.   Could you post a picture of the barrel rollstamp?   

One my early style receivers: