School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Welcome to the Leverguns.Com Forum. This is a high-class place so act respectable. We discuss most anything here ... politely.

Moderators: AmBraCol, Hobie

Forum rules
Welcome to the Leverguns.Com General Discussions Forum. This is a high-class place so act respectable. We discuss most anything here other than politics... politely.

Please post political post in the new Politics forum.
Post Reply
348win
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2025 9:41 pm

School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by 348win »

What the ideal years for Model 94 Trappers

I'm gathering something bout 1976-1980 is coil spring hammer operated, USA made

I really want a Pistol Grip so was considering a M64 20" but they are BIG MONEY

I see the late model Winchester Timber Scout, my jaw dropped I didnt know it exist but there AINT NO WAY IM BUYING A LEVER W NO HALF COCK and/or CROSS BOLT OR TANG SAFETY

I see some commemorative models have a halfway PG/Straight stock hybrid, better than no PG in my book......

Are there any Models in 16" or 18" that don't have the medallion in the stock and some kind of PG????

I know the straight stock trapper is the easy button but I will always regret the choice. We shoot straight stock 22 right now by the hundreds, and it just ain't what I'm looking for.

I see MANY different commemortaive, special edition, types of 94's

Maybe I'm overlooking one?

Or maybe I gotta get the Timber Scout and weld the tang up and add old style internals?
Not so sure I want a project. Also pretty sure I'd have to handle a late model rifle, my first thoughts are cheaply made junk......I could be wrong tho!!!

Idk!!!!

You guys are great tho and I'm sure have some contributing thoughts 🤔
348win
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2025 9:41 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by 348win »

And if the rebound hammer conversion, tang safety elimination is straightforward, it could be fun to make a personalized tang filler insert.

Or order one, bet they are out there.
User avatar
Griff
Posting leader...
Posts: 21164
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: OH MY GAWD they installed a STOP light!!!

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by Griff »

That I'm aware of, there's no PG Trappers offered at any time by the factory. However, it's an easy conversion. The difficulty will be finding a pistol grip lower tang & lever. The lower tang lacks the guides on the side of the lower tang that fits in slots in the post '64 top eject receiver. But, with the wood in place they're quite stable. I've had no issue with the assembly pictured below. Then, it's all a matter of getting the right stock. Models like the 64A have a curved tang, but use the same internals as a straight grip, mainspring, etc. You need part number U349995620 LOWER TANG, LEGACY, CURVED. The lever will be p/n: U342050610 FINGER LEVER PG LEGACY. The stock for that model is p/n: U341406070 BUTT STOCK ASSEMBLY, LEGACY, PISTOL GRIP, CHECKERED. But, it don't want a checkered stock, they are available in plain grades from a couple of aftermarket suppliers. I haven't checked availability of these parts in quite a few years. Those part numbers are from the 2005 parts catalog. The tang screw will be a little short of the bottom of the new lower tang, but since the top of that curved tang is straight, you'll have enough thread engagement to secure the stock.

Here's a couple of pics of one I made up for a custom rifle for my son. Pistol grip, ½rnd/oct, 26" bbl with half mag... (before completion, and having it CCH'd). Sorry about the glare on the internals. But, I really like the look of having the lifter & guides jewelled. The lever pictured was also CCH'd, pictured after it was polished. That receiver was built as a saddle ring version, but before I finished it, I welded up the hole and polished it out for being CCH'd. My son keeps the finished rifle locked up in his safe, & I don't have access to it.
DSCN1601.JPG
DSCN1602.JPG
The late top eject mdl 94s don't have quite the curved lever & lower tang that the pre-war guns do. It's a more gentle curve, not to dissimilar from a straight grip, I have a mdl 64A (1972 vintage) and this matches it quite well.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Griff,
SASS/CMSA #93
NRA Patron
GUSA #93

There is a fine line between hobby & obsession!
AND... I'm over it!!
No I ain't ready, but let's do it anyway!
User avatar
OldWin
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 9765
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 2:38 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by OldWin »

The best trappers are the pre-war originals. But if you think a 64 short rifle is pricey......... :D

Here's what I have. Only 2 are "factory". The rest we built in my buddy's shop. Sadly, he passed away this winter.

The 1892 on the far right in the 1st pic is a first year receiver that had a shot out 38-40 rifle barrel back in 1990. We found a 16" Numerich barrel in 44-40 and replaced everything in front of the receiver. Installed a 92 saddle ring and a 66 Lyman, then refinished it.

Next to it is a factory 94 Trapper in 44 magnum. This is an Angle Eject, but is pre cross bolt. Unfortunately, it had a rebounding hammer, and like you I can not abide. I dug in my buddy's parts and got a complete lower tang assembly from a late 60s 94. The only modification required is to file off the lugs that mate to the receiver and it's a direct swap. Works excellent. I use this carbine a lot. It has an XS ghost ring.

Third from the right is another factory Trapper. It's a Legendary Lawmen 30-30 from 1977. This has the coil mainspring, and has the right configuration for an early factory Trapper. Carbine butt, right front band, saddle ring, even the pre war forend. The front sight isn't technically correct, having a dovetail, but these work well for me. I bought it unfired a few years ago for a reasonable amount compared to most trappers. It's serial #25 out of 20,000.

On the far left in the pic is a first year Marlin 336RC 30-30 from 1948. These weren't worth anything when I paid 150 bucks for it and hacked it up back in 1993. We cut it to 16". Did a bunch of action polishing, i stalled an 1894 Winchester saddle ring (just because), and I had a local stockmaker take a ton of wood out of it and shape the forend more like the feel of a post war Winchester 64. It is Ballard rifled which I prefer.
The rifle on the left in the other picture is it's twin from 1950. We built this one for my dad the following year. It's the same except he left the wood factory and drilled it for a scope base.

The carbine on the right in the bottom picture is the first Trapper we built. I did it for my dad for his birthday in 1990. It's an 1894 from 1899 that had been factory rebarreled with a 20" 32WS carbine barrel. We cut it to 16", installed an 1894 saddle ring and installed a 66 Lyman. We left the finish for that "original Trapper look". It came out really well and is a great shooter.


From prior conversations, I know you prefer pistol grips. I'd like to mention a few things regarding trappers. Most of the later factory Winchester trappers have a smaller profile stock. Especially from comb to toe. This is to maintain a semblance of balance. Most Trappers that are home built will feel butt heavy to some degree. This bothers some people more than others. A pistol grip stock will exacerbate this I would think. I notice it more on my Marlin. It's not terrible, but Ive removed wood also. The Marlins are definitely heavier overall.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
"Oh bother", said Pooh, as he chambered another round.
348win
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2025 9:41 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by 348win »

Thanks guys

Just type of info were looking for

Did any 94s come PG Factory 20"
W no late model hammer/safeties

We could maybe settle on a 20"

I do like the idea get a Trapper and convert to PG, its an option!
Thanks for part numbers

Ya I'd really prefer checkered
Maybe one of the "Timber Carbine" rear stocks off the 450 Marlin

I always liked the short rifle forend cap versus the bands....but idk getting quite picky here!!!!!

Is chopping a 24" M64 a viable option
Drop it off to a smith and get barrel shortened and new sight dovetail/drill tap mount whatever it takes.

Might be able too do it myself if barrel can stay on, set it up in mill. Lots of indicating. Was a machinist for bout 10yrs working career.
348win
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2025 9:41 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by 348win »

Idk if they make piloted face cutters to dress a new crown while barrels on rifle.
348win
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2025 9:41 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by 348win »

Oldwin

I think your right on w the PG trapper being butt heavy!!!
Priceless info

Part of a lever being dandy is one handing carry the fulcrum point at front of reciever.
Too much weight front or back of rifle will certainly ruin that feature.
348win
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2025 9:41 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by 348win »

Also that late model Timber Scout looks cool "in configuration/concept"

I'm not so into the tapped holes where the barrel threads into receiver 😳 and down the top each side the receiver at rear for these sight/scope arrangements

Things getting to be Swiss cheesed
User avatar
OldWin
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 9765
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 2:38 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by OldWin »

The best way to crown them is in a lathe. You just need a lathe with a big enough pass through for the barrel. That's how we did mine.
The holes on the AE don't really bother me. They are factory holes, and allow for some neat sighting options. I've had all kinds of stuff on that 44. Except a scope. :D
What I can't stand is the stupid crossbows or tang safeties. And the aforementioned rebounding hammer.

The buy-in on a 64, let alone its collectibility, would stop me from hacking one up.
If you haven't handled a standard 24" model 64, I suggest trying it. These rifles have excellent balance. They feel very light and handy for a rifle.
My grandfather carried one as a Maine game warden all over the Allagash and north Maine woods prior to WW2. It was all on foot, much of the time on snowshoes. He never felt it was a hindrance.
"Oh bother", said Pooh, as he chambered another round.
User avatar
Grizz
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 12776
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:15 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by Grizz »

internet photo of a Winchester AE 357 16" . . . mine is temporarily unobtainable
.
win 357 trapper.JPG
.
it has all of the reprehensible non-features that Winch Corp is responsible for. in spite of which the bullets go where the barrel is pointed. the lever action functions like a Model 94. It is very quick handling and it is so nice that i am still tempted to cut the guide gun to 16"
.
it's a 357! i don't see the benefit of a 20" barrel, much less a 24" barrel. it would be interesting to have three identical pistol caliber 94's and chrono the velocities. I also don't see any value into trying to make the AE into a 'real' 94. It just ain't. It just is what it is. And it won't offend me unless the bullets go sideways thru the jugs, or miss the 100 yard gong.
.
OTOH barrel lengths are a personal choice, and so far we get to choose them. And a 30-30 could probably use a bit more room to accelerate, IDK. But there are more than a few trapper-length 30-30s around . . .

that's all folks
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
ywaltzucanrknrl
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 291
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2017 3:58 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by ywaltzucanrknrl »

From prior conversations, I know you prefer pistol grips. I'd like to mention a few things regarding trappers. Most of the later factory Winchester trappers have a smaller profile stock. Especially from comb to toe. This is to maintain a semblance of balance. Most Trappers that are home built will feel butt heavy to some degree. This bothers some people more than others. A pistol grip stock will exacerbate this I would think. I notice it more on my Marlin. It's not terrible, but Ive removed wood also. The Marlins are definitely heavier overall.
So, I picked up one of the new Ruger Marlin Trappers in 30-30 the other day that has a pistol grip. I wondered why they installed a heavy barrel on it----kind of a detraction to me. But after reading your comment about the balance being butt heavy on the home made trappers with a pistol grip, maybe Ruger realized this and did to help with balance.

I also noticed this when my wife bought a Wrangler. I was thinking the heavy barrel on it would ruin some of the handling traits, but in the end it may beneficial at least for balance.
ywaltzucanrknrl
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 291
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2017 3:58 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by ywaltzucanrknrl »

Thanks for that comment above Old Win, I'm not sure how to use the quotes, so I didn't get you quoted properly.
User avatar
OldWin
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 9765
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 2:38 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by OldWin »

ywaltzucanrknrl wrote: Mon Mar 31, 2025 1:35 pm Thanks for that comment above Old Win, I'm not sure how to use the quotes, so I didn't get you quoted properly.
No problem. My AE 44 has the heavy barrel too. All the late production trappers are in this configuration as far as I know. The earlier run of top eject trappers (like my legendary lawmen) are not. The old original versions weren't either. The balance, while noticeable for carry, is mostly a factor in the swing when shouldered. They are lightning quick, but a little more difficult to steady down off hand. Obviously, this is more of a factor for longer range off hand shooting. I'm in Maine, and hunt the thick woods we are known for, so it's not really an issue.
"Oh bother", said Pooh, as he chambered another round.
348win
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2025 9:41 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by 348win »

I read somebody saying the 1976-1980 M94's are some of the best years because of coil spring and other features....

I see this and am horrified at the finish.....

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1094603873

Is this what signs to come if I buy a '76-'80 gun w a particular receiver bluing process?

I read 1980 as last USA WINCHESTER over on Win collector forum so thats verified. I don't want my rifle turning to rust after a day in the rain or a few seasons carry.

I'm entertaining the straight stock trapper as I feel I can get into one for half the cost of a Model 64 and get my money back if need be.

Can a metal butt plate be fitted where plastic plate was supplied?
Same bolt pattern and dimensions or naw.
User avatar
Griff
Posting leader...
Posts: 21164
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: OH MY GAWD they installed a STOP light!!!

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by Griff »

348win wrote: Thu Apr 10, 2025 8:33 pmI read somebody saying the 1976-1980 M94's are some of the best years because of coil spring and other features....
I see this and am horrified at the finish.....
https://www.gunbroker.com/item/1094603873
Is this what signs to come if I buy a '76-'80 gun w a particular receiver bluing process?
I read 1980 as last USA WINCHESTER over on Win collector forum so thats verified. I don't want my rifle turning to rust after a day in the rain or a few seasons carry.
I'm entertaining the straight stock trapper as I feel I can get into one for half the cost of a Model 64 and get my money back if need be.
Can a metal butt plate be fitted where plastic plate was supplied?
Same bolt pattern and dimensions or naw.
I'm going to say that particular rifle was abused. My 1979 mdl 94 carbine is still like new, except for a few handling marks from being in an overcrowded safe. I'll post a pic when my camera battery is charged. My 1978 was refinished with a bone & charcoal case color when I converted it into a target rifle with a Numrich barrel and rifle furniture.
Stock lengths vary a bit. My 1979 stock mdl 94 has a 13" stock. My trapper made from NOS Winchester parts on a 1967 Canadian Centennial has a 12-½" stock including its curved carbine metal buttplate. My custom Fajen stock on the 1978 is 12-¾". My 1976 BiCentennial carbine also has an early styled curved steel buttplate and is 13" long. I haven't dug out my '50 or '70 carbines out of the safe, but with their checkered steel buttplates I'm fairly confident they'll be similarly dimensioned. As far as the checkered steel flat plate goes it would need a flat stock to be close to the same. Personally, I prefer both styles of Winchester's curved buttplates... the flat steel checkered plate with its sharp edges digs into my shoulder. Both curved styles are curved from top to bottom and side to side.
Griff,
SASS/CMSA #93
NRA Patron
GUSA #93

There is a fine line between hobby & obsession!
AND... I'm over it!!
No I ain't ready, but let's do it anyway!
User avatar
OldWin
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 9765
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 2:38 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by OldWin »

My opinion is that particular carbine wasn't cared for. It has nothing to do with the quality of the polish or finish process.
Not to beat a dead horse, but I'm guessing the hard rubber buttplate is for balance also. A steel buttplate would shift more balance rearward. Also, I don't think the spread on the screws is the same as the steel. As I'd mentioned before, the Trapper stocks aren't as tall from comb to toe as the standard carbines. I think this was done for weight and balance also.
The later top eject, post 64 94s are better in quality than the earlier ones IMO. That being said, I regularly use one from 1968 as a Jeep rifle, and it has performed just fine. I did swap out the carrier for the later cast version, but not because of an issue. For myself, I don't really prefer the coil mainspring. While it is definitely more durable, I dont care for the feel. Just used to the old rifles I guess.
"Oh bother", said Pooh, as he chambered another round.
348win
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2025 9:41 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by 348win »

Just got some time w a 94

What I DIDNT KNOW ABOUT
Was the trigger stop/ safety interlock mechanism requiring the squeeze of lever to enable trigger and firing of firearm.
Can't say I'm too crazy about that feature. I get the point, but its counterintuitive to trained brain of "only squeezing trigger" got myself fetched up a few times w unfamiliarity.....

Not so sure I'm in the M94 M64 camp anymore

Also handled several at a local GS.....loose forearms and rear stocks were common. So I decide I like a forend CAP rifle opposed to a forend BAND for durability, as to whats to come to my gun after "some miles"
ywaltzucanrknrl
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 291
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2017 3:58 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by ywaltzucanrknrl »

Don't let the loose fore ends and stocks worry you. I've had them on 95's, 94's, 336's, Marlin 94's and 95's and they are easy to fix. Brownell's epoxy is good as it's easier to match color, but Devcon, Marine Tex and probably a lot of other epoxies will work fine.

Seems most any lever gun stock will shrink or work loose after a period of use----just a feature of wood, but I live where it's dry, so maybe it's just more common in dry area's, I don't know.
User avatar
AJMD429
Posting leader...
Posts: 33391
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2007 10:03 am
Location: Hoosierland

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by AJMD429 »

OldWin wrote: Fri Mar 28, 2025 5:59 pm The best trappers are the pre-war originals. But if you think a 64 short rifle is pricey......... :D

Here's what I have. Only 2 are "factory". The rest we built in my buddy's shop. Sadly, he passed away this winter.

The 1892 on the far right in the 1st pic is a first year receiver that had a shot out 38-40 rifle barrel back in 1990. We found a 16" Numerich barrel in 44-40 and replaced everything in front of the receiver. Installed a 92 saddle ring and a 66 Lyman, then refinished it.

Next to it is a factory 94 Trapper in 44 magnum. This is an Angle Eject, but is pre cross bolt. Unfortunately, it had a rebounding hammer, and like you I can not abide. I dug in my buddy's parts and got a complete lower tang assembly from a late 60s 94. The only modification required is to file off the lugs that mate to the receiver and it's a direct swap. Works excellent. I use this carbine a lot. It has an XS ghost ring.

Third from the right is another factory Trapper. It's a Legendary Lawmen 30-30 from 1977. This has the coil mainspring, and has the right configuration for an early factory Trapper. Carbine butt, right front band, saddle ring, even the pre war forend. The front sight isn't technically correct, having a dovetail, but these work well for me. I bought it unfired a few years ago for a reasonable amount compared to most trappers. It's serial #25 out of 20,000.

On the far left in the pic is a first year Marlin 336RC 30-30 from 1948. These weren't worth anything when I paid 150 bucks for it and hacked it up back in 1993. We cut it to 16". Did a bunch of action polishing, i stalled an 1894 Winchester saddle ring (just because), and I had a local stockmaker take a ton of wood out of it and shape the forend more like the feel of a post war Winchester 64. It is Ballard rifled which I prefer.
The rifle on the left in the other picture is it's twin from 1950. We built this one for my dad the following year. It's the same except he left the wood factory and drilled it for a scope base.

The carbine on the right in the bottom picture is the first Trapper we built. I did it for my dad for his birthday in 1990. It's an 1894 from 1899 that had been factory rebarreled with a 20" 32WS carbine barrel. We cut it to 16", installed an 1894 saddle ring and installed a 66 Lyman. We left the finish for that "original Trapper look". It came out really well and is a great shooter.


From prior conversations, I know you prefer pistol grips. I'd like to mention a few things regarding trappers. Most of the later factory Winchester trappers have a smaller profile stock. Especially from comb to toe. This is to maintain a semblance of balance. Most Trappers that are home built will feel butt heavy to some degree. This bothers some people more than others. A pistol grip stock will exacerbate this I would think. I notice it more on my Marlin. It's not terrible, but Ive removed wood also. The Marlins are definitely heavier overall.
That information was VERY helpful - I am not even in the market for such a gun, but I love to read info like this.

One of my favorite leverguns is my little 357 Mag Rossi 16" woods-walking gun.
It's 2025 - "Cutesy Time is OVER....!" [Dan Bongino]
User avatar
OldWin
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 9765
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 2:38 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by OldWin »

AJMD429 wrote: Tue Apr 15, 2025 12:59 pm
OldWin wrote: Fri Mar 28, 2025 5:59 pm The best trappers are the pre-war originals. But if you think a 64 short rifle is pricey......... :D

Here's what I have. Only 2 are "factory". The rest we built in my buddy's shop. Sadly, he passed away this winter.

The 1892 on the far right in the 1st pic is a first year receiver that had a shot out 38-40 rifle barrel back in 1990. We found a 16" Numerich barrel in 44-40 and replaced everything in front of the receiver. Installed a 92 saddle ring and a 66 Lyman, then refinished it.

Next to it is a factory 94 Trapper in 44 magnum. This is an Angle Eject, but is pre cross bolt. Unfortunately, it had a rebounding hammer, and like you I can not abide. I dug in my buddy's parts and got a complete lower tang assembly from a late 60s 94. The only modification required is to file off the lugs that mate to the receiver and it's a direct swap. Works excellent. I use this carbine a lot. It has an XS ghost ring.

Third from the right is another factory Trapper. It's a Legendary Lawmen 30-30 from 1977. This has the coil mainspring, and has the right configuration for an early factory Trapper. Carbine butt, right front band, saddle ring, even the pre war forend. The front sight isn't technically correct, having a dovetail, but these work well for me. I bought it unfired a few years ago for a reasonable amount compared to most trappers. It's serial #25 out of 20,000.

On the far left in the pic is a first year Marlin 336RC 30-30 from 1948. These weren't worth anything when I paid 150 bucks for it and hacked it up back in 1993. We cut it to 16". Did a bunch of action polishing, i stalled an 1894 Winchester saddle ring (just because), and I had a local stockmaker take a ton of wood out of it and shape the forend more like the feel of a post war Winchester 64. It is Ballard rifled which I prefer.
The rifle on the left in the other picture is it's twin from 1950. We built this one for my dad the following year. It's the same except he left the wood factory and drilled it for a scope base.

The carbine on the right in the bottom picture is the first Trapper we built. I did it for my dad for his birthday in 1990. It's an 1894 from 1899 that had been factory rebarreled with a 20" 32WS carbine barrel. We cut it to 16", installed an 1894 saddle ring and installed a 66 Lyman. We left the finish for that "original Trapper look". It came out really well and is a great shooter.


From prior conversations, I know you prefer pistol grips. I'd like to mention a few things regarding trappers. Most of the later factory Winchester trappers have a smaller profile stock. Especially from comb to toe. This is to maintain a semblance of balance. Most Trappers that are home built will feel butt heavy to some degree. This bothers some people more than others. A pistol grip stock will exacerbate this I would think. I notice it more on my Marlin. It's not terrible, but Ive removed wood also. The Marlins are definitely heavier overall.
That information was VERY helpful - I am not even in the market for such a gun, but I love to read info like this.

One of my favorite leverguns is my little 357 Mag Rossi 16" woods-walking gun.
Thanks Doc!
I have an old Interarms Rossi 20" SRC in .357. I use it a lot. It's a great shooter. I love the .357 out of a carbine.
"Oh bother", said Pooh, as he chambered another round.
348win
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2025 9:41 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by 348win »

What's it take to remove a saddle ring and its boss.

The swivel boss is fastened from backside/inside of reciever?

I cant imagine its threaded into place; as horseback tied, would tend to loosen up a threaded fastener.
User avatar
OldWin
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 9765
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 2:38 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by OldWin »

The stud type like on a 94 is threaded. The staple type like on a 92 goes through and is peened over.
"Oh bother", said Pooh, as he chambered another round.
348win
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2025 9:41 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by 348win »

come 1983 the change to 94AE angle eject model, forged reciever; held the blueing better......do these 1983, 84, first years of change ALL have the receiver ring/where barrel threads into Drilled and Tapped for Scope Mounts?

My thought was I could get into a '83 or '84 model and not have the finish problems on the reciever. All these Post '64 - '82 guns I see that have been handled or used are showing rust signs. I really don't want that to happen to my investment/stare at every time I take the gun out.....

I've had good field service/durability from blueing on most firearms, but never owned a '64-'82 Winchester
User avatar
OldWin
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 9765
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 2:38 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by OldWin »

As far as I know, all Angle Eject rifles are drilled and tapped for bases, but I'm not 100%.
An option with the earlier guns is Cerakote. If its going to be a rifle for fairly constant or rough service, I'd get one that looks a little rough on the cheap, then Cerakote it and put it to work. I have one from 68 that I keep in the Jeep. It was basically new when I started using it, so it still has most all its finish. It was my uncles and sat in the back if my dad's safe for 20 years.
"Oh bother", said Pooh, as he chambered another round.
Bridger
Levergunner 3.0
Posts: 578
Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 11:12 pm
Location: S. Alabama

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by Bridger »

I’ve got a ‘79 model 94 standard 20” carbine. It was well used by the time I got it no doubt, but the receiver on it looks like chit too.

As a matter of fact it annoys the stuff out of me but at the same time it’s kind of sentimental since I bought when I was a broke college student and for a long time it was the only center fire rifle I had. So I keep it and just accept it for what it is. Later I got a 1949 model 94 and the difference between a pre and post 64 to me is like night and day but then that’s another subject altogether.
"The best argument against democracy
is a five minute conversation with the average voter."

- Winston Churchill
User avatar
OldWin
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 9765
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 2:38 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by OldWin »

Bridger wrote: Wed Apr 16, 2025 11:45 pm I’ve got a ‘79 model 94 standard 20” carbine. It was well used by the time I got it no doubt, but the receiver on it looks like chit too.

As a matter of fact it annoys the stuff out of me but at the same time it’s kind of sentimental since I bought when I was a broke college student and for a long time it was the only center fire rifle I had. So I keep it and just accept it for what it is. Later I got a 1949 model 94 and the difference between a pre and post 64 to me is like night and day but then that’s another subject altogether.
I agree on the pre/post-64 subject. It's pretty stark. But for me, it's just as stark from pre to post war. The post war guns are nice, but not on the level of the pre war guns. They just have a feel.
"Oh bother", said Pooh, as he chambered another round.
348win
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2025 9:41 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by 348win »

I got to feel me a Pre-War and see what this is all about

Its gonna feel like a late 80's Browning/Miroku......my guess. Cuz those feel good!

I'm straying away from post-64 quickly.
Oldncrusty
Levergunner 3.0
Posts: 531
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2020 12:39 am

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by Oldncrusty »

What a great thread. Thanks to all for the great info. Just picked up a 65 model that looks great, but is " loose as a goose" operation wise. Thinkin about trappering it if I can get the action improved.
User avatar
Griff
Posting leader...
Posts: 21164
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: OH MY GAWD they installed a STOP light!!!

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by Griff »

348win wrote: Thu Apr 17, 2025 10:55 amI got to feel me a Pre-War and see what this is all about
Its gonna feel like a late 80's Browning/Miroku......my guess. Cuz those feel good!
I'm straying away from post-64 quickly.
Here's an old thread that answers many of your questions: Winchester 94 Timeline?. Can't believe how much of that stuff I've just plain forgot!
Griff,
SASS/CMSA #93
NRA Patron
GUSA #93

There is a fine line between hobby & obsession!
AND... I'm over it!!
No I ain't ready, but let's do it anyway!
348win
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2025 9:41 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by 348win »

how bout peep sight options and ladder sight options

I'd really like a ladder sight if I can shoot decent in a 16"

Also any pictures of a saddle ring IN USE, for sling purposes or what not

Thanks in advance
User avatar
OldWin
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 9765
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 2:38 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by OldWin »

For me at least, the receiver sight is the hands down way to go. More sight radius with faster acquisition. It also pairs very well with the excellent front sight Winchester puts on the later trappers.
If you go with a traditional carbine (ladder) sight you have a very short sight radius. If the sight is true to the originals I think the factory Trapper front sight will be high. You will be relegated to one load once you are zeroed, also.
"Oh bother", said Pooh, as he chambered another round.
348win
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2025 9:41 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by 348win »

Wonder what the most compact rear peep is
User avatar
OldWin
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 9765
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 2:38 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by OldWin »

The most compact Ive used is the XS ghost ring. But it only installs on angle ejects unless you're willing to drill.
Other than that, I like either the Williams Foolproof or Lyman 66.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
"Oh bother", said Pooh, as he chambered another round.
User avatar
Griff
Posting leader...
Posts: 21164
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: OH MY GAWD they installed a STOP light!!!

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by Griff »

I've found no problems with my semi-buckhorn on my 16" Trapper out to 300 yards.
rear sight.JPG
and paired with the factory front sight, seems just about perfect.
front sight.JPG
Keeps the slim, svelte profile I like in a saddle scabbard or the sleeve in the back of the seat in my p/u.
DSCF0024.JPG
I generally find a saddle ring is a thing to be overcome... this silencer is pretty effective, but not 100% so.
DSCN1593.JPG
I typically avoid the use of a sling on my leverguns... The sole exception being my mdl 64A...
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Griff,
SASS/CMSA #93
NRA Patron
GUSA #93

There is a fine line between hobby & obsession!
AND... I'm over it!!
No I ain't ready, but let's do it anyway!
348win
Levergunner 2.0
Posts: 178
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2025 9:41 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by 348win »

I don't like slings at all, figure if your using an open sight gun, walk w it on the ready.

Mostly curious of interesting ways to use the saddle rings. What people do.
User avatar
OldWin
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 9765
Joined: Fri Oct 09, 2009 2:38 pm

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by OldWin »

I don't necessarily like an affixed sling either, but sometimes it's handy to have a means of hands free carry. I don't like putting my rifle in the snow.
That's the beauty of the ring. It's a single point sling attachment. I don't keep a sling affixed to it all the time. Just keep a thin 1" nylon strap with a buckle rolled up in your pocket or pack. It weighs nothing and takes up no room. If I need to climb a stand or need my hands free, I just clip the strap to the ring, run it around my neck, and the carbine can be slung over a shoulder. The modern AR15 clip in bungee slings would work well if you wanted to carry with it affixed, but there is no need IMO.
"Oh bother", said Pooh, as he chambered another round.
User avatar
Griff
Posting leader...
Posts: 21164
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: OH MY GAWD they installed a STOP light!!!

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by Griff »

SNOW? Climbing? My elevated blind has regular steps... walking? That's what the rifle rack is for in the golf cart! Huge difference in my hunting in my 70s vs even my 60s!
DSCN1449.JPG
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Griff,
SASS/CMSA #93
NRA Patron
GUSA #93

There is a fine line between hobby & obsession!
AND... I'm over it!!
No I ain't ready, but let's do it anyway!
User avatar
Malamute
Member Emeritus
Posts: 3807
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 8:56 am
Location: Rocky Mts

Re: School Me on M94's seeking PG Shorty/Trapper 16" 18"

Post by Malamute »

348win wrote: Tue Apr 29, 2025 9:43 pm I don't like slings at all, figure if your using an open sight gun, walk w it on the ready.

Mostly curious of interesting ways to use the saddle rings. What people do.
I put slings on virtually every one of my guns, they are extremely useful. that in no way means one is required to carry one slung at any or all times, the best place is in the hand, but sometimes those hands get busy, even just taking a pee break, not to mention if you have to drag game out or carry your snake bit dog out. So, going to lay your gun down in the dirt, rocks or against a sage brush? Ive scratched up several doing things like that.

Saddle/sling rings. Heres my take. Winchester copied them from older military cavalry carbines, they were used clear back into flintlock times, its not by any means Winchesters idea. The term "saddle ring" came about much later, primarily by collectors I believe. The military use for them is what would now be termed a single point sling, a wide leather sling loop over the soldiers body/shoulder, the gun attached with a large snap, it hung off the right side so the gun wouldnt be dropped when riding or dismounting in a hurry. Later cavalry saddles had a small "socket" or boot that held the barrel of the gun from flopping around a lot, the sling still attached to the soldier.

Winchester copied the butt style, leaf "ladder" rear sights and sling ring from existing military guns, I believe they always wanted to interest the military, any military, in their guns so included common styles and features. they were very slow in changing things. For example, they cut a screwdriver slot in the end of the magazine cap until well into the 1930s I believe. they stopped using threaded magazine caps in the 1870s. Basically useless vestigal items. Yes, we look at them as cool old time things, but the bottom line is they were pretty useless, the sling rings. Its understandable why so many were cut or otherwise removed from guns, Ive removed most from mine, the 73 carbine hasnt had it removed yet but it will, its already scratching up the side of the receiver. The original older ones were about a 14" threaded shank, the more modern ones were decorative and only about a 1/8" threaded shank, not something Id trust to have a gun flopping around on. Filler screws take care of the hole nicely.

Image search for cavalry carbine sling. https://www.google.com/search?q=cavalry ... client=img

JR, a former member here, used one made of modern materials, and a few others took it up for a while, I feel a common sling is at least as useful in general, but thats just me.

"Everybody knows" that they were used to hang the guns off a saddle horn with a loop of leather,...only theres no historical writings or images of anyone doing it. Someone may have, but I dont believe it was common by any means. we do have a fair amount of images and information about people hunging their rifles of the saddle horn with a loop of leather, only its the California Loop. Many may have misunderstood the concept and thought it applied to the sling rings, of which there is no know hisotrical information to support it, but the California Loop was well know, to the point the NWMP used them s regular and official eqiuipment with their Winchester 1876 carbines. the ides was known back into percussion days. Saddle scabbards pretty well took over at some point. Many simply carried their rifles across the front of their lap on the saddle. Ive done it, it works well with a saddle that fits well and its not excessively brushy, at which point I carried it in hand. I had a scabbard but didnt really want the gun in it was it was good grizzly country and I wanted my gun to come off with me if it got exciting.

Good piece on the various method of carry including good pictures of the California Loop. There are existing descriptions of it from way back as well as period artwork depicting its use.

https://truewestmagazine.com/article/ri ... -old-west/

somewhere recently extra-light loads were mentioned, I read it on my tablet but cant find it now. Anyway, in 30-30, a .315" round ball, lubed with Lee liquid alox, and loaded with 3 1/2 grs Unique, and a small tuft of dacron pillow stuffing to keep the powder near the primer, makes about as much noise as a 22 LR standard vel load. 6 1/2 grs unique with the dacron tuft is about 32-20 power level, a bit more noise, but a useful small game load. No dacron ends up with inconsistent ignition in my experience.

The round ball loads are excellent grouse, snake and close in bunny killers. I keep the magazine full of regular loads and single load the lighter loads as needed, a simple task in the winchester action. If the cartridge carrier cmes up it can be pushed back down with the little finger easily and the action closed. I make similar loads for 348 and 45-70. 3 grs Red dot with round ball in 348 and 6 1/2 grs unique with round ball in 45-70.

Hand seat the ball so the major diameter is just inside the case mouth, gently crimp ball in place so the crimp bites some of the ball, and done.
"Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs even though checkered by failure, than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat." -Theodore Roosevelt-

Isnt it amazing how many people post without reading the thread?
Post Reply