What vintage for a Winchester 94?

[Kid Cossack]

Gents:

Howdy. For reasons scattered all over creation, I'm thinking more about lever guns these days. As I've mentioned in other posts, I've mostly been a Marlin guy (1894S, 336 and 1895). Not, I'll point out, a militant Marlin guy, and not an anti-Winchester (or even anti-USRAC) guy, but that's just how it's ended up.

And now I find myself thinking that everybody needs a Winchester 94. More particularly, I find myself thinking that I need a Winchester 94.

I'm not especially particular about the configuration, although I suppose that your basic 20" .30 WCF version would suit me best, since that's what comes to mind when I think of the 94.

I know that there have been ongoing changes in the 94, and would like some pointers on what to avoid. I'm pretty sure I'd just as soon avoid the rebounding hammer, the pot metal frame (leastways, that's what I've heard it called) and the push-button safety, although I can live with a safety on a lever gun.

I'm not looking for an antique, I'm not looking for a safe queen; I'm looking for a good Winchester 94. I've got a feeling that if someone could give me a range of dates, I could track down serial numbers at oldguns.net and use those to help me in my search.

Advice and comment?

[J Miller]

Kid,

Check out the 94 in this thread posted by two bit okie:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=27811

Now I know they are sometimes referred to as pot metal receivers but they are not. The sintered-scintered-syntered (how ever you spell that word) metal casting is a strong and durable receiver. It's only defect is it don't take bluing like a forged and machined one.
So having said that I'll tell you that I've had 94s that were made just after the 1900s to a 1985 AE model and I'll buy any of them EXCEPT another AE. I only bought the one I have because it was the first lever gun ever chambered for the .45 Colt. First year production and the rebounding hammer action went bye bye.

Now, that leaves only the guns made from 64 to the mid (?)70s as questionable. And those only because of the stamped steel carriers. I've owned those too and NOT ONE of them ever gave me trouble. But ... it's up to you.

IF you have a choice grab a pre-64. If not, well the post-64s are not all that bad. They don't have the class of the pre-64s but they are good functional lever guns.

Joe

[Kid Cossack]

Joe:

That post was the next one I read after I posted this'n here. That would be just about perfect! Thanks for the information on the scintered (I think) receivers----I won't cross 'em off the list after all. It sounds as if mo' older, mo' better when talking about the 94. (This, of course, assumes that a vintage specimen hasn't been abused.)

Many thanks!

[Griff]

For the price and what you get, I think the '74-'82 top eject mdl 94 is the best buy on the market. They have a plastic buttplate, (doesn't hurt my shoulder like earlier flat steel ones), doesn't have the stamped carrier, HAS a coil mainspring, (IMO the smoothest action as direct from the factory).

[Kid Cossack]

Thanks, Griff---hadn't thought about the coil mainspring issue.

[Sarge]

I've had everything from pre-64's to Angle Ejects and I've had enough of them to form an opinion. I wish I had kept every darned one of them, except maybe that post-64 that'd sting your fingers with the lever when you fired it. I don't miss that one much. But I digress.

1. Most accurate 94 i ever had was the AE, but it never felt right when I hand carried it and the trigger was poor. I managed OK with it though. It had the most perfect, tight 30 WCF chamber I've ever seen and brass from it resized effortlessly.

2. The many pre-AE/Post 64's I've had were, with the above exception, stone reliable and plenty accurate. I'm still waiting to kill a deer farther than I did with the old, ugly peep-sighted 70's gun I had when we moved to beanfield country.

3. My current pre-64 is all the 94 I'll ever need (although I'd like a big long rack of 'em) and it shoots as well as any in category #2 above. It also has the wonderful old receiver contour and a trigger that feels as if it belongs on a good bolt action. It is shooting so well for me at various distances that I'm seriously considering qualifying with. it and replacing the Mini in my trunk with it.

About the only thing you have to watch on older 94's is an occasional tendency to produce fired casings with the primers backed out just enough to be noticeable. This usually happens with factory loads. So far, I've always been able to cure that by backing out the sizing die about between 1/4 to 1/2 turn and my reloads, which aren't powder-puffs, never do this at all.

Far lengthier 94 yammerings than this may be found at http://sargesrollcall.blogspot.com/ Caution: May cause drowsiness. Do not read while driving. 83 1/2% of user report product has secondary benefit of relieving insomnia.

[24thMICH]

Just my 2¢ worth, but I've got a '94 from 1952 that's the cat's meow for me. I managed to get it in very fine to almost unused condition (a long story) and ended up
putting a Marble's tang sight on it. Couldn't be happier with it--and overall I count myself as a Marlin kind of guy. The action is smooth, the accuracy is really good and the recoil is almost not there.

Where I live I've seen a small handful of 1950's Winnies for sale in reasonably good condition in the past few years. I would go this route again if I needed to.

Fortunately, I don't need to!



.

[gak]

Griff said:
For the price and what you get, I think the '74-'82 top eject mdl 94 is the best buy on the market.

---
+1 and the later of this period the better, but some examples in this range are close--at least superficially--to the vaunted Pre 64, and they seem to be fine operationally too. There are a lot of excellent to near-new ones in this range out there for some reason. Approximatey 4000xxx (+/-) on up into the 5 million + range seem to be the nice ones here--again, the higher the better (generally). I've got two '79s, one a standard 20" plus a trapper that are "just-so" in most important respects (though my Pre 64s still seem more "special"). Apparently, by the mid-to-late 70s, Winchester had come up with a different/better treatment of the receiver metal to at least more successfully mimic the nice blued, forged receivers of yore. I see less receiver pitting (any 94 will to a degree with remnant moisture not wiped down every so often) and not much flaking on these last "Winchester" years (pre USRAC) versus the earlier Post 64 years.

Overall, the best as many have mentioned are the Pre's. 1950 marked the last year virtually all had the nice Pre War through 40s "long wood" fore-arm (longer ahead of the barrel band as in the good ol' 92s, 86s and 73s etc also)--though a smattering of 51's got left-over '50 wood too. A little more "old west" look if you care.

Otherwise, pretty much take your pick in this period, with the odds being better of course of finding a gem--$ and condition--if it's war era or later on through '63, versus the pre WWII era. The latter period, though "technically" Pre 64 too of course, has its own niche and these guns are not usually called "Pre 64" but "Pre War" by 94/1894 afficianados.