"Winchester 94 Returns"

damienph · Post by **damienph** » Fri Aug 19, 2011 3:59 pm

Article by Joseph Von Benedikt, Shooting Times, Oct 2011. States that the "working man's" version of the 94 has finally returned. Towards the end of the article he does say that two concerns will beset the new 94; 1st it is only offered in 30-30, 2nd it is expensive - $1129 MSRP.

I am glad to see it back in production but I can't agree that it is for the working man at anything close to that price.

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Fri Aug 19, 2011 4:05 pm

OH? He didn't mention it was only limited production, still the same "Angle Eject" tang safety version as put out by USRA or that it's now a "made in Japan" knock-off?

Shame on him. I wonder what kind of deal he got in exchange for his "article". (Read "puff piece")!

damienph · Post by **damienph** » Fri Aug 19, 2011 4:10 pm

Actually he did mention all of that (except the limited production) but none of it seemed to be much of a concern.

.45colt · Post by **.45colt** » Fri Aug 19, 2011 4:11 pm

I just typed 30-30 in under leveraction over at Gunbroker and there are only 712 guns to choose from. the fine folks at usrac or who ever they are can keep these new ones, and the tang saftey and the STUPID rebounding hammer. I hope the triggers/actions on the new ones are far better than the one I got ten years ago.

.

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Fri Aug 19, 2011 4:45 pm

Well, my Win 94s never went anywhere. They're still right here.

And I agree with you, the price isn't a working mans price. Anything over $600.00 is past that point.

Joe

airedaleman · Post by **airedaleman** » Fri Aug 19, 2011 5:37 pm

Do I remember correctly? Classic rule of thumb - decent gun equals a working man's weekly wage plus a bit... (scrimp on the beer and smokes for a week or two)

Booger Bill · Post by **Booger Bill** » Fri Aug 19, 2011 5:44 pm

Good golly! I bought my 94 new back around 1956 or 1957. Pretty sure it was like $65 dollars! My inflation calculator says that would be $516.18 today! What a deal!

marlinman93 · Post by **marlinman93** » Fri Aug 19, 2011 5:51 pm

Last '94 I bought was right after they stopped making them, and it was a late 60's .32 Spl for a whopping $275 used. I think there's enough used ones under that price still.

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Fri Aug 19, 2011 6:00 pm

The last one I bought was in '02. A pre 64 in almost new condition for $250.00.

I think I shall not buy such expensive toys when there are lots of less costly ones around.

Joe

FWiedner · Post by **FWiedner** » Fri Aug 19, 2011 6:07 pm

IMO, that's not a Winchester Model 94, it's an overpriced Japanese replica destined for a collector cabinet.

O.S.O.K. · Post by **O.S.O.K.** » Fri Aug 19, 2011 6:49 pm

A Win 1895 in 405 Winchester for MSRP $1000 yeah.

But not a Model 94 in 30-30. There are only about 6 million copies floating around.... Originals too....

Bad business decision - shows that whoever made it knows absolutely nothing about the gun business... for sure.

tman · Post by **tman** » Fri Aug 19, 2011 8:23 pm

Marketing Genuiouses. No wander the real winchester went bust.

Pete44ru · Post by **Pete44ru** » Fri Aug 19, 2011 9:17 pm

AFAIK, the newer Miroku Model 94's are not "limited production" anymore, like the engraved Gr1/Gr2 pair last year were - IIRC, one of the new ones is a "Model 1894 Short Rifle" w/20" bbl, full mag, steel forend nosecap, forward mag tube hanger ILO barrel band of any kind, crescent butt, rebounding hammer/tang safety/angle eject.

.

RIHMFIRE · Post by **RIHMFIRE** » Fri Aug 19, 2011 9:32 pm

94 resturns..........BS

I'll by an original before Id buy one of those....

Gary · Post by **Gary** » Sat Aug 20, 2011 8:35 am

Around 1980, new Win 94's were $125 at Gemco.

DPris · Post by **DPris** » Sat Aug 20, 2011 11:42 am

The fine folks at USRAC are long gone, and Winchester as a separate company has been gone for many years.

As far as "knockoff" goes, while I truly don't like the angle eject, tang safety, or rebounding hammer, elsewhere the Miroku quality is far better than any Winchester-marked Model 94 put out in at least the past three decades.
Denis

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Sat Aug 20, 2011 1:01 pm

DPris wrote:The fine folks at USRAC are long gone, and Winchester as a separate company has been gone for many years.

As far as "knockoff" goes, while I truly don't like the angle eject, tang safety, or rebounding hammer, elsewhere the Miroku quality is far better than any Winchester-marked Model 94 put out in at least the past three decades.
Denis

The fine folks at USRAC are long gone, - - Thankfully. They are are the nitwits that brought us the rebounding hammer, cross bolt and tang safety, and angle eject. In effect completely ruining the Mdl 94.

and Winchester as a separate company has been gone for many years. - - This is so true. But at least they remained in the same factory and retained much of their history. Now they simply do not exist. Just a name stamped on a foreign made replica of a shadow of what once was a great rifle. They should have let the Mdl 94 RIP.

<snip>elsewhere the Miroku quality is far better than any Winchester-marked Model 94 put out in at least the past three decades.- - Well, I'm not going to agree or disagree to that because I haven't seen one of the Japanese made ones yet.
However on page 109 of the September 2011 issue of The American Rifleman there is a pic of the "new" 94. If the wood to metal fit is any indication of what they call quality, then it's far far and away grossly overpriced.
It's a small picture true, but even with my bare eyes I can see the gap between the wood and the metal. That does not say "quality" to me.

I'll stick with the old ones ... thanks.

Joe

DPris · Post by **DPris** » Sat Aug 20, 2011 1:24 pm

You know I'm not defending the current Winchesters or trying to tell anybody to buy one.
Just addressing a couple comments.

This week I returned a test sample '92 I worked with.
As I said- don't like the rebounding hammer & safety, but quality-wise it exceeded any other current '92 clone on the market, and the workmanship was far better than the USRAC plant was putting out.
Denis

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Sat Aug 20, 2011 1:49 pm

Joe,

Not to pic nits... but, from 1983 to 2005 (22 years) USRA sold nearly 2.5 million mdl 94AEs whereas it took Winchester 89 years to reach 4.7 million.

Winchester. = 52,808/year
USRA ........ =113,636/year

Even I will concede that USRA out-sold Winchester. Maybe that only proves that there truly is NO accounting for tastes, as it was clearly an inferior product!

.45colt · Post by **.45colt** » Sat Aug 20, 2011 2:10 pm

I'm the guy that posted about the "FINE folks" at usrac and I said it only to be civil

. I have owned and shot several Miroku shotguns over the years and I have No problem with the Quality that they produce....Excellent.
All that needs to be done is return to the original design and I would buy at least one 94 and an 86EL. but the rebounding hammer and the 10lb trigger pull never again.

DPris · Post by **DPris** » Sat Aug 20, 2011 2:53 pm

I've argued with one of the project guys, no luck.
We're stuck with those un-wanted "safety" features.
Denis

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Sat Aug 20, 2011 3:31 pm

Griff wrote:Joe,

Not to pic nits... but, from 1983 to 2005 (22 years) USRA sold nearly 2.5 million mdl 94AEs whereas it took Winchester 89 years to reach 4.7 million.

Winchester. = 52,808/year
USRA ........ =113,636/year

Even I will concede that USRA out-sold Winchester. Maybe that only proves that there truly is NO accounting for tastes, as it was clearly an inferior product!

Griff,
I am well aware of the numbers, and I'm at a loss to understand them. The only thing I can think of is these USRAC AE models catered to a different generation than us. A generation not educated in the tradition of lever actions.
I wasn't bothered too much about the Angle Eject feature, I could totally understand that. They were trying to recoup sales lost to Marlin.
But I just could not understand or accept that abominable rebounding hammer and later the safeties. Since USRAC took over back in, what 1982, 83 or so, I've only purchased one and that was because it was a first year production Trapper in .45 Colt. Had they not made that chambering I would not have bought even that one.

Joe

rodeo kid · Post by **rodeo kid** » Sat Aug 20, 2011 4:40 pm

Joe, I agree about the rebounding hammer, but the safeties are just to help prevent lawsuits, a sign of the times I'm afraid. To me the tang safety is not that bad, alot better than the crossbolt type. At your pricepoint you are living in the past if you want a new quality firearm. With the exception of a Sig-Sauer 522 rifle I bought for my son at $400 my last three purchases were $1199, $1329, and $1200 for new firearms. I don't like the prices either, but I want what I want so I pay them. God Bless.

Charles · Post by **Charles** » Sat Aug 20, 2011 5:19 pm

The Japchester rides again! Good enough rifles, but still Japchesters.

OJ · Post by OJ » Sun Aug 21, 2011 12:04 am

Interesting thread - I bought my Buffalo Bill Commemorative Winchester 94 in 1968 for $90 - my theory was that commemorative came in pairs - my friend dealer sold the 20" barrel to a customer who turned the 26" barrel I got down and dealer made his profit on the 20" rifle.

The remarks suggesting the "made in Japan" implies low quality goods interest me - such was true decades ago but Miroku produced rifles are definitely top grade rifles - my BL22 is as good as any made - and I am joined in this experience from what I see on other threads -

In 1995, Miroku - under license - made some 8000 Winchester 95 rifles as century commemoratives so to speak - about half were in Grade 1 and the other half in Hi Grade - I lucked out by being in the right place at the right time (2005) and my wife was doing her best to find a 25th anniversary gift for me - so I "helped" her find it ( husbands should help their wives any way they can) -

Beauty is way more than skin deep, so to speak - it shoots even better than it looks. I zeroed sights to hit POA at 25 yards and "fine tuned" it to hit 2" above POA at 100 yards - not bench rest but, just fist rest fist resting on range table. Solo shots were elbow rest shots. That was done on less than one box of ammo - I don't consider myself an expert shot - just an old geezer who has been shooting for over 80 years - and shoots every week.

Life is good - and Miroku makes high quality rifles IMO

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Sun Aug 21, 2011 11:08 am

I really don't think the quality of the Miroku made Winchesters is actually in question. I've yet to see even an example of "average" workmanship. Every one of their guns are well above average in fit & finish. Their 1886 made for Browning is a faithful copy and even my basic version shows the quality of their workmanship. I fulfills my need for an 1886.

My problem with their new 94 is the basic pattern. If I'd wanted an AE, I could have spent the last 29 years buying them, at well under half that $1200 price tag. You just can't put enough lipstick on that pig for me to drop my wallet.

IF USRA/Browning/FN had really wanted my business, they'd have offered the original top eject. And yes, I'd have gladly paid an escalated price for them. 'Cause I'd have bought more'n one of them! Maybe I oughta thank them, for otherwise I wouldn't have several decent old ones that, as Kirk sez, whisper their stories to me! I, for sure, wouldn't know as much about how they work and how to fix them; because I wouldn't have built my 1st custom, nor gathered up the parts for my current projects!

gak · Post by **gak** » Sun Aug 21, 2011 12:39 pm

I can abide (sort of) the tang safety, IF they must--as someone said, sure better than the abominable cross bolt. I cannot the rebounding works or the AE feature--not in a new $1,000-ish firearm. As someone also said, I can also understand the AE in 1983 and following years, to compete with Marlin for the "traditional" hunting $, but I also could have my pick of millions of nice used such if I want that feature. For a new Miroku (which does imply at least semi-special, semi-limited production anyway), however, I'll ++1 they shoulda made it (the configuration) as faithful as possible to the original,...meaning preferably Pre War spec, as there are still plenty plain 'ol Pre 64s kicking around.

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Sun Aug 21, 2011 1:54 pm

I guess we need to define quality. And that is going to be an individual thing. I will state my definition as best I can, and will not argue it with anyone.

MY DEFINITION OF QUALITY:
Quality is more than the precision of machining and assembly of parts. It is that as well as the implementation of all the design features so that they lead to the proper and reliable functioning as well as the ease of operation of the whole.

John Browning's original design of the Winchester lever action rifles accomplished this beautifully and did not include a rebounding hammer or any safeties other than the half cock. His designs functioned reliably for almost a hundred years without the assistance of lawyers or litigation frightened re-designers.

Therefore from my perspective the Miroku made Winchester marked 86's, 92's, 94's, and 95's that have this gawd awful abomination of a rebounding hammer action and the add on safeties, are not quality guns.
The rebounding hammer actions that have been proven many times to be UN-reliable and to make the use of these guns more difficult for shooters negate all the positives of Miroku's manufacturing.

The old saying: "One rotten apple will spoil the entire barrel" comes to mind. The rebounding hammer action spoils the otherwise excellent design.
Even if they were priced at one quarter their exorbitant price I would not purchase one if my wife won the power ball and handed me ten million dollars in cash.

Joe

afish4570 · Post by **afish4570** » Mon Aug 22, 2011 10:52 pm

If the selling price was too low for a Winchester to make a profit wouldn't it be reasonable to increase the price and continue business as usual????? To let a foreign company make something and then double the price cause we still want a Win. 94 (or whatever) is obscene. Did the price of cars go down when we closed US plants and put good union workers out on the street??? Too many bean counters and not enough skilled workers. Sounds like the Marlin shutdown is a simalar situation.......They don't learn from there mistakes. Glad I got my 94's and 356 despite the cross bolt safeties. Do like the scope mounting for my old eyes though.....

afish4570

DPris · Post by **DPris** » Mon Aug 22, 2011 11:03 pm

Shutting down the New Haven plant was basically nothing more than a business decision, and probably a good one.
Equipment was worn, quality was declining, there was union involvement, and the parent company saw no profit in sinking more money into the operation.

There's some similarity to Marlin.
Remington closed the old Marlin plant, split production up between two different domestic locations elsewhere.
FN closed the New Haven plant, and decided it made more sense from a profit point of view to split production between South Carolina and Japan.

Remington was willing to set up new production facilities for the Marlins, FN did with the Model 70, but moved the leverguns to the Miroku plant that's been producing leverguns for quite a while now.
The current "Winchester" lever-actions are perceived as a limited demand, limited production, nostalgia offering.

Denis

gak · Post by **gak** » Mon Aug 22, 2011 11:08 pm

DPris wrote:Shutting down the New Haven plant was basically nothing more than a business decision, and probably a good one.
Equipment was worn, quality was declining, there was union involvement, and the parent company saw no profit in sinking more money into the operation.

There's some similarity to Marlin.
Remington closed the old Marlin plant, split production up between two different domestic locations elsewhere.
FN closed the New Haven plant, and decided it made more sense from a profit point of view to split production between South Carolina and Japan.

Remington was willing to set up new production facilities for the Marlins, FN did with the Model 70, but moved the leverguns to the Miroku plant that's been producing leverguns for quite a while now.
The current "Winchester" lever-actions are perceived as a limited demand, limited production, nostalgia offering.

Denis

Denis, you hit all the nails on the head, as usual. However, regarding your last paragraph, all the more reason for them to be Pre War configuration.

DPris · Post by **DPris** » Tue Aug 23, 2011 12:53 am

Fully agree, but their legal department won't go for it.
Denis

gak · Post by **gak** » Tue Aug 23, 2011 10:08 am

DPris wrote:Fully agree, but their legal department won't go for it.
Denis

I agree too, but was thinking at least the non legal stuff: top eject, wood, choice of butts, sights, etc. Keep the dang safety if you must, but the rebounder's gotta go.

DPris · Post by **DPris** » Tue Aug 23, 2011 11:29 am

They seem to think a lot of people will scope the gun, so the AE stays.
The rebounding hammer is an equal part of the overall "safety" system, so it & the safety both stay.
It's too bad, they'd sell more in my opinion without those features, even at the higher prices.
I would have bought one, but they were a deal-killer for me.
One comment made was they really don't want to sell in large numbers, there's limited room at Miroku.

I told the project guy at the time that they had a perfect chance in setting up production in Japan to return to the original "classic" configuration, they weren't interested.
Denis

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Tue Aug 23, 2011 12:16 pm

DPris wrote:They seem to think a lot of people will scope the gun, so the AE stays.
The rebounding hammer is an equal part of the overall "safety" system, so it & the safety both stay.
It's too bad, they'd sell more in my opinion without those features, even at the higher prices.
I would have bought one, but they were a deal-killer for me.
One comment made was they really don't want to sell in large numbers, there's limited room at Miroku.
I told the project guy at the time that they had a perfect chance in setting up production in Japan to return to the original "classic" configuration, they weren't interested.
Denis

Somewhere in my notes I have the guy's name that was the interim project manager at Browning during the pre-production phase and when he & I spoke it wasn't even known if FN would let them continue any version of the 94. He told me that he hoped to convince then that going back to a TE be better for their projected market, but... it was his understanding that they'd have to almost re-engineer that as drawings were woefully outdated and their last offering of a TE was poorly received (1894-1994 Centennials). He personally, seemed to feel that they'd do better with tang safety and a TE, but making limited offerings in different calibers and configurations as Browning had been doing with the 92s.

Relunctantly, I kinda agree with him... but it as we've seen, even that didn't happen. I think their market research failed them.

DPris · Post by **DPris** » Tue Aug 23, 2011 12:33 pm

Yup.
Denis

Pete44ru · Post by **Pete44ru** » Tue Aug 23, 2011 3:50 pm

IMO, their decision makers & project managers all seem to look at leverguns as just another name for profit, not being in most cases directly involved with classic leverguns.

In their eyes, a levergun's most likely just a funny-looking boltgun - and should have the same "stuff".

IOW, they just don't "get it".

.

Steve Collins · Post by **Steve Collins** » Tue Aug 23, 2011 4:57 pm

Remember too, that there are some leverguns that just can't be made and be affordable anymore, i.e. the Savage 99 or a Winchester 88. The market won't support them. The big market items are bolt guns and anything with the word "tactical" attached to it, and the CCW market. Neither of which leverguns fit into.

Those of us here are a different breed. Fortunately, there are a lot of the old guns around for us to get ahold of when somebody wants to sell one for something more "tactical."

DPris · Post by **DPris** » Tue Aug 23, 2011 11:27 pm

Yeah, but unfortunately parts will be getting harder to find when needed.
Denis

kaschi · Post by **kaschi** » Wed Aug 24, 2011 12:04 pm

I'd still like to think that SOMEONE here in the US (for example: US Firearms or Big Horn Armory) could manufacture a true blue pre-64. Even if they at least offered complete actions, a guy could utilize other sources for barrels, mag tubes, wood, etc and pretty much make up the configurations and calibers he desired. A lot come to mind!

gak · Post by **gak** » Wed Aug 24, 2011 1:39 pm

USFA and Ruger are more than capable, just not inclined...capitalization costs, perceived market or whatever. I'd especially not expect Ruger to make a non-safety anything of this sort. I'd really like to see USFA build a proper '92. Gotta believe they can for what the Italians are charging.

afish4570 · Post by **afish4570** » Thu Aug 25, 2011 4:14 pm

Mossberg could do it and probably do a reasonable job and still compete with Rossi and other imports....just a thought. Would be a good way to grab the 4570 share of the market and maybe the pistol cals. too.afish4570