Winchester 94's

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 9:54 am

Well so much for them being gone the way of the dinosaurs...

http://www.winchesterguns.com/products/ ... amily=003C

damienph · Post by **damienph** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 10:05 am

They look good, but the prices.... a little more than I am willing to pay.

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 10:06 am

I would imagine the street price will be quite a bit under the listed msrp

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 10:11 am

Way too over priced. You can buy any number of them for far less than this.

They've moved the 94 from an American icon to a niche gun. Just like they do the 92s, 86s, 95s etc. They'll make just enough of them so those with deep pockets will buy them, but normal folks will just turn away and buy a used one.

And ~~ they're still not making anything I will buy.

JMHO

Joe

Mike D. · Post by **Mike D.** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:00 am

IF they would loose the tang safety and go back to an earlier style hammer with correct half cock I might consider plunking down several hunnert bucks for one.

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 12:37 pm

Well I'ld like to add the 38-55 sporting rifle this fall.
Would really like to see them do the short rifle in 25-35

Post by **Old Savage** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 1:05 pm

They have still pretty much gone away at those prices as a rifle many folks will use for the type of hunting the 94 has generally been used for. Certainly not a working man's gun.

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:04 pm

Oh I don't know if I'd go that far about them. Priced one of those Italian knockoffs of the 73 model the single action squib shooters use lately? The on the street retail price on one of those is as high as the msrp on the winchester.
Looked at at Tikka bolt gun or a benelli shotgun lately?
People will pay for quality guns, ask C Sharps, Shiloh etc.

Post by **Old Savage** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:14 pm

True, true Don and I may want to have one. I just don't think folks will be carrying them in river bottoms or the deep woods of Maine like the originals - more likely safe queens or range guns.

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:23 pm

I'm betting probably an even split. Then at a later date the safe queens will likely start showing up at bargain basement prices....
Still see a few of the last of the New Haven produced 94's at scalpers prices....
And it's probably a pretty safe bet that over half the folks that have "working" leverguns probably never take them out of the house during hunting season..

.45colt · Post by **.45colt** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:35 pm

I hope the Chimps at USRAC who designed the rebounder/tang saftey in My Legacey have retired by now. It's been ten years and still the worst out of the box firearm I have ever owned. I owned CAP Guns as a Kid that had better actions and triggers....Never again.
When Uberti makes a new 94 I will buy one.

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 3:38 pm

The Uberti made copies are a quality product that is for the most part made the same as the originals.
The current Mirokuchesters are greatly altered from their original designs.

That makes the Ubertis worth it, and the Mirokuchesters not.
If I had the cash I'd pay it for an Uberti 1873, but not for a new Japchester 94.

And yes, I'd carry the expensive Uberti in the field and hunt with it.

As I said, JMHO.

Joe

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 3:51 pm

Joe I've owned a Uberti hiwall and two Winchester/Miroku's and can very happily tell you that , there is absolutley no comparison in quality , and no longer own the Uberti, but would not part with either of the Winchesters.
Have also handled some of the Italian knockoff 73's, and they look sort of the same.... but that's about as far as the similarity goes...
My Miroku built Winchester marked 95 in 405, is one of the finest "production" leverguns I've ever had the joy of owning.

DPris · Post by **DPris** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 4:29 pm

When Winchester/FN was deciding on the Japanese re-intro project's specs, I was told the rebounding hammer & tang safety are here to stay.
They were not interested in any arguments against them, a lawyer thing.
I'd pretty much expect them to drop the gun entirely because of low sales than remove those objectionable features to sell more.
Denis

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 4:37 pm

Don,

I'm glad you like them and they work for you. I've handled several of the AE model 94s and actually bought one. That one was all it took to make me decide I'd never buy another one.
The only reason I bought it was that nobody else at the time, 1986, had a lever gun chambered in .45 Colt.
In order to use the gun I had to get rid of that abominable rebounding hammer action. Of course after 92 they added on the horrid safeties and their quality went down the toilet.
Now the Mirokuchesters are supposed to be of higher quality, don't know for personal experience because they come with the abominable rebounding hammer and the horrid safety so I'll have nothing to do with them. Not to mention being over priced for this old boy. That's just the way it is.

I've handled and shot a few of the Uberti lever guns and found them to my liking. I just don't have the wherewithal to own one, or I would.

So, to each their own.

Joe

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 4:44 pm

Some corners have been crabbing about the rebounding hammers and safetie's for ever. I don't think either of those have much to do with sales levels.
Model variations and chamberings likely have more to do with sales..

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 4:52 pm

Don McDowell wrote:Some corners have been crabbing about the rebounding hammers and safetie's for ever. I don't think either of those have much to do with sales levels.
Model variations and chamberings likely have more to do with sales..

Don,
That's sorta humorous. I don't think I've ever been referred to as being in or with a corner. LOL
At any rate you're right, by the fact they sell every one of them that's made just makes me a nonconformist. Oh dear

.

I'll stick with the older ones not encumbered with the horrid parts I dislike. You can have the new ones.

Joe

tman · Post by **tman** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 5:00 pm

Glad i have what i already have

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 5:47 pm

Just have to shake your head once in awhile and laugh.

We've heard how terrible everything post 64 was, then oh my gosh those AE rebounding hammers are so terrible why nobody would ever want one.

They manufactured and sold nearly 3 times as many model 94's from the post 64's to the end of New Haven production than they did in the 75 years preceding the end of the world in 64

FWiedner · Post by **FWiedner** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 5:57 pm

The only response I can croak out is...

...WOW...

olyinaz · Post by **olyinaz** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 6:01 pm

Old Savage wrote:They have still pretty much gone away at those prices as a rifle many folks will use for the type of hunting the 94 has generally been used for. Certainly not a working man's gun.

Exactly.

Oly

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 6:04 pm

I don't know about the "not a working mans gun" thing. Ever put the numbers together as to how much of a mans paycheck an 18$ one took as compared to what todays prices are?

olyinaz · Post by **olyinaz** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 6:10 pm

Don McDowell wrote:I don't know about the "not a working mans gun" thing. Ever put the numbers together as to how much of a mans paycheck an 18$ one took as compared to what todays prices are?

In the day they were premium guns, that's not true today and hasn't been for decades.

I'm certain they're well made, very well made in fact, but $1000 Winchester 94 .30-30s will not sell and they certainly wont be used the way a Marlin or Mossberg would be.

Just my 2 centavos...

Oly

.45colt · Post by **.45colt** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 6:21 pm

"Some corners have been crabbing about the rebounding hammers and safetie's for ever. I don't think either of those have much to do with sales levels."
Yep this is too funny.

USRAC can market and sell all the junk they make.
It won't be long and Turnbull will prolly do a run of 94's like they were designed,just like they did last year with the 92's.

.

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 6:26 pm

Oly, it'll be interesting to see what happens.

RIHMFIRE · Post by **RIHMFIRE** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 6:36 pm

made in japan and they can keep'em

DPris · Post by **DPris** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 7:51 pm

The reason, despite the numbers sold when it was that or nothing if you wanted a new 94, that I dislike the rebounding hammer is that it contributes to ignition unreliability and complexity, and requires more effort to work the lever.

I would almost certainly buy a high quality Miroku 94 IF it did not have that hammer & that safety.

There are others who won't buy them for the same reasons, so I think it's fair to say that they do affect sales.
Denis

1894cfan · Post by **1894cfan** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 8:05 pm

From what I've read so far, I am NOT getting rid of my '77 and '41 94's!!!!!!!!!

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 8:13 pm

I've heard alot of bluster about this "ignition" reliability with the rebounding hammers. Fortunately I've not experienced it with either of the 3 Winchester rifle's I have with that feature in the many thousands of rounds those rifles have accounted for. Haven't had any problem and notice no realistic difference in the trigger pull or stiffness of working the action between those dreaded rebouding hammers and the older models.

DPris · Post by **DPris** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 8:44 pm

I have a '51 & two more recent rebounders, the differences are quite obvious to me.
The rebound parts affect trigger pull & lever effort.
If you don't notice them, that's fine.
Bluster, however, is not a word I'd apply to those who do.
Denis

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 9:14 pm

Well, aside from my own not experiencing any great difficulty with these horrible guns. I see alot of them in action at various levergun matches and have heard none of the stuff from those actual folks , that we can all read on the internet...

Streetstar · Post by **Streetstar** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 9:25 pm

Count me in the corner that likes 'em !

I checked out the prices , and across the board, the prices for the "field grade" guns are comparable --- around 11-1200 bucks for not only the 1894, but also the 1892, 1895, and 1886.

I'm still keeping my older model 94's, but would not mind rounding out my collection at all with one of the other models (really want an 1895 and an 1892 TD)

Cimarron Red · Post by **Cimarron Red** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 9:33 pm

Bluster or not, it is much ado about very little as the rebounding hammer feature can be done away with very little effort and not much time. I understand that many shooters find the Winchester/Miroku safety features distasteful. And in a product-liability-lawyer-free world, I would happily do without them. But I have slowly given up idealism beginning at about the age of twenty-five. The Miroku rifles are beautifully made, and I'm content to shoot them as often as I can -- and acquire more as my wallet permits.

DPris · Post by **DPris** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 10:34 pm

I had, until about 18 months ago, one of the Miroku .45-70 86 leverguns from a while back.
For years I'd heard about the slickness of the old 86 Winchesters.
Most of the time I had that Miroku, I wondered where the slick was.
One day I got to working it & watching what was going on closely. The rebounding hammer was exerting substantial tension on the bolt as it passed over in cocking, requiring more effort to work the lever down.
That pretty much explained that, and it was a matter of hammer spring force, not wear-polished internals, or lack of same.

I'd installed large loop levers on my two rebounding 16-inch 94s, one .45 Colt & the other a .30-30, several years ago. They are less efficient, with more room for the hand to bounce around inside than a standard lever, but I liked the looks & honestly liked the heavy gloved capability they offered. Hollywoodish, admittedly, but I like what I like.

Also about 18 months ago, I decided one day to remove the looper from the .30-30 & replace the standard lever on it to fit a scabbard for my UTV a little better. Wanted to carry it on outings in a specific way.
Cycling the action on it afterwards, I wondered why it was suddenly so much harder to lever.
Hauled the '51 out, compared the two, and the difference between them was very noticeable. The '51 levers easily, the rebounder did not.
Took more effort to draw the bolt along the top of the rebounder's hammer.

Then compared the .30-30 rebounder & standard lever with the .45 Colt rebounder & loop lever, the looper was much easier to run.

After some agitation, cogitation, and rumination, I took the standard lever off the .30-30, and stuck the looper back on.

I found the large loop gives me more leverage, the way I position my hand inside it, to overcome the stiffer action & more leverage force required on the two rebounders. The large loop is longer. They are still not as easy to run as the '51, but much more so with the loopers on than with a standard lever.

Same situation with the 86 & the 94s, in my experience, relative to the rebounding hammer arrangement.
The trigger pulls are also affected.
Sold the 86.

Now, this is what I've personally found. I do not use sarcasm in addressing those who may have a differing opinion. I do have reasons for my own.
If your experiences vary from mine, that's fine. I won't accuse you of blustering for saying there's no real difference between the older style & the current rebounders, or of saying you see nothing "wrong" with the Mirokus.
If you're happy with the rebounding hammer, enjoy.
While expressing nothing but positive commentary on the high quality of construction of Miroku products, I choose not to buy another rebounder, no matter how well it's made, by whom, or where.
The two older rebounders I have will do, and Grandpa's '51 Winchester will do better.

Denis

Edited to add:
Don,
I saw very few Winchester 94s with rebounding hammers at the many SASS matches we went to when my wife was shooting.
The Winchesters were not a particularly popular choice in handgun calibers.

Lastmohecken · Post by **Lastmohecken** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:14 pm

Well, you can throw me in the corner with the complainers, no more rebounding hammer Winchesters for me, or top tang safety either, unless it goes straight to Turnbill to get rid of that stuff.

Fortunately, I have plenty of the older originals, and a few Brownings, so I don't really have to be in the market for a new one.

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:24 pm

Dpris you may want to back up just a tad , you're trying to take personal offense where none was directed or intended.

DPris · Post by **DPris** » Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:21 am

Don,
Not necessarily taking personal offense, just noting that there are rights to opinions on both sides of the issue, without applying "crabbing" and "bluster" to them.

Nobody here has told anybody else not to buy a current 94, and even Joe, who's crankier than I am, didn't use sarcasm with you in your opinion when expressed.

Denis

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:48 am

Dpris, lets leave it right there. You've taken onto yourself a personal level that was not directed at you by me.

DPris · Post by **DPris** » Thu Jan 13, 2011 1:04 am

Deal.

Denis

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Thu Jan 13, 2011 3:26 am

I also like what I like. And I could live with the rebounding hammer and tang safety... for they're easily overcome.

Give me back the top eject. I haven't bought, nor will I buy the AE model. A solution to a non-existant problem in my book. And the price isn't out of line. It is what it is. They'll sell some. Just won't be to me.

And I'm fine with that. Also fine if someone wants to buy one, and likes them. It's clearly why GM, Ford & Chrysler are still around. Am hopeful that will remain so.

Caliber selection is definitely a shortcoming. But, then again it's been that way since I was old enough to buy a new Winchester. And that right there is funny coming from me... as I don't own a mdl 94 in anything BUT a .30-30!!!

gak · Post by **gak** » Thu Jan 13, 2011 9:05 am

I find it interesting that Winbrownchester has had no models have come out of Miroku--except a short run of .45 92 trappers--that are the traditional (and historically most prolific/ubiquitous) round-barreled, full-mag carbine...really since the Browning 92s. I'm leaving out these latest hi-grade 94 "commemoratives," but just referring to "regular"--if high priced--models. I can (sorta) understand the 94s, if the manufacturer to date is using as their logic that "prolific" aspect--that there are still a gazillion older 94 carbines out there for folks to choose from,...but the 92 somewhat escapes me. Think about it: Browning's run twenty-plus years ago (and the above .45) aside, we've really had no new 92 carbines (as in traditional SRCs) with the "Winchester" name on it since 1941!! I guess they must also figure just too much competition not only from Rossi (for "affordable" models) but that Chiappa/Armi Sport beat them to the punch on the ones that are priced about where Winchester would place them.

What I'm slowly getting around to (:)) is that, rebounding and safeties aside (for the moment), it'd be nice to see "original" looking 92s and 94s (esp pre-war spec) in the very useful and iconic carbine and trapper formats again, and not just "everything else"--the various rifles (short and long) octagonals, TDs, etc., we have seen...as nice as they are.

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Thu Jan 13, 2011 9:12 am

gak have you been here http://www.winchesterguns.com/products/ ... mid=534177 lately

gak · Post by **gak** » Thu Jan 13, 2011 9:53 am

Don McDowell wrote:gak have you been here http://www.winchesterguns.com/products/ ... mid=534177 lately

Hey - thanks. No - a new one on me. I had been checking the site regularly but not in recent few months and must've missed specific discussion on. I too don't like the lawyer devices, but it's great to see tjhe model back! Time to sell off some things!

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Thu Jan 13, 2011 10:04 am

I suspect you got time to save a little and keep what you have now. They just updated the web catalog and nobody shows any on hand anywhere, so it'll probably be a few months....

gak · Post by **gak** » Thu Jan 13, 2011 11:38 am

Don McDowell wrote:I suspect you got time to save a little and keep what you have now. They just updated the web catalog and nobody shows any on hand anywhere, so it'll probably be a few months....

10-4. The "old" Browning's still the pinnacle and I've got that and several Rossis (which are perfectly fine), so no "rush" (after all this time!) and no personal complaints. I just found it odd that Winchester essentially ignored one of its best and most historically popular models for 50 yrs. Initially (1940s-60s) the pistol-caliber guns fell out of favor with the public with the advent and growth of the 30-30 (etc) market, we hear. However, I guess marketeers in the last 30 or so must have then seen too much competition from the imports to see a resurrected 92 profitable--or they were just dunces...or both! (Guess I answered my own question!) High priced and lawyered up though they may be, glad to see them dabbling in these levers again.

DPris · Post by **DPris** » Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:18 pm

When they were putting the project together in Japan, and I found out what configuration it'd be, I told the project guy that they were missing a great opportunity to dump the features (AE, rebound, safety) that people do not want, and return to the original pattern.
They had to basically start over in engineering anyway from the beginning, and could have just as easily reverted to the classic design.

Not at all interested.
Denis

Don McDowell · Post by **Don McDowell** » Thu Jan 13, 2011 1:19 pm

Dpris did/do you work for the company?
I'm curious about the "people don't want" on the ae thing. They only sold about a million of them, that doesn't jump right out as something consumers rejected.

gak · Post by **gak** » Thu Jan 13, 2011 1:39 pm

I'm with Denis on this one. I think at least 3/4 of those that bought the AEs "had no choice" - in a NEW 94--their chooice over a used, older one--and got what they could. (Maybe a third of those didn't care one way or another) The other 1/4, maybe, specifically got for--or actively appreciated--the better scope mounting opportunities. The other stuff my guess is few asked for and have only heard a few say they wanted--or would want. I can (barely) live with the safety, and therefore theoretically could get a gun and "deal" with the rebounding feature post-purchase.

As far as the new production, it IS a puzzlemennt the retention of the AE feature in that there is truly an almost limitless supply of the older AEs on the market. I can't see folks buying either of these 92s or 94s to race or even hunt with--at these prices--when other choices abound to scratch up in the brush and thickets. So that leaves "gentlemen" buyers (like gentleman ranches)--which hey, I don't pooh pooh, I wanna be one of 'em! THAT more likely market did give them an opportunity to re-configure the 94 back to at least most of its roots--I'm actually thinking Pre-War--even if the fukakata safety had to remain. ...as they clearly are not now trying to compete with Marlin for the affordable- scopeable market.

DPris · Post by **DPris** » Thu Jan 13, 2011 2:34 pm

Don,
I don't work for them, I deal with the industry at large.

The number of AEs sold from introduction in the 80s till end of production at New Haven in 2006 is really no indicator whatever of the number of people who do not want that feature, or the rebounding hammer, or a manual safety.
During those years, many people wanted a new Winchester 94, and if you were one of them (as I was myself), you had to take the bad (features) along with the good (overall design package).

It was very simply a matter of the only NEW Winchester 94 game in town.
Like the only card game in town, you may have strongly disliked some of the players, but if you wanted to play, you took your seat & put up with them.

The current S&W MIM parts & key lock (NOT to start up the wars over them again here

) are another example of the same situation.
Buyers & potential buyers differ in degrees of acceptance of the MIM parts, but nearly everybody dislikes the useless lock, and many people simply refuse to buy a gun with them.
S&W HAS sold a bunch of revolvers since instituting those annoyances, but again ONLY because they're the lone new S&W gun game in town.
You want a new Smith, you pretty much have to take the objectionable features along with the package (aside from a handfull they're now doing without locks).

Some diehard crusty old car people don't like a catalytic converter. Nowdays, again- only game in town if you want a new car.

When that's all there is in the new market, the majority will take what they can get, despite being unhappy about what comes with it.
Others buy older, but that only works till "older" dries up or wears out.

What's a far better indicator of peoples' feelings on the Winchester matter is Internet gun forums (not just this one), SASS match attendance & feedback from people there, and talking to those who have personal experience.

Among all that, the sense I get is far more tipped toward the "Wish they'd go back to the original design" side of the scale.

Denis

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Thu Jan 13, 2011 2:54 pm

I think Denis just hit the nail on the head. That's the reason I bought my 85 vintage AE Trapper in .45 Colt. It was at the time the only game in town.
And since then they've put out nothing I want.

The good part of this is that with all those buying the new junque, it leaves more of the old(er) stuff for crotchety old pharts like me.

As for catalytic converters, who cares? It's air bags I draw the line at. I won't own a vehicle so equipped.

And S&W's with key locks and MIM ........ forget it. I would rather they'd gone out of business than sink that low.

JMHO

Joe