Winchester 94...When Did They Get Worse or Better?

[CHEROKEE COWBOY]

Friends,
What is your opinion about post 64 Winchester 94 rifles? Do you think they were well made into the 70's and 80's, or do you definitely believe they lost some degree of accuracy and quality and that seeking a pre-64 is the way to go for the average hunter who has no desire to collect per se?

Happy holidays,
Cherokee Cowboy

[Adam Helmer]

CHEROKEE COWBOY,

I really cannot say about pre-1964 or post 1964 M94s. My 1894 Rifle was made in 1919 and serves me well. Any lever gun Winchester made today is a mass produced product. You may luck out and get a very good one, or you may have a "boat anchor."

What "degree of accuracy" do you expect from a M1894?

Adam

[Jack]

My 94 was made in 1979, and it is a very nice rifle, and quite accurate.

[Larryjk]

I have two Model 94s, both pre-64 and then some. One is 30-30 and the other .32 Spec. Both very good quality and both very accurate with iron sights. I have looked at a lot of other post-64 rifles and the early ones were accurate but had cosmetic issues. I think they are back to using all gun metals and the quality seems fine.

[Joe Boleo]

A Winchester 94 is no longer an economy rifle. Even the ones on the used gun racks are being priced right off the charts. Take care...
Joe

[skeet]

Well I was in Cabela's the other day. Saw a nice old pre war 94. It was priced at 495 bucks. Stock had been refinished. metal had about 40% blue..and it was a flat band gun. Bore was exc. I didn't reallly want it but a friend did. I offered 'em 450 and since no sales tax in Montana..he got it out the door for 450 bucks..which is a steal for a pre war 94 these days. I sold my Win 94 AE XTR at the gun show for more than that. If you look around you can find some decent buys..not great..but decent.

[popplecop]

From 64 to the early 70s(?) they were cheapend up alot. Stamp sheet metal parts, receiver with some sort of baked on finish etc. Then they corrected thes faults and it became a good lever action again. Only have 2 of the latter ones, a 94 Big Bore in .356 Win. and a 9422M, both well made.

[buckhunter]

Its a funny think. We all judge Winchester based on Pre and Post 64. I have seen pre 64's that down right sucked. Then again the majority were pretty good. Same goes for post 64's. The cheap Wally Word 94's per pretty bad but I have seen a lot that looked pretty good. As far as functioning the post's are a little tinny but do work just fine.

[scalerman]

I had one years ago. I am not sure when it was made but it was a challenge to say the least. It was very accurate and I loved how it shot. The challenge I had with it was that if I tried to load more than one shell in the magazine it would jam. The shells would jump over the stop on the floor plate. I had to make the one shot count. That might explain why I love single shots to this day.

[Adam Helmer]

scalerman,

Did you send that rifle back for REFIT with the same verbiage contained in your last post?

Adam

[Larryjk]

scalerman, I have seen a couple of those rifles where the little tip of the trigger plate was worn enough that shells would slip by and jam the gun. The part is hard to find, and I have one I kept. There is a fellow somewhere in the NE who rebuilds those and they work fine after.

[scalerman]

I did have the faulty floor plate replaced with a new one. Problem not solved. Still does it to this day.

[Larryjk]

scalerman, I really don't understand that one. All that stops the cartridge in the tube is the ring in the receiver that the tube presses against and that tip on the floorplate. Is there a lot of clearance between the crtridge rim and that opening that allows the cartridge to slip past the tip on the floorplate? I don't know what else could cause that other than the tip being too short.

[scalerman]

I wondered if it was because the spring was too strong- it really did push hard against the shells as I was inserting them.

[dovehunter]

I can't really comment on the pre-64 M94s, since I have never owned or shot one. However, we have had a post-64 M94 .30-30 in the family that my dad bought, as I recall, in the late 60's. It appears to have an alloy receiver and probably a birch stock. The action has always, at least to me, felt to be a little stiff and, compared to the Marlin, 336, a little on the wobly side. However, beyond that, it has always been very accurate and we have never had any problems with it. It gets used by both my son and/or I every season and it has taken many deer. I would have to say that I like it.

[skeet]

The post 64s weren't bad guns. They just cheapened them up so they could still make money on 'em at a decent price point. You are right about the stock..either birch or beech..possibly even gum as it looks about the same. The receivers were made from a cast steel. Didn't hold the blue too well so they did a kinda coating of iron on the receiver and blued it. Somewhat like they did the Stainless steel bbls on the M-70s in 220 Swift and the target guns in 243 and 300 Mag among others