Winchester 1894 Thoughts....

[Eye-Bite!]

Looking for an 1894 but, which one? Would like a Pre-64 for nostalgia in a 30-30 Cal. There seems to be so many variations or versions (?) available. Any thoughts of what works for you and for me to consider to help me along. I have a Browning 1886, NIB, Now (Just Waiting on my dies to arrive). It will be a shooter. Thanks, John

[North Country Gal]

Still a lot of pre-64s around in the carbine and if you're patient, you can still find one at a reasonable price. Pristine examples are pricey, yes, but I still see a few "well broke-in" examples at estate sales and pawn shops that are quite reasonable as in, say, $300-450. The good news with a lot of old 94s is that they got carried a lot more than they get shot. Most were taken off the gun rack once a year during deer season and, maybe, shot a few times. Don't let a little scratching and worn bluing put you off. It's actually pretty hard to find one that has been "shot out".

The only disadvantage of the pre-64s, of course, trying to mount a scope. With a good peep, though, they are terrific shooters. My 1953 '94 in 30-30 will outshoot my Marlin 30-30s and it has a better trigger to boot. Yes, Marlins have a lot of advantages, but, as far as I'm concerned, there is no finer handling and pointing carbine than an old '94 (and nothing as classy or nostalgic, either. )

[Eye-Bite!]

Still a lot of pre-64s around in the carbine and if you're patient, you can still find one at a reasonable price. Pristine examples are pricey, yes, but I still see a few "well broke-in" examples at estate sales and pawn shops that are quite reasonable as in, say, $300-450. The good news with a lot of old 94s is that they got carried a lot more than they get shot. Most were taken off the gun rack once a year during deer season and, maybe, shot a few times. Don't let a little scratching and worn bluing put you off. It's actually pretty hard to find one that has been "shot out".

The only disadvantage of the pre-64s, of course, trying to mount a scope. With a good peep, though, they are terrific shooters. My 1953 '94 in 30-30 will outshoot my Marlin 30-30s and it has a better trigger to boot. Yes, Marlins have a lot of advantages, but, as far as I'm concerned, there is no finer handling and pointing carbine than an old '94 (and nothing as classy or nostalgic, either. )

I am leaning towards a Carbine but, it's always a good idea to listen to others with an opinion or experience. A little carry wear shouldn't be a problem for me etc. I'm more of an Western/Cowboy shooter and Optics are not required outside of factory options for authenticity.

[Malamute]

The carbines are about the best for a carry/working gun, they are short enough to be extrememly handy, long enough to take much of the bark away that the 16" barrel guns have. I like earlier guns for several reasons, though don't look down on later guns if in decent shape. Certain later models are worth looking at if you like the longer octagon barreled rifles. Some of the commemoratives are often very good shooters. Some are a bit gaudy, some are pretty plain, like the Canadian Centennial. Plain wood, no bright plated parts. Some bright parts can be replaced also if they dont appeal. I still see NIB commemortives now and then in the $550-$600 range. I've had a couple of the Canadian Centennial rifles and wish I'd kept one.

I prefer the looks of the early type carbines (usually called saddle ring carbines, or SRC), enough that I modified a later pre-64 to early type front sight/magazine band and fore end wood. It's far cheaper than buying a comparable condition early gun for a shooter/working gun. Once in a while you can find parts guns or barreled receivers for fair prices to build an early gun from. Still not going to be really cheap, but it's fun to bring one back and make something you like out of it. If I didnt have a decent pre-64 to work with, I'd be fine with a decent post-64 to work with. I replaced the carrier (lifter) in a couple. The forged lifters are drop in to replace the stamped ones that they came with in the 60's-early 70's.

I like the Lyman No 56 receiver sights, I believe they were made from the 20's to the 50's. They are a much more classy looking receiver sight than the later ones, though they've gone up in price.

A late pre-64 ruined to earlier style,

[Eye-Bite!]

The carbines are about the best for a carry/working gun, they are short enough to be extrememly handy, long enough to take much of the bark away that the 16" barrel guns have. I like earlier guns for several reasons, though don't look down on later guns if in decent shape. Certain later models are worth looking at if you like the longer octagon barreled rifles. Some of the commemoratives are often very good shooters. Some are a bit gaudy, some are pretty plain, like the Canadian Centennial. Plain wood, no bright plated parts. Some bright parts can be replaced also if they dont appeal. I still see NIB commemortives now and then in the $550-$600 range. I've had a couple of the Canadian Centennial rifles and wish I'd kept one.

I prefer the looks of the early type carbines (usually called saddle ring carbines, or SRC), enough that I modified a later pre-64 to early type front sight/magazine band and fore end wood. It's far cheaper than buying a comparable condition early gun for a shooter/working gun. Once in a while you can find parts guns or barreled receivers for fair prices to build an early gun from. Still not going to be really cheap, but it's fun to bring one back and make something you like out of it. If I didnt have a decent pre-64 to work with, I'd be fine with a decent post-64 to work with. I replaced the carrier (lifter) in a couple. The forged lifters are drop in to replace the stamped ones that they came with in the 60's-early 70's.

I like the Lyman No 56 receiver sights, I believe they were made from the 20's to the 50's. They are a much more classy looking receiver sight than the later ones, though they've gone up in price.

A late pre-64 ruined to earlier style,

I had my hands on a C-Centennial a few years back, I thought it looked Gaudy. Pressed in graphics (?) etc. Like you, I like the traditional looking rifles. Still leaning towards the Carbine.

[Griff]

Before I get off into relative merits, let me just state for the record that, the Winchester 94 is the best derned rifle ever designed and produced... bar none. You can arguue that all you care to, but you'd be wrong.

Ok, now that we've settled that; before I'd recommend a configuration, it'd be helpful for you to share an intended purpose. If it's going to hang over the mantle, a fully engraved 26" octagon barreled, fancy wood, w/pistolgrip and checkering would be a grrand showcase for a piece of art. Although you don't "need" the fancy wood and egraving, such a rifle would be an excellent choice for those "long" range matches for games such as Cowboy Silhouette or the "long range" side events some SASS matches conduct. Also grand for hunting, if you're not a 'weak sister" and have plenty of manuvering room. And if you just like the looks of an octagon, they've been produced in lengths from 20-30", tho' those greater than 26" are rare and command "rarity-factored" pricing! But, there's nothing wrong with those round barrel versions either. There's a good reason the mdl 64 was called the "Deer Hunter's Rifle". With its pistol grip stock, slightly fatter forend, it comes quickly to the shoulder, its graceful barrel swings easily and in 26", the sight radius is equal to the task of aiding good accuracy.

Seriously, if you're going cowboying, the 20" carbine has no equal in the scabbard... (unless it's the 16" (or shorter), Trapper). Be it varmit control, deer hunting or protecting the homestead, the 94 Carbine can, has, and will continue to do the job... for as long as there are riflemen that appreciate handy tools. Others have said plenty about the carbine's attributes.

However, if you want the ultimate in manuverability, the Trapper is the bomb! And, unless you're indoors or under a cover, it's bark is no worse than a carbine's. Well... no worse to me.

And while we're on the subject of noise, the concept that one era of Winchester produced mdl 94s better or worse than any other is sorta like arguing over whether a Biscayne is better or worse than its alter ego, the Impala. Ok, the Biscayne only had two taillights, whereas the Impala had 3... except when it didn't! Yep, the scintered steel of the late '60s & '70s has a different sound quality, and it doesn't take a traditional rust blue... but really, does the Mona Lisa need lipstick? And I'm here to tell ya, that one of smoothest, quietest 94s I is the 1979 production that I keep loaded with coyote medicine. And I feel the late '70s production, thru 1982, with their coil mainspring is smoothest hammer feel and if you changeout a rebounder for that era mainspring, the bushed hammer is even smoother yet. Now, as far as USRA produced guns? So far I avoided these abominations of the JMB design. Although with their cessation
of producction, the availability of parts for my "projects" has been a great boon!

And if the noise of a lever rattling annoys you, you've never had a buck STOP, to check what made that noise! Okay... I'll concede that it can spook into instant flight also. If it offends... they make this wonderful product called "shim stock" that can virtually eliminate
any such sloppiness. Why without too much ingenuity, you can even stop that trigger wiggle. (I figure that if I can solve that, it can't require much ingenuity)!
But no thread about the Winchester mdl 94 is complete without PICTURES!!!!!!

Custom bull barrel 26", my favored target rifle:


1979 coyote medicine delivery system and "good" coyote:


1967 Canadian Centennial converted to "Trapper", plinker par excellance:

[Malamute]

...I had my hands on a C-Centennial a few years back, I thought it looked Gaudy. Pressed in graphics (?) etc. Like you, I like the traditional looking rifles. Still leaning towards the Carbine.

Yes, they have stamped "engraving", the maple leaves on the receiver, and the "Canadian Centennial" markings on the tang and barrel (the gold paint comes put with good bore solvent and a bore brush), but they are all blued, no nickel or gold parts as many commemoratives do. For a new, or nearly new condition 94 with a 26" octagon barrel, they are far less costly than an older gun. It's all relative, I didnt mind the Canadians, but if they dont appeal to you, there's plenty of carbines around.

[Eye-Bite!]

...I had my hands on a C-Centennial a few years back, I thought it looked Gaudy. Pressed in graphics (?) etc. Like you, I like the traditional looking rifles. Still leaning towards the Carbine.

Yes, they have stamped "engraving", the maple leaves on the receiver, and the "Canadian Centennial" markings on the tang and barrel (the gold paint comes put with good bore solvent and a bore brush), but they are all blued, no nickel or gold parts as many commemoratives do. For a new, or nearly new condition 94 with a 26" octagon barrel, they are far less costly than an older gun. It's all relative, I didnt mind the Canadians, but if they dont appeal to you, there's plenty of carbines around.

I;m partial to the "Western" or traditional look of a Winchester. Somehow the "Canadian" styled rifle just doesn't fit the Old
West thought of mind. In my opinion. If it works for someone else that is all right with me. Just not for me.