Difference in Winchester 1894 Breech Bolts

[JDGus19]

Hi again everyone. While doing some research online and looking at various parts, I noticed many places sell the Pre-64 or Pre-War used breech bolts for the Winchester 1894, but there seems to be two variations. One has a full curve on the bottom of the back side that the hammer rides against, and the other which is what I have, had a flat bottom on the back side with just the curved part down the middle (not edge to edge). Are they both interchangeable, or does anyone know if these two variations are specific to the production year of the rifle, caliber, or one of the 3 variations of pre-64 hammers?

Also, the hammer that I have has two straight claws for the sear on the bottom, but I also see pre-64 hammers that have a finger on one end of the upper claw that is longer than the rest of the claw. Any functional reason for the difference? I am looking at possible replacement parts so the hammer cocks when cycling the action, and determined it's not a bad sear or gunk built up.

[OldWin]

Regardless of whether the parts interchange, I would keep pre-war parts in a pre-war rifle. It would be glaringly obvious to anyone that it had mixed parts. The relief cuts for the extractor are different from pre-war to pre 64 also.

Hard to say, but it sounds like your hammer has a broken safety notch. It should not be a straight "shelf" like the full cock sear engagement.

[JDGus19]

Regardless of whether the parts interchange, I would keep pre-war parts in a pre-war rifle. It would be glaringly obvious to anyone that it had mixed parts. The relief cuts for the extractor are different from pre-war to pre 64 also.

Hard to say, but it sounds like your hammer has a broken safety notch. It should not be a straight "shelf" like the full cock sear engagement.

Okay, thank you very much. I've learned that the serration on the top of the hammer is a good identifier for what is pre-war so I will stick with that. I think you are correct because that other notch does look chipped and rounded out compared to the notch that the sear catches to cock it. I believe I found one that is identical and still has sharp edges. My first shot at the replacement didn't match. I ordered one from Numeric and both the top Hammer serrations and the claws for the sear looked different so I sent it back.

[OldWin]

The pre war hammers typically have a square checked patch on the hammer spur. These patterns and borders changed several times over production. The straight serrations all the way across the hammer are later post war version.
All this being said, there is always overlap and transition periods. Sometimes lasting for several years.

[JDGus19]

The pre war hammers typically have a square checked patch on the hammer spur. These patterns and borders changed several times over production. The straight serrations all the way across the hammer are later post war version.
All this being said, there is always overlap and transition periods. Sometimes lasting for several years.

Great. Mine has the square/diamond like checked patch on it, not the full length straight serrations, so I'll look for an exact match. I appreciate the help!

[Pat C]

Just a little to what's already been pointed out, from 1894 to 1964 the design is basically same .The first pattern hammer had the tombstone style checkering .After turn of the century standard square border checking all the way to WW2 .
After the war the serrated hammer came out but still has the styrup and flat mainspring.

The breech bolts had minor changes to the oil slot at the front top .Maybe some other minor cosmetic changes.

Bolts and hammer for the 94 are reasonably easy to find and even select vintage you need.

Here is pre war 1936 next to post war pre 64 1948.
Other than type of bluing and hammer patterns /oil port they are basically same.

[Stevie]

I do know the firing pins are different between pre and post 64 M94 rifles/carbines

[JDGus19]

Just a little to what's already been pointed out, from 1894 to 1964 the design is basically same .The first pattern hammer had the tombstone style checkering .After turn of the century standard square border checking all the way to WW2 .
After the war the serrated hammer came out but still has the styrup and flat mainspring.

The breech bolts had minor changes to the oil slot at the front top .Maybe some other minor cosmetic changes.

Bolts and hammer for the 94 are reasonably easy to find and even select vintage you need.

Here is pre war 1936 next to post war pre 64 1948.
Other than type of bluing and hammer patterns /oil port they are basically same.

Wow this is a lot of great info! I really appreciate it. I will try the new hammer first but I've got confidence that if it is the bolt I'll find a replacement based on your info.

[JDGus19]

One last question for y'all. When I remove the extractor, the part of the bolt that the extractor goes in is cupped towards the middle where the pin goes in to hold the extractor. Well on my bolt in that cupped area I can see the firing pin. There's an oval right in the center of that cup that looks like it is wore through from rust maybe. It's maybe one sixth of an inch long. Is that a problem? It looks like it deteriorated just a small spot about the size of a tic tac. Firing pin travels fine.

I'm not at home but here is a picture of where I am talking about, where that tic tac size spot is worn out and I can see the firing pin. Bolt pic: https://imgur.com/a/nvhM3Y1

[Pat C]

Your saying its rusted/eroded on the slot wall?

Careful stoning of the wall to make sure extractor can move freely .Mostly cosmetic damage.

The 1894 rifle/carbine can be an entire collection because of all the little variations and subtle changes.
As some might think its one of my great interests in firearms. I've had a number of rifles and carbines over the last 35 years or so .

Rifles and carbines were finely crafted ,with great detail to the polishing ,fitting, function. Somewhere aroundc the time we entered WW2 to just after the quality started to diminish .

Very subtle changes like the buttstock in letting , a lot of the precision details in the receiver polishing were lost.

If you had a vintage 1894 first year carbine in perfect condition and held it next to a last year 1964 era carbine .
There would be no comparison in quality .

Its this high level of craftsmanship that went into every standard firearm back then that gas been lost due to how much profit a company can make.

I look at most all firearms built today as merely tools as most do not satisfy me cosmetically .
Unfortunatly The 1894 eventually fell into this sane category.

[JDGus19]

Your saying its rusted/eroded on the slot wall?

Careful stoning of the wall to make sure extractor can move freely .Mostly cosmetic damage.

The 1894 rifle/carbine can be an entire collection because of all the little variations and subtle changes.
As some might think its one of my great interests in firearms. I've had a number of rifles and carbines over the last 35 years or so .

Rifles and carbines were finely crafted ,with great detail to the polishing ,fitting, function. Somewhere aroundc the time we entered WW2 to just after the quality started to diminish .

Very subtle changes like the buttstock in letting , a lot of the precision details in the receiver polishing were lost.

If you had a vintage 1894 first year carbine in perfect condition and held it next to a last year 1964 era carbine .
There would be no comparison in quality .

Its this high level of craftsmanship that went into every standard firearm back then that gas been lost due to how much profit a company can make.

I look at most all firearms built today as merely tools as most do not satisfy me cosmetically .
Unfortunatly The 1894 eventually fell into this sane category.

No not the wall where the extractor goes, but the bottom of the crevice. The side walls looked very good once I cleaned them with some CLP, but right in the bottom of that crevice it is wore through and I can see a little bit of the firing pin. I put it all back together and everything still fits correctly, obviously because the extractor pin holds the extractor from going down into that hole and catching the firing pin.

My brother has a 1980s Winchester carbine and comparing that to the one I have from 1898, there's clearly a difference in fit. His rattles all over the place where mine just feels more solid.

[Pat C]

The bottom probably broke through during machining ,as long as there are no burrs ,firing pin moves freely is only concern .

[JDGus19]

The bottom probably broke through during machining ,as long as there are no burrs ,firing pin moves freely is only concern .

Great thank you! No burrs and no additional rusting around that little hole, and the firing pin moves freely.