30-30, 92 type action

[getitdone1]

Why hasn't Winchester or Browning produced a lengthened model 92 for the 30-30 cartridge? Perhaps lengthened and enlarged a little.

I'd think it would sell extremely well.

Don

[J Miller]

A lengthened mdl 92 would be an 1886. Hmmm, I think they did that already.

Winchester told Browning to design a rifle for the new upcoming smokeless rounds and make it small and handy.

He did. And it sold quite well.

Joe

[getitdone1]

A lengthened mdl 92 would be an 1886. Hmmm, I think they did that already.

Winchester told Browning to design a rifle for the new upcoming smokeless rounds and make it small and handy.

He did. And it sold quite well.

Joe

Joe,

A lengthened model 92 would be smaller and lighter than an 1886--if done right. Perhaps the only negative thing that can be said about the 1886--especially the rifle--is it's weight. Now, it needs this weight, especially when loaded hot. Needs it for both tameing recoil and for strength.

By keeping a new version of the model 92 as light as possible and chambered for the 30-30 you would have the ultimate 30-30. Exception would be if you like a scoped rifle and that's where Marlin comes in--or angle eject. This new version would probably have to be heavier than a 92 but I don't think much heavier.

The popularity of the 92 plus the popularity of the 30-30 cartridge. Seems like a hard to beat combination. I'm puzzled by negative reactions to this idea in the past.

Don

[Terry Murbach]

WINCHESTER ASKED BROWNING TO MAKE A 30 CALIBER RIFLE [ USING THE 38-55 CASE AS THE 30-40 WAS FAR TWO LONG ] THE SAME SIZE AS THEIR '92 ACTION. HE DID THAT EXACTLY !! PERFECTLY !! THE MOSTEST WITH THE BESTEST IN LEVERGUN HISTORY. THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO REASON TO EVER EVER EVER MAKE AN ENLARGED '92 FOR THE 30-30 AS THAT WOULD BE A TWO FURLONG LEAP BACKWARDS, DON. THE '94 30-30 WAS/IS/WILL BE PERFECTION IN A 30-30 CARBINE UNTIL RESURRECTION DAY.

[pwl44m]

A+ on what TM said. I thought it was done in 1894 also.

[Timothy]

I often grab the wrong rifle out of the safe when reaching for a 92 or 94 because they're so close in size. Rather than a new action id like to see and industry wide push to popularize the 25-35 219zipper and 32win in 30-30actions. I too get bored with the 94 in 30-30.

[WCF3030]

Looks like TERRY beat us to it.

[getitdone1]

O.K. you guys. You 94 worshipers.

I like the 94 I just like the 92/86 style action better. For one thing the "guts" don't come down out of the bottom whenever you lever it like the 94. Two, the nicely rounded bottom of the 92/86 receiver is more comfortable to the hand and also looks better. Three, I want one.

I'm not saying you'd gain a lot with a 30-30, 92 but you'd have the nicest 30-30 lever-action ever made. Of course, opinions differ, as we're seeing here.

Are we still friends? Different strokes, ya know.

Don

[Marc]

I'm with you Don. I think the 92 is a better action. I have read that Browning didn't scale up the 92 for the 30-30 because it would have been to big. Hogwash! If JB was the mechanical genius that I think he was, he could have made it work and it would still be slim and trim. For whatever reason he didn't try. Wanted to try a new idea I guess that then developed into the 1895.

[Terry Murbach]

I'm with you Don. I think the 92 is a better action. I have read that Browning didn't scale up the 92 for the 30-30 because it would have been to big. Hogwash! If JB was the mechanical genius that I think he was, he could have made it work and it would still be slim and trim. For whatever reason he didn't try. Wanted to try a new idea I guess that then developed into the 1895.

YOU MISSUNDERSTAND HERE, SIR. WINCHESTER TOLD BROWNING TO MAKE AN ACTION THE EXACT-- EXACT-- EXACT SIZE OF THE '92, FRONT-TO-BACK, TOP-TO-BOTTOM, SIDE-TO-SIDE, BUT TO MAKE THAT ACTION HANDLE THE LONGER CARTRIDGES THE LENGTH OF THE 38-55 AND 32-40 UNTIL " WE CAN GET THE NEW 30WCF UP AND RUNNING."
IN W-W's MIND THE '92 WAS THE MOST PERFECT HANDLING SIZE EVER FOR A LEVERGUN AND ONLY NEEDED TO BE ADAPTED TO LONGER CARTRIDGES. MAKING THE '92 LONGER WOULD TRASH THE VERY REASON FOR BEING OF THE SOON-TO-BE HOT ROCK HIGH VELOCITY SMOKELESS PROPELLENT 30WCF CARTRIDGE, HIGH VELOCIY POWER IN A '92 SIZED RIFLE/CARBINE. AT THAT POINT IN TIME THE 30WCF IN THE NEW '94 WAS A REVOLUTIONARY DESIGN.

[Nath]

I likes the guts dropping out, lets all the leaves and gum wrappers fall out

N.

[J Miller]

I likes the guts dropping out, lets all the leaves and gum wrappers fall out

N.

Gum wrappers ............ That's funny no matter how you look at it.



Joe

[getitdone1]

Well...there's been over 7 million 94's made and little over 1 million 92's made. Am I barking up the wrong tree? (Give you guys something to work with.) Just kidding. Well, those numbers do tell you that the 94 is a great gun--I don't question that. I don't believe any sporting rifle has been as popular or been made in such large quantities.

No, I didn't start this thread to start an argument but I found-out some time ago that any negative remark about the model 94 Winchester will get response from the lovers of this gun. That's the way it oughta be. We've all got our favorites. You guys know the model 92 is also a great gun. Several member of this group put the model 86 in first place and about all of you know the 92 is, basically, just a smaller version of the 86. I believe Paco's first love is the model 92. This is the model you'll see in most Western movies. It was made too late for "the old west" but that's Hollywood for you.

I don't know which of these models has the strongest action. Be interesting to know. Might be close to a tie. The "outer portion" of the receiver of the 92/86 is bound to be stronger since it's not open at the bottom. I do see where the opening at bottom of 94 receiver can let some trash out that would remain in the 92/86 but I doubt this has been much of a problem.

I'll quit on this subject. We all have ideas of guns we'd like to see made and what makes sense to some does not to others. Usually nobody's right or wrong. Takes a lot of different types of guns to satisfy the gun buying public. Makes guns more interesting too.

Main thing is to keep on shoot'in and enjoying guns.

Don

[Nate Kiowa Jones]

Well...there's been over 7 million 94's made and little over 1 million 92's made. Am I barking up the wrong tree? (Give you guys something to work with.) Just kidding. Well, those numbers do tell you that the 94 is a great gun--I don't question that. I don't believe any sporting rifle has been as popular or been made in such large quantities.

No, I didn't start this thread to start an argument but I found-out some time ago that any negative remark about the model 94 Winchester will get response from the lovers of this gun. That's the way it oughta be. We've all got our favorites. You guys know the model 92 is also a great gun. Several member of this group put the model 86 in first place and about all of you know the 92 is, basically, just a smaller version of the 86. I believe Paco's first love is the model 92. This is the model you'll see in most Western movies. It was made too late for "the old west" but that's Hollywood for you.

I don't know which of these models has the strongest action. Be interesting to know. Might be close to a tie. The "outer portion" of the receiver of the 92/86 is bound to be stronger since it's not open at the bottom. I do see where the opening at bottom of 94 receiver can let some trash out that would remain in the 92/86 but I doubt this has been much of a problem.

I'll quit on this subject. We all have ideas of guns we'd like to see made and what makes sense to some does not to others. Usually nobody's right or wrong. Takes a lot of different types of guns to satisfy the gun buying public. Makes guns more interesting too.

Main thing is to keep on shoot'in and enjoying guns.

Don

The 92 and the 86 are much stronger than the 94. It has more to do with the angle of the locking bolt in relationship to the bolt. The 94 with it's single locking bolt has to be layed back some to prevent the bolt from seizing up once it's fired. But that laid back angle also allows it to try and come open once the pressures start getting over 45,000 psi.
The twin locking bolt at a more perpendicular angle allow higher pressure ammos for the 92 and 86.

Also, the pre-war 94 receivers had a more rounded bottom.

[L_Kilkenny]

I don't have an issue with liking the 92 better than the 94 or the Marlin offerings but why not just get a .357 and shoot the rubber tipped bullets if you need a little more range? Or maybe try for something a little easier to adapt to the action to the .327 or the close to defunct .357 maximum? Heck, bring back the .32-20.

I don't really see the point in trying to cram the .30-30 into the 92 action. It's not like it's the end all to rifle cartridges. IMO of coarse.

LK

[earlmck]

Why hasn't Winchester or Browning produced a lengthened model 92 for the 30-30 cartridge?

Well they are not really into innovation anymore. Big Horn Armory is making an oversized 92 but so far they are quite pricey and not chambering for what I would consider a pleasant shooting cartridge. We need Rossi to make us something a tad larger in the 92 style: they could bring it in at an affordable price.

The 92 and the 86 are much stronger than the 94.

And that's why Rossi can chamber one of their 92s for .454 Casull. And why, if we had a 92 style action just a little longer we could make some really cool rifles using the Remington BenchRest series. (a 6mm BR case feeds, extracts, and ejects slicker'n snot through my 454 Rossi, but there isn't enough overall length left over to seat the bullet out where it needs to go...)

Anyway, I'm pretty much voting your way, Don, even though it's not the 30/30 I'd be using the stronger 92-type action for.