Pre-64 winchester 94 Vs post-64

[sthwestvictoria]

Is there an appreciable different in quality between pre and post 64 model 94?

I know for the Model 70 there is definite demand for the pre-64 and for the 94 people talk about the solid pins versus rolled, changed magazine followers and machining quality.

What premium would you pay for a pre-64 versus a comparable condition late 1970's or early 1980's 94- a shooter this is, not a collectable. Standard 20 inch this is, not the AE, trapper, antique or other variants.

Thanks for the advise

[sthwestvictoria]

This post addresses a few of the actual differences:

http://castboolits.gunloads.com/show...ghlight=pre-64

[OverMax]

Is there an appreciable different in quality between pre and post 64 model 94?
Absolutely. Fit and finish. Cast verses forged. The touch of a skilled gunsmiths file verses CNC machining.

What premium would you pay for a pre-64 versus a comparable condition late 1970's or early 1980's 94- a shooter this is, not a collectable.
The last pre-64 --M-94 I purchased. I got a great deal for 525.00
The last post-64--M-94 I purchased I paid 75.00 for one in near new looking condition.

Would I buy another. You bet in a heart beat if it were a Pre-64--M-94
Would I buy another post 64--M-94. Nope.

Haven't seen one of the very new Winchesters yet. So my verdict is still out on those.

[Four Fingers of Death]

Taken in quickly, there is not a terriblly obvious difference, but as soon as you look past the surface you can see the quality. Performance wise (mind you I have only seen one, pre 64, my one) there is not much in it. The internals are a lot better and the action body on a lot of post 64 94s tend to develop blooms or spots under the finish.

If you are anal about the appearance of your guns, some post 64s might drive you nuts. If you like a hard working, no nonsense reliable pre or post64 94 Winchesters will both do the job.

The post 64s will not give you that warm fuzzy feeling, nor will they give you bragging rights at the range or in the hunt camp, but for filling up freezers, they are right up there.

Would I buy another pre 64? Nope, unless my financial circumstances change markedly. Would I buy a post 64? Yep. Great no frills rifle.

[Bret4207]

Fit and finish. Post 64's, especially the first few years after the change, tend to rattle a lot. Winchester spent a long time trying to rebuild it's rep after '64. The last 94's they made back to the Big Bores were much better than the 65-75ish era. Not that they are junk, just not up to what the pre-64's were. They shoot fine.

My last and only pre064 94 I paid $250.00 for I wouldn't pay more than $350.00 for any run of the mill 94, pre or post 30-30 or 32 Sp. Now a Model 64 or an unusual one, that's different.

[bob208]

i have collected winchesters for the past 30 years. mostly 94's . ihave one post 94. that is the one i hunt with i paid $250 for it it looks good shoots good. i do have a rifle conversion for it that has a 24" barrel part round part octgon. the other 94's i paid from $200 to $1200.

there is one post 64 that i would like to find it is a 64a. made from 68-72.

[Four Fingers of Death]

i have collected winchesters for the past 30 years. mostly 94's . ihave one post 94. that is the one i hunt with i paid $250 for it it looks good shoots good. i do have a rifle conversion for it that has a 24" barrel part round part octgon. the other 94's i paid from $200 to $1200.

there is one post 64 that i would like to find it is a 64a. made from 68-72.

Thats the one with the curved lever and pistol grip stock isn't it? I wouldn't mind one of those either.

The Legacy is another rifle that came out in the past few years. My mate has one in 44Mag. It has a longer barrel (24" I think) and is a really nice rifle.

[PAT303]

Fit and finish. Post 64's, especially the first few years after the change, tend to rattle a lot. Winchester spent a long time trying to rebuild it's rep after '64. The last 94's they made back to the Big Bores were much better than the 65-75ish era. Not that they are junk, just not up to what the pre-64's were. They shoot fine.

My last and only pre064 94 I paid $250.00 for I wouldn't pay more than $350.00 for any run of the mill 94, pre or post 30-30 or 32 Sp. Now a Model 64 or an unusual one, that's different.

I have a '66 era 94 and it's a rattley piece of ****,a mate of mine had a big bore and it was the worst factory made rifle I've ever seen,no wonder they went broke. Pat

[FergusonTO35]

Many post 64 guns had barrels that were canted to the left or right, causing the sights to appear lopsided. Wood to metal fit was poor, the floorplate would often unlatch by itself, and the lever rattled. I bought one brand new in 2003 that exhibited all these defects. Now, that gun would shoot very well and accounted for several deer but was a real eyesore. I sold it for roughly what I paid for it.

[smkummer]

One advantage to a post 64 94, was that it held its headspace much longer than a pre-64. Winchesters were always a working gun (and affordable) and that applies to the post 64 rifles. I kind of wished I never sold my 94-44 mag that was made around 1969. I doubled my money back in 1978 and that was big back then. The action felt gritty compaired to a pre-64 94 indeed.

[Bret4207]

I have a '66 era 94 and it's a rattley piece of ****,a mate of mine had a big bore and it was the worst factory made rifle I've ever seen,no wonder they went broke. Pat

Huh! Well, maybe the ones I saw were just better by luck then. The Big Bores and later rifles I saw were pretty fair shootin' irons. Now the Rangers and other low end jobs were pretty clunky, but the BB's were at least well finished. Might have just been luck of the draw, or your friends was bad by the same luck.

[Four Fingers of Death]

I had a few post 64s over the years, they were all ok and the only fault that comes to mind is the way some of the older actions developed blooms under the surface of the finish. I never, ever had one miss a beat and plumb wore a barrel out on one trapper that I had for several years. One of them was butt ugly but it worked ok, must have been one of the mid 60s ones.

I currently have a high mileage Classic which has virtually all of the finish worn off through handling and squillions of jacketed bullets, but like the others, it just keeps on keeping on.

[mortre]

I just got a Pre-64 Win 94 to replace the Post-64 Win 94 I left in TN when I moved to Washington. I haven't held the one in TN in probably 10 years, but I still remember how much the lever rattled, as it was my first deer rifle. I had to keep my hand in or on the loop it seemed like to keep it from making noise. With that said, the action on the Pre-64 I just acquired is much tighter.

It's definitely in worse cosmetic condition than the newer one in TN, but it feels and cycles like it's a better gun. I can't wait to see how it does on the range. The one in TN I was lucky to get 6 to 8 inch groups at 100 yards. But to be fair I am a much better shot now than I used to be, so I can't really compare apples to apples.

[405]

At a gun shop if you see a rack behind the counter with some Win 94s with the bottoms facing you, if there is no screw head showing in the middle of the bottom link then it is a post- 64. All pre-64s have that screw. However, and I'm not 100% certain, but some newer models of the post-64s may have that screw added again.

At a distance all things being equal, the post-64s look fine. But, once you've had a chance to take apart, work on, study, shoot, handle and look closely at quite a few pre-64s.... there is no doubt about what you are looking at up close when you pick up a post-64. The subtle becomes very obvious.

As far as accuracy, use and function- I dunno. I have never owned a 100 year old post-64 that is still going strong. But then again I have never owned a post-64 Win 94.

[izzyjoe]

i had one win. 94, it was a post 64. it would'nt group well with different kinds of ammo, so i sold it. i just could never warm up to 94's. another thing that blow's my mind is why someone would pay alot of money for something that was made in the million's, like over 6 million of them. but i would buy another one if the price is right! and i mean cheap, cause it would be a truckgun.

[GabbyM]

i had one win. 94, it was a post 64. it would'nt group well with different kinds of ammo, so i sold it. i just could never warm up to 94's. another thing that blow's my mind is why someone would pay alot of money for something that was made in the million's, like over 6 million of them. but i would buy another one if the price is right! and i mean cheap, cause it would be a truckgun.

You have to pay because even though there are millions of them out there no one in there right mind would give up grandpas old Winchester for a couple hundred bucks. Even if all you want to do is hang it on the wall.

They sold so many because of large demand and that demand continues. Thus the price.

If the new Japanese made Win 94’s didn’t have that safety and inertia firing pin things might be different. They’re not cheap though.

Last Spring I purchased a 94 AE in 30-30. Didn’t think the cross bolt safety and inertia pin would bug me. Well I’ve found I dislike both features more than a littel. Bully,, just have to live with it. Gun is like new with a perfect dimensioned bore and grove. Just needs a few thousand boolits down the tube to smooth out it’s over sharp rifling edges.

Didn’t understand the big deal about a pre 64 gun until I acquired this much post 64. Now I get it. Even though this AE is a stronger action It’s simply not as endearing. Especially to a machinist and carpenter like myself.

Still I’m happy with the 94 AE. Plan to see it go from like new to very used before I fade out. Between all the grand children and soon to come great step grand children. Just blast away. Would hesitate to do that with a nice pre 64 Win 94.

[6pt-sika]

I own ONE Winchester lever action anymore and it's a pre 1910 1894 takedown in 30 WCF .

Needless to say , that should tell you my preference in a Winchester !

Now if I'm going out looking for a 30-30 I'm gonna go looking for a nice pre 1920 Marlin Model 1893 with a 26" octagon barrel or a pre 1955 Marlin model 336SC with the untapped reciever top !

[gnoahhh]

I only ever owned one post-64 M94. I got it for a pittance since it had the notorious bad finish on the receiver. I disassembled it, had the bare receiver bead blasted and satin nickel plated, and literally everything else reblued. It turned out to be quite stunning. It had a gorgeous piece of walnut on it or I probably wouldn't have bothered. The addition of a receiver sight completed the makeover. It shot 180gr. CBs better than factory loads. It was also the only 'custom' rifle I ever sold and got more than I had in it! The new owner just had to have it.

Satin nickel plating will definitely fix any bluing issues with those post-64 receivers.

[rintinglen]

I have a 1953 era 94 carbine, I have 3 commemoratives--all post 64. My daughter has a 1979 carbine.
There is not enough difference betwixt them to matter, save that my NRA Musket heats up and strings its shots If I try to rush my shots. My Canadian Centennial is the best cast boolit shooter of the lot, the Theodore Roosevelt Commemorative is the Prettiest. The pre-64 is nice, but I would never pay a premium for one. Side by side, my Daughters gun, bought in a pawn shop for 150 bucks 8 years ago shoots groups just about the same size as my Carbine does. I paid more than twice what she did. I bought it because it was made during my birth year. If all I wanted was a good shooter, I'd save my dough and get the post 64. There are plenty out there, so if the first one you see doesn't light your fire, wait for next one. Like buses, another will be coming soon.

[TXGunNut]

My 94's are (or were) all shooters, they're also all post '64's. If I were a collector I'd be more interested in pre-64's but as a shooter I won't pay more for a '63 than I will for a '73 in most Winchesters. I'll add a pre-64 to my collection someday but it'll probably be marked 30, 38 or 44 WCF.