Lee PrecisionInline FabricationRotoMetals2Wisconsin Trigger
Graf & SonsTitan ReloadingStainLess Steel MediaMidSouth Shooters Supply

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 37 of 37

Thread: Choice between Winchester 1894 & 1892 in 45 Colt.

  1. #21
    I'm A Honcho!



    shdwlkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    moved to Idaho
    Posts
    1,645
    years ago had a winchester mdl 94 in .357 mag would not cycle for anything, got rid of it. The issue was the cartridge was not long enough to work effectively through the action.

    The mdl 92 is much better with pistol cartridges that fit that action
    Beware of a government that fears its citizens having the means to protect themselves.
    NRA Patron member
    Veteran

  2. #22
    Boolit Buddy 380AUTO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Mid west
    Posts
    73
    I'd get an older Marlin
    Proud to serve, U.S. Army Infantry

  3. #23
    Boolit Master bigboredad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    slc ut
    Posts
    1,080
    I have a 94 in 44mag and I really like it. It does like the longer oak but that's ok since I have 330gr bullet that has a long oak. The internals have been polished by a friend and the action is butter smooth and it also shoots the 330gr bullets very well even at speeds that don't beat me to death

  4. #24
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Visalia, Ca
    Posts
    411
    Good people to deal with. I've ordered from them quite a few times as I have a bunch of antique winchester 73's & 92's.

    Quote Originally Posted by AbitNutz View Post
    Anyone have experience with this place? http://homesteadparts.com/shopcart/Home.htm


    It seems they make (or market) an incredible amount of parts for lever guns...many of them improved.
    http://homesteadparts.com/shopcart/pid_1897.htm
    "This is the carrier for the Winchester model 94 POST 64 angle/side and top eject 44 mag and 45LC. They are extremely well made from 4140 alloy steal (which is hardened). They are NOT the stamped carriers. These carriers are improved versions of the originals. They are CNC machined here in the US. (The originals have a number of design flaws that make them very prone to breaking)"

  5. #25
    Boolit Master quail4jake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    The North Woods of Pennsylvania
    Posts
    213
    Thank you for this post, I never knew the '94 was chambered in handgun/carbine cartridges. I have a 1926 '94 in .32 WS and a 1926 '92 in .32 WCF, both are honest and a true joy to fire but there is no comparing the '92 action for glass smooth functioning. I would imagine the '94 in a short cartridge would jam and run rough. Send pics, would love to see it.

  6. #26
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    barry s wales uk
    Posts
    985
    Quote Originally Posted by AbitNutz View Post
    Anyone have experience with this place? http://homesteadparts.com/shopcart/Home.htm


    It seems they make (or market) an incredible amount of parts for lever guns...many of them improved.
    http://homesteadparts.com/shopcart/pid_1897.htm
    "This is the carrier for the Winchester model 94 POST 64 angle/side and top eject 44 mag and 45LC. They are extremely well made from 4140 alloy steal (which is hardened). They are NOT the stamped carriers. These carriers are improved versions of the originals. They are CNC machined here in the US. (The originals have a number of design flaws that make them very prone to breaking)"
    Nice people good service ,bought a lifter and ejector for my win 357 ae from them

  7. #27
    Boolit Master
    Griff's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Mclendon-Chisholm, TX
    Posts
    160
    Quote Originally Posted by AbitNutz View Post
    I own a Winchester 1895 but really not familiar with 1894's or 1892's. I always thought that the Winchester 1894 was for smokeless powder rifle length cartridges, like the 30-30 and the 1892 was for pistol length cartridges. However, I picked up a 1894 AE with a 16" barrel and color case hardened receiver in 45 Colt. It was just too pretty to resist.

    What's the good and the bad of the 1894 vs the 1892 in a pistol caliber? The action is totally different...even though they are different, aren't they pretty much the same? Similar size, same strength, same throw...etc, etc...

    I'm confused why they would even make a 1894 in 45 Colt.
    When Winchester quit making the mdl 1892, they didn't keep the tooling, etc. When demand for pistol calibered leverguns made a comeback, the only option Winchester had was to either re-tool, or modify the carrier & guides on the mdl 94 to accommodate the short rounds. It was first cataloged in 1967, in .44Magnum. They were only produced for a couple of years, not even cataloged in 1968! Mine serial numbered to 1969 & I bought it new in box thru the Navy Exchange in 1972. AFAIK, this was the only pistol caliber, regular production mdl 94 until the introduction of the mdl 94AE by USRA. I don't know when the .357 or .44 were cataloged, but the .45 Colt 1st made an appearance in 1985. 1976 & 1977 saw the Canadian issue of the "Little Big Horn" & "Cheyennne" commemoratives in .44-40, 1984 saw a Winchester/Colt commemorative set chambered in .44-40, 1986 had a .44-40 for the Winchester 120th Anniversary, and lastly, 1996 saw the issue of a Wild Bill Hickok commemorative in 45 Colt. I do not know if any of these post '83 guns were on top eject frames or if the were 94AEs.

    Quote Originally Posted by runfiverun View Post
    they made them in 44 and 357 too. [I have had all three, I'm down to just the 44 now]
    Winchester still makes the 92, they cost about 1200$ American dollars.

    the model 94's have shallow rifling and tend to run large in their bore diameters.
    but they will shoot.
    don't be too surprised to have to use a 454 diameter for better results.
    As with the Browning B92 & 1892 and new "Winchester" 1892, they were/are produced by Miroku of Japan. The last Winchester Repeating Arms produced guns left the Winchester plant in 1982. ALL produced since then are made by others, putting the Winchester name on them under license from Olin Corp., who owns the name.

    Quote Originally Posted by 2ndAmendmentNut View Post
    The 92 is the better pistol caliber action. Some 94s run okay with pistol rounds but it really is better suited to rifle rounds.

    The 94s in pistol calibers I have handled seem to have a "clunky" action if that makes any sense.

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Yep, the mdl 94 DOES have that extra part that has to fall out of the receiver and go back in during the cycle. IME, the action feels the same regardless of the cartridge it's chambered in.

    Quote Originally Posted by AbitNutz View Post
    Anyone have experience with this place? http://homesteadparts.com/shopcart/Home.htm


    It seems they make (or market) an incredible amount of parts for lever guns...many of them improved.
    http://homesteadparts.com/shopcart/pid_1897.htm
    "This is the carrier for the Winchester model 94 POST 64 angle/side and top eject 44 mag and 45LC. They are extremely well made from 4140 alloy steal (which is hardened). They are NOT the stamped carriers. These carriers are improved versions of the originals. They are CNC machined here in the US. (The originals have a number of design flaws that make them very prone to breaking)"
    FWIW, the stamped carriers only saw use from 1964 to sometime in 1971. All subsequent ones are machined from the factory. IME the stamped ones are fine... unless someone tried to load an over-length and tried to muscle it in. I have a '67 Canadian Centennial with the stamped carrier still in it. Works perfectly. I recently bought a '66 Centennial at that "scratch & dent discount, and replaced it's bent & warped carrier with one from Wisner's. Quick service & less money.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	1967 Mdl 94.jpg 
Views:	18 
Size:	69.7 KB 
ID:	191272
    1967 Winchester Catalog mdl 94 page
    Last edited by Griff; 03-21-2017 at 02:29 AM.
    Griff
    NRA Patron
    SASS Endowment/Life
    CMSA Life

  8. #28
    Boolit Buddy
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    57
    Howdy OP.

    In my experience, the 1892 is the best choice for pistol calibres for a couple reasons.

    Firstly, it was designed for the purpose of shooting pistol calibres. Secondly, the 1894 was designed around the 30-30 and similar cartridges. The 1894 fills this role well. As others have stated, the 1894 can have issues with shorter cartridges, ie; pistol calibres.

    As I mentioned in another topic a few minutes ago, the 1892 is a fine design for pistol cartridges, whether it be a genuine Winchester or a Rossi rifle. I am not sure, but the Rossi rifle may have slightly more metal on the receiver (don't quote me on that though!) and is surely strong enough for what it does.

    I like the 1892, it can be easily slicked up at little or no cost (except time) and once worked is utterly reliable. The action is relatively simple, yet strong and I have found it to be fast, smooth, strong and very reliable.

    Whilst not a perfect choice, it can do a fine job as a defensive rifle, especially in calibres like .44 mag and .45 Colt etc. I would be comfortable in using one for that purpose. When money permits I will be getting more of them in other calibres. Even as a western action gun, I can beat people with slicked up/worked 1873s in lighter calibres with no trouble.

  9. #29
    Boolit Master
    Griff's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Mclendon-Chisholm, TX
    Posts
    160
    Actually... the 44WCF, 38WCF & 32WCF (aka the .44-40, .38-40 & .32-20) were introduced as "rifle cartridges" in the 1873 Winchester... and only later chambered in pistols... so technically, they are what's become known as "pistol-length rifle cartridges". But still, "rifle cartridges". Whereas, the 45 Colt, introduced in the 1873 "Peacemaker" by Colt, is a pistol cartridge... although now chambered in several rifle actions. I've never heard it referred to as anything but a pistol cartridge. (Strictly a tidbit of information in case someone's got money on the line and saying they're "pistol cartridges"). The 1892 Winchester was introduced and only chambered in these traditional rifle cartridges until the latter third of the 20th Century... when clones began appearing in "pistol cartridges" such as the .357Magnum, .44 Rem Mag and even later for the 45 Colt. The original Winchesters can be found in these pistol cartridges, but it was on a case-by-case conversion basis.

    But, indeed, you are correct, it is the far better choice when contemplating a pistol length cartridge in a handy, short carbine... or even a rifle.
    Griff
    NRA Patron
    SASS Endowment/Life
    CMSA Life

  10. #30
    Boolit Buddy
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    57
    Howdy Griff.

    Thanks for the correction; yes you are spot on, I recall Elmer Keith talking about this issue and the fact that the .44-40 or .38-40 suffered ballistically out of a six shooter because at that time they were still running rifle powders meant for long barrels and not 4-7 inch ones.

    What I should have said was; "the 1892 was designed to suit short rifle cartridges such as......"

    Thanks for pointing that out

    Ozz

  11. #31
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Headed back to Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    502
    I started my pistol caliber journey with a 94 AE Trapper in 45 Colt complete with safety and inertia hammer. My friendly firearms advisor highly recommended the 92 action over the 94. It fed Keith style bullets but was rough racking. Alittle smoothing, polishing and clipping and it started to turn into a nice rifle.

    I followed up with a second in 357 Magnum but with a 92 20" carbine. Completely different lockup (stronger) and alot smoother. Since, the 94 went down the road and was replaced with a 92 Trapper TD in 45 and a third 92 rifle with an octogon barrel in 32-20.

    By once and cry once, there is no comparison in my mind.

  12. #32
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    503
    Miroku made 1892 rifles are as fine as they get.

  13. #33
    Boolit Buddy
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    57
    Hi Birch; do the Miroku ones have the safety button and rebounding hammer etc? I agree in regard to fit and finish and overall quality, but I am not a fan of the additional safety features. Hence my owning a Rossi.

    Would be cool if there was a manufacturer with the traditional half cock safety (nothing else) and the fit and finish of Miroku/Winchester!

  14. #34
    Boolit Bub

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    33
    I own two Miroku/Winchester '92's. 357 and 44/40. Both have the rebounding hammer and tang mounted safety. Both have been flawless. Have fired every round I've put through them. Like Greg S said you get what you pay for.

  15. #35
    Boolit Master
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Headed back to Anchorage, AK
    Posts
    502
    Ozz, to castrait the Lawyerized rebounding hammer strut is easy. Simple 5 min job with a cut off wheel and clipping the mainspring about 3.5 to 4 coils. The tang mounted safety can be deleted and doesn't effect the normal operation of the rifle like the rebounding hammer does. Some folks has removed the parts and tigged the windows over but requires a reblue.
    Last edited by Greg S; 03-26-2017 at 02:06 PM.

  16. #36
    Boolit Buddy
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    57
    Thanks Greg.

    Thats good to know. That being the case my next 1892 might be a Winchester/Miroku. I have not yet owned one but the one I used a few times had a very stiff mainspring that required the gun be unshouldered to get more leverage on the lever. Was overall stiff and tight, but I imagine your advice would resolve much of that, as would a regular 1892 action job.

  17. #37
    Boolit Master
    2ndAmendmentNut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,648

    Choice between Winchester 1894 & 1892 in 45 Colt.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Ozzman View Post
    Would be cool if there was a manufacturer with the traditional half cock safety (nothing else) and the fit and finish of Miroku/Winchester!
    The Miroku/Brownings are exactly what you are looking for.

    I have also heard that the Pedersoli lever actions are very nice and only have the traditional 1/2 safety.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    "I don't want men who miss." -Capt. Leander H. McNelly

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Abbreviations used in Reloading

BP Bronze Point IMR Improved Military Rifle PTD Pointed
BR Bench Rest M Magnum RN Round Nose
BT Boat Tail PL Power-Lokt SP Soft Point
C Compressed Charge PR Primer SPCL Soft Point "Core-Lokt"
HP Hollow Point PSPCL Pointed Soft Point "Core Lokt" C.O.L. Cartridge Overall Length
PSP Pointed Soft Point Spz Spitzer Point SBT Spitzer Boat Tail
LRN Lead Round Nose LWC Lead Wad Cutter LSWC Lead Semi Wad Cutter
GC Gas Check