Model 1894 - 30WCF

[375RUGER]

A friend came up with a nice old 1894 in 30WCF. Is there any reason not to load this rifle to current published data for 30-30?
Not likely that he will be running max pressure anyway, since I've got him hooked on casting as of this past week. He likes cheap boolits now, go figure.

[raingauge]

My '94 was made in 1897, it's handles current data just fine. I dont push the envelope with it, recently turned it into a cast boolit rifle, it hasn't given any signs of any pressure problems. They're fun old shooters

[w30wcf]

My '94 was made in 1897, it's handles current data just fine. I dont push the envelope with it, recently turned it into a cast boolit rifle, it hasn't given any signs of any pressure problems. They're fun old shooters

+1 :grin:

w30wcf

[375RUGER]

I kinda thought that they were well made.
This one is from 1907.
Thanks for the input.

[TXGunNut]

There's definitely something about those early 94's and 1894's. 1892's too for that matter. I just didn't understand until I handled and shot a few.

[Four Fingers of Death]

He likes cheap boolits now, go figure.

HaHa! If he's anything like us, he will go broke saving money!

[TXGunNut]

HaHa! If he's anything like us, he will go broke saving money!


I just need another 3128 lbs of lead to break even.....if I don't buy any more moulds. ;-)

[Four Fingers of Death]

HaHa! Fat chance of that!

[OverMax]

IMO: Your friend will know when his loadings are to hot for the rifle as he will have trouble adjusting the barrel sights to accommodate such ammo. The reason for this comment there wasn't but a few smokeless powders marketed at the time of this rifles making. So the charges listed currently are for more up to date rifles having better alloyed steel verses the much earlier nickel steel barrels. Others may say differently as they don't consider their rifle being antique. But overall your friend should keep in mind his rifle is indeed well over a 100 years old. It is an antique and should be treated as such when it comes to its firing in order to maintain a margin of safety.

[TXGunNut]

HaHa! Fat chance of that!


So true, my friend. Already treated myself to one new mould this month, broke in another and danged if another mould didn't catch my eye while I was on a mould mfgr's website. Also ordered six sets of mould handles and only two are spoken for, guess I need to round up a bunch more WW's to break even, lol.

[375RUGER]

HaHa! If he's anything like us, he will go broke saving money!
He is. He knows what he's getting into and he's diving right in the deep end.

[Hickok]

There's definitely something about those early 94's and 1894's. 1892's too for that matter. I just didn't understand until I handled and shot a few.TX you are so right! My 1894 was made in 1948, and I just wish it could talk and tell me stories of the people who owned it and hunted with it.

It is in excellent condition, perfect bore, the bluing is worn around the receiver where it was carried in someones right hand over many miles in the timber, absolutley no rust.

The only real issue was the buttstock and forearm. Some one had drilled a hole through both, and put a wire hoop through the wood for "sling swivels" and used bailer twine for a sling. Had to be a farmers rifle!

I replaced the wood and it looks great. I bet it could tell some stories!

[yooper]

It's from 1907? It's hardly broken in! My 1873 Winchester rifle and SRC are from the 1880's and they still get to the range for their day in the sun. Sure get some looks from the other shooters when I pull a '73 saddle ring carbine from its case and fire it up. They were made to shoot. Watch the loads and enjoy the dickens out of them.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v305/yooper35/1873-1.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/yooper35/media/1873-1.jpg.html)
yooper