1978 Winchester 94 on the way

[FergusonTO35]

Went to the fun store Friday to look around and they had a nice Winchester 94 .30-30 in stock. It is in really nice shape other than a few scratches in the wood and a small chip in the toe of the stock. This rifle is straight old school: no rebounding hammer, angle eject, or manual safety. The serial dates it to the same year I was born so into layaway jail it goes. Yes, I'm a gen-Xer who would rather have a nineteenth century design lever action than a plastic and aluminum autoloader! This will be the sixth one in my stable.

So, do 94's of this vintage tend to get along with boolits? This rifle will wear a receiver sight like God intended and hopefully it will like 28 grains 4895/Lee C309-150-RF as my Marlins do.

199811

[FergusonTO35]

199813Another view.

[Edward]

Probably like the lee 170 mine do also the ranchdog 165 /Ed

[Rainier]

Sweet looking rifle! Always nice to get a new boolit luncher. [smilie=w: I've never loaded for the 30-30 but I'm pretty sure there might be one or two folks here that do :smile: and... I suspect they'll point you in the right direction.
Good luck with her and most importantly... Have Fun!

[FergusonTO35]

Thanks, I sure will. I've always loved 94's but Winchester's awful quality control burned me on the first one I had, a 2002 model bought brand new. I figger if this one rolled off the line the same year I did it's gotta be good!

[Hick]

My 30-30 is from 1968-- which is the same design as the 1978 version (post 64 but before all the safety changes). It shoots very accurately and loves cast. I use a Williams receiver peep sight. It should be a great shooter.

[FergusonTO35]

"God" intended a tang sight.

Not on a 20" barrel with full mag tube. I hunt with lever actions on my feet in the thick woods so a tang sight offers no advantage anyway.

[izzyjoe]

Congrats on the rifle, I've had a few of them through the years, but never kept them, cause I prefer Marlins.

[modified5]

If you fit the boolits to the grooves just like anything else, you will be fine.
Nice rifle BTW.
I love my 94's! I have 5 right now. My oldest is from 1898 and my newest is from the 80's.
I like to buy stripped receivers and put the old levers back into action.
Enjoy it and make sure to give a range report when you get out.

[FergusonTO35]

Will do. I actually prefer Marlins but I sure do like the 94. The first one I had was bought brand new in 2002. It was a good shooter and accounted for many deer. Unfortunately the build quality was so bad you would swear it was made by Chrysler in 1979. Yawning wood to metal gaps, the front sight was pointed to 11:45, and the action was so loose it would open by gravity. Life is too short to put up with that nonsense so down the road it went. My Mossberg 464 is certainly not perfect but still miles ahead of that one.

[rking22]

I suspect you will find that a 1978 Win 94 is right up there with the 1950s 94s. At least my 1978 vintage 375BB is not embarrassed to stand beside it's 1956ish "Grandad". Winchester got it together and had fixed the shortcomings of the early post 64 rifle by 78. My 375 has become my favorite levergun, and I'm a bit of a prewar/pre64 snob :)

[dualsport]

Yes. Very accurate. Mine (traded it) shot the Ranch Dog designs very well. Still available from NOE. I know, they were originally designed for Marlins but my Win 94 shot 2 moa with it.

[shoot-n-lead]

Not on a 20" barrel with full mag tube. I hunt with lever actions on my feet in the thick woods so a tang sight offers no advantage anyway.

I agree...no tang sight will ever disgrace one of my lever guns.

[FergusonTO35]

I suspect you will find that a 1978 Win 94 is right up there with the 1950s 94s. At least my 1978 vintage 375BB is not embarrassed to stand beside it's 1956ish "Grandad". Winchester got it together and had fixed the shortcomings of the early post 64 rifle by 78. My 375 has become my favorite levergun, and I'm a bit of a prewar/pre64 snob :)

Honestly, Winny earned the bad reputation of the post-64 guns. I don't think the average hunter cared one way or another about the new push feed but they sure noticed the new Friday afternoon workmanship they were expected to plunk down hard earned money for. In 2002, I made $8.50 an hour and the 94 Ranger I bought cost me more than a week's take home pay. I knew it was a Walmart grade rifle and not an heirloom but dang, Ray Charles wouldn't have let that one go out the door. I still have a bad taste in my mouth over that rifle. The new Winoku 94's I have seen are very nice, and are priced like it too. Not many $8.50 an hour tire shop rats buying those!

[FergusonTO35]

I sure would like to add a .375 to the stable. Strangely, you see the Marlins around here much more often than the Winchesters in this cartridge.

[OlDeuce]

Not on a 20" barrel with full mag tube. I hunt with lever actions on my feet in the thick woods so a tang sight offers no advantage anyway.

Oh Man My 94 with the Tang sight are over 100 years old and that tang sight on a 20''carbine is / was most important for me in the wood of Montana getting
those White tails LoL All I and my family have ever used The good Old Lever Gun !!!!!

Ol Deuce

[shoot-n-lead]

Honestly, Winny earned the bad reputation of the post-64 guns. I don't think the average hunter cared one way or another about the new push feed but they sure noticed the new Friday afternoon workmanship they were expected to plunk down hard earned money for. In 2002, I made $8.50 an hour and the 94 Ranger I bought cost me more than a week's take home pay. I knew it was a Walmart grade rifle and not an heirloom but dang, Ray Charles wouldn't have let that one go out the door. I still have a bad taste in my mouth over that rifle. The new Winoku 94's I have seen are very nice, and are priced like it too. Not many $8.50 an hour tire shop rats buying those!

If it were that bad...WHY...WHY...WHY... did you buy it?

Honestly...were you that foolish.

Say what you want...most Winchester rifles were of pretty good quality...they were not the junk that you make them out to be.

[OlDeuce]

Fergusonto35........ for the post '94s I'd get a 38-55 barrel ! 20 0r 26'' commemorative barrels work well !!! I've done a few and they are hard to hang on to !!!
Ol Deuce

[OlDeuce]

Honestly, Winny earned the bad reputation of the post-64 guns. I don't think the average hunter cared one way or another about the new push feed but they sure noticed the new Friday afternoon workmanship they were expected to plunk down hard earned money for. In 2002, I made $8.50 an hour and the 94 Ranger I bought cost me more than a week's take home pay. I knew it was a Walmart grade rifle and not an heirloom but dang, Ray Charles wouldn't have let that one go out the door. I still have a bad taste in my mouth over that rifle. The new Winoku 94's I have seen are very nice, and are priced like it too. Not many $8.50 an hour tire shop rats buying those!

Hahaha You should Buy a 1894 Winchester !!!! I bought my 32'' barreled 38-55 set triggered gun for ????more than a Years wage of yours !!!! I loved it I wanted it and it came home with me WoW and that was more than 30 years ago !!! LoL I was Nuts but I'm glad now

Ol Deuce

[FergusonTO35]

I just naievely assumed an NIB gun would be perfect. A learning experience I suppose. No, not all of them were junk, I never have said that. What I meant was that far too many went out the door with defects that even a modicum of concern for quality and pride of workmanship would have not permitted. We aren't talking about guns that blow up or are completely unuseable. Things like proper wood to metal fit, bluing that doesn't flake off, actions that are reasonably tight, barrels clocked right. No excuse for any of these things at any price point!

[Tracy]

If it were that bad...WHY...WHY...WHY... did you buy it?

Honestly...were you that foolish.

Say what you want...most Winchester rifles were of pretty good quality...they were not the junk that you make them out to be.

Agreed. I've had several M94s, half of which were post '64, and all of them worked flawlessly. Even the ugly post '64 that seemed to be about ready to fall apart worked perfectly and shot accurately. It made meat twice within 24 hours the first time I ever took it hunting, too. One shot DRTs on both deer.
OTOH, I have also had several Marlins and about half of them had functional problems; most commonly a jam caused by interference between the loading gate, lifter and cartridge stop. None of these have been Remlins either.

[FergusonTO35]

Everyone has different experiences I suppose. All my Marlins have been flawless, especially my super accurate cheapo Glenfield 30. Anyhow, I'm glad that I finally found a "good" 94 as I love the design.

[OverMax]

From what I observed. The only 94s I encountered having a factory tang peep install were Win {rifle model's} having a 26" barrel. Seldom have I witnessed a factory mounted tang peep on the 20" barreled carbine. As the carbine was considered by many a short range up close sporting rifle. Having open barrel sights was sufficient for that purpose.

Although the mounting of a modern receiver peep is a handy gadget to have at dawn & dusk for those who wear glass's and prefer not too mount cheater glass on their 94.

As far as (my) preferred powder. Tried em all at one time or another. Ball powder seemed to give the best performance or so I've though. AA- 2230 was the winner over all the others for me. Use that powder for three of my 30-30s. (Savage 1899 & Win (rifle) 1905 built 1894 model & Win 1937-94 carbine.)

BTW. Shooting G/c cast having mediocre hardness is fine & dandy at moderate speeds. But if wanting to shoot a softer cast oh so easy to expand at speeds of a modern jacketed. Consider the paper patching technique.

[Tracy]

99.99%+ of the complaints I've seen about Winchester 94 reliability have been speculation, and not based on experience at all. I like Marlins, especially how easy it is to remove the bolt to access the breech end of the barrel. But what makes a good design is not subjective, and the Winchester 94 is a more reliable design. That's why the worst-fitted post '64 M94 still functions reliably, while a poorly fitted Marlin does not.
I'm talking about pre-angle eject 94s btw; I have no experience with angle eject and later so cannot comment on those.

[Texas by God]

I find tang sights to be in the way. Fine for range work but not hunting in my opinion at least. My 1954 model 94 has a Williams 5D on it that I installed. It's the business for close range hunting. I've had two post 64s- a late 60's model that had the receiver finish problems but otherwise a good shooter; and a 1981 Trapper that was cosmetically perfect but the best group I got was 5" at 100 yds. Down the road they went. I actually prefer the Marlin 336 Texan above the Win 94 but the 94 was my dads so IT is my lever action. Your new- to -you model 94 looks good. My favorite 30-30 powder is IMR 3031 for cast or jacketed.
Best, Thomas.

[OlDeuce]

99.99%+ of the complaints I've seen about Winchester 94 reliability have been speculation, and not based on experience at all. I like Marlins, especially how easy it is to remove the bolt to access the breech end of the barrel. But what makes a good design is not subjective, and the Winchester 94 is a more reliable design. That's why the worst-fitted post '64 M94 still functions reliably, while a poorly fitted Marlin does not.
I'm talking about pre-angle eject 94s btw; I have no experience with angle eject and later so cannot comment on those.

I'm with ya on the loose fitting post '94 Winchesters and before angle eject !!! I do have one angle eject in .44 mag and it does really good! Bought it NIB
in 1994 !!!! Nice gun spade wood ! but the post 94 work well when they get some mileage on them !! Most all the Winchesters I shoot are pre 64s and pre
Million Mark !!! The old ones never seem to change to the Loose and Junk type gun!!! could be the Iron they are made out of!!! Lot of Pride was put into the Old Winchesters during there Manufacturing !!!!!!Glade I have what I got and I shoot them all and all the 94 calibers ...32-40 & 38-55 are at the top of my list

Ol Deuce:Fire::Fire::Fire::Fire::Fire::Fire:

[FergusonTO35]

Thought I would post an update on my rifle. I have shot it a fair amount and it likes the Lee C309-150-RF and IMR 4895 just as much as my Marlins do. My local gunsmith has some aftermarket forend bands with an integral sling swivel. I got one and it works great. Only thing I don't care for so much on this rifle is how tall the ramp mounted front sight is. The ramp is soldered on so putting a shorter ramp on it would be above my abilities. I put a Williams Foolproof receiver sight on it which is not actually for this rifle but fits perfectly. Unfortunately, the elevation screw ran out of elevation. A receiver sight actually made for the 94 will probably correct it, I think I have a spare Lyman 66 in my little gun junk yard.

[FergusonTO35]

I do have a Lyman 66, however the front sight is still way too high for it. The original front sight is about .345 high. Found a NOS Redfield .260 front sight with white bead on Fleabay for a good price so I ordered it.

[Texas by God]

I had to go with a lower front sight as well.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[FergusonTO35]

It's no big deal, I've been swapping sights on rifles for years. Marble's are my favorite, I also have a couple of Redfield Sourdoughs in the collection.

[bob208]

I collect pre 64 model 94's. but I have a 72 94 carbine I use for everyday. it is just as reliable as the pre 64 rifles.

[northmn]

I like the Winchester 94. Thinking about getting one again. Marlin is a better rifle, side eject, smooth action, can easily be scope mounted which is great for older eyes, and the one I have with a Ballard rifled barrel shoots bout any cast I put through it. 94's are just great old rifles. I have not ha any problems shooting cast of about any type out of my Marlin or the Winchester I had. Tried 150 grain Lee, 120 grain Lee and a 188 grain bullet. All shot with no real hassle finding a load.

DP

[FergusonTO35]

The 94 has a very natural, intuitive feel like a fine shotgun when I shoulder it. As much as I love my Marlins, they just don't have it. I also like how slim n' trim the design is. It's the .30 caliber centerfire that carries like a .22.

[Bazoo]

My local gunsmith has some aftermarket forend bands with an integral sling swivel. I got one and it works great.


Congrats on the 94. I have one of about 72 vintage Im interested in hearing more about the sling swivel. Is it a swivel stud, or an integral loop? If you dont mind telling, what do they charge for such?

~Bazoo

[northmn]

One very popular combination seen with Win 94 users is my neck of the woods was with a receiver sight and the screw in aperture thrown away. Not only see these a lot on the used gun racks but I am old enough to hear about it speaking to those that used the 94. Its really not that popular of a rifle anymore. Seems the levers get bought as an "extra" for a pick up gun or back up gun. I have seen a lot of them that may not have shot more than a couple of boxes of shells. They are also bringing premium prices on the used shelves. One reason I am only considering at this point.

DEP

[FergusonTO35]

From what I can tell, most people who have 94's are holding on to them, they aren't being used for trading stock nearly as much as they used to be. Same for JM Marlins. Used to be the case that every gun and pawn shop had a rack of low mileage 94's and 336's collecting dust. Not the case anymore, and when they do come available they sell fast.

[FergusonTO35]

Congrats on the 94. I have one of about 72 vintage Im interested in hearing more about the sling swivel. Is it a swivel stud, or an integral loop? If you dont mind telling, what do they charge for such?

~Bazoo

The sling swivel is an aftermarket forend band with an integral sling swivel on the bottom. PM sent.