Ok Winchester guys, school me on the Win 94 AE.

[koger]

Looking at one locally in .32 Win special, it has the side saftey, but it also has the screw on the bottom of the lever plate like pre 64's and it appears to be steel, with machined parts like a pre 64. Works slick and is tight. Aside from the side saftey I see no fleas on it. This one is about 95% blue and wood, shot very little by the looks of it. I consider myself pretty well read/used to Marlins, but I have never had a lot of love for the post 64 1894's, and have not paid much attention to them. I am thinking of getting this one as he can find no ammo for it thru his distributors and offered me a deal, which I have molds and can make brass by running 30/30 brass into my sizing die. Any other info, good, bad or otherwise, I should know, all replies appreciated.

[Winger Ed.]

I'm a Marlin guy too, but have a 70s era Winchester in .30-30.
They're different than a Marlin, but fine rifles none-the-less. I think you'll like it.

If yours has the cross bolt safety, I think Brownell's has a flush mounting replacement plug sort of thing to get rid of it.

[pietro]

.

All post-64 Winchester 94's are not created equal................

In 1983, with the introduction of the Model 94AE (Angle Eject), Winchester went back to a (real) blued forged steel receiver, and remedied many of the hated changes of 1964.

Some of the changes (like the stamped lifter) were changed in 1972, more in 1983 (like the fake blue receiver finishes) - and all the changes were to the good.

The cross-bolt safety was introduced in 1992 & discontinued in favor of the tang safety in 2003

The cross-bolt safety can be removed & the holes camo'd via plugging with two 1/4" black nylon hole covers @ $1.50 from a real hardware store.

If the price is right, and you want it, I'd advise you to obtain it.

I've has 2 different M-94's in .32 Special, and found that while their performance was virtually identical to the .30-30, the nostalgia & "having something different" made them more pleasurable to me. (YMMV)


.

[Mk42gunner]

Well that is a new one to me, I thought Winchester quit making .32 Specials about 1973, except maybe for the commemorative rifles they produced in abundance.

I never heard of any AE versions in .32 WS, but I could be wrong.

As for the crossbolt safety, I trimmed mine down so it still works, but is not likely to be applied by accident.

Robert

[Shawlerbrook]

pietro nailed it. They are not bad guns, especially if bought right.

[gc45]

The 32 spec makes a great cast bullet rifle having a slower twist than the 30-30..

[farmbif]

the only "bad" lever gun I ever saw was one of those winchesters they made in 22 and 22mag that were all either pot metal or some sort of aluminum with a short stroke lever I'm guessing it was winchesters budget answer to the marlin 56, 57 and 62 levermatics. ive got a couple post 64 winchesters none with a safety and they all work great. I did get rid of one I didn't like much that had a rebounding hammer..
if its a winchester in 32 spl. enjoy,

[smkummer]

I’ve just picked up a Win 94 AE in 45 colt with a cross bolt safety from a late cowboy action shooter’s estate. The first thing I did was see that the lever didn’t open as far as my 94 in 30-30 and it didn’t. The quality of the metal and wood is very good to high quality. And as stated, it’s a real steel receiver. In my opinion, these are quality USA made firearms.

[Bazoo]

The crossbolt safety guns have rebounding hammers. There were several varieties of hammer struts for them, some work better than others, they are known to misfire when they want to be fickle. I've had one like this, mine was a later walmart gun marked Ranger. Not all of them have problems and the good ones are fine guns.

[BB57]

Well that is a new one to me, I thought Winchester quit making .32 Specials about 1973, except maybe for the commemorative rifles they produced in abundance.

I never heard of any AE versions in .32 WS, but I could be wrong.

As for the crossbolt safety, I trimmed mine down so it still works, but is not likely to be applied by accident.

Robert

Winchester discontinued the .32 WS in the Model 94 on 1973. FN Herstal brought it back in 1992 and IIRC was discontinued again when production moved to Miroku. However, it was reintroduced in 2018 and is still cataloged in three Winchester Model 94 models.

[BB57]

Looking at one locally in .32 Win special, it has the side saftey, but it also has the screw on the bottom of the lever plate like pre 64's and it appears to be steel, with machined parts like a pre 64. Works slick and is tight. Aside from the side saftey I see no fleas on it. This one is about 95% blue and wood, shot very little by the looks of it. I consider myself pretty well read/used to Marlins, but I have never had a lot of love for the post 64 1894's, and have not paid much attention to them. I am thinking of getting this one as he can find no ammo for it thru his distributors and offered me a deal, which I have molds and can make brass by running 30/30 brass into my sizing die. Any other info, good, bad or otherwise, I should know, all replies appreciated.

Winchester added the rebounding hammer in 1981 just before the Angle Eject in 1982 when Olin sold the company to its employees who formed US Repeating Arms.

USRA went under in 1989. FN Herstal bought what was left and started producing the Model 94 again in 1992 with the cross bolt safety to make it marketable over seas. FN switched to the tang safety in 2003. US production stopped in 2006 and was restarted with Miroku in Japan, where both the AE and tang safety were retained.

——

That time line clearly puts an AE, cross bolt receiver in the 1992-2002 time frame.

While there were .32 WS Model 94 AE carbines made in that time period, none of them should have had a lever link with a screw in it. That disappeared in 1964.

I’ve never tried fitting a pre-64 lever link in a post 63 Model 94. It might work, or not. I’d be skeptical about it and about what other parts may have been replaced.

I’ve seen .32 WS for sale in at least three different shops recently, so it’s out there. I’m not sure why his distributors can’t find it.

But I’m a .38-55 shooter and factory ammo for it is sparse and expensive when you can find it, and brass availability can be spotty so I buy 500 at a time when Starline has it in stock.

In contrast. 32 WS is easy as Starline, Winchester and Hornady all currently have .32 WS brass in stock. Like the .38-55 it’s better suited to cast bullets than jacketed bullets, especially when you consider availability of jacketed bullets.

[smkummer]

My Win. 94 45 colt AE has the screw like a pre 64. 6.2 million.

[MostlyLeverGuns]

I've got marlin 30-30's and .32 Special's. I much prefer the .32 Specials for accuracy and they do have more power than the 30-30 when loaded to equal pressure. The .32 Special also handles 180-200 grain cast boolits very well. A flatnose 200 grain bullet at 2000fps is easily attained, closer to the factory .35 Rem than a 30-30. I size to .323 in my Marlins.

[FergusonTO35]

Usually, they are good rifles and the .32 chambering is rare for that era. Biggest problems I've found with them are poor parts fit and light strikes. Parts fit is totally at random, some of them will be great, some ok, some terrible. Light strikes can usually be corrected with the revised stronger hammer spring and shortening the lower leg of the hammer strut a bit. If you like the rifle I would say get it, they just don't come up that often locally. If you don't like it you can probably sell it on GB at a profit.

[VariableRecall]

I've had the pleasure of trying out a friend's Winchester Model 94AE in 30-30 Win, with a Japanese mystery scope attached to the top of it. Above average trigger and smooth operating, and whoever put the scope on it before my friend bought it did a good job. However, with hard primers like the 7.62 NATO ones you get from CCI, it can have trouble setting them off reliably despite the rebounding hammer giving it a noticeable smack. with factory ammo and standard LRP's, I've had no issue at all. It thankfully lacks the ugly extra safeties with only the lever grip safety and the rebounding hammer to rely on. It's a winner and a worthy addition to your collection. Never heard of the .32 Win caliber, is it a historic cartridge?

[Sam Sackett]

32 Winchester Special. Commonly called 32 Special. Or at least that’s the caliber he is referring to.

It’s been around almost forever.

Sam Sackett

[VariableRecall]

32 Winchester Special. Commonly called 32 Special. Or at least that’s the caliber he is referring to.

It’s been around almost forever.

Sam Sackett

Just looked it up, and it seems like a lot like 30-30 WCF but necked up to .32 caliber. Seems like it could tackle a wide variety of game. Considering the less popular bullet diameter, perhaps 30-30 won out in the end, but this looks like a decent cartridge to use, minus trying to find projectiles for it. An excellent caliber for reloading, then!

[Texas by God]

The .32 Special was introduced to offer a cartridge similar to the new SMOKELESS 30-30 that could be used with black powder with out issues. The .32 Special model 94 even had a special rear sight for lower velocity black powder loads.
Or so I remember reading long ago.
As a kid, I looked at it as an also ran.
Now, I’d love to have one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FergusonTO35]

What's the price on it, Koger? A 1992 94 .30-30 in typical condition went for $575.00 the other day at my favorite shop. The owner is very fair on prices and won't gouge somebody even if he has the opportunity, so I consider his pricing to be very realistic for both buyer and seller.

[TD1886]

The .32 Special was introduced to offer a cartridge similar to the new SMOKELESS 30-30 that could be used with black powder with out issues. The .32 Special model 94 even had a special rear sight for lower velocity black powder loads.
Or so I remember reading long ago.
As a kid, I looked at it as an also ran.
Now, I’d love to have one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I believe that special rear sight was an option, not a standard item. Their are quite a few early 32's out there that had the smokeless sight.

[koger]

$750

[FergusonTO35]

Hmm, sounds kind of high to me. The rebounding hammer and pushbutton safety cut the value relative to one without those features. For a local sale, there isn't going to be much interest in the .32 chambering. If you wanted the gun, I would offer $600.00.

[BB57]

I’ve seen post 1963, pre rebounding hammer Model 94s in average condition sell for $750 recently, but not a rebounding hammer AE.

I’m in agreement that it’s closer to a $600 gun.

The 1964-81 Model 94s at least have the original quarter cock operating system.

A lot of the AE Model 94s from the 1980s and 1990s develop issues with light strikes.