Model 64 Durability, for a working hunting gun|General Discussions & Questions|Forum|Winchester Collector

Of the 1894 variants made before 1964, i like best a Model 64 made no later than about 1950, particularly the Deer Rifle.  I came to lever action Winchester centerfires relatively late. I’ve only owned a couple of early postwar carbines, a 1951 longwood and a 1955 shortwood, a 1949 standard grade M64 with Super Grade swivel bases, a refinished prewar M64 with 20″ barrel, and my Deer Rifle. All of them in 30WCF. I’ve taken one deer with one of the carbines. So, that’s my limited experience in the field and market. 

Subject to that limitation, my opinion is the 1894 is, all in all, the most useful and beautifully designed of all the Winchester lever guns.  That is why so many have sold and are still being sold. How many have you seen so worn out [I don’t mean abused] they won’t shuck and shoot?.

The 1886 is grand but too heavy. The 1892 is pretty but, in its original calibers, insufficiently powerful for a general purpose game rifle. The 1894 is just right. 

The 1894 is just right for deer and 2-legged varmints.  Jeff Cooper said it was the ideal urban assault rifle if equipped with a ghost ring peep. The Texas Rangers traded in their 1873 and 1892 carbines for the 1894 for its longer reach. It was a de facto military arm of Mexican guerrilleros in revolutions and rat land wars. 

No, the 1894 doesn’t operate as smoothly as an 1886 but it functions reliably and is fast enough. And you can carry it all day without changing hands.  If you take care of it, your children’s children’s children can enjoy it. 

Buy the.best M64 Deer Rifle you can find and afford and equip it with a good micrometer receiver sight. A Lyman 56A if you want it to look “factory” and a Redfield 70-EH if you’re going to hunt with it.  You will have a mechanically sound, finely made medium game rifle and the most elegant Winchester lever gun ever offered to the public. I’m prejudiced. 

.

Or, if you want one with more, “omph” get one in a .32 Special

Edit – some here know I had to say it!

Anthony said

steve004 said

Or, if you want one with more, “omph” get one in a .32 Special

Edit – some here know I had to say it!

  

LOL!!!

Steve,

Why Not?

Anthony

  

Tony – 

I agree with what was said above.  The .30 WCF is probably plenty enough gun for deer.  But still, if you just want that extra margin, the .32 Special….  

If you want to run +p ammo in  a Deer Rifle carbine, for Pete’s sake buy a Browning BLR .358 WCF  instead.  That would be like buying a cherry 1958 fuelie Vette and running it in the Baja 500. Or get a new Ruger Marlin 336, neither of which is chopped liver. 

I know you pays your money and you takes your choice but nice Prewar Deer Rifle carbines are rare and deserve loving care, not Gopher Baroque handloads. 

Pardon my tantrum. I’m over it now.

Your Friend,

Bill

Steve, the good news is you can have both!  The bad news is my 1977 BLR .358 is old,  48 years old. Of course,  my 1949 Deer Rifle is older,  76.

To me, 1977 still seems like yesterday, not near a half Century. Until I look at my hands, anyway.  

If you have the time and choose wisely, you can buy N.I.B. and eventually it will be old and, hopefully, collectible. Unfortunately, in 1977 I was busted flat so I had to get the BLR in 2022. 

And for good reason, Tom. Adequate powder capacity, brass readily converted from the ubiquitous. 45 Govt case,  popular .338 bullet diameter, flat nose half jacket bullet still available for rough bores, molds and commercial lead for slick bores. A useful and comfortable step up without going overboard. I prefer to load my .348 to that power level, in fact. 

If Winchester Guns would offer an 1886 ELW in 33 WCF,  particularly if Hornady would cooperate with a run of factory ammo, I think it could be a nice addition to the line. Hopefully, somebody with enough rank to make it happen would require inclusion of the fairly accurate, checkered steel shotgun buttplate with diamond-shaped bezels, as seen on the Miroku 1873 Deluxe Sporting Rifle. 

I would strain the budget to get one, particularly if it were a takedown model. Might even beggar myself for a leg-of-mutton case. 

To me the 33 WCF makes as much or more sense than the 35 Remington as a Whitetail and hog cartridge. (I’ve not hunted Black bear but the ones I’ve seen in Tennessee and Washington State seem to be outgrowing the “medium” label.  I might be more comfortable with a .338-06 for a couple of 350-400 pound boar Black’s I’ve observed on a security camera clip.) 

348win said
I should NOT have said +P

What I mean was a steady diet of max loads……..

Load it down for the kid and I to plink with and practice, but if shooting a big Northern Deer or Bear, I’m gonna want to run the 30-30 on max load. With safe indicators for pressure.

It may sound contradictory, that I don’t want to “hot rod” it. 

I have zero experience w these rifles and verifying they can handle a steady diet of max loads is my question. 

Its a feeler to see if someone says things like “my lever unlocks at max loads”, or ” my gun needed work after I run max loads hunting”

I’m not talking about going beyond published data or running flat primers showing dangerous conditions.

 

Also I’m not interested in BLR’s or anything over 30 cal for a beginners rifle. I have stuff like that. We were looking at 25-35 for reduced recoil, but I really need to set the kid up for ammo abundance and availability. I don’t want him stuck hand loading right from the start. It takes knowledge skill and patience, I would like him to know how to reload but reality is its too advanced for kids at a hard age for them to focus. 

I figure a 30-30 we can pass off, and I can load it to various levels. And ammo will be available for years to come. Hopefully!

  

Understood, although (as I’m sure you already know from experience) none of the Winchester centerfire lever actions except the Model 88 have what I’d call robust extraction capabilities.  Assuming 21st Century barrels the metals chemistry of which significantly exceed pre-WWII “Winchester Proof Steel” in hardness, toughness, and heat resistance, I would guess the current version of the Browning Model 1886, twin vertically rising rear locking bars in mating mortises, would resist destructive breech pressures better than its current equivalent 1894, single rear locking bar action.  Neither depends on a toggle link so I’d also guess hard-to-impossible extraction would become a problem long before a gas blowout, somewhat sooner in the ’94 design because I do not believe it is as “stiff” as the ’86.  I’m not an engineer and really couldn’t opine reliably but this is what I think.  I would also guess that hot loads would be more inclined to eventually, if gradually, increase headspace in a ’94 action. When and to what extent, I couldn’t say.  

I do know, as a matter of historical fact, that the original 1895 Winchester rifles and carbines chambered in .30 Gov’t ’06 unfortunately began to develop excessive headspace after firing a large number of rounds of standard factory ammunition.  As you know, the 1895 uses the same twin vertical locking bar design as the 1886 and 1892, although in modified form. EDIT: FRIEND TOMLINSON HAS RIGHTFULLY CORRECTED MY SENIOR MOMENT, FOR WHICH MY THANKS. THE 1895 HAS ONLY A SINGLE, RISING LOCKING BAR BEHIND AND AGAINST THE REAR EDGE OF THE BREECHBOLT. 

On the other hand, current semi-production rifles based on a new Model 71 action, suitably beefed up, are available in calibers that develop breech pressures over 60,000 PSI. 

And Browning has no concern about issuing new 1895 carbines chambered in 30/06, despite today’s product liability environment. I do know a little about that subject and will say if BACO’s product liability insurer had the slightest concern that one of those would let go and injure 3 hemophiliac nuns visiting the gun range, it would have a large litter of spotted kitties and pull its coverage so fast Browning’s board of directors would barely have time to fire the management team first. 

I attribute the differences to significant improvements in molecular chemistry and heat treatments . A 1939 Winchester lever action of any model will have a barrel and critical action components of high quality, Chrome Molybdenum steel, heat treated to the best known standards of the day. But when those guns were built, the notion of shooting a number of what amounted to proof loads was not contemplated. 

SAAMI’s Maximum Average (breech) Pressure for the .30 WCF is (from memory) 38,000 CUP/42,000 PSI.  The difficulty for those of us without pressure measuring equipment is in determining how much is too much. There are controlled studies by reputable experts, suitably equipped, that demonstrate difficulty of bolt lift, post-ignition inspection of primers, and measuring case head expansion with a “tenths” capable micrometer, cannot tell you whether the pressure generated exceeds safe limits.  By the time those warning signs appear, the lucky gunner is very possibly standing with all ten toes hanging over the edge of the Void. Would the next round blow up the gun? Probably not, if it’s a Remington 700 or a Weatherby Mark V. If it’s an old Springfield or a Pre-64 Model 70, he just might get a face full of gas and brass shrapnel.  At the very least, such activities are going to increase headspace. 

If an 1894 lever action were to fail in those circumstances – excessive breech pressure overcame the locking bar and opened – there wouldn’t be another shot fired because the shooter would be going to a hospital emergency room, if he were able. That would be a truly catastrophic event. 

My opinion, bottom line: the classic Pre-64 Winchester lever action rifles are simply not safe or prudent devices to shoot handloads that exceed factory velocities for the cartridge for which they are chambered.