Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Another one that appealed to me since it’s a rifle and not a carbine and less than a full magazine. Looks like King sights? Anyway, I may have overpaid a bit at $795 but I’ll be happy to shoot it regardless…
Technically, the glass is always full; half liquid, half air....
WACA #10293
As time goes by, it seems to be getting harder and harder to find a Winchester that has not been messed with somewhere along the line. Even high condition guns often have had some over cleaning or enhancement in one way or another. Your model 1894 appears to be an exception to that rule. Although the condition isn’t high, it is in honest period of use condition. Very refreshing to see guns like this. I think the price you paid, is very reasonable.
I like the rifle as well, looks like an honest gun. And at a great price. Sights were likely swapped along the way but that not any big deal, lots of them have been swapped over the years. Interesting and rarer configuration with the 2/3 magazine. I once owned a rifle just like yours with a round barrel and 2/3 magazine in 38-55 and have come to regret selling it years ago. 32WS is a great caliber too for hunting too. I have a buddy that I gave a 1937 vintage carbine to last year in 32WS and he has shot 10-12 deer with it so far (plus a horse that had to be put down) and he tells me it will cut through brush like its not even there and will absolutely crush deer.
1892takedown @sbcglobal.net ......NRA Endowment Life Member.....WACA Member
"God is great.....beer is good.....and people are crazy"... Billy Currington
I have a better (circa 1958) .32 Carbine but it wears a Redfield M294 mount and 2X IER scope that was so popular in it’s day. Great set up but I’ve wanted a .32 that’s not drilled and tapped and this one came along.
Technically, the glass is always full; half liquid, half air....
WACA #10293
November 7, 2015
Offline
I agree with Rick and Chris; it’s nice to find a good, honest gun even if the condition is a bit low. I don’t feel like you overpaid, looks like a solid value to me but I’m often drawn to well-used specimens with unusual features and chamberings. How’s the bore?
Mike
The seller states the bore is clean but the lands are worn a bit thin. No issues since I cast and size my own bullets.
Technically, the glass is always full; half liquid, half air....
WACA #10293
So I finally got around to working on this rifle (strayed for a bit with the shotguns). As I placed it on the bench, I thought man that’s a large muzzle…. put a mic to it and it measured (.690″) 11/16″. So I went on to research heavy weight barrels to no avail but did learn that 11/16″ is the standard for rifle muzzles. So….had to go into the safe to measure my other two 26″ rifle barrels. Seems those are narrower; I have two lightweights I didn’t recognize as they were the first two rifles I purchased… and I had nothing to compare them to- nice surprise I guess. Always learning. BTW the SN places it circ 1926 and the barrel has a 21 stamped in it under the wood. I suppose parts sat around a while. The sights are Marble’s with a No.3 front sight.
Technically, the glass is always full; half liquid, half air....
WACA #10293
What is the serial number? Is it an octagon, or a around barrel? Exactly where on the barrel is the “21” stamped? Can you post pictures of the rifle including the “21” stamp?
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert, pics are in the first post. SN#994088. I’ll get pics of the lower barrel markings tonight. The 21 is under the wood, up against the receiver. Ron
Technically, the glass is always full; half liquid, half air....
WACA #10293
Here are the barrel markings under the wood:
Technically, the glass is always full; half liquid, half air....
WACA #10293
Can you send me a clear picture from a bit closer up ?
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Here you go Bert- hope this helps. What is the interest in the 21?
Technically, the glass is always full; half liquid, half air....
WACA #10293
The “21” means the barrel was manufactured in 1921. The serial number lookup on this site (other sources are often incorrect) indicates a manufacture date of 1926. This means the original barrel was replaced with an earlier barrel.
mrcvs said
The “21” means the barrel was manufactured in 1921. The serial number lookup on this site (other sources are often incorrect) indicates a manufacture date of 1926. This means the original barrel was replaced with an earlier barrel.
Is it a possibility the barrel sat around in a parts bin for 5 years before being assembled? It would be interesting to see close-up photos of the barrel and receiver proof marks to see how well they match.
rwsem said
Here you go Bert- hope this helps. What is the interest in the 21?
Winchester began date stamping barrels in 1920, but on a very infrequent basis. For the years 1920 – 1923 I have surveyed (636) Model 94s and have confirmed less than a handful with a barrel date on them (two “20” marked, and two “21” marked). Barrel dating did not become the “norm” until 1924. Consequently any barrel date earlier than 1924 is of interest to me.
Thanks for the picture!
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
mrcvs said
The “21” means the barrel was manufactured in 1921. The serial number lookup on this site (other sources are often incorrect) indicates a manufacture date of 1926. This means the original barrel was replaced with an earlier barrel.
I disagree… it does not mean the barrel was replaced. It does make it a “possibility”, but definitely not a certainty. I am inclined to believe that the barrel is original, and that it is just a case of Winchester using parts on hand. Keep in mind that after WW I, the Model 94 production shifted more heavily to the Carbine variation, and that the Rifle variation was predominately in 30 WCF.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
deerhunter said
Is it a possibility the barrel sat around in a parts bin for 5 years before being assembled? It would be interesting to see close-up photos of the barrel and receiver proof marks to see how well they match.
Don,
Yes, that is a strong possibility in this rifle’s case. Of all the possibilities, it is the most likely.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
win4575 said
As time goes by, it seems to be getting harder and harder to find a Winchester that has not been messed with somewhere along the line. Even high condition guns often have had some over cleaning or enhancement in one way or another. Your model 1894 appears to be an exception to that rule. Although the condition isn’t high, it is in honest period of use condition. Very refreshing to see guns like this. I think the price you paid, is very reasonable.
rwsem said
Another one that appealed to me since it’s a rifle and not a carbine and less than a full magazine. Looks like King sights? Anyway, I may have overpaid a bit at $795 but I’ll be happy to shoot it regardless…
In my collection I have a carbine near identical to yours. # 927896, PR 2-15-21. Has the 44-A rear sight and a post front. 32 caliber, with a 20″ bbl. and 2/3 magazine. No sling ring, and it has a special order 4 1/2″ composition buttplate. I will be taking it apart soon to get a bbl. date, if it has one. Mine looks similar to yours and the bore is an 8 out of 10. Not pitted, just worn. I think you did well on your purchase. I paid $1,500 for mine just to get the very scarce stock. I have another from 1930 in 98% condition I paid $2,000 for. If your rifle was mine, I would put original type sights back on it. Again, you have a fine honest rifle. Sorry, no pics. Big Larry
deerhunter said
It would be interesting to see close-up photos of the barrel and receiver proof marks to see how well they match.
I’m confident this barrel is original to the receiver and is just a case of WRA using what was on hand.
Bert- Thanks for the information on the lower barrel markings, that’s another nugget that I’ll file away.
Technically, the glass is always full; half liquid, half air....
WACA #10293
1 Guest(s)
