Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Madis book says no assembly no. on 94s. I just noticed on my 94 the no. 47 stamped immediately in front of trigger. Bert says my 94 was made in May 1938. Is there some significance to this no. ? Don
All my 94’s have assembly numbers so don’t know what Madis is talking about. There’s nothing really special about them.
Don
Well now gentlemen I think we are cutting hairs here. But I believe your seeing an Inspector’s mark, regarding the 47 in front of the trigger. But I also do believe there are assembly numbers located on the tangs. And would mostly agree there’s nothing special about them. But there are exceptions, like when you find a Winchester where the numbers are XXX out and a newer set of numbers has been applied, that is somewhat special.
I’d have to see exactly on what page and edition of the Winchester Book that old George was exactly referring to.
Sincerely,
Maverick
WACA #8783 - Checkout my Reloading Tool Survey!
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-research-surveys/winchester-reloading-tool-survey/
The little numbers next to the hammer are inspector stamps just like Maverick said and some 94’s do have assemble numbers on the side of the lower tang. Here is a Extra light weight that has a assemble number, grade of wood and RB for Rubber Butt
WACA Life Member--- NRA Life Member---- Cody Firearms member since 1991 Researching the Winchester 1873's
Email: [email protected]
Madis book 1985, page 405 at bottom “assembly numbers were not used on standard arms”. The no. 47 is stamped on bottom of receiver immediately in front of trigger. This is a plain-jane 30-30 carbine. I removed the butt stock and butt plate and found nothing. Bert says made in May 1938. As stated, this is probably an inspectors stamp. Don
November 7, 2015
Offline
86Win said
Madis book 1985, page 405 at bottom “assembly numbers were not used on standard arms”….(snip!) Don
That’s true for most models as far as I know. Assembly numbers were only necessary for special models with special wood or other features. They aren’t found on standard production guns as far as I know, none of mine have them.
Mike
Online
86Win said
Madis book says no assembly no. on 94s. I just noticed on my 94 the no. 47 stamped immediately in front of trigger. Bert says my 94 was made in May 1938. Is there some significance to this no. ? Don
Don,
The “47” marking you refer to is an inspector’s stamp. Assembly numbers typically are not visible without some disassembly. Madis was dead wrong about “no assembly numbers on standard 94s”.
The attached pictures show the assembly numbers stamped on Model 1894 standard Sporting Rifle S/N 269
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert
Is it possible that the machining of parts became so precise that assembly nos. and hand fitting became unnecessary? Your SN 269 is obviously quite old. Don
86Win said
BertIs it possible that the machining of parts became so precise that assembly nos. and hand fitting became unnecessary? Your SN 269 is obviously quite old. Don
Don,
S/N 269 is not my rifle. The information and pictures were provided to me my the owner shortly after he acquired it so that I could document it in my research survey of the First Model 1894s.
In regards to the machining and hand fitting process that Winchester used, it continued for several decades (years) after this rifle was manufactured. Quite frankly, I was surprised by the assembly numbers on this rifle, and I do not know how frequently assembly numbers were stamped on the early production Model 1894s… I would love to be able to inspect at least 4-5 dozen of the early production First Models to see if any pattern develops.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Would barrel date help confirm the 1938 production question, or were they just taking barrels out of a bin at that point? I would assume since it’s pre war(ww ll) the barrel dates would still be legit? I could/ might be wrong, just wondering.
Bill Hanzel said
Would barrel date help confirm the 1938 production question, or were they just taking barrels out of a bin at that point? I would assume since it’s pre war(ww ll) the barrel dates would still be legit? I could/ might be wrong, just wondering.
Bill,
The S/N positively confirmed that Don’s Model 94 was manufactured in May, 1938. The barrel date would just be an interesting tidbit of additional information. I suspect that it will have a “38” marked barrel, but it could just as easily be one or two years different.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Hi Bert
Just pulled my 1938 winchester model 1894 carbines magazine and found 38 stamped in front of receiver, 30WCF in front of that and a 3 stamped cross-wise in front. Could this be an assembly no.? Don
86Win said
Hi BertJust pulled my 1938 winchester model 1894 carbines magazine and found 38 stamped in front of receiver, 30WCF in front of that and a 3 stamped cross-wise in front. Could this be an assembly no.? Don
Don,
I have not ever found a Model 1894/94 with an assembly number stamped on the underside of the barrel. Typically, the stamped markings that are not self-explanatory are inspector stamps. In general, “assembly” numbers are usually found on the side edge of the upper or lower tang (most frequently on the left side edge of the lower tang), in the butt stock upper tang channel, the end grain of the butt stock (underneath the butt plate), and on the inside surface of the butt plate. Less frequently, an assembly number can be found on the end grain of a forend stock or in the barrel channel.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert,
Thanks for sharing the info on the assembly numbers on that standard first model 1894. Ive not come across assembly numbers on a standard rifle in my travels.
1892takedown @sbcglobal.net ......NRA Endowment Life Member.....WACA Member
"God is great.....beer is good.....and people are crazy"... Billy Currington
Bert H. said
86Win said
Madis book says no assembly no. on 94s. I just noticed on my 94 the no. 47 stamped immediately in front of trigger. Bert says my 94 was made in May 1938. Is there some significance to this no. ? DonDon,
The “47” marking you refer to is an inspector’s stamp. Assembly numbers typically are not visible without some disassembly. Madis was dead wrong about “no assembly numbers on standard 94s”.
The attached pictures show the assembly numbers stamped on Model 1894 standard Sporting Rifle S/N 269
Bert
Bert,
Did the 269 rifle have a factory letter with it? Was there any sign that the rifle had gone back to Winchester for any work such as re-blue, re-barrel, etc.?
mark minnillo said
Bert,
Did the 269 rifle have a factory letter with it? Was there any sign that the rifle had gone back to Winchester for any work such as re-blue, re-barrel, etc.?
Here is your answer to both of your questions…
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert H. said
Here is your answer to both of your questions…
Interesting. The 94s (and other models) I have seen with assembly numbers were special feature guns or guns that went for repair. I’ll bet the 269 gun went for repair at one time in its life.
mark minnillo said
Interesting. The 94s (and other models) I have seen with assembly numbers were special feature guns or guns that went for repair. I’ll bet the 269 gun went for repair at one time in its life.
I disagree with your “bet” statement. Winchester did not stamp “assembly” numbers on guns that were returned for repair/rework. Instead, they stamped work order numbers on them. Further, as of this time, I have not ever encountered a “work order number” stamped on the stock in the upper tang channel. It is my belief that the numbers stamped on S/N 269 have been there since the day it was manufactured, and that they are in fact “assembly” numbers.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert H. said
I disagree with your “bet” statement. Winchester did not stamp “assembly” numbers on guns that were returned for repair/rework. Instead, they stamped work order numbers on them. Further, as of this time, I have not ever encountered a “work order number” stamped on the stock in the upper tang channel. It is my belief that the numbers stamped on S/N 269 have been there since the day it was manufactured, and that they are in fact “assembly” numbers.
My apologies for misspeaking, I meant work order numbers on guns for repair. I believe that is what the 3 digit number on the 269 gun was for. Makes sense that if the gun was disassembled, the stock removed from the rest of the gun, the parts would be numbered to keep the parts together. Perhaps this was done at Winchester or by an outside gunsmith. The location, right side of top tang and upside down, of the number is also quite odd for it to be an assembly number.
mark minnillo said
My apologies for misspeaking, I meant work order numbers on guns for repair. I believe that is what the 3 digit number on the 269 gun was for. Makes sense that if the gun was disassembled, the stock removed from the rest of the gun, the parts would be numbered to keep the parts together. Perhaps this was done at Winchester or by an outside gunsmith. The location, right side of top tang and upside down, of the number is also quite odd for it to be an assembly number.
Several issues with your theory;
(1) There is no “R&R” entry in the records for this rifle. Based on its physical appearance and condition, it shows no signs what-so-ever of having been “repaired”.
(2) The numbers stamped on the upper tang and in the upper tang channel have by all visual clues, been there for a very long time, and again, I have never encountered a “work order” number stamped into the upper tang stock channel. I have observed them stamped on the end grain of the butt stock.
(3) I have seen multiple specimens with markings on the edge of the upper tang, and some of them were “up side down”.
(4) It is very unlikely that an outside gun smith would feel the need to stamp numbers on a repair project gun.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
1 Guest(s)
