Log In
I came across a rifle today that has me scratching my head. It’s stamped as a 94 in 219 zipper. However it looks like a model 64 deluxe. I can’t find any info that a 94 219 zipper was ever made. The serial number also dates the gun to 1919. The 219 zipper wasn’t even created then. What am I looking at?
April 15, 2005
Offline
Lance,
You are looking at a put together piece parts rifle. The 219 Zipper was only available in the Model 64, beginning in the year 1937. At the time it was introduced, the Model 94 was only available as a Carbine.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
December 21, 2006
Offline
Lance Winchester did in fact produce some Mod. 1894 rifles after 1936. I have 2 of them as follows; Ser# 1,299, 636 is 24″ mod. 64 rnd bbl stamped mod 64 w/ straight grip mod. 94 rcv’r. Ser# 1,343,643 is an identical gun only the bbl is stamped mod 94. this gun is in Bob Rennenberg,s book, 2nd addition. both these guns were manufactured in 1939 and so stamped under the bbl. They were factory made up from parts due to the shortage of steel . It sure would be interesting to see this 219 zipper first hand , the possibility exists it may be one of these factory made from parts guns. Henry I just went back and read the rest of Lance.s post where he says the Ser# dates the gun to 1919 so I have to eat crow and say this is not one of the factory made from parts guns as they generally tend to be in the 1,300,000 ser # range Henry
W.A.C.A. life member, Marlin Collectors Assn. charter and life member, C,S.S.A. member and general gun nut.
April 15, 2005
Offline
Henry,
I am not trying to pour cold water on you here, but I do want to point out that serial number 1343643 was manufactured in October of 1945. If it has a “39” marked barrel on it, something is very fishy about it.
As for serial number 1299636, it was manufactured in October of 1941. Again, it is very odd for it to have a “39” marked Model 64 barrel on it. In light of the fact that the Model 64 rifle was in full production through August of 1942, I find it very odd that a “39” marked Model 64 barrel would have been factory installed on a Model 94 Carbine receiver in late 1941.
What caliber are both of the rifles in question?
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
December 21, 2006
Offline
Bert I was sitting in My office and these guns are at home when I replied to this post. I don,t know what made me think they were stamped 39, the one is stamped 45 and the other 41 as You pointed out. Henry
W.A.C.A. life member, Marlin Collectors Assn. charter and life member, C,S.S.A. member and general gun nut.
April 30, 2006
Offline
Henry,
There are NO straight-gripped Model 64s mentioned in my book, NO .219s pictured save a barrel marking, and NO 1.3M rifles of any kind. Any 1.3M rifle would be cause for VERY close scrutiny.
Please do not quote my book without careful review and absolute correctness. It has plenty of mistakes that I am slowly trying to address without outside misquotes complicating the facts. Most of your posted information is incorrect as well.
B
April 15, 2005
Offline
Henry Mero said
Bert I was sitting in My office and these guns are at home when I replied to this post. I don,t know what made me think they were stamped 39, the one is stamped 45 and the other 41 as You pointed out. Henry
Henry
Can you post (or send me) a clear picture of the “45” marked barrel? I have never seen one with that date on it. Thus far, all of the 1945 production Model 94 and Model 64 carbines and rifles I have inspected have a “42” marked barrel on them.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
1 Guest(s)
