Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
About when was the last model 94’s made in 38-55 caliber. Saw this on Merz’s web site and am curious.
http://merzantiques.com/item/rare-pre-64-winchester-94-in-the-1157000-serial-range
Thanks,
Al
Al,
The last ones I know of are 1936 vintage, like this rifle, and about 50,000 rifles earlier.
Michael
Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation
Michael,
I’m not sure what you mean by"and about 50,000 rifles earler"? Do you mean that the gun listed on Merz is too late to be a 38-55?
Thanks,
Al
Al,
Winchester announced in the January 1938 Salesman catalog that the 32-40 and 38-55 calibers were officially discontinued. At the same time they announced that the Model 94 Sporting Rifle and Model 55 Rifle were discontinued, and that only the Model 94 Carbine and Model 64 Rifle were available.
Serial number 1157117 (Merz’s gun) was manufactured in mid December 1937. If it was not the last one made in 38-55, it was very near it. That stated, I have found a small number (less than a handful) that were made after January 1938. In each case, they appeared to be parts clean guns.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
So, how can Leroy Merz claim he has both one of the last .38-55’s produced, and yet it is an antique (pre-1899)????
mrcvs said
So, how can Leroy Merz claim he has both one of the last .38-55’s produced, and yet it is an antique (pre-1899)????
Not sure where you got the idea it was made pre-1899. As Bert mentioned above, it was made in 1937.
mrcvs said
So, how can Leroy Merz claim he has both one of the last .38-55’s produced, and yet it is an antique (pre-1899)????
Not sure where you got the idea it was made pre-1899. As Bert mentioned above, it was made in 1937.
Merz has it listed under the "antique" category which was probably just a simple error on his part.
Regards,
WACA Life Member #6284 - Specializing in Pre-64 Winchester .22 Rimfire
Leroy has about 15 or so Model 1894s that are listed as antiques
one is above 400000 not sure what is up with the guys at Merzs?
After a long hiatus the caliber was re-introduced in the mid 90s and is still available today.
mrcvs said
So, how can Leroy Merz claim he has both one of the last .38-55’s produced, and yet it is an antique (pre-1899)????
Is it an antique or a modern firearm is one of the most common questions we are asked by our customers. This modern/antique status is a critically important element of every gun sale we make here at LeRoy Merz Antique Guns as are all of the laws that govern how we conduct business. Selling guns is our business and our lively hood. We take it very seriously!
What the law says.
Reference: The United States Department of Justice website.
The following is an excerpt from a United States Department of Justice webpage with some text color changed for emphasis.
*************************************************************************************************************
What qualifies as an antique firearm?
As defined in 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(16) the term “antique firearm” means —
…
•any firearm(including any firearm with a matchlock, flintlock, percussion cap, or similar type of ignition system) manufactured in or before 1898; or
•any replica of any firearm described in subparagraph (A) if such replica —
•is not designed or redesigned for using rimfire or conventional centerfire fixed ammunition, or
•uses rimfire or conventional centerfire fixed ammunition which is no longer manufactured in the United States and which is not readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade; or
•any muzzle loading rifle, muzzle loading shotgun, or muzzle loading pistol, which is designed to use black powder, or a black powder substitute, and which cannot use fixed ammunition. For purposes of this subparagraph, the term ‘antique firearm’ shall not include any weapon which incorporates a firearm frame or receiver, any firearm which is converted into a muzzle loading weapon, or any muzzle loading weapon, which can be readily converted to fire fixed ammunition by replacing the barrel, bolt, breechblock, or any combination thereof.
*************************************************************************************************************
The short version;
the term “antique firearm” means — any firearm… manufactured in or before 1898; or… uses rimfire or conventional centerfire fixed ammunition which is no longer manufactured in the United States and which is not readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade;
That is correct, There are actually two different criterion which can be used to classify a cartridge gun as an antique.
- Antique by date of manufacture
- Antique by obsolete caliber (fixed ammunition)
Most of you are aware of the Antique by date of manufacture classification, which is any firearm manufactured in or before 1898.
Many people are unaware of the Antique by obsolete caliber (fixed ammunition) classification, which is any firearm manufactured that uses rimfire or conventional centerfire fixed ammunition which is no longer manufactured in the United States and which is not readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade.
Which calibers are obsolete? The ATF does not provide any reference that will answer this question.
I asked an ATF Agent why they will not provide a list of obsolete calibers. His answer, The list would be obsolete almost immediately, What have been considered obsolete calibers in the past have in some cases gone back in to production or some manufacturers have done production runs of calibers that had for years been considered obsolete.
It is a complex issue. FFL Dealers like us face this constantly. We do our best to comply with all laws and regulations because as I said, Selling guns is our business and our lively hood and we take it very seriously!
Let’s take a look at 22WRF. Had been out of production for how long? Could maybe find some to buy here or there but certainly not readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade. Obsolete, right? Oh wasn’t there a production run not that long ago….
Was obsolete. Is it now? Was an antique, is it now? How does an antique become no longer an antique? Older now than it was when it was considered an antique!
Talking with LeRoy about the 38-55 and the 32-40. The calibers the 1894’s were introduced in. He recalled a conversation he had years ago with an ATF Agent at a gun show. The subject of these calibers and their classification came up, The agent stated that he considered them to be obsolete calibers. Since then the 38-55 has regained popularity with manufacturers producing both guns and ammo.
Was Antique by obsolete caliber Is it now? How does an antique become no longer an antique? Older now than it was when it was considered an antique!
Ever since that conversation with the ATF Agent, LeRoy had been operating under a policy that 38-55 was an obsolete caliber. We have changed our policy and no longer classify the 38-55 an obsolete caliber.
As sketchy as it may seem, the ATF will not provide a list of obsolete calibers, so we must use our discretion.
I must strongly disagree with the last reply in this topic.
Rick L. Ruen is grossly misinterpreting the federal code.
The following is the exact precise text of the referenced federal code. I took the liberty of changing the text color and using bold text to help focus the three separate parts of the code.
“Per U.S. Code Title 18, Part I, Chapter 44, Section §921, paragraph (16), an “Antique” firearm is defined as follows;
(16) The term “antique firearm” means—
(A) any firearm (including any firearm with a matchlock, flintlock, percussion cap, or similar type of ignition system) manufactured in or before 1898; or
(B) any replica of any firearm described in subparagraph (A) if such replica—
(i) is not designed or redesigned for using rimfire or conventional centerfire fixed ammunition; or
(ii) uses rimfire or conventional centerfire fixed ammunition which is no longer manufactured in the United States and which is not readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade; or
(C) any muzzle loading rifle, muzzle loading shotgun, or muzzle loading pistol, which is designed to use black powder, or a black powder substitute, and which cannot use fixed ammunition. For purposes of this subparagraph, the term “antique firearm” shall not include any weapon which incorporates a firearm frame or receiver, any firearm which is converted into a muzzle loading weapon, or any muzzle loading weapon which can be readily converted to fire fixed ammunition by replacing the barrel, bolt, breechblock, or any combination thereof.” end quote
Paragraph (A) is quite clear… All firearms (regardless of what cartridge they are chambered for that were manufactured on or before December 31st, 1898 are Antique.
Likewise, paragraph (B) is also clear. If you own a replica Model 1866 lever-action rifle chambered in 44 Henry rim fire, it qualifies as Antique. However, if you purchase a replica Model 1866 lever-action rifle chambered for the 44 WCF (44-40) cartridge, it is not Antique per subparagraph (ii).
In legal terms and simple plain English, subparagraphs (i) and (ii) of paragraph (B) only apply to replicas . An 1899 – 1937 production Model 94 in 32-40 or 38-55 is not a “replica“. Therefore, all post-1898 production Winchester Model 1894 rifles and carbines are modern firearms regardless of what cartridge they are chambered for. I honestly do not understand how so many people (including some BATF field agents) continue to misinterpret the code. I urge any of you that are still struggling with this to slowly, and carefully read the text. The code is divided into three sections, (A), (B), and (C). Read each section as a standalone piece of text.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Then at the Merz shop, you don’t enter the guns that meet the antique by obsolete calibers criteria in or out of your FFL log? They ship direct to the customer without ffl or C&R?
The top of the Page states
“Merz Antique Firearms ~ Catalog of Old Guns and Related Items”
Merz Antique Firearms is the name of the company.
“~Catalog of Old Guns and Related Items” that statement seems self-evident or self explanatory.
No where is the description of the firearm does Merz mention the firearm is a antique. So I think you guys are blowing this one out of the water quite a bit. And as long as Mr. Merz has been in business I imagine he knows the difference between an Antique or otherwise.
Sincerely,
Maverick
WACA #8783 - Checkout my Reloading Tool Survey!
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-research-surveys/winchester-reloading-tool-survey/
Brady,
Rick Ruen works for Leroy, and he has most definitely misinterpreted the federal code. Additionally, in the very recent past, there were indeed several post-1898 production Model 94s listed on Leroy’s website as “Antique”.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert H. said
I must strongly disagree with the last reply in this topic.
Both Leroy Merz and Rick L. Ruen are grossly misinterpreting the federal code.
The following is the exact precise text of the referenced federal code. I took the liberty of changing the text color and using bold text to help focus the three separate parts of the code.
“Per U.S. Code Title 18, Part I, Chapter 44, Section §921, paragraph (16), an “Antique” firearm is defined as follows;
(16) The term “antique firearm” means—
(A) any firearm (including any firearm with a matchlock, flintlock, percussion cap, or similar type of ignition system) manufactured in or before 1898; or
(B) any replica of any firearm described in subparagraph (A) if such replica—
(i) is not designed or redesigned for using rimfire or conventional centerfire fixed ammunition; or
(ii) uses rimfire or conventional centerfire fixed ammunition which is no longer manufactured in the United States and which is not readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade; or
(C) any muzzle loading rifle, muzzle loading shotgun, or muzzle loading pistol, which is designed to use black powder, or a black powder substitute, and which cannot use fixed ammunition. For purposes of this subparagraph, the term “antique firearm” shall not include any weapon which incorporates a firearm frame or receiver, any firearm which is converted into a muzzle loading weapon, or any muzzle loading weapon which can be readily converted to fire fixed ammunition by replacing the barrel, bolt, breechblock, or any combination thereof.” end quote
Paragraph (A) is quite clear… All firearms (regardless of what cartridge they are chambered for that were manufactured on or before December 31st, 1898 are Antique.
Likewise, paragraph (B) is also clear. If you own a replica Model 1866 lever-action rifle chambered in 44 Henry rim fire, it qualifies as Antique. However, if you purchase a replica Model 1866 lever-action rifle chambered for the 44 WCF (44-40) cartridge, it is not Antique per subparagraph (ii).
In legal terms and simple plain English, subparagraphs (i) and (ii) of paragraph (B) only apply to replicas . An 1899 – 1937 production Model 94 in 32-40 or 38-55 is not a “replica“. Therefore, all post-1898 production Winchester Model 1894 rifles and carbines are modern firearms regardless of what cartridge they are chambered for. I honestly do not understand how so many people (including some BATF field agents) continue to misinterpret the code. I urge any of you that are still struggling with this to slowly, and carefully read the text. The code is divided into three sections, (A), (B), and (C). Read each section as a standalone piece of text.
Bert
Let it be known that this submission is being made by Rick Ruen under LeRoy Merz’s username as only members are allowed to post images such as the letter below.
So effectively you are saying that I could manufacture a “replica” Winchester Model 1886 tomorrow of an obsolete caliber, lets just say in caliber .38-56, and as a replica, it would be legitimately an antique right? But if you were to take a Winchester Model 1886 in .38-56, lets say with a serial number 126050 manufactured in 1902, it would not be an antique, Right. That is what you are saying is it not? Do you realize how ridiculous your argument is?
As I said before, This is a complex issue. Like any law it requires interpretation. That is why there are lawyers and others that will always interpret the law differently.
Antique by obsolete caliber is a legitimate antique gun classification. I encourage anyone with questions regarding antique by obsolete caliber classification to contact the BATF directly rather than take Bert’s or my own opinion as the ruling authuority.
In support of our interpretation I submit a copy of a letter from Rex D. Davis, past Director of ATF. This letter is in response to a letter submitted which requested clarification of the term “antique firearm” as it pertained to a specific gun. In the letter it explains that the particular item is not considered an antique under the Antique by date of Manufacture classification, BUT IT WOULD be considered and antique by obsolete caliber classification.
According to Rex D. Davis, the Director of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms Division when the above letter was written on August 13, 1971
A Winchester Model 1886 in .38-56 caliber manufactured in 1902 WOULD fall into the category of an antique firearm as defined in section 921 (a) (16) (B) (ii) based on the fact that the Model 1886 winchester in 38-56 caliber and hypothetically of 1902 vintage, had an antecedent in the pre 1899 era and is chambered for ammunition which has not been available since approximately 1936.
Was that not the very code that you cited to make your point?
Come on Bert, get down off of your horse and walk with the people…
LeRoy
I don’t think the “ammunition which is no longer manufactured in the United States and which is not readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade” holds much water anymore.
When I contacted the ATF as to a clear definition, their response was “the internet is now an ordinary channel of commercial trade, if you can find it on the internet, it’s not obsolete”.
Respectfully
Mike Hunter
Rick,
In response to your comment;
So effectively you are saying that I could manufacture a “replica” Winchester Model 1886 tomorrow of an obsolete caliber, lets just say in caliber .38-56, and as a replica, it would be legitimately an antique right?
No, I am not inferring anything of the kind. However, the federal code implies that.
But if you were to take a Winchester Model 1886 in .38-56, lets say with a serial number 126050 manufactured in 1902, it would not be an antique, Right. That is what you are saying is it not? Do you realize how ridiculous your argument is?
Yes, that is correct… a 1902 vintage Model 1886 is not an “antique”. It is not my argument, and I am not the person who wrote the federal code.
Antique by obsolete caliber is a legitimate antique gun classification.
Again, I strongly disagree with you. Using a letter written in 1971 as your source document for your arguement is very weak in my opinion. I will suggest that your try getting the same determination from the current BATF Director.
Now, what I would like to get back to is the original topic question… Is a Model 94 in 38-55 caliber that was manufactured in the 1930s a federally recognized Antique? If you still believe that it is, then you and I need to agree to disagree.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Boys, let’s change the subject! I think we can agree that the law states that firearms manufactured in 1898 or before are considered “antiques” and not subject to certain provisions regarding shipping etc. The second part of the statue, when read literally, refers only to “replicas”. The 1971 letter to Tommy Rholes takes a divergent viewpoint that seems to say that antiques are either those firearms manufactured in 1898 or before or of an obsolete caliber.
The law as written, defies logic, in that a replica in an obsolete caliber is considered an antique but an original firearm in a now obsolete caliber would not be considered an antique. From what I’ve heard and observed, ATF has adopted an informal policy to look the other way regarding the obsolete caliber issue because it is not a major concern or problem to the agency. Continuing to stir this pot will only result in some federal attorney being forced to adopt the strict interpretation of the letter of the law that will cause us all considerable heartburn.
Just my humble opinion of course but I’d much rather be chatting with Hokie about his 25″ barreled Model 1895 or his smoking habit………….
WACA Life Benefactor Member
NRA Life Member
January 26, 2011
Offline
I don’t think everyone will ever agree on this topic, whether its the Madis vs. PR dates or interpreting the antique firearm laws or codes. Ultimately its not much different than speeding on the highway. I really don’t care how fast you are going if you are driving the car and I’m the passenger (unless we hit 88mph and end up in Hokies “twilight zone). Yet when I am driving it becomes my responsibility to follow the law as I am the one at risk to get the ticket.
I suppose we can make our own interpretations and take care of our own affairs as we see fit. The consequences will eventually catch up with the folks that deserve them, like the Tulsa gun show thieves.
~Gary~
2 Guest(s)
