Avatar
Please consider registering
Guest
Search
Forum Scope




Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
Register Lost password?
sp_Feed sp_PrintTopic sp_TopicIcon
Impressions concerning Model 94 originality.
sp_NewTopic Add Topic
Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 347
Member Since:
February 18, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
1
January 30, 2021 - 12:15 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost

Hi Folks!  Requesting Expertise!

Started to tack this onto the below months old Thread referenced.  Central to my question here as super reference on a much repeated subject.  For that, with thanks to all involved rendering expertiese!  On point, but conjuring in wider issue “whole rifle originality” perspective as question below. 

Ref:  https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-rifles/1894-receiver-sight-holes/#spEditFormAnchor

My here ‘usual suspect’, a Model 94, 25-35 Win, SN 1344501 of the ’42+ war years lacking specific manufacture dates.  Apparent standard carbine in 25-35 Win chambering.  Decades owned.  Working here conveniently from file pix – best conveniently available. Few more available but 8 pix seems a posting ‘sweet spot’.

My belief the overall finish is original – metal blue / sorry color rendition pretty lousy!  Requesting expert opinions of such, features as shown & wider estimates of side/tang sight mount holes originality from “probability perspective. “Such holes as depicted likely?”  

Thanks for opinions! 🙂

Best & Stay Safe!

JohnR255-2U.jpgImage EnlargerR255-4U.jpgImage EnlargerR255-15U.jpgImage EnlargerR255-5U.jpgImage EnlargerR255-10U.jpgImage EnlargerR255-13U.jpgImage EnlargerR255-6.jpgImage EnlargerR255-19U.jpgImage Enlarger

sp_PlupAttachments Attachments
Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 10590
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
2
January 30, 2021 - 1:51 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

John,

The holes drilled & tapped in the upper left side of the receiver frame are 90% not likely to be factory original, and the two extra holes drilled & tapped in the upper tang are 100% not factory original.  The butt plate is at least 50% suspect, as it is just a bit too early of a serial number for that type.  The vast majority of the Model 94 Carbines manufactured in 1945 were equipped with the late pre-war serrated steel butt plates. 

Speaking of manufacture dates, your carbine was manufactured in October 1945, almost exactly 1-month after Winchester resumed production of the Model 94 following the WW II hiatus.  The CFM records office can provide you with the exact date if you feel inclined to know what it was. 

I highly suspect that if you check the barrel date, it will be marked “42”.  In my research survey of the immediate post-war carbines, a fair percentage of them have pre-war dated barrels.

One last item… the rear sight and its elevator are not original to a post-war production carbine.

Bert

WACA 6571L, Historian & Board of Director Member
High-walls-1-002-C-reduced2.jpg

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 329
Member Since:
October 29, 2019
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
3
January 30, 2021 - 4:11 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

The

Bert H. said
John,

The holes drilled & tapped in the upper left side of the receiver frame are 90% not likely to be factory original, and the two extra holes drilled & tapped in the upper tang are 100% not factory original.  The butt plate is at least 50% suspect, as it is just a bit too early of a serial number for that type.  The vast majority of the Model 94 Carbines manufactured in 1945 were equipped with the late pre-war serrated steel butt plates. 

Speaking of manufacture dates, your carbine was manufactured in October 1945, almost exactly 1-month after Winchester resumed production of the Model 94 following the WW II hiatus.  The CFM records office can provide you with the exact date if you feel inclined to know what it was. 

I highly suspect that if you check the barrel date, it will be marked “42”.  In my research survey of the immediate post-war carbines, a fair percentage of them have pre-war dated barrels.

One last item… the rear sight and its elevator are not original to a post-war production carbine.

Bert  

The holes you mention in the left receiver don’t look to me like they are in the right location for factory holes. Definitely the extra tang holes shouldn’t be there.

Shoot low boys. They're riding Shetland Ponies.

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 347
Member Since:
February 18, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
4
January 31, 2021 - 5:37 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost

Thanks so much Bert for the information and also Polishing Room data!  As I consider the value of such expert evaluation…  Seriously, this Forum, this gathering of experts providing free assistance here…  Just super!  Old Logger, thanks for your input too and head’s up!  I’ll have to look closer at the holes location. Just now, conjuring “Mützig Old Lager”, a Heiniken French Pilsner beer!  How a devious mind works! 🙂  

My carbine is as I need to be.  With eight decades on my own frame, a lot of “parts alterations and replacements”, for me by now highly desirable!  🙂  For it, perhaps ‘compromising’ any collector interest, yet a great little piece and the only rifle I have in 25-35. Closest a massive Remington Model 30 in .25 Remington.  Size & weight about opposite end of sporting rifle spectrum!  

Thanks again for both the kind analysis as well as almost instant response.  

Best & Stay Safe!

John

Forum Timezone: UTC 0
Most Users Ever Online: 778
Currently Online: Jeremy Scott., antler1, tim tomlinson, tsbccut, Dave M.
Guest(s) 16
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
clarence: 6136
TXGunNut: 4857
Chuck: 4509
1873man: 4255
steve004: 4091
Big Larry: 2288
twobit: 2280
TR: 1686
mrcvs: 1652
Forum Stats:
Groups: 1
Forums: 17
Topics: 12474
Posts: 108299

 

Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 1725
Members: 8699
Moderators: 4
Admins: 3
Navigation