Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
Thanks for the encouragement guys.
I started this because it was like some of the other things about Winchesters that was not all that specific when changes took place.
Don’t know if anybody really cares about little things like this but, I will have some guidelines available if they do.
Paul
maverick said
Yeah George didn’t consider 94s much past WWII as "a Collector’s Winchester", which is why there is only 4 tang markings.
Was just trying to make a little joke. No need to over analyze it.
Sincerely,
Maverick
Let me clarify this statement since it was taken so literally.
In earlier editions of "The Winchester Book" George didn’t discuss much regarding guns of the post WWI & WWII era. He didn’t consider them "Collector’s Winchesters" due to the trend in collecting at the time of his writing. These were actual terms used by George, and short of me re-reading the whole book again, you will have to forgive me for as of yet quoting page, line, and verse. This is also why later models were not in some cases discussed at all. After publishing various editions and the popularity in collecting grew and collecting trends changed. George included more additional information about more models and more info on the previous models he discussed. This is why earlier editions of the 94 chapter only have serial numbers out to WWII. The last edition of 1985 has serials from 1894 – 1983.
Collecting trends change and collectors wanted to know more about Winchester. This is why the last edition has more models discussed.
When I made earlier statement I didn’t give that much thought, and considered it as more of an off comment.
94shorties
My copy of the lastest edition of The Winchester Book discusses 6 markings on pages 438-439. And the 6th type (per Renneberg) marking is discussed on page 443 in the Model 55 chapter.
Bob doesn’t show the discussed 6th Type that George has in his book on page 439. Just as George doesn’t show the 1A Type that is in Renneberg’s book(2nd Edition). As George explains for Type 6 "Three individual dies were used for this last marking, and dashes before and after "Trade Mark" and "Made in U.S.A." This also explains the Type 7 marking. And after that all the upper tangs are blank.
Bob knew George and there is a dedication in Bob’s book about George. So I don’t see where George left out anything that Bob has covered other than the 1A Type. But there again George discusses a different Type 6.
All this said, I’m not putting down anyone’s current work or research.
And I think its great Bert has added a Type 5A designation to his survey.
Sincerely,
Maverick
WACA #8783 - Checkout my Reloading Tool Survey!
https://winchestercollector.org/forum/winchester-research-surveys/winchester-reloading-tool-survey/
After we get the website updated to allow direct posting of pictures to the forums, I will post a picture of each type of tang marking used for the Model 1894/94.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Maverick
You are right. I only went by the photo on page 417 in the Madis book. I should have went through the whole chapter on the 1894 and I would have found the rest of the markings.
Paul
Bert H. said
After we get the website updated to allow direct posting of pictures to the forums, I will post a picture of each type of tang marking used for the Model 1894/94.
Excellent! That will be very helpful.
Type 6 has three possibilities – upper dashes, lower dashes, both dashes. The no dash is type 7 This will be clarified in future (if) editions.
B
Looks nice – rarer round barrel. OBSERVE carefully – pricey, but remember George’s statement! Would also like to see mention of the 21 in a letter.
Not to be a forum pest but some Cabela’s are very easy to haggle with.
BOBR94 said
Looks nice – rarer round barrel. OBSERVE carefully – pricey, but remember George’s statement! Would also like to see mention of the 21 in a letter.
Bob,
It does not letter with the Lyman No. 21.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bob,
Thanks for chiming in on this first variation model 1894. Bert was kind enough to find out that it does not letter with the lyman 21 sight. I like the idea that it is a first variation receiver, but not for the price Cabelas wants for it. With everything I’ve read, seems a first variation model 1894 is a rare item, that’s what drew me to it in the first place. It is a very nice looking gun. I’ve noticed Cabelas is open to haggling price, especially after the gun has sat unsold for awhile. I’ll just wait and see how long it sits unsold.
Thanks,
Al
It looks like a decent example – the lack of a recording of the Lyman 21 is more of a bargaining point than actual importance. If you’ve seen the gun in person – follow my ending statement, look carefully and you’ll not likely go astray.
Good luck,
Bob
Bob,
Based on the CFM information that Bert sent me on this rifle, it lists an Octagon barrel. Somewhere along the line, the barrel was changed to round. I just noticed this.
Al
There are no proof stamps on either the receiver or the barrel, which suggests that the round barrel was either installed in the factory prior to the time they started proof stamping them (can’t recall the exact year) or it is a non-Winchester barrel. Photos of the barrel address would be helpful. Looking at what appears to be consistent aging of the barrel relative to the rest of the gun, I would tend to go with a factory installation of a round barrel. However, all that being said, the fact that the factory letter differs from the configuration we have today, would be a factor in determining its value.
If I remember correctly, there was no "R&R" entry for that rifle. I suspect that it has a non-factory replaced barrel on it. Regardless, at this point in my opinion it is priced way too high, even for a First variation Model 1894.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Uh oh, I didn’t know about the record or barrel discrepancy, just the 21 – the plot sickens. Now I’m looking at a factory refin as well. I thought it looked mighty good from the available photos – there’s another reason for not appraising by anything but in-the-hand.
B
Bert, I believe you may already have this information however I own an 1894 Winchester First variation rifle as follows;
SN 3149
Barrel 26" Octagon
Caliber .38-55
Standard sights
I suspect the possible odd error in some of the records. Out of a dozen serial searches all info was reassuring except for my 1 RBR1894 that lists octagon where I really think the rifle came with this Round ( Pre proof mark both barrel and receiver ) fore end would also have to have been changed , but the current wood matches perfectly and the rifle just seems to be as original with the round
Clipper47 said
Bert, I believe you may already have this information however I own an 1894 Winchester First variation rifle as follows;
SN 3149
Barrel 26" Octagon
Caliber .38-55
Standard sights
I do have it, and thanks for checking.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
1 Guest(s)
