Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
Howdy folks, I’m an avid Curio and Relic collector but am new to the Winchesters, so please bear with me. I found a model 94 at a local gun shop that I now have on layaway after talking down the price. The issue is, I am still paying more for it than I would a new in box standard Model 94. I’ve got the Blue Book of Gun values and it lists it at around ~$1650 due to it’s ~80% condition – is it truly worth that much? Attached are a few pics, the rifle has a nearly perfect bore and I don’t see any pitting to be found on the exterior. Action feels solid, bluing is mostly there, but there is a Redfield 102 type peep sight on the receiver and no rear sight where one would be. The SN appears to be of 1920’s vintage, so would the receiver had to have been drilled and tapped at some point? I’m confused to where the value should be on this gun, Blue Book also states that it may be a Eastern variant since it doesn’t have the ring; I can not find any reference for this. Any help on understanding this rifle would be greatly appreciated!
Apologies for the somewhat candid photos, it’s not in my hands just yet.
Chris,
My first piece of advice to you is this… if you intend to collect Pre-64 Winchesters, do not use the Blue Book for identification purposes or trying to place a value on a Pre-1964 Winchester. The information in the Blue Book is woefully lacking, and for the most part not accurate.
In regards to the Model 94 you are looking at, it is a 1920 production Saddle Ring Carbine (SRC). The ring was removed from the stud when someone decided to drill & tap the receiver and mount the aftermarket Redfield peep sight.
I see a substantial number of issues that detract from the potential value;
1. The drilled & tapped receiver.
2. The missing saddle ring.
3. The missing No. 44A rear sight.
4. The front sight blade is a replacement
5. The butt stock has an aftermarket sling stud in it.
6. The magazine tube shows excessive wear from the aftermarket sling attachment (now removed).
7. The front barrel band is installed backwards (after being reinstalled when the aftermarket sling attachment was removed).
Quite frankly, the realistic value is considerably less than Blue Book value. That stated, only you can decide how much you are willing to pay for it.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Thanks for the info Bert! So say that this was an unmolested SRC in this condition, what would we be looking at in terms of value since the Blue Book is off? I also find it odd that the finish on the Redfield nearly matches the receiver; is there a reference I can find on what Winchester did for specialized orders?
Chris N said
Thanks for the info Bert! So say that this was an unmolested SRC in this condition, what would we be looking at in terms of value since the Blue Book is off? I also find it odd that the finish on the Redfield nearly matches the receiver; is there a reference I can find on what Winchester did for specialized orders?
Chris,
It if were a true 80% condition unmolested SRC in 38-55, it would be worth approximately $5,100.
Winchester almost exclusively used Lyman receiver sights. Any sight that has been on a gun for 50+ years will look like it has been on the gun for nearly 100-years. The original catalogs of that era listed what could be special ordered.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Like Bert says, a lot of issues from a collector standpoint. Still a good hunting rifle as long as you didn’t overpay. The Redfield receiver sight is definitely aftermarket. The “Eastern” carbine you mention is simply a carbine without the stud and ring on the receiver. Yours has the stud so is a standard SRC. Later on in the 20’s (around 1926, I think) Winchester dropped the saddle ring altogether as a standard item. With the drilled and tapped receiver(for the receiver sight), drilled stock(for the sling swivel) and missing sight I would think value would be roughly a third of your Blue Book value which as Bert said is a poor yardstick at any rate. MY 2 CENTS.
Based on my research survey, saddle rings were standard through 1929, and then began to be phased out through early 1932. When Winchester transitioned from the older nickel steel barrels and old style sights to the proof steel barrels and ramp style front sights, saddle rings were purely a special order feature, and are rarely found.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert H. said
Based on my research survey, saddle rings were standard through 1929, and then began to be phased out through early 1932. When Winchester transitioned from the older nickel steel barrels and old style sights to the proof steel barrels and ramp style front sights, saddle rings were purely a special order feature, and are rarely found.
Bert
This being the case with the barrel, would I be correct to assume that any ammo loaded for this particular firearm would have to adhere to the reduced pressures more common for the period rather than the higher pressures found today?
Chris,
Having a saddle ring (or not) has nothing to do with the ammo, and modern 38-55 ammo is loaded to the same pressure as it was 100-years ago. The issue with modern 38-55 ammo is the smaller bullet diameter. Nominal 38-55 bore diameter up through WW II was .3795. Some of the modern 38-55 ammo is loaded with a .375 bullet, which in many cases will not shoot accurately in an older bore.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
1 Guest(s)
