Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
November 7, 2015
Offline
Scott-
Do the rounds that hang up have a wide meplat? I seem to recall my early 2nd variation 1894 (sn 5310) prefers the traditionally shaped bullets over the ones with little taper and wide meplats. Maybe it just preferred shorter OAL. I apparently need to keep better notes, all I recorded was that I shortened the OAL by .025” for bullets cast in the Accurate 382255L….and it seems to have a smaller meplat than another mould. I do know she likes fat bullets; mine are sized .381”.
Mike
TXGunNut said
Scott-Do the rounds that hang up have a wide meplat? I seem to recall my early 2nd variation 1894 (sn 5310) prefers the traditionally shaped bullets over the ones with little taper and wide meplats. Maybe it just preferred shorter OAL. I apparently need to keep better notes, all I recorded was that I shortened the OAL by .025” for bullets cast in the Accurate 382255L….and it seems to have a smaller meplat than another mould. I do know she likes fat bullets; mine are sized .381”.
Mike
Mike,
I’ll try to explain it the best I can:
You lever the fired shell out of the rifle and the next one comes out of the magazine and when I lever to bring it up, the bullet tip comes up and just starts into the chamber but gets wedged in the chamber between the bullet tip against the top of the chamber and the case neck on the bottom edge of the chamber but yet the rim of the cartridge is not up to the recesses in the side rails to allow the case to come into a horizontal position to be fed in. I’m wondering if the lifter is coming up a little too high??
I compared mine to my friends which was a more modern commemorative model but the front of the lifter on his sits back a good bit further from the mouth of the chamber than my old girl. He was stumped by what mine was doing as well.
If you don’t mind me asking…what is a meplat?
Scott
Scott McNally said
TXGunNut said
Scott-
Do the rounds that hang up have a wide meplat? I seem to recall my early 2nd variation 1894 (sn 5310) prefers the traditionally shaped bullets over the ones with little taper and wide meplats. Maybe it just preferred shorter OAL. I apparently need to keep better notes, all I recorded was that I shortened the OAL by .025” for bullets cast in the Accurate 382255L….and it seems to have a smaller meplat than another mould. I do know she likes fat bullets; mine are sized .381”.
Mike
Mike,
I’ll try to explain it the best I can:
You lever the fired shell out of the rifle and the next one comes out of the magazine and when I lever to bring it up, the bullet tip comes up and just starts into the chamber but gets wedged in the chamber between the bullet tip against the top of the chamber and the case neck on the bottom edge of the chamber but yet the rim of the cartridge is not up to the recesses in the side rails to allow the case to come into a horizontal position to be fed in. I’m wondering if the lifter is coming up a little too high??
I compared mine to my friends which was a more modern commemorative model but the front of the lifter on his sits back a good bit further from the mouth of the chamber than my old girl. He was stumped by what mine was doing as well.
If you don’t mind me asking…what is a meplat?
Scott
Online
TR said
Thanks, I just learned a new word. T/R
T/R, thanks for that. I, too, just learned a new word.
Here is what the rear sight elevator should be. This is my First model 1894, serial number 1124.
Al
tionesta1 said
Here is what the rear sight elevator should be. This is my First model 1894, serial number 1124.Al
Al, thank you for the pictures. after seeing yours, I don’t think mine is correct. I sent you a pm if you don’t mind looking at it.
Thanks!
Scott
Scott McNally said
tionesta1 said
Here is what the rear sight elevator should be. This is my First model 1894, serial number 1124.
Al
Al, thank you for the pictures. after seeing yours, I don’t think mine is correct. I sent you a pm if you don’t mind looking at it.
Thanks!
Scott
ok
November 7, 2015
Offline
Sorry for the confusion. Cast bullet hunters often like a wide meplat because moderate velocity rounds need all the help they can get in transferring their modest amount of energy to the target. Sometimes the edge of the meplat causes feeding issues in repeaters designed for more rounded noses, or meplats.
Mike
I would just seat the bullets to where the action functions correctly. The overall length should be no longer than 2.49″ but it doesn’t say which exact bullet.
If you are using bullets that are flat nose try a bullet with a more rounded nose with a smaller flat spot as Mike has said. Me I just wouldn’t worry about it.
Seems in how I’ve had several of these Model 94 rifles apart over the years the only thing I can think of that would cause the lifter to rise too much might be wear in the lifter notch that the spring rides in or the spring. But if this 94 works with cartridges of a specific length than I’d work on the OAL of your reloads first.
Judging by the overall condition of this Winchester I doubt that taking it apart will hurt.
The sad ending to this story is that the gun has been altered! I took it today to a more than reputable gunsmith outside of Lancaster, PA. As he eyed it up and was trying to cycle a round into it, he said there is an issue on the underside of the rail but then he was confused on the sharpness of the bottom of the chamber entrance since it was gouging the the mouth of the brass. He noticed something fishy about the discoloration of the barrel about 3-4 inches in from the muzzle. He put his optivisor on a low and behold a sleeve was installed and whoever did it, didn’t do very good squaring up the muzzle. In addition, the barrel has been stretched and that is why the peculiar mark around the barrel about 4 inches back. Whoever did it did not resecure the screw through the tube into the barrel so that is why the tube was moving forward.
I guess that explains the pristine bore and it slugging at .374.
The only good thing that came out of it is that he’ll get cycling and clean things up and square off the end of the barrel and I’ll have a good shooting 38-55.
Also, barrel not fully turned into position with the reciever so he will fix that as well. It was slightly canted to the right.
Oh well, I wanted a shooter so that’s what I’ll have.
Amazingly, many of the things we’re not obvious to the naked eye. Especially, the liner. And I’ve seen several in the past.
?
In addition, the barrel has been stretched and that is why the peculiar mark around the barrel about 4 inches back. Scott McNally said
Sad indeed! Sounds like one of those do-it-yourself lining jobs using a Brownell’s kit. Anybody with an electric drill can do it, don’t you know? Given even such an obvious level of incompetence, I don’t understand what is meant by “stretching” the brl. And the “guy at the gun club” knew nothing about this?
Saddest of all to consider is that, even if the bore was badly pitted, the chance is good that it would have produced acceptable hunting accuracy with jacketed bullets.
clarence said
In addition, the barrel has been stretched and that is why the peculiar mark around the barrel about 4 inches back. Scott McNally said
Sad indeed! Sounds like one of those do-it-yourself lining jobs using a Brownell’s kit. Anybody with an electric drill can do it, don’t you know? Given even such an obvious level of incompetence, I don’t understand what is meant by “stretching” the brl. And the “guy at the gun club” knew nothing about this?
Saddest of all to consider is that, even if the bore was badly pitted, the chance is good that it would have produced acceptable hunting accuracy with jacketed bullets.
Quite a few years ago I was at a gun show and looked at a 94 rifle 25-35 Octagon barrel that had a very clean bore, it seemed to be priced right maybe a bit low, so I bought it. Come to find out it too was relined but apparently by using a round barrel and the reason I say that it because when I replaced the front sight you could see what looked like a shim or insert to make up the difference in diameters.
Hey, we relined a friend’s father’s old Remington Model 12 .22 just like you posted.
I also had a 94 32-40 that had a bore that was okay usual bit wear from corrosive ammo, etc, but it seemed to shoot okay.
clarence said
In addition, the barrel has been stretched and that is why the peculiar mark around the barrel about 4 inches back. Scott McNally said
Sad indeed! Sounds like one of those do-it-yourself lining jobs using a Brownell’s kit. Anybody with an electric drill can do it, don’t you know? Given even such an obvious level of incompetence, I don’t understand what is meant by “stretching” the brl. And the “guy at the gun club” knew nothing about this?
Saddest of all to consider is that, even if the bore was badly pitted, the chance is good that it would have produced acceptable hunting accuracy with jacketed bullets.
Clarence, “stretching” is a term used in longrifle collecting fraternity quite often where a section of barrel is welded onto the existing barrel to restore it to it’s original length. It’s usually done as part of restoration.
In this case, I suspect that the end of the barrel was damaged and cut off and a new piece tig welded on perhaps. After that, the barrel was sleeved. But muzzle wasn’t dressed up as nice as it should’ve been and the front sight was put on maybe by hand dovetailing as it’s a little cattywampus. Here again,all surmising at this point.
Ken Windeler said Quite a few years ago I was at a gun show and looked at a 94 rifle 25-35 Octagon barrel that had a very clean bore, it seemed to be priced right maybe a bit low, so I bought it. Come to find out it too was relined but apparently by using a round barrel and the reason I say that it because when I replaced the front sight you could see what looked like a shim or insert to make up the difference in diameters.
Any shiny bore in a well-used gun made before about 1930, when non-corrosive ammo became available, should be regarded with suspicion. Even after 1930, there must have been lots of old-stock corrosive on dealer’s shelves that you can bet wasn’t thrown away. The best lining experts can leave a thin flange of the muzzle untouched, so there’s no tell-tale ring showing at the muzzle, but if the bore is shiny, unless in a near-mint gun, suspicion is justified.
Excellent bores may show up in BP guns in which the early corrosive smokeless was never shot, because even though BP cartridges also used corrosive primers, BP fouling actually protected the bore by diluting the corrosive salts. In addition, BP guns were cleaned with water which dissolved these salts, as nito-solvent did not.
Scott McNally said
The sad ending to this story is that the gun has been altered! I took it today to a more than reputable gunsmith outside of Lancaster, PA. As he eyed it up and was trying to cycle a round into it, he said there is an issue on the underside of the rail but then he was confused on the sharpness of the bottom of the chamber entrance since it was gouging the the mouth of the brass. He noticed something fishy about the discoloration of the barrel about 3-4 inches in from the muzzle. He put his optivisor on a low and behold a sleeve was installed and whoever did it, didn’t do very good squaring up the muzzle. In addition, the barrel has been stretched and that is why the peculiar mark around the barrel about 4 inches back. Whoever did it did not resecure the screw through the tube into the barrel so that is why the tube was moving forward.I guess that explains the pristine bore and it slugging at .374.
The only good thing that came out of it is that he’ll get cycling and clean things up and square off the end of the barrel and I’ll have a good shooting 38-55.
Also, barrel not fully turned into position with the reciever so he will fix that as well. It was slightly canted to the right.
Oh well, I wanted a shooter so that’s what I’ll have.
Amazingly, many of the things we’re not obvious to the naked eye. Especially, the liner. And I’ve seen several in the past.
?
It sounds like your found your way to a competent gunsmith who knows his way around old rifles – that’s a plus.
November 7, 2015
Offline
Bummer, I really like that rifle. I have better luck spotting a liner from the breech but the .374 bore would have made me look it over very carefully.
Not a total loss; you will have a good shooter you can take anywhere, you found a good gunsmith and we all learned something. I’d wager this has happened to most of us, some of us may even have a surprise or two in our collection. Hard to say if these were legitimate repairs or fakery, I’m inclined to think they were honest repairs. It’s not hard to imagine a 129 year old gun having a few rough years and needing a little help along the way.
Mike
Hard to say if these were legitimate repairs or fakery, I’m inclined to think they were honest repairs. TXGunNut said
I think installing a liner is a legit repair IF the bore is really so ruined that not even modest hunting accuracy can be expected from it. Esp. the case with .22 RF, because the option of jacketed bullets doesn’t exist. Would hate to see it done merely because there were a few pits unlikely to impair accuracy.
The slob “gunsmith” who did this work is an example of the kind I was warning against. His kind are plentiful.
1 Guest(s)
