Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
Howdy again,rnI thank everyone for their help, especially Bert,
I had asked whether my ’41 was original finish, and had gotten a negative from Bert.
I’m going to post a few more pictures just to confirm. I had the gun in strong sunlight when I took pictures, and now that I look at it under more subdued lighting, and in comparison to my other ’94’s, the photo’s I took did make the ’41 look very bright garish red. In person and under normal lighting it is more akin to the “Winchester Red” examples I have seen online of the same era.
If its not original, I’m going to do my best to refinish it back to what would have looked original.
The telltale sign might be the hole that was drilled for the sling swivel, I presume. It wasn’t done very well and I’ll have to work up a filler for it if I refinish the wood. However, whoever did it was so kind as to fill it with wax, so it will be easy to dig out and refill
When its shown in direct comparison to the ’50, which is a darker wood, its not as glaringly red.
Also of note on the ’41, I think at some point the magazine tube might have been replaced. I have been told on other forums that there should be an open seam running the entire length of the tube, and the tube on my gun looks to have been welded. You can see the line of weld pits running down the length of the magazine tube and some faint filing or grinding marks from removing weld spall. All of this was blued over. It also appears to be a different shade of bluing than the barrel, although only in the strongest and most direct lighting.
Is it possible that the third, middle notches were a factory installed barrel band with sling swivel? A shot in the dark but that would be nice. Any way to find out what configuration this gun was in when it left the factory via factory letter?rn rn rn rn rn rn
Also curious about the ’50.
It seems to be an oil finish, a bit darker and more brown than the ’41.
Is this the original finish, do you think?
Thanks for everyone’s help, I’m very leery about removing factory original finishes so I want to be sure before I do anything to these.
Online
safestuffer said
Also curious about the ’50.It seems to be an oil finish, a bit darker and more brown than the ’41.
Is this the original finish, do you think?
Thanks for everyone’s help, I’m very leery about removing factory original finishes so I want to be sure before I do anything to these.
The stocks have been sanded and refinished. The last picture shows a noticeably undersized fit to the lower tang.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert H. said
safestuffer said
Also curious about the ’50.
It seems to be an oil finish, a bit darker and more brown than the ’41.
Is this the original finish, do you think?
Thanks for everyone’s help, I’m very leery about removing factory original finishes so I want to be sure before I do anything to these.
The stocks have been sanded and refinished. The last picture shows a noticeably undersized fit to the lower tang.
Thanks, Bert. I suspected as much with the ’50. I think the wood is refinished but the bluing is original.
As to the ’41…what do you think about that one?
That ’41 has me a bit stumped. It looks like from the hole in the buttstock that its a very light colored wood that has been stained. After seeing more pictures, are you still of the mind that the wood has been refinished? All lines that I can see are flush to the metal or even proud, it shows no signs of being sanded. Its possible that someone stripped the lacquer, applied a stain, then relacquered it, all without sanding through the original stain or finish…as far as I can find, the pre-war 94’s were a lacquer with added stain.
I would like to think this is a factory applied “Winchester red”, but it is definitely on the red end of the spectrum compared to other ’41’s that I can find
What wood would have been used for the very late pre-war 94’s?
I
I am of the opinion that that the stocks on the “41 Carbine have been sanded and refinished. Winchester used straight grain American Black Walnut on all of the post-WW II through 1963 production Model 94 Carbines.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert H. said
I am of the opinion that that the stocks on the “41 Carbine have been sanded and refinished. Winchester used straight grain American Black Walnut on all of the post-WW II through 1963 production Model 94 Carbines.
Bert,
Is it the color that leads you to believe that the ’41’s stocks have been refinished? Or is there some other signs I’m missing?
Also, what do you think of the originality of the bluing on each of these? I suspect the magazine tube on the ’41’s been replaced, but other than that I think the bluing is original. I think the ’50 is completely original, as I see no signs of any buffing or rebluing.
Thank you
safestuffer said
Bert H. said
I am of the opinion that that the stocks on the “41 Carbine have been sanded and refinished. Winchester used straight grain American Black Walnut on all of the post-WW II through 1963 production Model 94 Carbines.
Bert,
Is it the color that leads you to believe that the ’41’s stocks have been refinished? Or is there some other signs I’m missing?
Also, what do you think of the originality of the bluing on each of these? I suspect the magazine tube on the ’41’s been replaced, but other than that I think the bluing is original. I think the ’50 is completely original, as I see no signs of any buffing or rebluing.
Thank you
The most evident clue is in the picture showing the left side of the butt stock wrist where it adjoins the receiver and lower tang. The wood is significantly undersized to the adjoining steel on the lower tang. As manufactured by Winchester, the wood was finished so that it would stand slightly proud (above) the receiver frame and tangs.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert H. said
safestuffer said
Bert H. said
I am of the opinion that that the stocks on the “41 Carbine have been sanded and refinished. Winchester used straight grain American Black Walnut on all of the post-WW II through 1963 production Model 94 Carbines.
Bert,
Is it the color that leads you to believe that the ’41’s stocks have been refinished? Or is there some other signs I’m missing?
Also, what do you think of the originality of the bluing on each of these? I suspect the magazine tube on the ’41’s been replaced, but other than that I think the bluing is original. I think the ’50 is completely original, as I see no signs of any buffing or rebluing.
Thank you
The most evident clue is in the picture showing the left side of the butt stock wrist where it adjoins the receiver and lower tang. The wood is significantly undersized to the adjoining steel on the lower tang. As manufactured by Winchester, the wood was finished so that it would stand slightly proud (above) the receiver frame and tangs.
Bert, apologies, I guess I made a confusing post by including pictures from both the ’41 and the ’50.
I believe you are referring to the ’50. The ’50 is the gun that shows the wood being undersized at the tang.
The wood on the ’41 sits proud of the metal at the tang.
Do you have better pictures of the ’41 butt stock and forend stock fit at receiver frame?
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert H. said
Do you have better pictures of the ’41 butt stock and forend stock fit at receiver frame?
Bert,
Yes, here you go.
It is my opinion that the wood was very lightly sanded and then refinished.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert H. said
It is my opinion that the wood was very lightly sanded and then refinished.
Thank You, Bert
For my own knowledge, what are the indicators you see that show a light sand and refinish?
safestuffer said
Bert H. said
It is my opinion that the wood was very lightly sanded and then refinished.
Thank You, Bert
For my own knowledge, what are the indicators you see that show a light sand and refinish?
Rounded corners on the wood, and the fit in places is not correct. Specifically, the fit of the forend stock to the receiver frame is not as it should be, and the butt plate is oversized to the wood.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
I think I figured out what was going on. When I purchased this rifle there was some kind of coating all over it, a varnish of some sort. I used acetone to get it off of the metal but didn’t want to use acetone on the wood, while soap and water didn’t really do much except get the top layer of dirt off.
After reading online, I found a suggestion to use 0000 steel wool and mineral oil to cut the top layer off without hurting the varnish or lacquer underneath.
So I gave that a try and I think you were right, Bert…I think whatever red gunk was on the metal was also on the wood, giving it a much more red hue than it left the factory with. After working the stocks with mineral oil and steel wool, I was left with a bunch of reddish residue on my towel, and stocks that had lost a lot of the red and are now a more rich reddish brownish orangish hue that is more akin to other rifles I own. I use a silicon cloth to buff the stocks a bit and this is what I was left with.
I can clearly see that that butt stock wrist is undersized to the receiver and upper tang on the upper left corner of the stock. That same corner of the stock wood is rounded off from sanding, and it has finish covering it.
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Bert H. said
I can clearly see that that butt stock wrist is undersized to the receiver and upper tang on the upper left corner of the stock. That same corner of the stock wood is rounded off from sanding, and it has finish covering it.
Thank you, Bert.
For a refinish, I’m happy that whatever signs there are of a refinish are subtle, and the stock cleaned up to something more natural looking and even attractive, compared to the shape she was in when I got her.
Again, I appreciate all your help.
Bert, there is just one thing that confuses me that perhaps you’d be so kind as to clear up for me.
I was perhaps a little reluctant to call the ’41 a refinish based on the fitment issues you are pointing out, because I am comparing the ’41 fitment to the example I have of what I believed to be a factory original finish pre-64 Winchester stock.
I have a 1962 carbine that came to me in fairly rough shape. It was the first of my 94’s and I had not had the opportunity to purchase many pre-64 94’s prior to that one. I had believed the finish to be original because the condition of the stocks matched the condition of the gun and I’m not familiar with how strict Winchester is with the fitment of their wood during the different production eras.
Now I’m not so sure.
Here is the condition of the 1962 carbine when I got it, in what I believed to be rough but factory original finish.
So I can safely assume, from what you’ve said, that this 1962 carbine stock is also refinished, as it shows undersized corners at the upper tang on both sides?
Thank you,
Victor
1 Guest(s)
