Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
In the last couple weeks, I’ve seen two model 94 rifles with model 64 barrels on them with the 6 in 64 marked over to a 9. Was this something that Winchester did? I’ve seen lots of model 94’s with model 64 barrels on them but with the original 64 marking. Changing the 6 to a 9 seems like something the average gunsmith wouldn’t have been able to do…..
In my opinion, No, it is not something that Winchester would have done. If Winchester needed to replace a barrel on a Model 94, they would have used the correct barrel, as replacement Model 94 barrels were much more plentiful than Model 64 barrels. It would be interesting to know what the serial numbers are on the two rifles you’ve seen.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
I was wondering if someone wanted to upgrade their model 94 whether Winchester might have done this. I don’t think I’ve seen a model 94 with a proper 64 style barrel. So, after seeing those, I thought maybe that’s how Winchester handled the few requests that they might have gotten from model 94 owners.
Of course, I think they’d have probably just told them to buy a 64……
sb said
I was wondering if someone wanted to upgrade their model 94 whether Winchester might have done this. I don’t think I’ve seen a model 94 with a proper 64 style barrel. So, after seeing those, I thought maybe that’s how Winchester handled the few requests that they might have gotten from model 94 owners.Of course, I think they’d have probably just told them to buy a 64……
By the time Winchester had reached the 1.2 – 1.3 million serial number range, the Model 94 Carbine and the Model 64 Rifle were the only available options. Winchester discontinued the Model 94 Sporting Rifle at the end of the year 1937 (circa serial number 1158800). Serial number 1.2-million was reached in early 1939, just slightly more than 1-year after the Model 94 Sporting Rifle was discontinued. At the time, I suspect that Winchester still had a supply of Model 94 barrels on hand to deal with R&R orders on older Model 1894/94 rifles. Also (and like you), I believe that if an order came in for a brand new Model 94 Rifle, I suspect that a Model 64 would have been shipped in its place.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Online
Many years ago my dad came into the front end of a TD that fits that description. The barrel was stamped on the underside with a “49”, assumed to be 1949.
I have no opinion either way, but here are some pics to mull over.
1892takedown @sbcglobal.net ......NRA Endowment Life Member.....WACA Member
"God is great.....beer is good.....and people are crazy"... Billy Currington
I’ve got one too, 64 front end on a 94, about 98% gun, 9 stamped over 6, under barrel date is 47 or 49, it’s been years since I’ve looked. If I were a betting man, my money would be on it left the factory that way.
Mine is a solid frame
Bert H. said
In my opinion, No, it is not something that Winchester would have done. If Winchester needed to replace a barrel on a Model 94, they would have used the correct barrel, as replacement Model 94 barrels were much more plentiful than Model 64 barrels. It would be interesting to know what the serial numbers are on the two rifles you’ve seen.
Bert
Hence the 94/95 Hybrids
Mike Hunter said
Hence the 94/95 Hybrids
Mike,
That is an “Apples and Oranges” comparison. Winchester did not remark, or over stamp any of the several thousand surplus Model 95 barrels that were modified for use on the 1928 production Model 94 Carbines.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
Hi Bert,
I can understand someone switching out a Model 64 barrel on a standard frame rifle and then changing the model markings from a 64 to 94, but why would you go through the trouble to do it?
Dont mean to be argumentative but based on its merits, at least for the example I posted pics is of a TD assembly that would have required additionally threading to accommodate the TD ring in addition to milling of the existing barrel threads to accept the receiver. Also note the placement of the barrel markings and proof on the example provided, they look to be in the right place and not cut off or too close to the TD ring. Am assuming too that Mike’s is a TD as well. I dont have the TD assembly anymore to look at again but I see no indications the barrel has been reblued or to suggest its not original. At that time I showed it to a number of collectors who also had no problems with believing it was made that way at the factory. Still on the fence because I cant answer the question of why.
1892takedown @sbcglobal.net ......NRA Endowment Life Member.....WACA Member
"God is great.....beer is good.....and people are crazy"... Billy Currington
November 7, 2015
Offline
1892takedown said
Many years ago my dad came into the front end of a TD that fits that description. The barrel was stamped on the underside with a “49”, assumed to be 1949.I have no opinion either way, but here are some pics to mull over.
I’ve seen a takedown with two barrel/mag assemblies, seems to me one was 38-55 and the other 30WCF. IIRC the 30WCF was a 26″ rifle barrel and the 38-55 may have been shorter. May have been the 2017 Cody show but could have been another show. Need to work on my note-taking. I’m guessing your front end was once part of a similar set. Seemed to be a novel arrangement. Wish I’d looked at it more closely. I’m sure Winchester could have put something together along these lines; I wonder if records of such a set survive.
Mike
It seems to me that if it were done by Winchester, it would have been done a pretty small scale. Otherwise, they would have made a run of m94 barrels properly marked. Perhaps, if a gun owner were to return their m94 for some reason and wanted it to be more like a 64, it could have been done. But, I can’t think of another reason at the moment. The takedown front ends add further mystery.
1 Guest(s)
