Avatar
Please consider registering
Guest
Search
Forum Scope




Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
Register Lost password?
sp_Feed sp_PrintTopic sp_TopicIcon
Winchester model 94 Caliber Rarity
sp_NewTopic Add Topic
Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 80
Member Since:
June 12, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
1
April 21, 2022 - 1:24 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost
sp_ReportPost

I have looked everywhere but I can’t find a list of model 94 production numbers by caliber. If somebody has that handy please

post 

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2846
Member Since:
March 20, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
2
April 21, 2022 - 5:57 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost
sp_ReportPost

Hello,

Here are the results from the ARMAX survey which looked at the first 353,999 Model 1894 rifles Manufactured:

1:2 (45.92%) was a 30 W.C.F. (162,568)
1:5 (22.80%) was a 38-55 (80,734)
1:9 (11.31%) was a 32-40 (40,023)
1:9 (10.45%) was a 25-35 W.C.F. (36,999)
1:11 (8.77%) was a 32 W.S. (31,050)

I am sure that Bert will have some extrapolated numbers for the balance of production from 354,000 to 2,700,000.

Michael

Signature-Pic.jpg

 

Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 80
Member Since:
June 12, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
3
April 21, 2022 - 6:29 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost
sp_ReportPost

Well that makes sense with 32 WS being the least production since they didn’t start until 1902. It will be interesting to see numbers that Bert extrapolated from production thru 1963

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 3115
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
4
April 21, 2022 - 6:59 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost
sp_ReportPost

twobit said
Hello,

Here are the results from the ARMAX survey which looked at the first 353,999 Model 1894 rifles Manufactured:

1:2 (45.92%) was a 30 W.C.F. (162,568)
1:5 (22.80%) was a 38-55 (80,734)
1:9 (11.31%) was a 32-40 (40,023)
1:9 (10.45%) was a 25-35 W.C.F. (36,999)
1:11 (8.77%) was a 32 W.S. (31,050)

I am sure that Bert will have some extrapolated numbers for the balance of production from 354,000 to 2,700,000.

Michael  

Interesting that for this range of numbers, it was the rarest chambering.  Of course, for many of these years of production – about 8 – it wasn’t available.  

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1298
Member Since:
June 4, 2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
5
April 21, 2022 - 8:07 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost
sp_ReportPost

  What I find interesting is the lowest serial number for the 32 WS is 10,675 but it was made 8/23/02. Maybe worth the search to find out why 10,675 was made in 1902? The serial number is on the receiver, big factories do strange things.

 Is it an antique firearm? The serial number applied date according to the web sight is 1895. T/R

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1183
Member Since:
September 22, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
6
April 21, 2022 - 8:59 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost
sp_ReportPost

Interesting that .32 Special is the rarest but yet the least desirable.

Edit:  This is only up to 353,999.  After that they are likely considerably more.  But still a very underrated caliber.

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 3115
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
7
April 21, 2022 - 9:44 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost
sp_ReportPost

mrcvs said
Interesting that .32 Special is the rarest but yet the least desirable.

Edit:  This is only up to 353,999.  After that they are likely considerably more.  But still a very underrated caliber.  

But as you know, many a .32 Special owner that actually hunts with his rifle (or carbine) would debate that statement  🙂

Avatar
NY
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 4319
Member Since:
November 1, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
8
April 22, 2022 - 1:05 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost
sp_ReportPost

mrcvs said
Interesting that .32 Special is the rarest but yet the least desirable.
 

If rarity determined desirability, or collector interest, or value, then S&W revolvers would surpass Colts.  Demand, & only demand, determines desirability, or (to be crass) value.

Avatar
Kingston, WA
Admin
Forum Posts: 12727
Member Since:
April 15, 2005
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
9
April 22, 2022 - 1:30 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost
sp_ReportPost

Based on my research survey, the 32-40 is the least common of the (5) standard cartridges;

 

ARMAX Survey for Serial Numbers 1 – 353999
Caliber Qty %  
30 WCF 162,658 45.949%  
38-55 80,741 22.808%  
32-40 40,023 11.306%  
25-35 WCF 36,999 10.452%  
32 WS 31,052 8.772%  
Blank 2,067 0.584%  
Other 275 0.078%  
Rec/Parts 184 0.052%  
Total 353,999 100.000%  

 

My Survey of Serial Numbers 354000 – 1079689
Caliber Qty % Extrp Qty
30 WCF 4,780 54.368% 394,540
32 WS 1,704 19.381% 140,648
25-35 WCF 869 9.884% 71,727
38-55 699 7.950% 57,695
32-40 661 7.518% 54,559
38-55/30 WCF (2-Bbl sets) 2 0.023% 165
38-55/32 WS (2-Bbl sets) 3 0.034% 248
30 WCF/32 WS (2-Bbl set) 1 0.011% 83

 

Combined caliber totals from 1894 through 1931;

Extrapolated Caliber Totals for Serial Numbers 1 – 1079689 (1894 – 1931)
Caliber ARMAX Qty Survey Qty Total Extrp Qty %
30 WCF 162,658 394,540 557,198 51.668%
32 WS 31,052 140,648 171,700 15.921%
38-55 80,741 57,695 138,436 12.837%
25-35 WCF 36,999 71,727 108,726 10.082%
32-40 40,023 54,559 94,582 8.770%
38-55/30 WCF (2-Bbl sets)   2 165 0.015%
38-55/32 WS (2-Bbl sets)   3 248 0.023%
30 WCF/32 WS (2-Bbl set)   1 83 0.008%

 

For years 1932 through 1963;

S/N Range 30 W.C.F. 32 W.S. 25-35 W.C.F. 38-55 32-40 Total in Range
> 1079689 985,664 408,994 47,852 1,961 490 1,520,322
% 64.83% 26.90% 3.15% 0.13% 0.03%  

WACA 6571L, Historian & Board of Director Member
High-walls-1-002-C-reduced2.jpg

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 3115
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
10
April 22, 2022 - 1:48 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost
sp_ReportPost

It is interesting to see how the popularity of the .32 Special grew a good bit.  

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 80
Member Since:
June 12, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
11
April 22, 2022 - 10:31 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost
sp_ReportPost

Great info. Thanks Bert. I will copy and save. 

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 2846
Member Since:
March 20, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
12
April 22, 2022 - 11:48 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost
sp_ReportPost

steve004 said
It is interesting to see how the popularity of the .32 Special grew a good bit.    

Keep in mind that the 32 WS was not introduced until 1902 and the ARMX survey data includes 8 years of production which occurred before there was the possibility of the 32 WS being a choice.  It would be more meaningful to look at only the time period AFTER the 32 WAS introduction in the ARMAX “time period” (which the survey does not have) and then compare that percentage to the data from 354000 to 1079689.

Michael

Signature-Pic.jpg

 

Model 1892 / Model 61 Collector, Research, Valuation

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 76
Member Since:
March 14, 2022
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
13
April 22, 2022 - 2:41 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost
sp_ReportPost

twobit said

Keep in mind that the 32 WS was not introduced until 1902 and the ARMX survey data includes 8 years of production which occurred before there was the possibility of the 32 WS being a choice.  It would be more meaningful to look at only the time period AFTER the 32 WAS introduction in the ARMAX “time period” (which the survey does not have) and then compare that percentage to the data from 354000 to 1079689.

Michael  

I have to agree with Michael. Those figures would be of more interest to me. I am a fan of the 32WS & always have been. 

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 3115
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
14
April 22, 2022 - 3:11 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory sp_QuotePost
sp_ReportPost

How many cartridges did Winchester develop that they named, “Special”?  Yup, Winchester considered this one SPECIAL!

 

Edit – let me add some cartridge trivia.  The Bullard .32-40 cartridge – which is a bottleneck cartridge and quite different from the standard .32-40 – including a different bullet diameter, was called in at least one Bullard catalog, the “.32 Special”.  The rifles were not marked thusly and I can’t recall seeing a box of cartridges marked with the Special nomenclature.  

Avatar
NY
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 4319
Member Since:
November 1, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
15
April 22, 2022 - 4:43 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost
sp_ReportPost

steve004 said
How many cartridges did Winchester develop that they named, “Special”?  Yup, Winchester considered this one SPECIAL!

Calling it “.32 WCF” would have been logically consistent with the “.30 WCF” designation, but since the “other” .32 had been previously available, that name might have lead to caliber confusion, which this entirely new name “Special” avoided.

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 76
Member Since:
March 14, 2022
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
16
April 22, 2022 - 5:16 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost
sp_ReportPost

clarence said

steve004 said
How many cartridges did Winchester develop that they named, “Special”?  Yup, Winchester considered this one SPECIAL!

Calling it “.32 WCF” would have been logically consistent with the “.30 WCF” designation, but since the “other” .32 had been previously available, that name might have lead to caliber confusion, which this entirely new name “Special” avoided.  

Good call Clarence. Never really thought why it was designated that way but totally makes sense. 

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 3115
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
17
April 22, 2022 - 7:28 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost
sp_ReportPost

Or, maybe they thought it was really SPECIAL.  🙂   Actually, they might have also been trying to hype it and build some enthusiasm in their newest cartridge.

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 3523
Member Since:
March 31, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
18
April 22, 2022 - 7:36 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost
sp_ReportPost

The way I look at the 32 SPL is that it may be a great cartridge but the guns are not antique.  When you look at the antique 94’s a lot of collectors prefer the 38-55.  In some cases the 32-40 is preferred over the 30 WCF.

Avatar
Wyoming - Gods Country
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 1226
Member Since:
January 26, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
19
April 22, 2022 - 11:58 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost
sp_ReportPost

Just for fun, here’s the table I have for just the ’94 short rifles I’m surveying. The fellows that bought the chopped down specials were clearly 30 WCF guys. We must keep in mind that over 28% of the short rifle survey are ELW models and the 30 WCF completely dominates that group …. over 86%. Any ’94 short rifles that are not 30 WCF are good property, in my narrow-minded opinion.

Total 25-35 47 6.85%
Total 30 WCF 456 66.47%
Total 32 WS 88 12.83%
Total 32-40 32 4.66%
Total 38-55 63 9.18%
No cal. Listed 13 1.86%

                                                                               ~Gary~

                                                                                                                                                                              94-SRR.jpg

Avatar
Member
WACA Member
Forum Posts: 3115
Member Since:
November 19, 2006
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
20
April 23, 2022 - 1:41 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_QuotePost
sp_ReportPost

pdog72 said
Just for fun, here’s the table I have for just the ’94 short rifles I’m surveying. The fellows that bought the chopped down specials were clearly 30 WCF guys. We must keep in mind that over 28% of the short rifle survey are ELW models and the 30 WCF completely dominates that group …. over 86%. Any ’94 short rifles that are not 30 WCF are good property, in my narrow-minded opinion.

Total 25-35 47 6.85%
Total 30 WCF 456 66.47%
Total 32 WS 88 12.83%
Total 32-40 32 4.66%
Total 38-55 63 9.18%
No cal. Listed 13 1.86%

  

That’s great information – interesting.  It helps explain when I see a short rifle for sale, I’m always let down when it turns out the be a .30 WCF.

Forum Timezone: UTC 0
Most Users Ever Online: 628
Currently Online: 1873man, tsillik, caveman3094
Guest(s) 78
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
1873man: 5182
clarence: 4319
TXGunNut: 3903
Chuck: 3523
steve004: 3115
twobit: 2846
Maverick: 2017
JWA: 1828
Big Larry: 1765
Forum Stats:
Groups: 1
Forums: 16
Topics: 10422
Posts: 89845

 

Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 1432
Members: 11514
Moderators: 3
Admins: 3
Navigation