Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
I recently inherited a Mod. 94 Win. (30-30) it’s in pretty decent shape and I’m thinking of selling it. I know by the serial # (1,305,127) that it was made in either late 41′ or early 42′. I’m no expert but I would judge this gun to be in the 90-93% range of condition. I did see a note in my book of values that a gun of this # range could be worth a premium if it bears a U.S military stamp. What would this stamp look like and where on the gun would it be located? Thoughts? Feedback greatly appreciated!!! Thanks…………
Offline
To the very best of my knowledge, there were no WW II U.S. military contract Model 94 Carbines made. The serial number identifies it as a November 1941 production carbine. Winchester did sell 2,500 Model 94 carbines to the Canadian military for use by the Pacific Coast Militia Rangers (PCMR).
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
country cruiser said
What would this stamp look like……
Here’s a pic of one on a 94.
Vince
Southern Oregon
NRA member
Fraternal Order of Eagles
“There is but one answer to be made to the dynamite bomb and that can best be made by the Winchester rifle.”
Teddy Roosevelt
Vince,
That is what they looked like for WW I. Martially marked WW II Winchesters used completely different ordnance markings. Fortunately, the people out there that are inclined to make fakes are not smart enough to know the difference, and they typically use the WW I style markings.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
That’s what I love about this site, learn something every day.
Vince
Southern Oregon
NRA member
Fraternal Order of Eagles
“There is but one answer to be made to the dynamite bomb and that can best be made by the Winchester rifle.”
Teddy Roosevelt
This is what the WWII marking looked like:
"This is the West, sir. When the legend becomes fact, print the legend."
Bert H. said
Vince,
That is what they looked like for WW I. Martially marked WW II Winchesters used completely different ordnance markings. Fortunately, the people out there that are inclined to make fakes are not smart enough to know the difference, and they typically use the WW I style markings.
Bert
You are spot on with that statement. I collected all US martially marked rifles for many years and can spot a fake US or ord. bomb on a M1897 trenchgun a mile off. It is the very same stamp used on the Spruce guns. Usually the fakers cannot count the flames on the bomb or make the o inside too big or too small. They were hand stamped and show little variance in size, but the US stamps are usually not on line with each other. A few years ago it was begging to be a common thing to fake all kinds of stock and metal cartouches as many had been boned off. It adds immensely to the value of any rifle to have its original cartouche, so here came the fakers. Some good and some very bad. Trenchguns and 1903’s and Garands were favorite targets of the fakers. WW2 guns for the most part were roll stamped. Some Winchesters were hand engraved with an electric pencil US Property on the receivers. M70’s M52’s and M52-S. According to Pauline Muerrelle, this was done at the factory. Big Larry
Wincacher,
Where did you find your WWII marking pic? That’s NOT a 94 – I thought that’s what was being discussed. There are examples of WWII 94 markings but examples are few and pix are fewer.
B
We were discussing WWII Ordnance stamps. I don’t believe they would have stamped each model with a different logo.
"This is the West, sir. When the legend becomes fact, print the legend."
Outstanding Quote…haven’t heard it in years. The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance I believe………..
Getting back on point here..Since this is right at the time of the start of WWII (and we got caught napping) would/could it have been possible that in all the confusion they dragged out the old WWI stamp until they made a new one for WWII guns. I’ve even heard that the need was so great at the beginning that alot of guns went out and records are scarce as to where exactly they ended up. I positively know this gun was purchased in a small gun store in Detroit right around 47-48 (straight from the 2nd owner) and he told me it WAS a war surplus gun. I’m thinking that it may have been sitting in a box at the factory and hadn’t been shipped out, the war started, and everything on hand got shipped with little documentation. I recall a WWII flick about a submarine putting a weather group ashore to report weather conditions for the Dolittle raid and 1 of them was carrying a Mod. 94! They’re pretty good about historical detail so I believe it was an accurate portrayal (as far as costume/armaments go) Personally I’m inclined to think that this gun was probably used for training and then later on as home defense forces, maybe POW camp(s) Something like that. It’s not all banged up so it definitely wasn’t at Bataan.
paul lucas said
Outstanding Quote…haven’t heard it in years. The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance I believe………..
From the very end of that movie.
"This is the West, sir. When the legend becomes fact, print the legend."
Hi Bert H. I don’t know if you’re still following this thread or reply much, but I have a Winchester 94, serial # 1256593 that has “USBR” stamped in the left side butt stock near the firing mechanism and “24” stamped on the left side butt stock, near the butt plate. I’m guessing this would be a WW2 issued gun, correct? Can you narrow down the manufacture date? The Winchester site just says 1943-48.
thanks.
Marc said
Hi Bert H. I don’t know if you’re still following this thread or reply much, but I have a Winchester 94, serial # 1256593 that has “USBR” stamped in the left side butt stock near the firing mechanism and “24” stamped on the left side butt stock, near the butt plate. I’m guessing this would be a WW2 issued gun, correct? Can you narrow down the manufacture date? The Winchester site just says 1943-48.
thanks.
Hello Marc,
The so called “Winchester” website contains erroneous date of manufacture information. Per the actual factory records, Model 94 S/N 1256593 was manufactured in December, 1940… almost exactly one full year before the U.S. entered WW II. So No, it is highly unlikely that it was a WW II issued gun. I do not know what the “USBR” signifies. The “24” is most likely an inventory or rack number.
Which caliber is it e.g. 30 W.C.F. or 32 W.S. ? Does it have a “W” stamped on the flat area just below the serial number?
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
This is off point, but I note that you’re located in Washington State Burt. But you time Zone per this Website, appears at least five or six times zones different than my Pacific Daylight time! Is it a computer ‘situation’, this Website or… ???. Returning here after posting I’m showing seven hour later! If you’re in Iceland too… Let’s get together for a beer or two and try to create some credible story for our wives! Mine will want to know “what her name is!” 🙂 🙂 🙂
Best!
John
Bert H. said
Hello Marc,
The so called “Winchester” website contains erroneous date of manufacture information. Per the actual factory records, Model 94 S/N 1256593 was manufactured in December, 1940… almost exactly one full year before the U.S. entered WW II. So No, it is highly unlikely that it was a WW II issued gun. I do not know what the “USBR” signifies. The “24” is most likely an inventory or rack number.
Which caliber is it e.g. 30 W.C.F. or 32 W.S. ? Does it have a “W” stamped on the flat area just below the serial number?
Bert
I find it interesting that the BATFE still recognizes the GM published DOM’s. Has anyone made any progress to have the Polishing records recognized by the U.S. Gov? I’d imagine there are many “antique” firearms that won’t be “antique” anymore, resulting in a substantial loss of value. . . . I suppose thats probably been why it hasn’t been transitioned already?
WACA #12263
CHolms10 said
I find it interesting that the BATFE still recognizes the GM published DOM’s. Has anyone made any progress to have the Polishing records recognized by the U.S. Gov? I’d imagine there are many “antique” firearms that won’t be “antique” anymore, resulting in a substantial loss of value. . . . I suppose thats probably been why it hasn’t been transitioned already?
That “anyone” would be a presumptuous meddling fool to confuse the legal issue by stirring the pot. The less attention brought on the “antique” exemption, the better, considering who’s now in control of the US gov’t. Most gun-haters would be surprised, & outraged, to know that such an exemption exists, & that the trade in antiques evades back-ground checks.
Clarence, I agree with you but….The BATFE knows about this but so far hasn’t done anything about it. I don’t want to be the test case.
1 Guest(s)
