Winchester 94: Lots of little pieces...

Nightcrawler · May 12, 2001, 09:34 PM

*sigh* I tried to take apart my Winchester 94 trapper, .357 Magnum.

Taking it apart was the easy part. Getting it back together. So many screws that go into the receiver. I can't seem to get the pins in just right, either.

Stupid. I'll probably have to take it to the shop to get it back together...

Harley Nolden · May 13, 2001, 07:50 AM

Nightcrawler:
I am sending, by separate email the assem/disassem w/photos for you convenience. I hope this will help.

HJN

Nightcrawler · May 13, 2001, 11:39 AM

It was a looooong download for me (I'm on dialup, sadly) but I appreciate it. The shop is closed today, so maybe I'll take one more crack at it myself...

Nightcrawler · May 14, 2001, 04:54 PM

Took 'er in to the shop today. Gonna sell it as soon as I get it back. I hope to heck I didn't lose any pieces...

James K · May 15, 2001, 10:43 PM

I wonder why so many people assume that just because it is an old design the Model 94 is simple. Few of the old rifles (or shotguns) were made to be taken apart and the old timers did not do so. Any gunsmith who has worked on those old guns knows that cleaning was the last thing on the owner's mind.

Jim

PKAY · May 16, 2001, 05:13 PM

First of all, if the old timers were lucky enough to latch onto a lever gun and have enough ammo, cleaning it was not often done. Nor was disassembly an option. I can imagine on the frontier ready access to cleaning "kits" with bore brushes, solvent, patches, light to work by, tools, etc. was not available. Can you imagine not cleaning after shooting black powder cartridges? I'd like to know more about how or forefathers maintained their firearms.

Rodger Parrish · May 17, 2001, 09:19 AM

Pkay
My thoughts exactly! It makes you wonder how there are any decent 19th century pieces left.

James K · May 17, 2001, 08:33 PM

Pretty simple. The ones that were shot weren't maintained and the ones that were maintained weren't shot. The nice ones we see today were owned by gun collectors or "gentleman sportsmen" who fired a gun little and did not carry it under rough conditions. The average Winchester 1873, 1892 or 1894 that was used on farm or frontier is a POS - rusty, stock cracked, buttplate pounded, screw heads battered, sights missing, magazine tube bent, no finish, rifling long gone, etc.

Nightcrawler and others who try to take those guns apart soon understand why the Army refused to issue them. Just imagine troops in an encampment trying to clean a Model 1892 after a long dusty day in the saddle. The Model 1873 Springfield may have been slow, but it could be cleaned, would work under some pretty bad conditions (after they got good ammo), and packed a real wallop at both ends.

Jim

John Y Cannuck · May 18, 2001, 05:31 AM

Jim Keenan
I see a little inconsistancy in your above statement.
In your first paragraph, you describe the horendous conditions that the rifles were able to work in with out cleaning.
In the second paragraph you talk about the inability to keep it clean being a problem.

I'm not saying that a lever gun is any more reliable than a bolt gun in dirt and dust, just that there isn't as much difference as some would lead you to believe.

I am of the belief that a number of factors came in to play in the decision not to use a lever gun in combat. In addition to field stripping being impossible, the tender tube mag for example would not long stand up to battle use. Where do you mount the bayonet? (and how ridiculous does it look). Low power calibers etc.
I have stripped my 1910 M94 at hunting camp with no manual and just a few hand tools. It is possible (but I wouldn't even think about it in the field). I should point out that I am a mechanic, I am used to keeping mental track of a multitude of small parts.

James K · May 18, 2001, 04:14 PM

Hi, John,

Yes, there is some inconsistency, but few civilian rifles ever got as dirty as ones carried by the military. Civilians could at least wrap a cloth around the rifle, something the military was not allowed to do.

You are right that those lever actions usually did keep working, in spite of all the abuse. I saw a '73 recently that a fellow bought at a gun show. It was about as I described, but my quick checkout indicated it could have been fired. I don't know how accurate it would have been or if it could have been fired rapidly due to wear on the carrier, but it would have gone bang.

I agree that the stripping needed for cleaning can be done in a hunting camp by someone who is careful. But I can't recommend it unless absolutely necessary, and I am not sure I can think when it would be necessary. There is just too much chance of a spring or pin wandering off and taking the hunting trip along with it.

Jim

John Y Cannuck · May 18, 2001, 04:35 PM

Jim
You are right of course, and I never go to camp without a spare.

May 13, 2001, 11:39 AM	#3
Nightcrawler Senior Member Join Date: September 22, 2000 Location: Northern Michigan Posts: 2,945	Thanks! It was a looooong download for me (I'm on dialup, sadly) but I appreciate it. The shop is closed today, so maybe I'll take one more crack at it myself...

May 14, 2001, 04:54 PM	#4
Nightcrawler Senior Member Join Date: September 22, 2000 Location: Northern Michigan Posts: 2,945	*sigh* Took 'er in to the shop today. Gonna sell it as soon as I get it back. I hope to heck I didn't lose any pieces...

May 16, 2001, 05:13 PM	#6
PKAY Senior Member Join Date: March 22, 1999 Location: L.A., CA, USA Posts: 911	Jim's Right! First of all, if the old timers were lucky enough to latch onto a lever gun and have enough ammo, cleaning it was not often done. Nor was disassembly an option. I can imagine on the frontier ready access to cleaning "kits" with bore brushes, solvent, patches, light to work by, tools, etc. was not available. Can you imagine not cleaning after shooting black powder cartridges? I'd like to know more about how or forefathers maintained their firearms. __________________ Safe shooting - PKAY

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

May 12, 2001, 09:34 PM	#1
Nightcrawler Senior Member Join Date: September 22, 2000 Location: Northern Michigan Posts: 2,945	sigh I tried to take apart my Winchester 94 trapper, .357 Magnum. Taking it apart was the easy part. Getting it back together. So many screws that go into the receiver. I can't seem to get the pins in just right, either. Stupid. I'll probably have to take it to the shop to get it back together...

May 13, 2001, 07:50 AM	#2
Harley Nolden Staff In Memoriam Join Date: January 8, 1999 Location: Brunswick,GA USA Posts: 1,884	Nightcrawler: I am sending, by separate email the assem/disassem w/photos for you convenience. I hope this will help. HJN

May 15, 2001, 10:43 PM	#5
James K Member In Memoriam Join Date: March 17, 1999 Posts: 24,383	I wonder why so many people assume that just because it is an old design the Model 94 is simple. Few of the old rifles (or shotguns) were made to be taken apart and the old timers did not do so. Any gunsmith who has worked on those old guns knows that cleaning was the last thing on the owner's mind. Jim

May 17, 2001, 09:19 AM	#7
Rodger Parrish Member Join Date: October 2, 2000 Posts: 62	Pkay My thoughts exactly! It makes you wonder how there are any decent 19th century pieces left.

May 17, 2001, 08:33 PM	#8
James K Member In Memoriam Join Date: March 17, 1999 Posts: 24,383	Pretty simple. The ones that were shot weren't maintained and the ones that were maintained weren't shot. The nice ones we see today were owned by gun collectors or "gentleman sportsmen" who fired a gun little and did not carry it under rough conditions. The average Winchester 1873, 1892 or 1894 that was used on farm or frontier is a POS - rusty, stock cracked, buttplate pounded, screw heads battered, sights missing, magazine tube bent, no finish, rifling long gone, etc. Nightcrawler and others who try to take those guns apart soon understand why the Army refused to issue them. Just imagine troops in an encampment trying to clean a Model 1892 after a long dusty day in the saddle. The Model 1873 Springfield may have been slow, but it could be cleaned, would work under some pretty bad conditions (after they got good ammo), and packed a real wallop at both ends. Jim

May 18, 2001, 05:31 AM	#9
John Y Cannuck Member Join Date: March 29, 2000 Posts: 60	Jim Keenan I see a little inconsistancy in your above statement. In your first paragraph, you describe the horendous conditions that the rifles were able to work in with out cleaning. In the second paragraph you talk about the inability to keep it clean being a problem. I'm not saying that a lever gun is any more reliable than a bolt gun in dirt and dust, just that there isn't as much difference as some would lead you to believe. I am of the belief that a number of factors came in to play in the decision not to use a lever gun in combat. In addition to field stripping being impossible, the tender tube mag for example would not long stand up to battle use. Where do you mount the bayonet? (and how ridiculous does it look). Low power calibers etc. I have stripped my 1910 M94 at hunting camp with no manual and just a few hand tools. It is possible (but I wouldn't even think about it in the field). I should point out that I am a mechanic, I am used to keeping mental track of a multitude of small parts.

May 18, 2001, 04:14 PM	#10
James K Member In Memoriam Join Date: March 17, 1999 Posts: 24,383	Hi, John, Yes, there is some inconsistency, but few civilian rifles ever got as dirty as ones carried by the military. Civilians could at least wrap a cloth around the rifle, something the military was not allowed to do. You are right that those lever actions usually did keep working, in spite of all the abuse. I saw a '73 recently that a fellow bought at a gun show. It was about as I described, but my quick checkout indicated it could have been fired. I don't know how accurate it would have been or if it could have been fired rapidly due to wear on the carrier, but it would have gone bang. I agree that the stripping needed for cleaning can be done in a hunting camp by someone who is careful. But I can't recommend it unless absolutely necessary, and I am not sure I can think when it would be necessary. There is just too much chance of a spring or pin wandering off and taking the hunting trip along with it. Jim

May 18, 2001, 04:35 PM	#11
John Y Cannuck Member Join Date: March 29, 2000 Posts: 60	Jim You are right of course, and I never go to camp without a spare.