new Winchester Model 1894 30-30 - Page 3

gak · November 7, 2012, 12:40 AM

Dpris said:
"I was thinking 92 too, till I found the firing pin changes, the internal trigger block addition, the rebounding hammer, the tang safety and so on. Beautifully done, but..."

Not disagreeing, just saying IF you gotta have a new "Winchester" lever...

DPris · November 7, 2012, 12:48 AM

Yeah, if you gotta.

I'll just keep playing with my tuned up Rossi 92 when I want to do 92 stuff, my two older Winchesters, and my Marlins.

If FN had left the 92 design alone I'da picked up THREE of those. The original 92 was one of the best totin' carbines ever invented.

Denis

BlueTrain · November 8, 2012, 10:05 AM

The older Winchester Model 94s may have been the quintessential American working man's rifle but the price of one was well above my father's weekly take-home pay (in 1962). And the price of a Japanese produced version is well above my own weekly-take home pay. So somethings haven't changed in the last fifty years.

musicmatty · November 8, 2012, 02:23 PM

I viewed 4 Wins today..all 30-30 calibers. 3 of the 4, were selling for $495. The other was selling for $295. ..the one for $295. has a saddle ring and some fancy designs on the receiver, it was in decent shape. Not sure of the model years for any of those Wins..but the one model, was a very late model which was drilled and tapped for a scope mounting...it also had a checkered Walnut stock and a hooded front sight...it was the nicest of all the models in my opinion and with a very smooth action but tight tolerance in it's craftsmanship.

The last 16yrs or so of the model 94, were very well crafted levers. In my opinion/experience, they were the best of the fleet for many reasons..but I know the Pre-64 lovers will not agree

November 8, 2012, 10:05 AM	#53
BlueTrain Senior Member Join Date: September 26, 2005 Location: Northern Virginia Posts: 6,141	The older Winchester Model 94s may have been the quintessential American working man's rifle but the price of one was well above my father's weekly take-home pay (in 1962). And the price of a Japanese produced version is well above my own weekly-take home pay. So somethings haven't changed in the last fifty years. __________________ Shoot low, sheriff. They're riding Shetlands! Underneath the starry flag, civilize 'em with a Krag, and return us to our own beloved homes! Buy War Bonds.

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

November 7, 2012, 12:40 AM	#51
gak Senior Member Join Date: February 28, 2005 Location: Aridzona Posts: 2,767	Dpris said: "I was thinking 92 too, till I found the firing pin changes, the internal trigger block addition, the rebounding hammer, the tang safety and so on. Beautifully done, but..." Not disagreeing, just saying IF you gotta have a new "Winchester" lever...

November 7, 2012, 12:48 AM	#52
DPris Member Emeritus Join Date: August 19, 2004 Posts: 7,133	Yeah, if you gotta. I'll just keep playing with my tuned up Rossi 92 when I want to do 92 stuff, my two older Winchesters, and my Marlins. If FN had left the 92 design alone I'da picked up THREE of those. The original 92 was one of the best totin' carbines ever invented. Denis

November 8, 2012, 02:23 PM	#54
musicmatty Senior Member Join Date: September 30, 2009 Location: Eastcoast Posts: 346	I viewed 4 Wins today..all 30-30 calibers. 3 of the 4, were selling for $495. The other was selling for $295. ..the one for $295. has a saddle ring and some fancy designs on the receiver, it was in decent shape. Not sure of the model years for any of those Wins..but the one model, was a very late model which was drilled and tapped for a scope mounting...it also had a checkered Walnut stock and a hooded front sight...it was the nicest of all the models in my opinion and with a very smooth action but tight tolerance in it's craftsmanship. The last 16yrs or so of the model 94, were very well crafted levers. In my opinion/experience, they were the best of the fleet for many reasons..but I know the Pre-64 lovers will not agree