![]() |
![]() |
#1 |
Member
Join Date: January 2, 2018
Location: Mission Viejo, CA
Posts: 35
|
Winchester 94 forearm
In 1951 or so Winchester shortened the forearm of the model 94 carbine by an inch or so. Can I replace the forearm of my 1953 model 94 with the earlier longer style without any modifications?
My forearm has some damage and I have a chance to buy the longer version at a good price Thanks |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: March 28, 1999
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 3,691
|
Go ahead. I see no problem. Frankly, I think the M94 looks a lot better with the longer forearm.
Paul B.
__________________
COMPROMISE IS NOT AN OPTION! |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Member
Join Date: January 2, 2018
Location: Mission Viejo, CA
Posts: 35
|
Thanks Paul
Change was made at S/N 1,850,000 |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 9, 2009
Location: North Alabama
Posts: 7,954
|
Interesting
Never realized the difference in carbine forearms. Stuff ya don't know
![]() Curious though, does not the barrel band and the screw that secures same, create a potential problem? |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Member
Join Date: January 2, 2018
Location: Mission Viejo, CA
Posts: 35
|
yea, the barrel band is a definite reason for my post. The new and used ones that I see for sale only say pre or post '64, no mention of anything else. I think the bands are the same.
From the pictures I see, the barrel band appears to be the same distance from the receive on both the long and short ones. The longer one just looks to go further past the band towards the muzzle. I measured mine and it's 6 7/8 inches from the front edge of the receiver to the center of the band screw. If someone has a pre s/n 1,850,000 carbine, I would be interested to know what yours measures. Thanks |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Member
Join Date: January 2, 2018
Location: Mission Viejo, CA
Posts: 35
|
SOLVED
I was refereed to a book by another source that said Arthur Pirkle's "Winchester lever action repeating firearms Vol 3, The Models of 1894 and 1895" had the answer on pages 73-75.
It says the longer forearms are 9 1/8 in length and the newer, shorter ones are 7 7/8. More importantly to my question it says the barrel band location remained identical. Stated the effect was to reduce the amount of wood protruding beyond the barrel band to 1 1/4 inches. Also notes that many collectors consider the shorter forearm as undesirable.... I'm not sure I agree with that. I'm going to purchase the longer one |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Member
Join Date: January 29, 2022
Posts: 41
|
Go for it! Would love to see a before and after pic, if you're so inclined.
Frank |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 9, 2009
Location: North Alabama
Posts: 7,954
|
stuff
More stuff ya didn't know......thanks for the follow up!
|
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Member
Join Date: January 2, 2018
Location: Mission Viejo, CA
Posts: 35
|
I hate to beat this to death, I promise this is my last reply to this, but I just received a copy of Arthur Pirkle's book and I must say that it is the most detailed book on the 1894/94/1895 I have come across.
No photographs but lots of diagrams, charts etc. Even down to the screw sizes for the model. I have no affiliation with the author, just my opinion, available at the usual online places. |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|