I’m a fan of the rifle and short rifle pattern Model 94s and I’m glad that the current iteration of the Winchester is still marketing them. They are made by Miroku and they do make very good rifles.
On the other hand, they are also very over priced by pretty much any standard.
I’ve never been a big fan of the tang safety, or the cross bolt safety that preceded it, or the rebounding hammer that preceded that. I instead prefer the original system with its quarter cock notch on the hammer. I still prefer it despite my dad managing to shoot himself in the chest with that system on a Model 92 in .32-20 when it slipped off the tractor he was driving and sheared that notch on the way down.
I’m also not alone in those sentiments given the popularity of the original system on the pre-rebounding hammer and pre- AE Model 94s (both came along about the same time in 1981 and 1982 respectively), and the various clones that still use the original system.
However, I’ve also never been a big fan of the post 1963 Winchester lever guns. I own 4 pre-64 Model 94 (3 carbines and 1 26” rifle) and all of them shoot 1.25 MOA 5 shot groups at 100 yards with a tang sight installed.
I have not found the standard grade post 1963 Model 94s to be nearly as accurate as the few I have owned have been 3-4 MOA carbines. Not bad and arguably minute of deer, but not the same quality as the pre-64s.
That said…several years ago I bought a Legendary Frontiersman commemorative in .38-55 as it was a 26” rifle pattern Model 94 in .38-55 and wasn’t over gaudy as the silver plated receivers look quite nice once they tarnish. They also had all the XTR features with very nice polish and blue and very well executed checkering on the stock and forearm.
However, Winchester also made 19,999 of them, which is about 17,999 more than is prudent for a “collectible” commemorative. That was good news for me looking for one as a shooter as you could find them at the time for $700-$800. That was about half the cost of what Winchester wanted for the tang safety equipped Miroku made Model 94 rifles and carbines that they started making again in 2012. And quite frankly I’m not a big fan of the dark black finish on the Miroku made Model 94s and Model 92s.
So I bought one with a beat up box and a couple minor handling marks to see how it shot. In that condition, shooting it a bit (within reason) wasn’t going to hurt the value any further, and if it shot poorly, I could resell it.
To my surprise it shot quite well. It wasn’t quite pre-64 30-30 1.25 MOA accuracy, but it was still shooting very credible 2 MOA groups at 100 yards with 245 gr plain base cast bullets launched at black powder velocities (using smokeless powder). It’s become one of my favorite fun guns.
In that regard, Winchester had a bad habit of making commemoratives in huge numbers (for example 102,309 of the 1966 Centennial rifles, 90,301 of the 1967 Canadian Centennials, 112,923 of the Buffalo Bill Commemoratives, etc) that rendered them more or less worthless as collectible firearms.
However, many of these had octagon barrels which were not available as a factory option and which were generally more accurate than their round barrel Model 94s. Their commemoratives also had the same fit and finish that Winchester eventually called it’s “XTR” grade guns.
Most of them were pretty gaudy, but a few like the Legendary Frontiersman aren’t bad and they make very nice looking and very shootable rifles.
Similarly, when I was a teen and into early adulthood during the XTR era, Winchester was offering commemoratives made to order for towns out west celebrating their 100th anniversaries. These were basically standard XTR carbines in .30-30 with some gold filled engraving on the barrel with the name of the towns and the dates.
From a collector perspective all of the above will get a big yawn, it as shooters, they are hard to beat. They are by far the less expensive wash to get an XTR grade gun and all of them made prior to 1982 come with the original hammer system and none of the lawyer safeties.
Interestingly, given the popularity of the original hammer system with just a grip safety and no other manual safety, the 1964-1981 Model 94s have become popular with shooters. They have never had any collector value so they have never carried premium prices like the pre-64 and in particular pre-WWII Model 94s. That made the, good deals for shooters looking for an original configuration Model 94.
Even more interestingly, until the recent shortage of everything firearm, the market pretty well fell out of the pre-64 Winchester lever guns as the people collecting them were dying off a lot faster than new collectors were coming on board. That created a glut in the market as they were sold off by their estates.
Thus you could get a really nice post WWII, pre-64 Model 94 carbine in excellent condition for around $100 more than you could get a rather beat up 1964-1981 Model 94. Pre-war rifle pattern Model 94s could also be found for a lot less than previous. I stocked up. Good thing too, as prices for even common 30-30 carbines now seem to top $1000 again and finding a pre 64 in a rifle pattern is hard, and expensive when they come up for sale.
——
Which is a long intro to my recent (and sadly unsuccessful) search for another Model 94 rifle or short rifle. In the current shortage people aren’t selling often and when they do prices are high.
I did however find a Model 94 Classic. Winchester announced the Classic in 1967 as a “normal” version of their gold plated Centennial 66. They were cataloged from 1967-1970 and if I recall correctly Winchester only sold 47,000 of them.
It was available in both a 26” rifle and 20” short rifle pattern. They used semi fancy wood, had some minimal engraving on the receiver and other than a rather obnoxious gold plated loading gate.
It’s a nice looking rifle and I’m not entirely sure why Winchester sold over 102,000 Centennial 66 and over 90,000 Canadian Centennials, but less than half as many Classics.
I suspect it might be the appeal of those early commemoratives to collectors, before they figured out Winchester scheduled way too many for production to make them actually collectible.
There is also the reality that the Canadian Centennial itself was even plainer with different engraving, a blued loading gate, standard wood and just gold filled centennial dates on the barrel and tang. The Canadian Centennials also make great shooters given the prices at which they can be found.
I don’t know the prices at the time, but I suspect the Canadian Centennial was less expensive given the difference in wood.
—-
In any case, I found it hard to pass on a $600 rifle pattern Model 94 in .30-30 with very nice semi fancy wood and just a single handling mark on the forearm.
As with my LF, I strongly suspect the combination of higher than average fit and an octagon barrel would make it a better than average shooter as 1964-1981 Model 94s go.
But…I also had reservations as Winchester didn’t get rid of many of the of the most offensive 1964 changes until 1970.
One of those really offensive changes was the switch to a stamped steel lifter. To be fair it works fine, but it screams “cheap”.
The good news is that the use of roll pins was discontinued by 1967 when this rifle was made. As for the lifter, I’m tempted to just replace it with one of the later lifters.
——
I took took it out to the range on the same day and the good news is that it does indeed shoot just fine. This is 6 shots at 50 yards with the standard open sights. I’ll need to drift the rear sight a bit to the left, but otherwise it shoots quite well. The first three shots are a clover leaf and the last two are not walking all that far out of the group as the barrel warms. It should be a great field rifle and a pretty decent fun gun for steel plates out to 200 or so yards.
I’m debating the merits of drilling and tapping a hole in the tang for a tang sight, versus just installing a receiver sight.
It’s not a commemorative per say, but some folks regard it as such given that “only” 47,000 of them were made. I e been advised the value will plummet if I D&T the tang, but I’m not impressed by that argument as its primary value is its value as a shooter.
However, I may try a receiver sight and if that doesn’t satisfy I can D&T it later.
On the other hand, they are also very over priced by pretty much any standard.
I’ve never been a big fan of the tang safety, or the cross bolt safety that preceded it, or the rebounding hammer that preceded that. I instead prefer the original system with its quarter cock notch on the hammer. I still prefer it despite my dad managing to shoot himself in the chest with that system on a Model 92 in .32-20 when it slipped off the tractor he was driving and sheared that notch on the way down.
I’m also not alone in those sentiments given the popularity of the original system on the pre-rebounding hammer and pre- AE Model 94s (both came along about the same time in 1981 and 1982 respectively), and the various clones that still use the original system.
However, I’ve also never been a big fan of the post 1963 Winchester lever guns. I own 4 pre-64 Model 94 (3 carbines and 1 26” rifle) and all of them shoot 1.25 MOA 5 shot groups at 100 yards with a tang sight installed.
I have not found the standard grade post 1963 Model 94s to be nearly as accurate as the few I have owned have been 3-4 MOA carbines. Not bad and arguably minute of deer, but not the same quality as the pre-64s.
That said…several years ago I bought a Legendary Frontiersman commemorative in .38-55 as it was a 26” rifle pattern Model 94 in .38-55 and wasn’t over gaudy as the silver plated receivers look quite nice once they tarnish. They also had all the XTR features with very nice polish and blue and very well executed checkering on the stock and forearm.
However, Winchester also made 19,999 of them, which is about 17,999 more than is prudent for a “collectible” commemorative. That was good news for me looking for one as a shooter as you could find them at the time for $700-$800. That was about half the cost of what Winchester wanted for the tang safety equipped Miroku made Model 94 rifles and carbines that they started making again in 2012. And quite frankly I’m not a big fan of the dark black finish on the Miroku made Model 94s and Model 92s.
So I bought one with a beat up box and a couple minor handling marks to see how it shot. In that condition, shooting it a bit (within reason) wasn’t going to hurt the value any further, and if it shot poorly, I could resell it.
To my surprise it shot quite well. It wasn’t quite pre-64 30-30 1.25 MOA accuracy, but it was still shooting very credible 2 MOA groups at 100 yards with 245 gr plain base cast bullets launched at black powder velocities (using smokeless powder). It’s become one of my favorite fun guns.
In that regard, Winchester had a bad habit of making commemoratives in huge numbers (for example 102,309 of the 1966 Centennial rifles, 90,301 of the 1967 Canadian Centennials, 112,923 of the Buffalo Bill Commemoratives, etc) that rendered them more or less worthless as collectible firearms.
However, many of these had octagon barrels which were not available as a factory option and which were generally more accurate than their round barrel Model 94s. Their commemoratives also had the same fit and finish that Winchester eventually called it’s “XTR” grade guns.
Most of them were pretty gaudy, but a few like the Legendary Frontiersman aren’t bad and they make very nice looking and very shootable rifles.
Similarly, when I was a teen and into early adulthood during the XTR era, Winchester was offering commemoratives made to order for towns out west celebrating their 100th anniversaries. These were basically standard XTR carbines in .30-30 with some gold filled engraving on the barrel with the name of the towns and the dates.
From a collector perspective all of the above will get a big yawn, it as shooters, they are hard to beat. They are by far the less expensive wash to get an XTR grade gun and all of them made prior to 1982 come with the original hammer system and none of the lawyer safeties.
Interestingly, given the popularity of the original hammer system with just a grip safety and no other manual safety, the 1964-1981 Model 94s have become popular with shooters. They have never had any collector value so they have never carried premium prices like the pre-64 and in particular pre-WWII Model 94s. That made the, good deals for shooters looking for an original configuration Model 94.
Even more interestingly, until the recent shortage of everything firearm, the market pretty well fell out of the pre-64 Winchester lever guns as the people collecting them were dying off a lot faster than new collectors were coming on board. That created a glut in the market as they were sold off by their estates.
Thus you could get a really nice post WWII, pre-64 Model 94 carbine in excellent condition for around $100 more than you could get a rather beat up 1964-1981 Model 94. Pre-war rifle pattern Model 94s could also be found for a lot less than previous. I stocked up. Good thing too, as prices for even common 30-30 carbines now seem to top $1000 again and finding a pre 64 in a rifle pattern is hard, and expensive when they come up for sale.
——
Which is a long intro to my recent (and sadly unsuccessful) search for another Model 94 rifle or short rifle. In the current shortage people aren’t selling often and when they do prices are high.
I did however find a Model 94 Classic. Winchester announced the Classic in 1967 as a “normal” version of their gold plated Centennial 66. They were cataloged from 1967-1970 and if I recall correctly Winchester only sold 47,000 of them.
It was available in both a 26” rifle and 20” short rifle pattern. They used semi fancy wood, had some minimal engraving on the receiver and other than a rather obnoxious gold plated loading gate.
It’s a nice looking rifle and I’m not entirely sure why Winchester sold over 102,000 Centennial 66 and over 90,000 Canadian Centennials, but less than half as many Classics.
I suspect it might be the appeal of those early commemoratives to collectors, before they figured out Winchester scheduled way too many for production to make them actually collectible.
There is also the reality that the Canadian Centennial itself was even plainer with different engraving, a blued loading gate, standard wood and just gold filled centennial dates on the barrel and tang. The Canadian Centennials also make great shooters given the prices at which they can be found.
I don’t know the prices at the time, but I suspect the Canadian Centennial was less expensive given the difference in wood.
—-
In any case, I found it hard to pass on a $600 rifle pattern Model 94 in .30-30 with very nice semi fancy wood and just a single handling mark on the forearm.
As with my LF, I strongly suspect the combination of higher than average fit and an octagon barrel would make it a better than average shooter as 1964-1981 Model 94s go.
But…I also had reservations as Winchester didn’t get rid of many of the of the most offensive 1964 changes until 1970.
One of those really offensive changes was the switch to a stamped steel lifter. To be fair it works fine, but it screams “cheap”.
The good news is that the use of roll pins was discontinued by 1967 when this rifle was made. As for the lifter, I’m tempted to just replace it with one of the later lifters.
——
I took took it out to the range on the same day and the good news is that it does indeed shoot just fine. This is 6 shots at 50 yards with the standard open sights. I’ll need to drift the rear sight a bit to the left, but otherwise it shoots quite well. The first three shots are a clover leaf and the last two are not walking all that far out of the group as the barrel warms. It should be a great field rifle and a pretty decent fun gun for steel plates out to 200 or so yards.
I’m debating the merits of drilling and tapping a hole in the tang for a tang sight, versus just installing a receiver sight.
It’s not a commemorative per say, but some folks regard it as such given that “only” 47,000 of them were made. I e been advised the value will plummet if I D&T the tang, but I’m not impressed by that argument as its primary value is its value as a shooter.
However, I may try a receiver sight and if that doesn’t satisfy I can D&T it later.
