I bought a Win 94 Saddle Ring carbine a few years back for $175. The "case hardening" on the receiver doesn't put up with being a truck gun, it's substantially worn and rust pitted. Research on the serial number put it about Oct 64, a "post" gun.
What happened was the Winchester was losing money, and needed to modernize it's production. The biggest component was labor - the parts were being made out of reasonable production tolerances and couldn't be simply put together with a guarantee the guns would work. They had to be hand fitted to get them operating. It was a profit eating expense and the company was clearly headed for closure in the near future.
This is where the fanboys wax poetic about the high levels of craftsmanship that were equal to European masters, as if they were bespoke guns fitting for the privileged but priced for the common man. The reality is that a production run of parts included what we would now call a high number of rejects - but labor was ostensibly cheaper in the minds of production managers and they just tried to use them anyway instead of scrapping them.
What resulted was that some high cost parts were simplified, things were tightened up on the line, and the parts were made to a higher standard with less rejects. That meant less hand labor and more guns being finished sooner for less cost. But, this was anathema to the cultists who were enjoying their Win 70's as a icon they could put up against the high end makers. The reality is that the post 64 guns kept Winchester alive and don't need as much expensive gunsmithing to replace a critical part. In other words, they worked to make Eli Whitney's vision of assembling a gun from a pile of parts and work right the first time a reality. It wasn't happening before.
It's what most AR15 builders enjoy - you assemble a pile of parts from the four corners of the US and it works. The fanboys were aghast and made all sorts of noises about it, which should actually make them suspect by insisting on something that makes repair of the guns more difficult and expensive.
The post 64 guns work, and work well, chose one for what it is. In lever actions there are specific periods where certain features were introduced, for better or worse according to who owns what. Side eject allows scoping it better, but it can be done with top eject. A cross bolt safety may or may not suit - the safety under the lever requires you to squeeze it enough and it's something you need to shoot to get used to it. An exposed hammer is known to be subject to impact and a negligent discharge if falls to the ground, but there are those who like to stalk their game hammer down and thumb it when they sight something. Preferences abound.
I like my Saddle Ring, it has a metal butt plate and you need a winter coat to soften the impact. It hasn't ever jammed on me, I've shot others that would regardless of the ammo. It does limit you to round nose, but only if you load more than one extra in the tube. Two shots should be enough for a deer, or get the soft polymer nose rounds and fill er up. Sling? Scope? Fringed doeskin jacket? Up to you.
