Pre '64 Winchester 94

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jshudson

Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2011
Messages
21
Here's a Pre '64 (still waiting on the SN) Model 94 that a gentleman has asked me to make him an offer on. I've been in the market for my first lever action 30-30 and this seems like a good opportunity to grab one. He says he bought the rifle new and has never even fired it. I have a few questions for you Guru's: First, what's a fair offer to make him? I'm not trying to break the bank being a student but still want to be fair. Also, he does seem ready to deal...Second, is the receiver supposed to be the color it is? My impression from research is that they were blued but this one looks pretty worn in the photos. It might just be the lighting. I have requested more for a closer look.

Thanks in advance!

Alanna433.jpg
Alanna432.jpg
 
That looks like a nickel plate finish, but I can't be sure. It is not the regular blued finish. I'd offer $250. $300 tops. It's really hard to tell from the photos alone and I'm just kinda guessing.


Mark, esquire
 
That is a post WWII, Pre-64.
I'd guess late 40's early 50's.

The sling swivels have been added later

Not unusual to see the finish on an older Winchester receiver go first.

Especially one that has been carried a lot of miles, rode hard, and put away wet.

The natural balance point is right at the receiver and 50 years of sweaty palms with do that to bluing.

Assuming the barrel, and especially the muzzle rifling is still good, and not worn funnel shaped from a cleaning rod?

I'd think $350 - $400 range in todays market would be fair to all involved.

He might get more on an on-line auction.
Or Cabala's will give him $150 bucks on a trade!

rc
 
He may not have fired it, but it sure looks like he carried it a lot.
 
I agree with natman. I can't believe this is a "new" rifle. Not only is the receiver apparently missing all finish, it also looks as though the finish has been worn completely off the wood, where you would grip it while firing.

The gentleman may be - exaggerating, mistaken, forgetful, or lying...
 
The receiver was blued with nickel steel and it took Winchester a while to get that to stick just right and that's why it looks like it does.


Waste not want not. :)
 
baylorattorney, what do you mean it took Winchester a while a while to get the nickel steel to "stick just right?" I think you're right though, it does look like it's a nickle steel version as opposed to just being worn. more photos to come. thanks again for all your input guys.
 
He says he bought the rifle new and has never even fired it.
Click to expand...
The guy obviously has a faulty memory.

Or he is lying.

Or else he never fired it, but hunted with it and drug it through the brush for 50 years.

I'd guess #1 or #2 though.

I'm not saying it is a bad rifle, or a bad deal if the bore is good and you can get it for less the four bills.

I'm just saying it didn't get to look that way if it was bought brand new and never fired.
Unless it stood in a corner of his barn with the pitchforks all this time.

rc
 
He says he bought the rifle new and has never even fired it.
Click to expand...

And if you believe that I have some ocean front property here in Mimmesota to sell you ! It is a well used gun !
 
Haha, well put. I may be young and still gun-stupid, but even I can see it's been used once or a hundred times.

Thanks guys.
 
It almost looks like every thing but the wood, the receiver housing and the fore end band has been swapped out.
Stranger things have happened with old Winchesters.
The receiver is the only thing with a serial number.
 
jshudson said:
baylorattorney, what do you mean it took Winchester a while a while to get the nickel steel to "stick just right?" I think you're right though, it does look like it's a nickle steel version as opposed to just being worn. more photos to come. thanks again for all your input guys.
Click to expand...

On some early versions of the 94, Winchester used a bluing technique that was incompatible with the metal, which resulted in the receiver bluing "evaporating" over time, leaving the steel in the white. My grandfather's 94 is one of them; the barrel, bands and wood look nearly new but there isn't a speck of blue on the receiver. No rust, no wear, just no blue. However, IIRC, that batch of 94s was made in the 1920s.

When he said "nickel steel" he was talking about the metallurgical composition of the receiver, not a steel receiver that was nickel plated. The gun pictured was originally blue, but it's been worn off the receiver.

If you get it, don't do anything more than a good cleaning, maybe a bit of 0000 steel wool and oil to remove the rust. Then keep it oiled. Don't refinish it.
 
Thanks for the explanation natman. I think I'm going to pass on this one. Too many things don't add up with the seller and the gun and I think a better opportunity to get a 94 will come my way.
 
He maybe never shot it but the Grandkids sure used the hell out of it. Just look at the stock. A stock doesn't look like that from stting in the closet !!!
Dave
 
It's never been fired? :rolleyes: bwahahahahah!
Please pass it by. Check on gunbroker for pictures of Winchester 94 pre 64 that have seen little action.
 
I have a couple of these old Winchesters, and one that I picked up a couple of years ago from a very nice old lady looks almost exactley like this one. I offered her $400.00 for it, and she told me that was twice as much as a gundealer had offered her, she was very happy to sell it to me. They may look worn on the outside, but most are carried alot more than they are shot, so if the barrel is in good shape I'd offer $400 and see what he says. Good luck.
 
jshudson said:
baylorattorney, what do you mean it took Winchester a while a while to get the nickel steel to "stick just right?" I think you're right though, it does look like it's a nickle steel version as opposed to just being worn. more photos to come. thanks again for all your input guys.
Click to expand...

Sorry I was away for a couple of days. Natman nailed it tho. Thank you Natman. I still think that doesn't detract from the rifle overall, especially if the price is right. Did we get a year on production yet?


Mark, esquire
 
The owner would not give me a partial SN so I could look up the manufacture date and that in itself makes me wonder if he's telling the truth about it being pre-'64. Is the SN located on the bottom of the receiver? If so you can see a few digits of it in a few of the photos. It seems to begin with '270' which would put it at a manufacture date of 1964...so it's not a pre-1964, correct?
 
Here is an excellent article that will guide you in your decision.... http://www.americanrifleman.org/Webcontent/pdf/external/W94_DICKEY.pdf

According to this article, the 1964 models began with 270xxxx.

Without the full serial number or amount of numbers we cannot be sure at this point. If it is pre-64 and begins with 270xxx it would be from like 1902... If its 270xxxX then it would not be pre-64.


Mark, esquire
 
Last edited:
I finally coaxed the last digits of the SN out of the owner, I told him I wasn't interested if I couldn't get those and I wasn't going to make a 1 hour trip just to look myself...the last four digits are 7352, which would make this a NON pre-'64 rifle made in 1964. Close, but that only counts in horseshoes and hand-grenades.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Ed
  • Locked
Winchester pre or post 64 question
Replies
5
Views
903
SASS#23149
SASS#23149
F
  • Locked
Pre-64 Winchesters
Replies
9
Views
764
Kali Endgame
K
L
  • Locked
Winchester Mod. 94 Pre 64
Replies
9
Views
643
towboat_er
towboat_er
W.E.G.
  • Locked
"Pre-64" Winchester Model 94 30-30 -- so what?
2 3
Replies
70
Views
19K
Art Eatman
A
A
  • Locked
Winchester 94 Help
Replies
10
Views
593
CeilingCat
C
Back
Top