Question about old Winchester lever guns

[essayons21]

I've been researching a lot lately, aiming to eventually buy a pre-64 Winchester 1894, probably in 30-30. Not exactly a fine antique, but its a piece of American history I'd like to add to my collection.

After looking at and handling many of these guns, I noticed that nearly all of the older models that had been used were missing almost all of the bluing from the receiver and the barrel bands, while the bluing on the barrel, magazine tube, lever, and other small parts is in pretty good shape.

At first I thought this was a result of franken-guns who had been pieced together over the years, but I see it on almost every pre-1930s Winchester, including ones I know to be original.

Does anyone know why this occurs?

 

[natman]

The bluing used on 94s from that time period fades over time, even without handling. I have my grandfather's 94 which was made in 1926 and could never understand why the receiver was white, but with no wear on any of the other parts.

 

[Oro]

I have been told it is the particular type of steel used that does not react as well with the bluing salts. It is the same with post-64 as well. Poor bluing on Winchester's is normal over time.

Many shops won't guarantee or even re-blue Winchester lever guns. I am told it CAN be done well, but it requires a specific technique and extra effort. This is what I have been told by a few different knowledgeable sources, but I can't swear to the accuracy of it. However, I was told this by older "gunnies" whose opinion I respect.

 

[Jim Watson]

"Flaking" of blue from Winchester receivers is well known and not considered a major detriment as long as the exposed metal has been kept clean and rust-free. You have by now seen advertisements like "50% flaking blue on receiver, 90% on barrel and magazine." No way around it unless you pay for a coddled specimen.

 

[rcmodel]

Oro nailed it, as the newer receiver steel bluing is hard even for the factory to do.
Part of it is the Mystery Metal they used after WWII.
Part of it is the surface hardening process used on pre-war receivers that gave a hard carburized surface that flakes off after 100 years.

And not only on 94's. I see the same thing on old Winchester .22 pumps due to the heat treatment used back then.

The other thing is, those old Winchesters were carried at the balance point many a mile with someones sweaty or work gloved hand wrapped around the receiver.
That's hard on bluing no matter who made the gun.

As for barrel bands, I think it is because they stick out more and got rubbed on more in saddle scabbards, gun cases, and such..

rc

 

[DRYHUMOR]

Most people want clean and pristine, which opens the door for rifles in excellent condition (except for blueing loss) to picked up far cheaper.

Look for wood in good condition, no buggered screws, sight hood and elevator sight intact.

 

[Oro]

I will add this point since you are shopping - don't rule out a post-64 if you want it for more than just collecting. I have two at the moment- a '54 and a 1980 era one (albeit a dressier XTR model). The newer one's action is much better machined and smoother. Accuracy and all other comparisons are the same. The only thing I avoid was angle eject and cross-bolt safety - not because they are bad guns but just features I did not want. If i wanted to 'scope it, then I'd opt for an angle eject.

So I would not fixate too much on pre- vs. post- 64 unless you really want it for collecting purposes. And that's fine, but in practical use they are just not different and a newer one could be likely had in better condition and much more cheaply.

There is just so much to be said for a 94 that it boggles my mind that most civilian shooters these days don't see past the fact it's not black, plastic, or have unnecessary rails for hanging useless things. At these prices they are bargains and that will change in the future.

 

[essayons21]

Thanks for all the info.

I'm primarily looking for a pre-war model, the older the better as long as its in decent condition. I'm primarily looking for the gun as a collector's piece, but all of my guns are shooters too.

I saw a decent looking late 1920s 1894 in 30-30, most likely came from an institution, for $550 at the gun show yesterday. I was tempted to bite, but I want to do a bit more research.

 

[eastbank]

here are two of my familey used 1894 winchesters, the one is a saddle ring carbine in 30wcf and made in 1913,the second one is a eastern carbine in 30 wcf(carbine but with out a saddle ring) made in 1928. as you can see they both have the finish wore off more in certain areas and they were both used hard but taken care of. eastbank. ps sorry about the feet.

 

[essayons21]

eastbank,

I am green with envy.

Those 94's are pretty much exactly what I'm looking for. Pre-war, been used, but taken care of.

 

[eastbank]

essayons21, here are two 1892,s a round barrel 44-40 made in 1894 and a 32-20 octigon barrel made in 1918, again sorry about the feet. eastbank.

 

[Oro]

I saw a decent looking late 1920s 1894 in 30-30, most likely came from an institution, for $550 at the gun show yesterday. I was tempted to bite, but I want to do a bit more research.

If the gun is good, that is probably not a bad price. I have just seen shocking prices for pre-war models at shows around here. That sounds more like a sane price, though I admit I have no idea what the "book" (which I never trust) is. But that sounds like a decent "street" price from what I have seen.

 

[Jim K]

I understand that the steel in post-64 Model 94's was so resistant to bluing that they had to plate them with iron in order for the bluing to take at all.

Jim

 

[rcmodel]

The this about that from Brownells.

"POST ‘64 WINCHESTER MODEL 94
We have had a degree of success in bluing these “nonbluable”
receivers with the Oxynate No. 84. However, even our most successful
bluing jobs did not result in a finish that was as nice as we would
like. At this point we are still experimenting. We found that we had
our best luck with these receivers when we polished all the old finish
off first, then pickled the receiver in full-strength Hydrochloric Acid
prior to going into the Oxynate No. 84 salts."

http://www.brownells.com/.aspx/pid=1103/Product/OXYNATE_reg__NO__84___HOT_CHEMICAL_BLUING_COMPOUND

rc

 

[essayons21]

I'm looking at one with serial no. 1,475,XXX.

Best i can figure is it was made between 1943-1947. Can't seem to find more accurate records for this period. Anyone know why this is? Because of WWII? Is there any way to date it more accurately?

 

[rcmodel]

Winchester produced very few sporting firearms during WWII because the entire workforce was busy making M1 Garands and various other stuff.

Any 94's produced then would have been alloted to Law Enforcement, prison guard, and defense plant security..

The only way I would know to find out more would be a factory letter from the Cody Museum in Cody WY.
They hold all the old Winchester records now.
There is a sizable fee for the research & letter.

rc

 

[jim in Anchorage]

http://www.winchestercollector.org/forum/index.php
Try here. Theres guys on that forum that have literally written books on Winchester levers.

 

[cfendley]

I'm looking at one with serial no. 1,475,XXX.

Best i can figure is it was made between 1943-1947. Can't seem to find more accurate records for this period. Anyone know why this is? Because of WWII? Is there any way to date it more accurately?

It is because of the war. I had a war time gun that was actually pretty neat, wish I had kept it. It had a hammer like a pre-war gun but the tang did not have the stamping on the top and the serial # put it being made during the war. I heard they put together guns during and right after the war with a lot of parts that had been around for a while.

 

[TEDDY]

win 94

I have two a win 94 30/30 and a 94 trapper in 45 colt.both post 64 and I could less.30/30 $70 as new and the trapper was expensive $200.I dont like to pay over a hundred for a gun.and most a lot less.I bought a G/K 43 for $25 new condition with book and spare parts.had scope also zf43.