Within the next couple of weeks I plan on picking up a couple of new rifles. I've pretty much decided on a CZ 527 carbine in 7.62x39, but have also been considering a pistol caliber Winchester 94. Looking over the Winchester catalog I've narrowed my choice down to either the 94 Ranger Compact or the 94 Trapper in 357 magnum. I would appreciate any feedback on any of these rifles (reliability, durability, etc). Also other than length and a saddle ring on the Trapper are there any difference between the two 94 models? Does the trapper come with a Walnut stock? Looking at the website it doesn't appear to be walnut, but I was under the impression that the Trapper models has walnut while the Ranger was just hardwood. There is a $60 price difference between the two. Thanks for any help.
Winchester 94?
- Thread starter Doug S
- Start date
- Status
1892 replicas
Haven't owned a Winchester 94 yet, but recently sold a Navy Arms (Rossi-built) 1892 SS Rifle in 44-40. I was considering Cowboy Action Shooting, which lead to my purchase of the 1892. From the information I gathered, there were mixed reports on the reliability of the Winchester 94 to feed pistol calibers since the action was designed around the longer 30-30 cartridge length. I found a good price on the 1892 replica, and the search was over.
If you want a pistol caliber lever-action, I'd take a look at the 1892 models. There are several importers selling the Rossi rifles and Winchester also has their own 1892 out in the market. Calibers available include 32-20, 38sp/357mag, 38-40, 44-40, 44 mag, 45 Long Colt, and 454 Casull. Plenty of options. I regret selling my NA 1892, but I had another firearm catch my fancy and something had to go. Only had it to the range twice, and was impressed with accuracy and reliability. The man who bought it was very impressed with the rifle. He had owned "Rossi's" in the past and was skeptical in the quality of the rifle. After looking over the rifle, he expressed amazement in the boost in quality from Rossi. From what I have researched, Navy Arms was a major driver in Rossi's improvements.
In a nutshell, I would consider the 1892 replicas if you are interested in a lever-action, pistol caliber rifle. The actions are amongst the strongest of the Winchester designs and make for shorter cartridges. Good luck and enjoy.
Haven't owned a Winchester 94 yet, but recently sold a Navy Arms (Rossi-built) 1892 SS Rifle in 44-40. I was considering Cowboy Action Shooting, which lead to my purchase of the 1892. From the information I gathered, there were mixed reports on the reliability of the Winchester 94 to feed pistol calibers since the action was designed around the longer 30-30 cartridge length. I found a good price on the 1892 replica, and the search was over.
If you want a pistol caliber lever-action, I'd take a look at the 1892 models. There are several importers selling the Rossi rifles and Winchester also has their own 1892 out in the market. Calibers available include 32-20, 38sp/357mag, 38-40, 44-40, 44 mag, 45 Long Colt, and 454 Casull. Plenty of options. I regret selling my NA 1892, but I had another firearm catch my fancy and something had to go. Only had it to the range twice, and was impressed with accuracy and reliability. The man who bought it was very impressed with the rifle. He had owned "Rossi's" in the past and was skeptical in the quality of the rifle. After looking over the rifle, he expressed amazement in the boost in quality from Rossi. From what I have researched, Navy Arms was a major driver in Rossi's improvements.
In a nutshell, I would consider the 1892 replicas if you are interested in a lever-action, pistol caliber rifle. The actions are amongst the strongest of the Winchester designs and make for shorter cartridges. Good luck and enjoy.
Hi, thanks for the response. I've heard of some of the reliability issues with the 94 pistol calibers & this is one of the primary reasons for my post. I'll check out the 1892 models, but was hoping for a nice short 94. Anyone else had any reliability issues with the 94?
I just bought a trapper in 30-30, haven't shot it enough to comment on reliability, but it seems to be a nice, well made rifle (though not as nice as my ca. 1910 32 Win. Special).
The stock on the trapper is indeed walnut.
The stock on the trapper is indeed walnut.
Smoke Rizen
Member
Winchester 94
I have a new 94 Trials End model in .45 L.C. that I purchased for CAS matches. I shot it last weekend in a match and am very happy with the fit and finish of the rifle. It has a 13 3/4 length of pull which is a fraction longer than the 92 Rossi I was shooting previously,small difference,big improvement. I was really happy with the feeding of the 94,as I had much trouble with the 92 stove piping often. The action on the 94 is not as smooth as the old,"true", Winchesters I own, as Larry stated earlier. I also like the 94 for ease of cleaning,as I shoot all black powder loads,and the 94 is much simpler to dissasemble for cleaning. I'm not talking down the 92,just a personal observation. S.R.
I have a new 94 Trials End model in .45 L.C. that I purchased for CAS matches. I shot it last weekend in a match and am very happy with the fit and finish of the rifle. It has a 13 3/4 length of pull which is a fraction longer than the 92 Rossi I was shooting previously,small difference,big improvement. I was really happy with the feeding of the 94,as I had much trouble with the 92 stove piping often. The action on the 94 is not as smooth as the old,"true", Winchesters I own, as Larry stated earlier. I also like the 94 for ease of cleaning,as I shoot all black powder loads,and the 94 is much simpler to dissasemble for cleaning. I'm not talking down the 92,just a personal observation. S.R.
Good Feedback on Trails End
I was looking at the Trails End in 45LC when I bought the 1892. I didn't have any stove pipe issues with the Navy Arms 1892. I had a few cases with dings in the case lip, but didn't have the rifle long enough to determine the cause. Since I am now outfitted to reload both 45LC and 44-40, I may have to put a Winchester 94 in 45LC back on my wish list.
Majority of my research before buying the 1892 came from CAS shooters who preferred the Marlin levers to the Winchesters. The common complaint was the short cartridge versus the short pistol cases. Good to hear positive feedback on the Winchester! I really like the looks of their new 94 with the octagon barrel. Interested in seeing what the "street price" will be.
One more note: Did see a Puma 1892 in 357 locally that had feed problems. The gunsmith that was working on it said he had not seen this problem in any of the Pumas in the big bore calibers. More food for thought when choosing your lever action.
I was looking at the Trails End in 45LC when I bought the 1892. I didn't have any stove pipe issues with the Navy Arms 1892. I had a few cases with dings in the case lip, but didn't have the rifle long enough to determine the cause. Since I am now outfitted to reload both 45LC and 44-40, I may have to put a Winchester 94 in 45LC back on my wish list.
Majority of my research before buying the 1892 came from CAS shooters who preferred the Marlin levers to the Winchesters. The common complaint was the short cartridge versus the short pistol cases. Good to hear positive feedback on the Winchester! I really like the looks of their new 94 with the octagon barrel. Interested in seeing what the "street price" will be.
One more note: Did see a Puma 1892 in 357 locally that had feed problems. The gunsmith that was working on it said he had not seen this problem in any of the Pumas in the big bore calibers. More food for thought when choosing your lever action.
Smoke Rizen
Member
Winchester 94
I've fired a few of the Marlins in pistol cal. and really liked them. I own 3 old Win. a mod.1873, a 1917-mod. 94 and a 1950-mod 94 they are a much smoother action then the new" Win. Repeating Arms" are. But if I put 4-5 thousand rounds through it it should get better. As I said in last post, I shoot black through it,so when I disassemble it to clean I can stone and smooth the rub spots. I guess my main consideration in buying the Win. over the Marlin was price. I have a mod. 336 Marlin that I like a lot. S.R.
I've fired a few of the Marlins in pistol cal. and really liked them. I own 3 old Win. a mod.1873, a 1917-mod. 94 and a 1950-mod 94 they are a much smoother action then the new" Win. Repeating Arms" are. But if I put 4-5 thousand rounds through it it should get better. As I said in last post, I shoot black through it,so when I disassemble it to clean I can stone and smooth the rub spots. I guess my main consideration in buying the Win. over the Marlin was price. I have a mod. 336 Marlin that I like a lot. S.R.
J Miller
Member
From my experiance with my USRAC Trapper in .45 Colt, the rumors of them not feeding properly with the shorter handgun ammo is just that. Rumors.
Mine has over 3K rounds through it, from mild to wild and it has fed every thing I've put in it. No concern whatever for bullet shape or COAL.
USRAC modified the action specifically to feed the shorter rounds. If you compare a 94 chambered for a handgun round, to one chambered for the 30-30 the first thing you will notice is a shorter lever throw. The next thing is the carrier is also modified just for the shorter rounds.
I've owned Marlin 1894's in .357 and .45 Colt, and they do work well, but they have their problems too. Some of them can be real finiky with cartirdge OAL, and bullet shapes.
I also own a Rossi Puma. These being Win 92 clones are supposed to be made for the shorter rounds. Mine was acquired NIB with all the papers.
When I got it, it would not even feed factory ammo. Of course Rossi's owners manual insists you use ONLY factory ammo.
Needless to say it had to be overhauled before it could even be used.
When considering all of the handgun caliber lever guns I have owned, my USRAC Trapper in .45 Colt has, since I got it in 1986, been 100% mechanically trouble free.
If it wern't for the rebounding hammers and safetys, I'd buy another one in a heart beat.
Joe
Mine has over 3K rounds through it, from mild to wild and it has fed every thing I've put in it. No concern whatever for bullet shape or COAL.
USRAC modified the action specifically to feed the shorter rounds. If you compare a 94 chambered for a handgun round, to one chambered for the 30-30 the first thing you will notice is a shorter lever throw. The next thing is the carrier is also modified just for the shorter rounds.
I've owned Marlin 1894's in .357 and .45 Colt, and they do work well, but they have their problems too. Some of them can be real finiky with cartirdge OAL, and bullet shapes.
I also own a Rossi Puma. These being Win 92 clones are supposed to be made for the shorter rounds. Mine was acquired NIB with all the papers.
When I got it, it would not even feed factory ammo. Of course Rossi's owners manual insists you use ONLY factory ammo.
Needless to say it had to be overhauled before it could even be used.
When considering all of the handgun caliber lever guns I have owned, my USRAC Trapper in .45 Colt has, since I got it in 1986, been 100% mechanically trouble free.
If it wern't for the rebounding hammers and safetys, I'd buy another one in a heart beat.
Joe
Well I think I'm pretty much set on the Winchester. If I go with the Ranger I only have the choice of 357. If I go with the Trapper I could opt for 44 magnum. I was thinking that I like the idea of matching a rifle with pistol caliber. I already own a 357. On the other hand, I don't own a 44mag but like the idea of a 44 Mag carbine. What would you all do? Does the matching pistol/rifle caliber really have real world merit, or might my needs be just as well met by the more powerful 44 magnum?
onecruiser
Member
357 and 44
I own both a Winchester .357 Trapper and a Winchester in 44 Mag. I just have fun shooting both of them. I was also unprepared for the accuracy of both.
I bought the .357 about 4 years ago and am able to hit the bullseye at 100 yards frequently. I use either factory hollow points or my own max loads using a 125 grain bullet. I would have to say that I am getting about 2000 to 2100 ft per second. It's just a guess, but a fairly good one.
The .44 gives you a bigger shoulder slam when it fires, but it just feels comforting rather than punishing. I use IMR4227 with a 240 grain hollow point. It is also more accurate than this shooter is. For all around and probably a good deer gun, I would choose the .44. For fun and defense, I would choose the .357.
Now, if they would make one in .50 Smith and Wesson...
I own both a Winchester .357 Trapper and a Winchester in 44 Mag. I just have fun shooting both of them. I was also unprepared for the accuracy of both.
I bought the .357 about 4 years ago and am able to hit the bullseye at 100 yards frequently. I use either factory hollow points or my own max loads using a 125 grain bullet. I would have to say that I am getting about 2000 to 2100 ft per second. It's just a guess, but a fairly good one.
The .44 gives you a bigger shoulder slam when it fires, but it just feels comforting rather than punishing. I use IMR4227 with a 240 grain hollow point. It is also more accurate than this shooter is. For all around and probably a good deer gun, I would choose the .44. For fun and defense, I would choose the .357.
Now, if they would make one in .50 Smith and Wesson...
mtnbkr
Member
I have a 357mag Trapper. It's a nice gun, looks good, is accurate, etc. However, with my heavy bullet reloads, I've had to replace the link twice because the "tab" that holds the cartridges in the tube mag keeps chipping or breaking off completely. These are not superhot loads by any means, I shoot them in my GP100. However, I don't think the gun will hold up to a steady diet of heavy (180gr or more) bullets loaded to mag pressures. It should be fine with standard weight bullets though.
Chris
Chris
Smoke Rizen
Member
Winchester 94
Chris, could you be more specific on the part that you have broken? I haven't had any problems, but will watch when I dissasemble. I shot 180 rds. through mine yesterday. 170 of those were my standard CAS loads. The last 10 were my Alaska fishing loads I carry in a wheel gun. They're loaded with a 330gr. tempered lead,gas checked, with 21.5 of 110, around 1250fps. I didn't see any problem. I wouldn't normally shoot that load in the rifle anyway, but thanks for the heads-up. S.R.
Chris, could you be more specific on the part that you have broken? I haven't had any problems, but will watch when I dissasemble. I shot 180 rds. through mine yesterday. 170 of those were my standard CAS loads. The last 10 were my Alaska fishing loads I carry in a wheel gun. They're loaded with a 330gr. tempered lead,gas checked, with 21.5 of 110, around 1250fps. I didn't see any problem. I wouldn't normally shoot that load in the rifle anyway, but thanks for the heads-up. S.R.
mtnbkr
Member
The part is called the Link. It is the part that forms the bottom of the action when the lever is closed. When you cycle the lever, it pivots out. Integral to the Link is the tab that keeps the cartridges inside the magazine tube until the action is cycled. That tab is the part that breaks. Under recoil, the contents of the magazine slam against this tab. With standard loads, it's probably fine, with my 180gr reloads (running at 1200fps out of a 4" revolver), the load is higher. It doesn't help that this part is cast instead of forged.
It's a $30 part that takes all of 5 minutes to replace. A flathead screwdriver, a brass hammer, and a couple punches is all it takes.
Chris
It's a $30 part that takes all of 5 minutes to replace. A flathead screwdriver, a brass hammer, and a couple punches is all it takes.
Chris
six 4 sure
Member
Here is my $.02 for what it’s worth.
I have two 94 Trappers .357 and 44-40 and a Ranger in 30-30. I prefer the trappers, they’re light, handy, have little recoil, and make a great truck gun The 44-40 is from the 70’s (pre-safety’s) and came with walnut, the .357 has the push button and is birch. I love them both I wish the 44-40 was a 44 mag, but oh well I got it cheap. I have shot .38’s and .357’s through my trapper with zero feed problems. But, that’s me, and I’ve worked on the action a bit.
If I had it to do over again, I’d buy 1892’s. They have stronger actions that allow for hotter loads. My next purchase is going to be a 1892 in .454.
six
I have two 94 Trappers .357 and 44-40 and a Ranger in 30-30. I prefer the trappers, they’re light, handy, have little recoil, and make a great truck gun The 44-40 is from the 70’s (pre-safety’s) and came with walnut, the .357 has the push button and is birch. I love them both I wish the 44-40 was a 44 mag, but oh well I got it cheap. I have shot .38’s and .357’s through my trapper with zero feed problems. But, that’s me, and I’ve worked on the action a bit.
If I had it to do over again, I’d buy 1892’s. They have stronger actions that allow for hotter loads. My next purchase is going to be a 1892 in .454.
six
- Status
