Hokkmike
Member
I was looking some older Winchester Model 94's in .32 Special.
A 1958 model had rifling that was barely discernible to the eye. The bore was clean and shiny with no apparent rust or other corrosion but the lines of the rifling were thin and pencil like. The exterior of the gun and wood was very good for its age. The metal about 93% and the wood contained one or two small dings. Oddly, the fore stock and butt stock, while having the same grain, seemed ever so slightly off color which each other, the fore stock being a bit lighter than the butt stock. The owner assured me that they were both original wood.
An other M-94 date 1906 had much more distinct rifling that looked like a bold edition of what I saw in the first gun. The metal finish on this gun was about 65-70% (I am no expert). The wood was pretty good with no obvious dings or cracks.
A third model 94 that I looked at, Pre-64 but I don't know the year - I THINK 1927, had a bore so bright and shiny and clean that it was if I was looking in a mirror and could not see any rifling at all. I do not recall the exterior condition of this rifle.
I wish I could post pictures but just looking down the bores to inspect the rifling was hard enough. I used two methods. #1.- I placed a bore light directly in the open action and moved it around until I got the best view. #2.- I placed white tissue in the open action and reflected the light off the tissue into the bore. Each time I looked though the muzzle end to try to see the lines of rifling.
Here is my question. Would you conclude from my observations that the second gun, the 1906 mfg, has the best barrel and therefore would be the best of the three to purchase? This, assuming all actions and other parts moved easily and without being loose, etc.?
All advice and comments are welcomed. Thank you all.....
A 1958 model had rifling that was barely discernible to the eye. The bore was clean and shiny with no apparent rust or other corrosion but the lines of the rifling were thin and pencil like. The exterior of the gun and wood was very good for its age. The metal about 93% and the wood contained one or two small dings. Oddly, the fore stock and butt stock, while having the same grain, seemed ever so slightly off color which each other, the fore stock being a bit lighter than the butt stock. The owner assured me that they were both original wood.
An other M-94 date 1906 had much more distinct rifling that looked like a bold edition of what I saw in the first gun. The metal finish on this gun was about 65-70% (I am no expert). The wood was pretty good with no obvious dings or cracks.
A third model 94 that I looked at, Pre-64 but I don't know the year - I THINK 1927, had a bore so bright and shiny and clean that it was if I was looking in a mirror and could not see any rifling at all. I do not recall the exterior condition of this rifle.
I wish I could post pictures but just looking down the bores to inspect the rifling was hard enough. I used two methods. #1.- I placed a bore light directly in the open action and moved it around until I got the best view. #2.- I placed white tissue in the open action and reflected the light off the tissue into the bore. Each time I looked though the muzzle end to try to see the lines of rifling.
Here is my question. Would you conclude from my observations that the second gun, the 1906 mfg, has the best barrel and therefore would be the best of the three to purchase? This, assuming all actions and other parts moved easily and without being loose, etc.?
All advice and comments are welcomed. Thank you all.....
