Problem with the hammer on a Winchester 94AE

[ijosef]

I just bought a Winchester Model 94AE from a private party, and noticed the hammer functionality is quite a bit different than my older 1975 standard Winchester Model 94. When I dry fire it, the hammer doesn't go all the way to the receiver block (I think that's what you call it) where it would strike the firing pin. Instead, it stops in what is essentially "half cock safety" on my older Model 94. If I pull the trigger, I can manually push the hammer so it connects with the receiver block, but it won't any other way. Is this rifle supposed to function like that, or is there something wrong with it? I've attached a picture of the gun. Where you see the hammer in the pic is where it stops.

I'm relatively new to these guns, so any info would be appreciated.

 

[1911Tuner]

It's called a "Rebound Hammer, and it goes all the way to the bolt. It just rebounds so quickly that you can't see it hit.

 

[ijosef]

Thanks man. I just tested it with one of those tiny thin bank receipts that has the carbon built-in. I place a thin strip against the firing pin and dry fired the rifle. I could see that the hammer struck as it should - you're right though, it's super fast. Do you know the reason for the change?

BTW - I like this forum because I can ask a newbie question and not get called an idiot for not knowing. On guitar forums I'm the one dispensing advice, but here the tables are turned, and it's a bit refreshing. Being fairly new to guns, I've taken a real liking to lever action rifles. There's just something cool about working that lever... I can't put my finger on it but it's just... "it."

 

[1911Tuner]

The early 94s had a half-cock...which offered the only safe way to keep a chambered round in the rifle in the field. The firing pin wasn't a rebound type, and lowering the hammer full down would cause the tip of the firing pin to rest against the primer. Some people didn't realize that, and the practice was often to lower it all the way, then recock it to rest on the half-cock instead of releasing the trigger before the hammer passed the half-cock "safety" notch.

Very high risk of an unintentional discharge even if very carefully done. The rebounding hammer is a bit less dangerous, due to the rebound spring providing tension away from the primer. Still pretty hairy, but not as much as the original. Note that fully lowering the hammer was never the designer's intent, but rather for the owner to release the trigger and let the half-cock catch it.

Although lowering the hammer with a hot chamber is a bit risky, regardless of the design...with care and attention to the task, it can be done without issue. The main thing being to keep the rifle pointed in a safe direction so that if it fires, nothing of importance will be destroyed.

Although I'm perfectly comfortable with the original "dangerous" design...as countelss thousands of others who have used the old "thutty-thutty" for generations...I have to admit that the new rebounding hammer does offer a small margin of extra safety for many.

Git-tar man, are ya? Me too...since 1963. Travis pick is my specialty.

 

[Jim Watson]

Corresponding mutation of the 1886 has been reported prone to misfires due to too much rebound and not enough "bound" in the hammerfall. I have seen procedures to minimize or eliminate the rebound so the gun will go off when wanted.

I don't know if the descendant of the 1894 is similarly afflicted, though.

 

[1911Tuner]

Jim, I haven't had it happen with any of the newfangled 94s that I own...but I think it's feasible that it could happen with "hard" primers.

I have some CCI mil-spec primers...the toughest that are commercially available. When time permits, I'll load a few rounds of .30-30 with'em and put it to the test.

 

[mothernatureson]

rebounding hammer

I have an ae 94, the hammer does not hit as hard as conventional half-cock models. Ive reloaded thousands of rounds, and harder primers such as cci, are harder, and give me ignition problems with cci primed reloads . no problem with my marlin 336. just my two cents. good rifles, those 94s

mothernatureson