Has this Winchester 94 been reblued?

It looks original to me. But there is no way to know for sure without a hands on examination. Or without seeing clear signs of a bad polishing job such as rounded corners or shallow factory stamps.

Regards,

Rob
 
Looks correct to me also, for reasons already given. My first (that I could call my own) centerfire gun was a Model 94, but in 1966! I spent more than a few years looking at pre-64 to learn the differences, and there are many.

However, I still have my Model 94 and wouldn't trade it for $1,000. It has taken a few whitetail deer, now has Lyman peeps on it, and a cast bullet load worked up for it.

I would jump on the Model 94 on GunBroker.
 
Mine is a '57 and looks about the same. When they hide in back of the safe they always look nice. I know nothing of their actual value on the market but if I were looking for one.....enough said.
 
That is a pre-64, the description says bought new in 1961 and never fired after the initial zeroing. The condition seems reasonable to me if true, and It seems legit.

Exact value is hard to say, but I'd not be surprised to see it go for $700 or more.
 
94

Pre 64, from pics looks correct to me. The only part I see that I'm. Not sure of is
action blue. Can't tell from pics, but matches overall shape of gun. Looking at
Lettering on barrel, looks original blue to me. As other Guy said $700 wouldn't
surprise me. The late Jack O'connor said anyone who couldn't go in woods with
30/30 and come out with deer, had no bussiness in woods. It's a hunting rifle
not a sniper rifle.
 
Around here in Pennsyltucky, more than a few pre-64 30-30's come on the shelves of local gun stores. Prices generally start around $500 for ones that are beat-up, have the receiver drilled & tapped for scope, etc. Last I saw that was in original shape, as far as no alterations was a bit more than $600, but no where near as nice as this one.

In that condition, I would pop at $700.
 
The late Jack O'connor said anyone who couldn't go in woods with
30/30 and come out with deer, had no bussiness in woods. It's a hunting rifle
not a sniper rifle.
Click to expand...
Don't be so condescending, and assuming.

Just because tacticool crap is today's rage, doesn't mean that's why someone doesn't like a .30-30.


Myself, in particular.... I don't like a .30-30, because I'm after ELK far more often than I'm after deer or antelope. And for that job.... I carry a .444 Marlin. Same basic rifle as the Marlin 336 .30-30 (or Winchester 94, if you carry a Winchester in .444) .... but with significantly more "thump." ;)
 
Except for NIB rifles, I've never seen an un-restored 94 that didn't show wear on the bottom of the receiver from one-hand carrying.

Judging by the nicks in the stock, the rear sight without blueing, and the buttplate shiny on the edge, I'd say that the receiver has been re-blued, and possibly the barrel. It wasn't heavily polished prior to bluing, however. The screws may also have been replaced.

The stock also appears to have been refinished, but the work on both metal and wood is very good.
 
Judging by the nicks in the stock, the rear sight without blueing, and the buttplate shiny on the edge, I'd say that the receiver has been re-blued, and possibly the barrel. It wasn't heavily polished prior to bluing, however. The screws may also have been replaced.

The stock also appears to have been refinished, but the work on both metal and wood is very good.
Click to expand...

Though my experience with the 92 and 94 is limited I agree with Picher's analysis.
 
My BIL has one from 1958 that looks almost new, and it's in original condition. They're out there. There's not enough close detail to tell whether it's reblued or not, but like I said, there's some like new older ones out there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top