Mossberg 464 lever-action?

Profitable or not, US or not, large or not, all companies can and will lay an egg.

If Mossberg can last out the original issues with the 464 it may turn into a great firearm. But just like they do with restaurants, customers usually only give a gun one shot and don't forget their initial experience.

LK
Click to expand...

Well, as I noted, producing lever gun 30-30 rifles isn't strange ground they haven't trod before and the ones they made in the 1980s obviously were duds and were discontinued and it probably wasn't Mossberg's choice.

If Mossberg is concerned and has customer satisfaction in mind, they've kept it a secret. As far as I can see, it's just another Mossberg scam.

They could take a lesson from Toyota who is replacing millions of defective gas pedals but, I don't see any evidence Mossberg's caring in the slightest.

Maybe a large court judgment would be what it would take.

:barf:
 
I don't know about cast or not and I thought they changed to the AE models a couple years before but......

The receivers on the '65 to early 80's were definetly what is often refered to as "mystery metal". They were complete crap and rusted bad. They rusted under a plateing and then fell away. It did not change how they functioned in the least. The biggest problem with the post '64 Win 94's "function wise" were the stamped lifters used on post '64 models up to the early 70's. Some lasted only a couple shots, some lasted longer.

Now as far as post '64 quality IMO the early model AE's (angle eject) are pretty good. The biggest issue most shooters have is with the rebounding hammer and the 7-8lbs trigger pull. But it took me less than $20 and 1 hour to get it down to 4 lbs. The fit and finish of the early AE's were pretty good even with the birch wood on the Rangers.

LK

LK
 
Yes Mossberg has dabbled in the lever gun market before. My dad bought one of my older brothers one in 30-30 for christmas back in 1977 complete with a Tasco zoom scope. He hunted with it for about 10 years and did manage to take a buck or two. He only used it for brush hunting west of the cascades in Oregon. They don't call it "subtropical rain forest" for nothing. I think he finally got tired of fighting rust and bought a higher quality bolt action after that.

The old Marlin (circa 1950's) 30-30 I hunted with in the early eighties didn't seem to ever have rust problems no matter where I hunted until dad enherited it from my grandad and left it wrapped in newspaper in the garage for five years. We discovered the rust last year. I hope he got around to trying to clean it up, I'd like to have that old rifle some day.

If it were me I'd buy I used Marlin before I bothered with a new Mossberg.
 
I don't know about cast or not
Click to expand...

Well, that's my point. To my knowledge, Model 94 receivers were never cast and always forged. When people make blanket assertions that have no basis in fact, it tends to discredit, or at least bring into question, their other claims that pretend to be facts.
 
I've owned my model 94 Ranger that features the angle eject, for about 20yrs now. The Birch wood on this model is exceptional..everyone comments how gorgeous the wood looks in the light color.

This gun has put through several thousand rounds and numerous hunting trips in the rain and Snow. No failure ever and it is as solid today as when new. Yes..it gets cleaned after every shooting and is placed back in the gun cabinet..but my point..this gun is no cheap wanna be.

Perhaps other 94 that havent held up, may have been neglected?? I wouldn't trade or ever sell my Post model 94 30.30 for anyother rifle..never ever. :cool:
 
To my knowledge, Model 94 receivers were never cast and always forged.
Click to expand...
Winchester did indeed cast the receivers of the 94 in that timeframe. I thought this was rather common knowledge. Ever notice that they were not actually blued but plated?
 
The Birch wood on this model is exceptional..everyone comments how gorgeous the wood looks in the light color.
Click to expand...

Wow, that amazes me. I have two 94s, one about 25 years old and the other made just before Winchester got out of the 94 business and they both work just fine. Dandy rifles. But that said, the birch on one of mine is simply horrendous - looks like something off of a cheap $99 Wal-Mart special.

Oh well, glad to hear that yours are nice!

Oly
 
Regarding the question (at least in my mind) as to whether 94 receivers were ever made as a casting, I'd still like to see the evidence.
 
Winchester did indeed cast the receivers of the 94 in that timeframe. I thought this was rather common knowledge. Ever notice that they were not actually blued but plated?
Click to expand...

Still looking forward to seeing the evidence that Winchester Model 94 receivers were cast instead of forged during the time period in question (1964 through 1983). Nobody argues that Winchester didn't "cheapen up" some of their firearms during this period of time (the loading gates/carriers of 94s during this period of time, for instance, were reportedly stamped instead of machined or forged) but to claim that the receivers of 94s were cast instead of forged is an allegation I would appreciate seeing the proof thereof.

My 1981 Winchester catalog states: "Matched chamber and rifling are cold-forged in one operation for precise alignment and accuracy.High-strength receiver and major components are of machined steel..."
My 1982 Winchester catalog states: "All these Model 94 carbines are chambered for 30-30 Winchester. Major components are of machined steel...The high-strength forged receiver is beefed up with reinforcing side panels to handle the powerful .375 cartridge..."
My 1983 Winchester catalog states: "Modern Model 94 carbines have been developed and refined through almost a century of sporting use and technological advancement. Major components are of machined steel..."
I am not trying to prove an argument, just trying to ascertain the truth of the question at hand. Until proven otherwise, it's my continued opinion that Model 94 receivers were always forged/machined-never cast, no matter the "common knowledge" of others. I stand ready to be corrected in the face of verifiable evidence to the contrary.
And it should be noted that Model 94s were always available with a blued finish as opposed (or in addition to) to a "plated" one.
 
464 action

just acquired a mossberg 464.. wally world, 350. i expected to leave the store in handcuffs, the female sales staff was so alarmed by selling a RIFLE omg.
action was balky and loose. dry cycled 6 rounds several times.. has to be done quickly and smoothly or it will hang up at 1/4 swing or just before the shell lines up with the chamber, jamming in the loader.
fit and finish seem ok.
one alarming outcome, there were several shells with tiny dimples in the primer.
from banging the bolt home, i am sure, safety was on. and i put the hammer down manually every time.
the instruction book makes you want to puke, fully half the verbaige is lawyer written warnings they might as well instruct, bang 30 caliber steel plugs in both ends of the barrel before touching the trigger.
sighting down the barrel, the iron sights look good. I need the weaver 48107 #403 mounts to put on my scope. shells dribble out to the right, wont likely impinge the scope.
 
Mossberg has been building solid firearms for as long as I can remember. I handled a new 464 at Gander Mt. last summer and it appeared well made. But please don't compare it to rifles costing a lot more.

This is a photo of Mossberg's model 472 that was produced for only a few years in the 1970's.

mossberg2.jpg


Jack
 
The older Mossberg leverguns were decently made rifles. Nothing to compare them to the junk being made by them now.

The Winchester 94 has never had a cast receiver. The only centerfire levergun that I know of to ever have cast receiver is the now discontinued Ruger.
 
If you compare a used 336, that can easily be had for 350 or less if you search, to one of these new Mossbergs, you'll realize quickly that there is no comparison. The Mossberg is junkie, on all levels.
 
I just bought a Mossberg 472 from a retired couple yesterday. These were only made from '72 to '78. Talk about a well made gun. This thing is tighter than the marlin 336 sitting in the rack at academy sports. My buddy has a 336 with scope and sling and after he took a look at my 472 without anything on it, he wanted to trade his full package for my 472. NO WAY! This baby is made the way guns USED TO be made. Great walnut stock and solid action. You won't find many of these out there.
 
I have handled a few of the Mossbergs and liked them just fine except for the safety design. It's not a bad design, I just didn't like it.

Fit and finish were good for the money. I would consider buying one if I was in the market and the price was right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top