new Winchester Model 1894 30-30

M

musicmatty

New member
The November issue of rifle magazine has an article on the new 30-30 Winchester from the model 1894. They gave it very high ratings stating it's the best engineered lever action to date. I could see myself taking ownership of 1 of these fine Winchesters in the very near future I hope.
 
Don't know that I'd go quite that far. :)
The Mirokus are nice, but there was really nothing wrong with the pre-safety non-angle-eject design.
Denis
 
Well ...it's a little more than just the safety and angle eject. Apparently, a fair bit of re-engineering went into the lever action itself... kind of ingenius really.. if you read the article, something they probably could have done long ago. Truly, it sounds like something to be real envious about, I can't wait to check it out.
 
Typically what the project people have done with the Winchester leverguns is re-engineer more "safety" into them. The Model 92s are a prime example.
What's supposed to be superior about the current Miroku 94s?

Can you condense it, I don't want to buy the magazine. :)
Denis
 
Nevermind, found it.

I don't think you'll like that crescent plate.
And I'll stick to Grandpa's 1951 Model 94. Very smooth, totally reliable, no safety, no rebounding hammer, no angle eject. :)
Denis
 
The Mirokus are nice, but there was really nothing wrong with the pre-safety non-angle-eject design.
Click to expand...

my understanding is that the post 64 Winchester 94's (from 1965 to 1980 or thereabouts) used inferior metal on their barrels and receivers which were prone to pitting/rusting. when the angle-eject was introduced they went back to using 100% forged steel. I don't know how Miroku manufactures the new Winchester 94 but by all accounts they're a quality firearm and superior in every way to all post 64's. Of course, the safety features suck but the mechanics and aesthetics appear to be top notch. to me it's like comparing a new Honda to an old Chevy pick-up truck, meaning you'll pay a premium price tag to own a premium rifle. Either way, the deer aren't going to notice.

I personally have no problem with the new Winchester 94 being made in Japan. Sure, it would be nice if they brought production of this classic American icon back to US shores like the Model 70, but somehow I doubt that would bring prices down, meaning, customers would still find ways to complain about cost. I look at it this way. Every Tom, Dick and Harry that's selling an older Winchester 94 is already asking a premium for their rifle. At the rate these older Winchesters keep going up in price you might as well buy a new Miroku made Winchester.
 
The post-64s used sintered metal frames & stamped parts. By the early 1980s they were back to forged frames & had improved other internal parts to a degree. That was not entirely connected to the introduction of the angle eject feature.
The barrels were not a problem.

I deliberately said there was nothing wrong with the pre-safety non-angle-eject DESIGN.
I didn't say anything about the execution of that design, or the quality drop in post-'64 94s. :)

My 1951 Model 94 is tight, utterly reliable, and slick.
My later 1990s Model 94 is an angle eject with crossbolt safety & rebounding hammer. It's loose. The overall quality is much better than the immediate post-'64 versions, but not quite up to the '51 carbine.

In looking at the article referenced, it appears one of the engineering changes was relieving the underside of the bolt for a "smoother" (as in less effort required) lever cycling.

This wasn't needed in the older pre-rebounding hammer guns.
The rebounding hammer requires a stronger hammer spring arrangement, which produces more tension on the underside of the bolt from the hammer dragging along it as the bolt travels rearward.

The result of that was a corresponding increase in the amount of force needed to cycle the lever rearward, and a stiffer trigger pull than the original design produced.

My 1990s 94 rebounder has a much stiffer lever throw, and I use the large loop lever on it because of that. Bigger/longer lever loop gives more leverage to counteract the stiffer lever throw.
With the standard lever, that gun takes noticeably more effort to cycle than the older one does.

The new engineering in that respect isn't any kind of improvement over the original DESIGN, it's there to reduce the length of contact between hammer & bolt during rearward travel, which in itself reduces some of the effort required to drag the bolt along over the top of the hammer during cycling.

In other words- it's not an improvement over the original DESIGN, it's a bandaid approach to "correcting" a problem created by the current re-designed actions on new 94s.
In that respect, it's a good idea, but if the people who developed the rebounding hammer modification back in the 1980s had not done so, the new engineering in that area wouldn't be needed. It's a created solution to a created problem that wasn't there when John Browning designed the 94 to begin with. :)

The round locking bolt trunnions may help, can't say on those.

Otherwise, quality coming out of Miroku is excellent. They are not, however, superior to ALL preceding Model 94s "in every way".
If you want a new one, I'm not trying to talk you out of it. :)
Just putting things in perspective.

Denis
 
Why would anyone in their right mind pay $1200.00 for a 30-30 . You can snag a primo pre-64 for a lot less , and end up with something with resale value , and a pedigree !
 
DPris said:
Otherwise, quality coming out of Miroku is excellent. They are not, however, superior to ALL preceding Model 94s "in every way".
If you want a new one, I'm not trying to talk you out of it.
Just putting things in perspective.
Click to expand...

If my Miroku built 1885 "low wall" single shot is any indication of Miroku quality, this rifle ought to be a real gem.
As for the price, I suspect that the ones built before '64 would cost that much today if you account for inflation.
 
I agree with BLE on all accounts. No one is discounting the older models as bad rifles, but they have just taken a good design and made it better. No doubt, the Japanese are preserving the great heritage of the Winchester guns and there's nothing wrong with that.
 
And there are many who feel the original design has been bastardized beyond endurance, rather than made better. :)

Parts & processes have been altered & added that do not improve the gun.
With the rebounding hammers in 86s, 92s, and 94s came stiffer actions, heavier triggers, and in some cases reduced ignition reliability.
The angle eject was only an improvement for the 4% of Model 94 owners who mounted glass.
The crossbolt safety has been known to activate itself on occasion.
And, the current slider can be uncomfortable against skin & in the way of a tang sight installation.

With the possible exception of the scope users, very few of the over 6 million Model 94 fans & owners since the model came out ever asked for any of that. :)
Denis
 
Why would anyone in their right mind pay $1200.00 for a 30-30.
Click to expand...

why not? I say if you can afford one then have at it. I have no doubt that the new Winchester 94's are nicely built guns. I would rather spend $1200 for a rifle I know will work versus $600 for one that doesn't *cough*Remlin*cough*

You can snag a primo pre-64 for a lot less , and end up with something with resale value , and a pedigree !
Click to expand...

you sure about that? the last time I saw a pre-64 up for auction on gunbroker it went for well over $1200, and it sure as heck wasn't in mint condition. for that kind of money i'd want a pre-64 NIB and unfired.
 
B.L.E.,
That was pretty much the problem.
When the 94 was being revived after New Haven shut down I discussed it in several emails with the project manager.

My position was that they had a perfect chance to start over & return the 94 to the configuration that had made it an enduring American icon.
Jettison the angle eject, drop the unwanted rebounding hammer & the disliked safety, take it back to Browning's original design.

Nope.

The gun had to be lawyered up, it was not going to be the working man's rifle anymore, it was going to be part of the limited production (and expensive) "nostalgia" series produced in Japan.

While I have no problem with the country of origin whatever, and the Miroku operation turns out excellent quality products, the Model 94 died in 2006 with the New Haven plant as far as I'm concerned. :)

Others are perfectly free to make their own decisions, this is just me.
The new 94s are well built, but they are NOT "better" as a blanket statement than the original guns when they were at their peak prior to 1964.
A prettier blueing job isn't the only consideration. :)

Denis
 
Dpris you pretty much confirmed my suspicion, watching the reintroduction of the not-really-94 from the sidelines. To give you some idea of how far we've fallen... when I was a 16 year old kid, a post 64 Model 94 was not something to brag on. Now-and 40 years later-I would be delighted to see those post-64's on the rack at WalMart.
 
If they'd gone back to the 94's roots as Browning planted 'em, since they were doing all new tooling anyway, they could have done some of the best 94s ever produced & I'd own two new ones today, regardless of the high prices. :)
Denis
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top