Winchester 9422 question regarding build quality

G

gaseousclay

New member
I have a 1983 Winchester 9422 XTR but I was curious if the 9422's were built to the same specifications as the post 64 Winchester 94 30.30's? I've read numerous articles/comments about how the post 64 Win 94's weren't held to the same standard as the pre-64's and were thus prone to pitting and were overall a poorer quality firearm. And then when the Win 94AE was introduced Winchester went back to better build quality for their guns.

Does this hold true with the 9422's? Are the 1972-1982/83 models considered a lesser quality .22 than the post '83 9422's?
 
Well...I've got a 9422 that I bought cheap ($80, believe it or not) 5 or 6 years ago. The stock was dinged up and worn and the action and barrel were pretty scuffed up. The good news is that it functions extremely well and I can't imagine a more well built 22 rifle. What I never bothered to find out was when it was made. Maybe tomorrow I'll get the serial number and try to find out. As for your specific question, all I can do is determine the age of the rifle and give you that info.
 
.

Except for special edition high-grade 9422's made after about 1996, there was a slight degradation in the quality of the 9422's production fit/finish as compared to earlier guns, most likely due to attrition of experienced assemblers (retiree's) and/or union/labor issues - which had zero relationship to the Model 94's pre/post 64 issues, all related to the use of economy parts.


.
 
It is my understanding that the 9422 was an attempt to regain some of the Winchester's reputation for quality firearms and expert craftsmanship. The 9422's used all forged steel and solid American walnut. I've heard many times that Winchester lost money on every 9422 they made. The ones I own, including an early rifle from 1972, are all very well constructed and function beautifully. My 1975 model 9422M is one of my all-time favorite rifles. All 72-83 rifles that you asked about are very high quality, as well as the ones that followed. As mentioned above, the only dip in quality I have ever heard about was at the end of production, but I've seen some gorgeous rifles from that era also.

I have one of the alloy/steel model 94's that you are referring to with the poor finish and such. The 9422's are made from superior materials and are nothing like that batch of rifles.
 
I have a 9422M.....the other day I hit a chewing tobacco lid dead center at 100 yards ( yes, luck was involved but I still did it with this lever gun / peep sights ) :D
 
I got one back when they first came out.
As a gunsmith I can say without reservation that my 9422 was held to much better tolerances than the 94 rifles made at that time, and probably better than the 94 made at any time.
 
I bought my 9422, new in november 1993. No tool marks, excellent wood to metal fit, bluing, etc. Zero quality issues. It looks great with a redfield, 3/4 inch steel tube, 4 X mini scope on it.

The only regret is that I didn't also buy a 9422 magnum at the same time, but money was tighter then. Should have bought another mini-redfield, too.
 
The problems with post 64 Winchesters were pretty well solved by about 1980. The 1950's-1970's were hit or miss days for Winchester. Even many of the pre-64's made during the 1950's and early 60's were slipping.

I have one of the 94-22's bought used. I have no idea when it was made, but quality is as good as any.
 
write up

About the time that the it was announced that there would be no more 9422. One of the gun scribes, either PEARCE or VENTURINO (?) did a write up and described the quality as very high. The models I've handled all seem to support that.

One of those rifles ( in .22 Mag) is on my list....but prices have soared and it may not happen.
 
I have both a 22 LR and 22 mag. 9422. They are both early slick stock rifles. In fact the 22 LR is a first year 9422 in 95% condition. Next to a Winchester 62A I used to own they are the best 22 rifles I have ever owned. And yes, I have kicked myself in the butt many times for letting the 62A get away from me. I was young and stupider back then.
 
I have an older 9422 . Very well made and superbly accurate. It's one of the most accurate rimfires I've ever owned. When I was a kid I used to shoot empty .22 cases with it at 50 yards.

Boomer
 
I've owned 2 9422's. The first one was one of the 1st made and it shot minute of gopher eye all day long. From what I hear it is still doing so after 10's of thousands of rounds. My next 9422 was a XTR with better wood and checkering. It shot good but nowhere near as accurate as my early one. Both of these guns were extremely well built and showed craftsmenship long gone from American gun manufacture.
 
I only have one..but it is a 9422M XTR trapper....Very well made and accurate....It will be passed on to the kids....
 
I have been privileged to own three of the 9422s, two 9422 (both made in 1975) and one 9422M (1995). They are superb rifles.

The 9422, as previously mentioned, was an attempt (successful, IMO) by Winchester to re-establish their reputation for quality. The action is the same as the 62a, replacing the slide with a lever. I gave the best one to my grandson on his first birthday, here he's trying to take it from his dad, a bit prematurely, I admit:

attachment.php


The other two will eventually pass to my heirs.

Will
 
Last edited:
My 94 22 XTR was the first rifle I ever bought new, November of '83 for $223.00
It is a well constructed well fitted and accurate rifle. The more I shoot
it the smoother and nicer it works.
It is one of the firearms that I will never part with, not necessarily because it was the first but because it is so well built and fitted. It is truly a pleasure to handle and fire.

Roger
 
The action is the same as the 62a, replacing the slide with a lever.
Click to expand...
Not the same action....The 62 pump 22 ejects out the top...The 9422 ejects out the side... Also the 62 pump is a takedown....
 
I believe PSYFLY is somewhat correct. The 9422 design borrows from the 62A, especially in the way the receiver halves come apart for takedown. They are almost identical in this respect. Winchester decided to keep the sides of the 9422 receiver clean and smooth, so used a coin-slotted takedown screw rather than a knob. I've seen quite a few 9422's that have had the takedown screw replaced with a knob or a saddle ring by the owner. These add-on parts are usually available at your nearest auction site. I think Uncle Mike's used to sell the saddle ring takedown screw at one point in time.
 
The 9422 design borrows from the 62A, especially in the way the receiver halves come apart for takedown.
Click to expand...
The 9422 can be taken down by a screw....But they are not the same action....The 61 is side eject..but then no hammer....
 
Last edited:
rossie made a lever action with the same type of action as their pump that used the drop down breech block when locking up, like the win 62. the win. 62 uses a completly different type action than their 94/22 that uses a strait back working bolt with a inturnal lock up useing the leaver to do it. eastbank.
3517
[/IMG]
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top