Winchester Model 94

Strait94 · Post by **Strait94** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 11:05 pm

Good evening, this is my first post and I'm looking forward to participating on this forum.

About 10-12 years ago, I purchased a Model 94AE Ranger (20" barrel) in 30-30 thinking I would use it if I ever decided to pursue deer hunting. I only shot it a handful a times so I sold it a little over a year ago. I really liked the weight/feel of that gun and I'm interested in purchasing another 94 but in either .357 or 45 LC.

I'd appreciate any perspective/comments from members that have owned or still own one of these guns in either of these calibers. Were there any problems? Anything to be on the lookout for? Thank you in advance!

Strait94

Blaine · Post by **Blaine** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 11:22 pm

Welcome. I've never had a 94 in a pistol calibre, but I'd sure like to. They sure are steep tickets these days.

Post by **Chuck 100 yd** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 11:31 pm

Welcome to the forum. You have a great rifle in the 94 AE. Most Winchester fans prefer the earlier top eject guns but you could do a lot worse than an AE for a hunting rifle.
The 94 being designed for longer bottle necked cartridges sometimes has problems feeding straight sided pistol cartridges although there are plenty of them that have been in use for a long time without issues. If I were a new shooter and wanted a rifle to shoot pistol cartridges I would buy a version of the Winchester 1892 or the Marlin 1894. They were designed around pistol length cartridges.
Have fun and ,again, WECOME to the fire!

Blaine · Post by **Blaine** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 11:37 pm

We had a lengthy thread extolling the virtues, or lack thereof, of the 92 Rossi.....I came away from that thread convinced that a Rossi 92 in .357 would be an excellent shooter/truck-gun grade rifle.

http://www.levergunscommunity.com/viewt ... =1&t=65531

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Mon Mar 14, 2016 11:43 pm

I agree with Chuck 100 yd.

Nothing more fun than a handy little '92 Win (or clone), or '94 Marlin. Eventually you'll wind up with both short and long actions anyway...

If you want an affordable shooter consider a Rossi (see thread on 'Rossi quality' for more discussion). They may not be authentic', but the Japchesters really aren't either. An old original '94 definitely has an aura about it, but won't be any more fun to shoot (probably less 'cuz you'll have less money left for ammo...

).

My two cents on Rossi's....

1. http://www.levergunscommunity.com/viewt ... =1&t=55112

2. http://www.levergunscommunity.com/viewt ... =1&t=60289

I know those threads will be helpful.....since you asked about Win 94's.....! But really I think if you want a 'pistol calicer' levergun, a short action like the Win '92 will be ideal....lessun' you like Marlins better....

Anyhow welcome to the forum....we're here to enable your levergun addiction....

jkbrea · Post by **jkbrea** » Tue Mar 15, 2016 2:25 am

I've got bolt actions, levers and ARs but my favorite go to gun when traveling or home defense is my Winchester Trapper in .357. Great handling and a blast to shoot. A slicked up Rossi would also be great and easier to acquire. Good luck and welcome.

AJMD429 · Post by **AJMD429** » Tue Mar 15, 2016 6:01 am

Reading the OP again, I note "I really liked the weight/feel of that gun...", so given that, and the fact that the 92 is a bit lighter and shorter than the 94, maybe you should go for a pistol-caliber 94.

Decisions, decisions....

Ji in Hawaii · Post by **Ji in Hawaii** » Tue Mar 15, 2016 7:02 am

At one time a Winchester model 94AE was the least expensive pistol caliber firearm you could buy especially the Ranger line with birch stock. Back in 2004 when I first joined this forum I purchased a Winchester Ranger Compact in 357 Magnum with 16" trapper length barrel. I had read some horror stories about feeding problems with short pistol ammo in the "long" 94 action but at $230.00 NIB I was willing to take a chance. It turned out my particular gun had not read about all the feed problems it was supposed to be having so fed flawlessly from day one using all manner of both 38 Special & 357 Magnum ammo. When new I used to sit in front of my TV watching old reruns of "The Rifle Man" while working the lever in my Ranger compact continuously. I probably worked that lever thousands of times before ever taking her to the range which probably didn't hurt. She has been 100% reliable these past 12 years and as you may guess by now I consider her a keeper. I hear many say that the 94 action is much longer than the 92 action but in my observations they really don't vary a whole lot to be worth mentioning in my humble opinion (see picture below). John M. Browning's 1894 was a ingenious design the relative short 1894 action able to handle a relatively long 30WCF (aka 30/30) cartridge. Where you may notice a difference is when working the lever the 94 having a longer 2 stage throw designed for the 30/30, and the 92 having a relatively shorter throw designed for the 44/40. This may make a difference in CAS but not so much in the real world field shooting of game. I surely do like the early Miroku made Browning marketed 92 clones but not enough to look to trade in my Ranger Compact 94AE especially with all the mods I made to her over the years to make her a even better shooter (any offers?).

Just my 2 cents thank you.

Model 52B · Post by **Model 52B** » Tue Mar 15, 2016 7:48 am

In addition to Winchester 94s in .30-30 and .375 Win, I have:

a Winchester 94AE Trapper in .45 Colt;
a Rossi 92 20" carbine in .45 Colt;
an Armi Sport/Chiappa Model 92 24" Takedown rifle in .45 Colt;
a Rossi 92 24" rifle in .357 Mag; and
a Rossi 92 20" rifle in .357 Mag.

That's also the order I bought them in. I actually prefer the balance and handling of the 20" 92 carbine compared to the 16" 94 carbine, and I prefer the accuracy of the rifles, although again I prefer the handling of the 20" rifle to the 24" rifle. I also gravitated to the .357 over time as it's a flatter shooting round and will still get the job done on deer sized game out to around 175 yards, giving up only about 50 yards to the .30-30 and only about 80 yards to the .375 Win. I say this from the perspective of using 30,000-32,000 tier three loads in the .45 Colt giving it .44 Mag performance. At that level the .45 Colt isn't bad in terms of trajectory, but accuracy starts to suffer, and while it's great fun to shoot with tier 1 or tier 2 .45 Colt loads, it's not nearly as pleasant to shoot tier 3 .45 Colt in a 6-7 pound carbine or rifle. In comparison the .357 mag is quite pleasant to shoot with maximum loads, and with .38 specials, an 8 year old probably wouldn't find it uncomfortable.

Here are my general thoughts on how they compare:

Winchester Model 94 Trapper:

The Winchester 94 action is about 1.25" longer than the 92 action, and it's proportionately heavier. The end result is it that a 20" Model 92 is only 2.75" longer overall than a 16" Model 94, the weight difference is minimal, and the balance is actually better on the 20" Model 92.

The Winchester 94 was never intended for pistol sized rounds, but then again the .45 Colt was never intended for lever gun use either, but oddly enough my Model 94AE in .45 Colt feeds just fine, provided that I don't try to push semi-wad cutters through it, and provided I use enough crimp on the case mouth to ensure there's no lip to snag when chambering the round.

However, it is no where near as smooth functioning as a Model 92, and that's just an artifact of the Model 94 having a toggle link and a longer receiver, so there's no fix for it. It's not bad, it just won't ever be great.

If you plan to hunt with it, a rebounding hammer 94AE will make clicking noises as you carry it (distinct from any movement of the lever moving the grip safety, and it's not the quietest lever gun to carry in the woods.

The accuracy of my 94 AE Trapper in .45 Colt is also the worst of any of the lever guns I own, and that's consistent across loads.

20" Rossi 92 Carbine.

As noted above the length difference compared to a 94 trapper is only 2 3/4", accuracy is substantially better (around 4 MOA at 100 yards) and properly tuned, the action is very slick and easy to operate, with none of the mechanical clunkiness of a Model 94 with it's toggle link.

If you're handy with tools, have a proper set of screwdrivers and a Dremel, doing an action job yourself is fairly straightforward. You can find a DVD walking you through the process at Stevesgunz.com along with a lighter ejector spring and a metal magazine tube follower. The plastic followers eventually fail, so it's a matter of when you replace it, not if, and if you do nothing else to it, replace the ejector spring. The Rossi 92 is over sprung in that regard and a lighter spring makes a large difference in the level of effort needed to work the lever. And it'll drop brass at your feet when you're done rather than launching them 10 feet over your shoulder.

In general Rossi 92 rifles and carbines have a reputation for hit and miss quality, but it's actually gotten a lot better the last couple years and I no longer expect to find issues with them. The last one I bought was actually pretty smooth inside and needed very little polishing to complete an action job. The current wood finish is also a bit better and won't run in the rain like it did a few years ago.

Rossi deviates from the Winchester pattern in a few areas, but on the other hand Rossi has been making the Model 92 in modern straight wall pistol cartridges longer than anyone else. The original Winchester 92 was designed around the tapered and mildly bottle necked .25-20, .32-20, .38-40 and .44-40, and was never intended to run the straight walled .38 Special/.357 Mag, .44 Special/.44 Mag, and .45 Colt. It takes a few tweaks to get them to feed smoothly, particularly with the standard and magnum length differences, and Rossi seems to have gotten it figured out quite well.

Armi Sport 24" rifle.

I bought a Charles Daly marked Model 92 and the quality is superb. It was very nicely finished and butter smooth right out of the box. It's worth noting however that quality of an Italian reproduction from Armi Sport/Chiappa, Uberti or Pedersoli will depend to some extent on the importer and the specifications they requested, so to a large extent you're getting what you pay for.

Armi Sport/Chiappa follows the Winchester Model 92 pattern very closely, but the major difference you'll notice compared to a Rossi 92 rifle is the out of the box smoothness of the action, and the lighter barrel profile - and of course a price tag that is about 2 times as high as the Rossi. There's no free lunch.

That applies to the barrel profile as well. The slightly heavier Rossi profile, impacts handling somewhat, but both my Rossi rifles will deliver 2.0 to 2.5 MOA accuracy with a tang sight out to 200 yards. The Armi Sport can't touch that and is about a 3.5-4 MOA rifle at 100 yards.

The Armi Sport uses a length of pull that is about an inch less, and that along with the lighter barrel profile gives it an edge in handling over the Rossi.

Rossi 20" and 24" rifles

I have Marbles Tang sights on all my lever guns (with the exception of my Model 94 in .30-30 which has a Lyman No 2 tang sight), and they really pay off on the Rossi rifles in .357. I get 2.0 to 2.5 MOA accuracy with the tang sight and a Lyman 17A front sight, on par with my 94s in .30-30 and .375 Win. The 20" rifle is a little heavier than a 20" carbine due to the heavier barrel profile, but it's accurate and still nicely balanced right at the front of the receiver. The 24" is a little heavier as you'd expect and it moves the balance point about 2 fingers forward onto the rear of the fore end.

I've found the .357 Mag Model 92s to be flawless in feeding, and very non-picky in terms of OAL and point shape. They'll feed SWCs, LRNs and HPs in both .38 Special and .357 Magnum without complaint. I suspect the smaller overall diameter allows for a little more room for error and avoids some of the potential hang ups entering the chamber that can occur with the larger .45 Colt.

The 20" rifle will launch a 158gr JSP at 1800 fps and the 24" rifle is only 25 fps faster. With a 125 gr XTP, the velocity picks up to 2175 fps in the 20" barrel and it's about 40 fps faster in the 24" barrel. If I zero the 150 grain load for 150 yards, I'm about 3 3/4" high at 80 yards, the max mid range trajectory, and I'm about 4" low at 180 yards. Hold dead on and you're pretty much good to go on deer sized game from 0 to 180 yards. The energy level drops below 600 ft pounds at 170 yards. That's about 175 ft pounds behind a 150 gr .30-30 at the same range, but the .357 Mag is a bit heavier, it starts out cutting a bigger hole, and it seems to kill things just as dead. For hogs, where the ranges are much shorter and the target a little tougher, I still prefer a .45 Colt load with a 255 grain bullet at around 1500 fps.

So...over the course time, I eventually migrated from Model 94s in .30-30 and .375 Win for short range hunting of deer sized game, to the .45 Colt, and eventually to the .357 Magnum in 20" Model 92 rifles and carbines. In my opinion a Rossi 92 20" rifle is about the optimum compromise between accuracy, range, and handling. In particular if you replace the hammer screw with one that incorporates a saddle ring, you can also carry it on a modern tacti-cool single point sling, which isn't significantly different in concept to the cavalry slings used in the last half of the 19th century.

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Tue Mar 15, 2016 8:01 am

and Welcome to THE Forum. The Winchester 94 is my all time most favorite rifle. I have a boatload of them... some 23 at present count, plus 6 receivers that I'm slowly (very slowly) building into custom rifles. The 2nd one I owned was a .44Mag I bought while in the Navy. I shot the snot out of it... with both Magnum and 44Special ammo. The only trouble I had with it was related to bullet shape... it didn't like SWCs. If it hadn't been stolen in 1974, I'd still own it and shoot it. But I gotta agree with Chuck, the 94 action WAS designed for rifle length cartridges and fills that role superbly.

I also agree with Ji, in that there are excellent examples that have crossed the line to function with pistol length ammo... But, will say, the 1892 design is definitely stronger than the mdl 94, and better suited to pistol length cartridges! Being as it was designed to replace the 1873 using all those same cartridges, and it modern steel, things like the 454 Casull, and the 480 Ruger... I don't believe the 94 action would stand up to that. Having participated in CAS (cowboy action shooting) since 1985, I've seen my share of 94s in pistol cartridges... and while adequate, that long action gives a short cartridge a LOT of time to bounce around before it gets in the chamber. Whether it's CAS, or a quick follow up shot while hunting, a reliable feeding gun is paramount. Bullet nose shape and cartridge overall length are the two most important components that lead to reliable feeding.

Good luck in your hunt for a fun rifle... I also have a slight preference for the 45 Colt, but... that's a whole lot larger conversation!

trapper45 · Post by **trapper45** » Tue Mar 15, 2016 8:24 am

Got my 94AE Trapper in .45 (Long)Colt when it first came out, December '85--original model: no button safety, colored receiver, saddle ring. Not a single complaint in 30+ years of owning/shooting it. It handles any load with any bullet shape--round nose, flat nose, semi-wadcutter--with no hiccups or feed problems. The forend and wrist are shiny from handling.

A few years ago a .357 version, with the cross-bolt safety, came to me and it's just great, too. It likes .38s as well as .357s, but full wadcutters need to be single loaded, hand-chambered. Out to 75-100 yards the same sight picture on a 6" bull will see all shots in the black, regardless of .38/.357, various bullet weights and shapes. The groups may vary in exact position, but they're all there in the black. I think that qualifies as maximum utility and versatility.

The .45's the favorite, but the .357 is a keeper, too.

Find either one and go have some fun.

Nath · Post by **Nath** » Tue Mar 15, 2016 8:26 am

I loved my 94.
Two in 30wcf and one in 357.
Feeding issues are zero for me however the 357 uses an additional flimsy sheet clip to control cartridges so the magazine can be topped up.
Cheap as chips to replace and will not stop the gun shooting with out it.
I had an issue with a tang safety model. It was in 30wcf and never shot very well, well enough but not like my earlier crossbolt safety model!
I now strongly believe I now know what the issue was but alas never got to prove it but did improve the following 357 model I had after by pursuing my theory.
Ae triggers are a fiddle but certainly a vast improvement is capable with some fine stoning.

Of all the rifles that has passed through my hands I still miss carrying a 94!

N.

Pete44ru · Post by **Pete44ru** » Tue Mar 15, 2016 9:59 am

.

Welcome to the fire, Strait94 !

We B lookin' forward to the pics of yer new shootin' iron, when you get it.

.

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Tue Mar 15, 2016 10:10 am

Strait94,

You've read all the responses above and honestly I haven't read them all, soooo if I repeat what one of the others has said, that's OK. I also look at things from a different perspective than a lot of folks too. For instance I do not shoot CAS. So I don't go for super light, short stroked actions that are useless with anything but CAS squib lever ammo.
I do occasionally shoot the Ruger Level Only ammo, so I prefer a lever gun that can safely do this.
I'm a fan of the K.I.S.S. principle. Added afterthought lawyer instigated things like the rebounding hammer actions, cross bolt or tang safeties or the bolt safeties as found on Rossies turn me off. I tend to avoid them, or fix them.

I bought a Win 94AE Trapper in .45 Colt new in 1986. It was a 1985 first year production model with the color cased receiver and the skinny barrel.

I've shot thousands of rounds through it with absolutely zero malfunctions caused by the rifles design. It will chamber and feed rounds as long as 1.75" and as long as I don't short cycle the action it never misses a lick.

No parts have ever broken due to design flaws or failure. The only complaint I have is that the skinny barrel is too light which affects the balance as the magazine empties out. The later ones have a heavy barrel which balances better. The carbines do not have this trait either, they also have the heavier barrel after about 86.

The one thing I can say from experience is that mine does not like black powder ammo. The chamber is on the max side of SAMMI specs, as most are, and the blow back into the action is horrid. Once the rifle cools down the fouling is like asphalt, it glues the action closed. Perhaps there is a way to load BP ammo that won't do this, but I haven't loaded any in many years and won't shoot it in this trapper again. It will however handle the Ruger level loads with ease all day long.

OK, everyone compares the Win 94 to the Win 92s or clones, and the Marlin 1894s.
I have had one Rossi 92 in .45 Colt and it was a piece of junk. I had to send it back to the repair center to have it fixed so it would feed even factory ammo. Then it had to be specially tuned to feed ammo loaded with Keith bullets.
And once back it continued having parts failures right and left. I finally got rid of it at a tremendous financial loss. I'll never buy a Rossi product again. That's my experience with Rossi and obviously I'm in the minority.

The Winchester 94 receiver is only about 1" longer than the 92 receiver. An insignificant amount in the over all scheme of things. However this is actually a benefit. As COAL sensitive as the 92s are, the 94 is not. The 94s will feed and functions with ammo far longer than the 92s.

The only thing the 92s have over the 94s is the slimmer action that's completely inside the receiver. This is however not a mechanical superiority, just a different design for different cartridges. Both designs are from John M.Browning and are well thought out.

The Marlin 1894 is a great design. When they are set up right they run great. But even they have their issues. Look up "The Dreaded Marlin Jam". We have a section of articles on our home page and several address that. The 1894 Cowboys of the mid to late 90s are said to have been factory tuned to avoid this. This seems to be correct as mine has been tuned and unless I short cycle the lever it never misses a beat.
Many people say the Marlin design is better than the Winchesters because the cartridge carrier raises the cartridge on the forward stroke of the lever rather than the rearward stroke like the Winchesters. Not better, just different.

So, if you can find a post 1986, pre 1992 Win 94 AE in .45 Colt I think you'd be thrilled with it. After about 86 they went to the heavier barrel on the trapper and the carbines, and up till 92 they did not have the added cross bolt safety, only the rebounding hammer action.

The rebounding hammer action can be tuned to reduce the usually heavy trigger pull, or you can do like I did and just replace it with a half cock action and be done with it.

I've had my 94AE in .45 Colt since 1986 and it's a keeper.

Joe

Blaine · Post by **Blaine** » Tue Mar 15, 2016 11:02 am

AJMD429 wrote:Reading the OP again, I note "I really liked the weight/feel of that gun...", so given that, and the fact that the 92 is a bit lighter and shorter than the 94, maybe you should go for a pistol-caliber 94.

Decisions, decisions....

Clearly, the Rifleman should get one of each, plus a Henry, and a Marlin 1894, too.....

DeaconBlues · Post by **DeaconBlues** » Tue Mar 15, 2016 12:51 pm

I have a Winchester Model 94 AE Trapper in 357 Magnum. I found it on gunbroker and got it for a thousand dollars. The seller said it was mint but when I received it the FFL, who was a gunsmith, said he was pretty sure it had never even been fired, apart from test firing. Even the loading gate area looked mint.

I have shot it a few times now, and it flawlessly feeds 357 and 38 Special. I just found a new in box Winchester 1873 Trapper, so the 94 has been getting a rest, but I'm keeping that rifle forever. It's short, light and accurate. The only thing I have done to it is remove the saddle ring and I got a screw plug for the hole from homestead.

If you can find one, I recommend it highly.

OldWin · Post by **OldWin** » Tue Mar 15, 2016 1:49 pm

I have exactly ONE post 64 Winchester 94. Its a pre crossbolt angle eject trapper in .44mag. I bought it cheap to use as a jeep/truck/snowshoeing gun so I didn't have to beat on my old Winchesters.
I didn't expect much but it turned out to be a pretty good shooter. Mine has always fed everything with no problems but I much prefer the 92 for pistol calibers. The 92 is way stronger also. Especially compared to the angle eject.
I also have a Browning 92 in 44mag that I prefer to the 94 and it is more accurate.

The real surprise is a Rossi 92 in .357 that I bought last fall. Mine feeds literally every load I give it and has given me uncanny accuracy. I never expected this little carbine to perform like this.

Were it me I'd just buy a Rossi 92. It may need some smoothing up but that's part of the fun. Nate and others here can help you with that no problem.
I would go this route before paying the inflated prices for a late production (post 64') Winchester. If you want an original Winchester, put a little more money with it and buy an old one in an original caliber. For not much more money, and a little finish wear, you can go this route and have a nicer rifle.
JMO

tman · Post by **tman** » Tue Mar 15, 2016 3:23 pm

Much as I love my 94's, in a pistol length cartridge, I going with a 92. The Rossi are great, inexpensive guns.

RIHMFIRE · Post by **RIHMFIRE** » Tue Mar 15, 2016 6:45 pm

howdy....all great comments....consider the 44mag too in 94
and the 92 pistol caliber are awesome especially the older ones in 25-20, 32-20, 38-40 and 44-40....
top 92 in 38-40....very accurate 90 year old shooter
bottom is a 94 in 44mag....case colored

hondo1892 · Post by **hondo1892** » Tue Mar 15, 2016 9:03 pm

I have a 92 Miroku (japchester) with the rebounding hammer and tang safety. It has a very smooth action on it. I'm an old school kind of guy and hate the safety and rebounding hammer. Today they both went away. However I never had any miss fires like many complain of with the rebounding hammers though. Never owned a Rossi so can't comment on them. Oh mine is a 44 mag the crescent steel butt plates are hard on the arm in this caliber. My rifle lost the crescent butt stock quick and was replaced with a shotgun style. I think they are the most comfortable style of butt for shooting heavier loads. I like my 92 a lot but would like an old one in 38/40 or 44/40 even more.

Marlins if they are the older ones are great rifles. And if you want a scope they are easy to mount one over the bore and low without interfering with ejections. Never had a Marlin 94 but do own a 336. I don't think Marlin actions are as slick as Winchester 92's but they do have their advantages. Just my opinion though.

Winchester 94's have owned several but only in rifle calibers. I like the carbines for hunting and carrying. Like others have said the 94 is not as slick as the 92 action.
If I was looking for a .357 lever gun I would try to hit a few gun shows and handle as many different models as I could find. You may find a Rossi that is fairly smooth out of the box if you look at enough. Rossi's are the ones you will find the most of. But every now and then you find someone walking around with the gun your looking for at a show.

Nate Kiowa Jones · Post by **Nate Kiowa Jones** » Wed Mar 16, 2016 12:51 pm

I work on all the leverguns. Have been for the last 25 or so years.This is what I have found.
If you go with the 94 get the 44 or 45lc version. The 44/45 size guns hardly ever have feeding issues. Even though it is shorter than the 30-30 it is about the same diameter. This is important because the action works better with ammo in that diameter.

Over the years I have work several in 357 that had feeding issues. I have one here now that double feeds from the mag tube. In order for the Win 94 to work with the 357m size ammo Win had to add metal back into the reciever and parts. But, because their method of making the parts too loose for easy assemble and the added on shims these Win 94's in 357m will sometime be too loose allowing the double feeding.

I have had limited success changing the lower links, drilling the receivers and making an oversize link pin.

For pistol cals buy a gun designed for pistol cals.

Homer · Post by **Homer** » Wed Mar 16, 2016 4:24 pm

Just a couple small additions to the previous comments. I am not trying to be flippant, even though this recommendation is often given flippantly - buy two guns - in either order.

I suggest the Marlin 1894 in 357 Magnum with a 20" barrel. This short rifle was made for handgun cartridges and will give you a couple lifetimes of service. It may be a tad heavier than a Winchester 94, but is balanced well enough to erase the couple extra ounces. In general, the Marlin's come with good iron sights right from the factory, but because the top of their receiver is solid, you can mount a scope or a good set of peep sights to make hitting your target a lot easier (and at some time in the future because of age, you may have little choice but to add better sights). I have open sighted 1894s and peep and scoped ones as well. And these are hardy rifles and will take a lot of use and abuse and keep on shooting.

I also suggest buying a Winchester 94 chambered in 30-30 (I have a scoped Marlin 336 too that shoots 1/2" 3 shot groups all day long) for carrying, balance, quick action, and for its chambering. Try as folks might, the 357 Magnum will never be a 30-30 Winchester when it comes to power. The 30-30 will hit harder than the 357 Magnum whether the target is just off the muzzle or 200 yards out. In fact, the Winchester 94 chambered in 30-30 just might be the pinnacle of rifle/cartridge combinations. It will easily kill deer, elk, black bear, and everything in-between and all the way down to potato bugs. You can't say that about the 357 Magnum. Oh sure, it will work on the big stuff "if" - but the 30-30 will work "always" - and has a track record to prove it. And, go out and check out ammo prices, comparing hunting ammo to hunting ammo, and you will find that 30-30 ammo isn't that much more than 357 Magnum ammo - and sometimes the same or less.

So that's my bit of advise, it was free and about worth as much. Have fun.

Canuck Bob · Post by **Canuck Bob** » Fri Mar 18, 2016 2:03 pm

I own a Winoku 92 take down in 32-20 and love it. It functions every time but the rebound hammer is getting modified some day. I don't mind the tang safety at all. I bought a Winoku with my eyes open. My 94 is a 32 Special 50s carbine. I agree the 94 carries like a dream. The 92 is the same.

My advice is follow Steve's advice (Nate above) on all things lever.

I find the Marlins fit a bit "bigger" than the Winchesters. If looking to shoot 357 Mag I would consider it a dandy deer rifle and woods carrying gun. For a dedicated hunter I would lean toward the 30-30 or 32 Special in a 94 or 336. The 92 and 1894 are designed for pistol cartridges. My 92 is a joy to lever and I like that its guts don't dropout the bottom.

If your eyes allow it a peep sight makes the perfect sight IMO. If scoping the AE or a Marlin are your choices. My prettiest levers are Winchesters and my go to hunter for decades is a 444 Marlin based on the 336 action.

The best thing about choosing a lever action is that whatever it is, it isn't a mistake!

Strait94 · Post by **Strait94** » Fri Mar 18, 2016 7:35 pm

WOW....I am impressed (and grateful) for all of the information each of you have shared! Thank you very much for taking the time to post. I've certainly learned more from this one post than I ever expected. I really appreciate all of the advice and recommendations. I think I've narrowed it down to the 94 in either 45 long Colt or the 44 magnum. I've never shot either caliber (in rifle or pistol) so I looked at some cowboy ammo yesterday at Cabela's and was surprised at how similar the casing was for both calibers? Ammo was within a dollar of each other ($29-$30 for 50 rds).

This gun won't be used for any hunting and just occasional shooting with my sons at a friend's farm. I guess I'm buying it more as an investment/collector but also something to pass down to my sons down the road.

There is a gun show this weekend in Mesquite (Dallas) I may try to sneak off to and see about handling the 94 in both calibers. One other question I have as I see these advertised on Gunbroker, Guns America etc. is what is the difference between a trapper and a carbine? I know the trapper is 16" so is the carbine 20"?

Thank you again everyone and I hope you have a great weekend!

Strait94

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Sat Mar 19, 2016 4:31 am

OH, just one more comment, and it's really picking nits ...

The "original Winchester 92 cartridges; 44 WCF (44-40), 38 WCF (38-40), 32 WCF (32-20) are NOT pistol cartridges. Technically (nit picking) they are rifle cartridges that were later adapted to revolvers.

Winchester brought them out first in the 1873, then Colt and others chambered their revolvers for them.

So .... the original bottle necked dash(-) cartridges are no more a pistol cartridge than the .45 Colt, 44 Mag, .357 mag is a rifle cartridge.
Or .... the .45 Colt is just as much a rifle cartridge as the dash (-) cartridges are pistol cartridges.

It's too early for this, but I couldn't sleep. My wife keeps the house to darn hot.

Joe

Strait94 · Post by **Strait94** » Mon Apr 04, 2016 3:23 pm

Howdy,

Just wanted to check in and let you know I purchased a 94 in 44 mag. It should make it to my FFL later this week. I will be sure and post some pics when able.

Thank you again for everyone's input!

Strait94

Frank V · Post by **Frank V** » Mon Apr 04, 2016 4:22 pm

Years ago I had a 94 Win in .44 Mag. It was a lot of fun, but got sold.

Lastmohecken · Post by **Lastmohecken** » Mon Apr 04, 2016 8:07 pm

Enjoy your Winchester. It seams like there are varying degrees of experiences with the pistol cartridge leveractions.
Me? My first real experience was with a the Marlin 94 in 44 mag. I remember when I was a young man back in the 70's and I knew this old gun dealer who I frequented quite often who would not hardly trade for used Marlin 94 in 44 mag because he had been burnt so often with taking in trades that were jammers.

A few years later being quite fond of the model 336 in 30/30, I decided to give the Marlin 44 a chance and bought a minty one, but it soon become a jamming aggravation and I got rid of it. later I purchased a Model 94 Winchester pre-safety angle eject in 44 mag. It was one of the lighter barreled models. I never could get it to shoot full house ammo accurately but shot quite well with cast lead bullets at moderate speeds, and I used it for a time in CASS shooting. It was a good gun, but I later purchased a used Browning 92 in 44 and sold the Winchester. The Browning 92 is the best 44 mag lever I have ever had, both accurate and reliable, and smoooooth in it's action.

Tried a Winchester 94 crossbolt safety model in .357 and frankly it was a pretty good gun, that was both very accurate and fairly reliable as long as I fed it the right bullets and worked the lever smoothly, however I once traded off along with some cash for 2 Rossi's in .357, BIG MISTAKE! They were accurate enough but both were jamming pieces of $%%^, and my gun dealer was gracious enough to trade me back my old 94, but I eventually sold it, after I bought a Uberti 73 in .357, which is very accurate, and quite reliable and smooth after I worked on it just a little bit. It's in no danger of getting traded off.

JerryB · Post by **JerryB** » Mon Apr 04, 2016 9:19 pm

Welcome to the forum, it sounds like you made a good buy.

Nath · Post by **Nath** » Tue Apr 05, 2016 2:24 am

Lastmohecken wrote:Enjoy your Winchester. It seams like there are varying degrees of experiences with the pistol cartridge leveractions.
Me? My first real experience was with a the Marlin 94 in 44 mag. I remember when I was a young man back in the 70's and I knew this old gun dealer who I frequented quite often who would not hardly trade for used Marlin 94 in 44 mag because he had been burnt so often with taking in trades that were jammers.

A few years later being quite fond of the model 336 in 30/30, I decided to give the Marlin 44 a chance and bought a minty one, but it soon become a jamming aggravation and I got rid of it. later I purchased a Model 94 Winchester pre-safety angle eject in 44 mag. It was one of the lighter barreled models. I never could get it to shoot full house ammo accurately but shot quite well with cast lead bullets at moderate speeds, and I used it for a time in CASS shooting. It was a good gun, but I later purchased a used Browning 92 in 44 and sold the Winchester. The Browning 92 is the best 44 mag lever I have ever had, both accurate and reliable, and smoooooth in it's action.

Tried a Winchester 94 crossbolt safety model in .357 and frankly it was a pretty good gun, that was both very accurate and fairly reliable as long as I fed it the right bullets and worked the lever smoothly, however I once traded off along with some cash for 2 Rossi's in .357, BIG MISTAKE! They were accurate enough but both were jamming pieces of $%%^, and my gun dealer was gracious enough to trade me back my old 94, but I eventually sold it, after I bought a Uberti 73 in .357, which is very accurate, and quite reliable and smooth after I worked on it just a little bit. It's in no danger of getting traded off.

Interesting how that 94 in 44m would not shoot full power loads accurately but light loads yes.
Had similar experiences myself, that is, until I opened the levers eye at the bolt pin juncture!
If only I could encourage some one else to try it here to confirm or discount my finding!
Many a 94 has to much load on that lever when the bolt should be only being held shut by that raised lug!

N.

Rube Burrows · Post by **Rube Burrows** » Tue Apr 05, 2016 10:17 am

Welcome.

One of my favorite deer rifles I use every year is my Winchester Ranger AE in 30-30.

I would love to have a Winchester 94 in .45 Colt or .357mag but just haven't ever picked one up since there are so many Winchester 92 or 92 clones out there.

Booger Bill · Post by **Booger Bill** » Tue Apr 05, 2016 12:04 pm

I have a Browning 92 in .44 mag. A Winchester 94 30-30 I bought new about 1956 and a Rossi 92 in .357 mag. The Rossi 92 in 357 mag is the sweet heart to shoot. Quite a difference between it and .44 mag. I suppose the best gun if you could find one would be the Browning 92 in .357 mag but they are usually costly. Best bet considering price is still the Rossi 92.

Frank V · Post by **Frank V** » Tue Apr 05, 2016 1:22 pm

Well there is the Marlin 94

They are fantastic guns!

tman · Post by **tman** » Tue Apr 05, 2016 1:58 pm

Model 52B wrote:In addition to Winchester 94s in .30-30 and .375 Win, I have:

a Winchester 94AE Trapper in .45 Colt;
a Rossi 92 20" carbine in .45 Colt;
an Armi Sport/Chiappa Model 92 24" Takedown rifle in .45 Colt;
a Rossi 92 24" rifle in .357 Mag; and
a Rossi 92 20" rifle in .357 Mag.

That's also the order I bought them in. I actually prefer the balance and handling of the 20" 92 carbine compared to the 16" 94 carbine, and I prefer the accuracy of the rifles, although again I prefer the handling of the 20" rifle to the 24" rifle. I also gravitated to the .357 over time as it's a flatter shooting round and will still get the job done on deer sized game out to around 175 yards, giving up only about 50 yards to the .30-30 and only about 80 yards to the .375 Win. I say this from the perspective of using 30,000-32,000 tier three loads in the .45 Colt giving it .44 Mag performance. At that level the .45 Colt isn't bad in terms of trajectory, but accuracy starts to suffer, and while it's great fun to shoot with tier 1 or tier 2 .45 Colt loads, it's not nearly as pleasant to shoot tier 3 .45 Colt in a 6-7 pound carbine or rifle. In comparison the .357 mag is quite pleasant to shoot with maximum loads, and with .38 specials, an 8 year old probably wouldn't find it uncomfortable.

Here are my general thoughts on how they compare:

Winchester Model 94 Trapper:

The Winchester 94 action is about 1.25" longer than the 92 action, and it's proportionately heavier. The end result is it that a 20" Model 92 is only 2.75" longer overall than a 16" Model 94, the weight difference is minimal, and the balance is actually better on the 20" Model 92.

The Winchester 94 was never intended for pistol sized rounds, but then again the .45 Colt was never intended for lever gun use either, but oddly enough my Model 94AE in .45 Colt feeds just fine, provided that I don't try to push semi-wad cutters through it, and provided I use enough crimp on the case mouth to ensure there's no lip to snag when chambering the round.

However, it is no where near as smooth functioning as a Model 92, and that's just an artifact of the Model 94 having a toggle link and a longer receiver, so there's no fix for it. It's not bad, it just won't ever be great.

If you plan to hunt with it, a rebounding hammer 94AE will make clicking noises as you carry it (distinct from any movement of the lever moving the grip safety, and it's not the quietest lever gun to carry in the woods.

The accuracy of my 94 AE Trapper in .45 Colt is also the worst of any of the lever guns I own, and that's consistent across loads.

20" Rossi 92 Carbine.

As noted above the length difference compared to a 94 trapper is only 2 3/4", accuracy is substantially better (around 4 MOA at 100 yards) and properly tuned, the action is very slick and easy to operate, with none of the mechanical clunkiness of a Model 94 with it's toggle link.

If you're handy with tools, have a proper set of screwdrivers and a Dremel, doing an action job yourself is fairly straightforward. You can find a DVD walking you through the process at Stevesgunz.com along with a lighter ejector spring and a metal magazine tube follower. The plastic followers eventually fail, so it's a matter of when you replace it, not if, and if you do nothing else to it, replace the ejector spring. The Rossi 92 is over sprung in that regard and a lighter spring makes a large difference in the level of effort needed to work the lever. And it'll drop brass at your feet when you're done rather than launching them 10 feet over your shoulder.

In general Rossi 92 rifles and carbines have a reputation for hit and miss quality, but it's actually gotten a lot better the last couple years and I no longer expect to find issues with them. The last one I bought was actually pretty smooth inside and needed very little polishing to complete an action job. The current wood finish is also a bit better and won't run in the rain like it did a few years ago.

Rossi deviates from the Winchester pattern in a few areas, but on the other hand Rossi has been making the Model 92 in modern straight wall pistol cartridges longer than anyone else. The original Winchester 92 was designed around the tapered and mildly bottle necked .25-20, .32-20, .38-40 and .44-40, and was never intended to run the straight walled .38 Special/.357 Mag, .44 Special/.44 Mag, and .45 Colt. It takes a few tweaks to get them to feed smoothly, particularly with the standard and magnum length differences, and Rossi seems to have gotten it figured out quite well.

Armi Sport 24" rifle.

I bought a Charles Daly marked Model 92 and the quality is superb. It was very nicely finished and butter smooth right out of the box. It's worth noting however that quality of an Italian reproduction from Armi Sport/Chiappa, Uberti or Pedersoli will depend to some extent on the importer and the specifications they requested, so to a large extent you're getting what you pay for.

Armi Sport/Chiappa follows the Winchester Model 92 pattern very closely, but the major difference you'll notice compared to a Rossi 92 rifle is the out of the box smoothness of the action, and the lighter barrel profile - and of course a price tag that is about 2 times as high as the Rossi. There's no free lunch.

That applies to the barrel profile as well. The slightly heavier Rossi profile, impacts handling somewhat, but both my Rossi rifles will deliver 2.0 to 2.5 MOA accuracy with a tang sight out to 200 yards. The Armi Sport can't touch that and is about a 3.5-4 MOA rifle at 100 yards.

The Armi Sport uses a length of pull that is about an inch less, and that along with the lighter barrel profile gives it an edge in handling over the Rossi.

Rossi 20" and 24" rifles

I have Marbles Tang sights on all my lever guns (with the exception of my Model 94 in .30-30 which has a Lyman No 2 tang sight), and they really pay off on the Rossi rifles in .357. I get 2.0 to 2.5 MOA accuracy with the tang sight and a Lyman 17A front sight, on par with my 94s in .30-30 and .375 Win. The 20" rifle is a little heavier than a 20" carbine due to the heavier barrel profile, but it's accurate and still nicely balanced right at the front of the receiver. The 24" is a little heavier as you'd expect and it moves the balance point about 2 fingers forward onto the rear of the fore end.

I've found the .357 Mag Model 92s to be flawless in feeding, and very non-picky in terms of OAL and point shape. They'll feed SWCs, LRNs and HPs in both .38 Special and .357 Magnum without complaint. I suspect the smaller overall diameter allows for a little more room for error and avoids some of the potential hang ups entering the chamber that can occur with the larger .45 Colt.

The 20" rifle will launch a 158gr JSP at 1800 fps and the 24" rifle is only 25 fps faster. With a 125 gr XTP, the velocity picks up to 2175 fps in the 20" barrel and it's about 40 fps faster in the 24" barrel. If I zero the 150 grain load for 150 yards, I'm about 3 3/4" high at 80 yards, the max mid range trajectory, and I'm about 4" low at 180 yards. Hold dead on and you're pretty much good to go on deer sized game from 0 to 180 yards. The energy level drops below 600 ft pounds at 170 yards. That's about 175 ft pounds behind a 150 gr .30-30 at the same range, but the .357 Mag is a bit heavier, it starts out cutting a bigger hole, and it seems to kill things just as dead. For hogs, where the ranges are much shorter and the target a little tougher, I still prefer a .45 Colt load with a 255 grain bullet at around 1500 fps.

So...over the course time, I eventually migrated from Model 94s in .30-30 and .375 Win for short range hunting of deer sized game, to the .45 Colt, and eventually to the .357 Magnum in 20" Model 92 rifles and carbines. In my opinion a Rossi 92 20" rifle is about the optimum compromise between accuracy, range, and handling. In particular if you replace the hammer screw with one that incorporates a saddle ring, you can also carry it on a modern tacti-cool single point sling, which isn't significantly different in concept to the cavalry slings used in the last half of the 19th century.

? I've never heard of a plastic follower failing in a magazine tube. I have several levers with them along with Remington 870 shotguns. One of the 870 is from 1972, has been shot a lot, and it's still like brand new.

Canuck Bob · Post by **Canuck Bob** » Tue Apr 05, 2016 3:48 pm

Strait94 wrote:Howdy,

Just wanted to check in and let you know I purchased a 94 in 44 mag. It should make it to my FFL later this week. I will be sure and post some pics when able.

Thank you again for everyone's input!

Strait94

Great choice, a Win 94 is the most famous and most sold leveraction for very good reasons. You will be happy with 44 Mag for fun and hunting. The original rifle cartridges are fun but there is a lot to ammo shopping at Walmart!

Strait94 · Post by **Strait94** » Thu Apr 14, 2016 7:08 pm

Well, here's my "new to me" model 94AE in 44 mag. It has a few dings/scratches but overall, appears to be a good gun. I'm anxious to take it out and put some rounds through it. I've read some posts here about the "rebounding hammer" and didn't notice that on my 94 30/30. I noticed the hammer doesn't sit "flush" against the firing pin so I'm guessing this is what the rebounding hammer is (I've attached a photo)? Has anyone had problems with this in their 94AEs?

Thanks again for everyone's comments and help!

Nath · Post by **Nath** » Fri Apr 15, 2016 12:49 am

Great choice.

You will not have any issues with the rebounding hammer. Unless! You, in the vain hope of lightening the trigger wrongly lighten the hammer spring!

If your action nearly wants to stay shut and or the slightest touch on the lever opens it. Relieve the levers eye where the bolts cross pin passes through. A suitable chainsaw file is perfect.
Relieve it so the locking lug has full lock up and no forces from the lever hold the bolt in battery.

N.

Panzercat · Post by **Panzercat** » Fri Apr 15, 2016 6:17 am

Nothing wrong with 44mag or Winchester. You made a better (or at least safer) choice than picking up a Rossi, IMO. You have to buy them with the mindset that you could be getting a project. As an aside, Marlin also has 44 mag leverguns in active production.

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Fri Apr 15, 2016 1:20 pm

Nice!

Strait94 · Post by **Strait94** » Mon Apr 18, 2016 1:51 pm

Nath wrote:Great choice.

You will not have any issues with the rebounding hammer. Unless! You, in the vain hope of lightening the trigger wrongly lighten the hammer spring!

If your action nearly wants to stay shut and or the slightest touch on the lever opens it. Relieve the levers eye where the bolts cross pin passes through. A suitable chainsaw file is perfect.
Relieve it so the locking lug has full lock up and no forces from the lever hold the bolt in battery.

N.

Nath, I would like to "lighten" the hammer Spring a bit but if it'll cause me some issues down the road, I won't mess with it. Is there a certain "tension" I can reduce to without having any problems?

Thanks!

MrMurphy · Post by **MrMurphy** » Tue Apr 19, 2016 1:51 am

I owned a 1977 Marlin 1894 in .44 Magnum.

If you're primarily going to plink with it, and not hunt, I recommend Magtech ammo in .44 magnum. They make (relatively speaking) inexpensive .44 Magnum full metal jacket ammo for those of us who do not handload. They're not light loads, you're definitely shooting a Magnum and you know it, but they're not Hammerheads or Buffalo Bore either. My Marlin never had an issue with the brand and they were available from multiple gun stores and major chains. Quality is good and it doesn't shoot dirty.

Frank V · Post by **Frank V** » Tue Apr 19, 2016 5:59 pm

Congratulations, that's a pretty rifle. Bet it's fun too.
Let us know how it shoots when you get it to the range please.
Thanks

Tycer · Post by **Tycer** » Tue Apr 19, 2016 8:42 pm

Strait94 wrote:
Nath wrote:Great choice.

You will not have any issues with the rebounding hammer. Unless! You, in the vain hope of lightening the trigger wrongly lighten the hammer spring!

If your action nearly wants to stay shut and or the slightest touch on the lever opens it. Relieve the levers eye where the bolts cross pin passes through. A suitable chainsaw file is perfect.
Relieve it so the locking lug has full lock up and no forces from the lever hold the bolt in battery.

N.
Nath, I would like to "lighten" the hammer Spring a bit but if it'll cause me some issues down the road, I won't mess with it. Is there a certain "tension" I can reduce to without having any problems?

Thanks!

It's oversprung to provide enough inertia to overcome the lower forks on the mainspring strut. The items you need can be found on eBay.

http://onesticky.levergunscommunity.org ... rsion.html
http://www.levergunscommunity.com/viewt ... ng#p668079
http://onesticky.levergunscommunity.org - Remove darned cross bolt safety.

Griff · Post by **Griff** » Tue Apr 19, 2016 11:29 pm

Strait94 wrote:
Nath wrote:Great choice.
You will not have any issues with the rebounding hammer. Unless! You, in the vain hope of lightening the trigger wrongly lighten the hammer spring!
If your action nearly wants to stay shut and or the slightest touch on the lever opens it. Relieve the levers eye where the bolts cross pin passes through. A suitable chainsaw file is perfect.
Relieve it so the locking lug has full lock up and no forces from the lever hold the bolt in battery.
N.
Nath, I would like to "lighten" the hammer Spring a bit but if it'll cause me some issues down the road, I won't mess with it. Is there a certain "tension" I can reduce to without having any problems?
Thanks!

IIRC, shorten the upper leg of the hammer strut. This should apply a bit more pressure to the upper portion of the hammer, by pivoting the strut upward. This will have the effect of increasing the spring pressure, then you can lighten the spring pressure a little to get a bit softer action. Preferably, I'd go with Shasta's suggestion of getting the parts to replace the pivoting strut. Ideally, all you need is a strut from a late 1976-1982 gun. Then you can relieve the spring tension with all the force of the spring at the upper portion of the hammer. When they have it in stock it's Numrich part # 301750. Which is seldom. I keep thinking I need to have a fab shop make me some.

using the AE lower tang, hammer, trigger, etc. makes it a modular install... instead of having to hold your tongue "just right" as you line up all the parts the put the hammer, trigger, lower tang in the receiver.

I've done two of my kit/parts guns with this strut, the rebounding hammer and even the new AE, non "eared" lower tang and its works well.

Tycer · Post by **Tycer** » Wed Apr 20, 2016 5:07 am

Griff, LOWER leg(s) of the strut shorter. My challenge was doing it this way, is that you still end up without the half-cock safety and that strange sprung trigger that comes with the rebounding hammer. Give me the floppy crisp trigger any day.

Nath · Post by **Nath** » Sun Apr 24, 2016 1:51 am

All I did and would again is stone the sears and keep everything stock, except for the first stage tiny spring. Those I replace.

N.

Ji in Hawaii · Post by **Ji in Hawaii** » Wed Jun 08, 2016 3:56 pm

On my 2004 vintage tang safety trapper I replaced the lower tang with rebounding hammer with a leaf spring hammer lower tang from a early 70s vintage gun, and filled the upper tang safety whole with a chunk of antler. The trigger pull is now smooth as silk at about 3 lbs. I'm happy.

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Thu Jun 09, 2016 2:26 pm

Strait94,

To lighten up the trigger pull on an AE 94 these are the steps I've found to work.

A: Disassemble the action.
> Clean it thoroughly.
> Remove the firing pin and clean the channel it fits in. Any debris or gunk in there will slow down the lightweight firing pin.
> Check the breach bolt edges for burrs, if any are found polish them off.
> Check the ejector and it's area for burrs. Polish them if any are there.
> Remove and check the back of the loading gate for burrs. Polish them off if any are found. This will help with loading.
> Make sure the cartridge guides are tight.
> Make sure the cartridge lifter spring screw is tight.

B: Disassemble the lower tang completely.
> Polish all mating and contact surfaces. Try not to remove any metal, just polish.
> Bevel the edges of the main spring rod then polish them. These edges are sometimes rough and sharp. They create a lot of friction.
> Polish the four fingers where they contact the hammer.

C: Reassemble the lower tang making positive sure the springs in the lower tang are not contacting the sides of the mortise they are mounted in. If they do it increases the the felt weight of the action and will slow down the hammer fall.

D: Reinstall the lower tang into the reassembled action and try it. You should notice an improvement.

E: If the trigger pull is still too, heavy now is the time to very carefully stone the sear shelf of the hammer and edge of the sear.
Try it again.

About the only thing left to do then is to shoot it till it wears in.

Reducing the spring weight can cause light firing pin strikes and that's a risk I'm not willing to take.

That is what I did with my 1985 vintage 94AE Trapper's original action. I reduced the trigger pull from around 5 1/2" pounds to just under 3 ... safely.

Unfortunately when I had to send it back to the factory for a new barrel due to a broken front sight they replaced the lower tang with one that had a super horrid 8 pound trigger pull.

After that I replaced the rebounding hammer action with a half cock action and never looked back.

Joe

Booger Bill · Post by **Booger Bill** » Thu Jun 09, 2016 3:05 pm

I haven't read all the posts above so some of my opinions might be redundant. I have had 92`s in .357 and .44 mag. I still own my model 94 I bought new in 1956 in 30/30. The .357 is a sweetheart to shoot. In the same light carbine the .44 mag not as much. On my 94 I have a Williams foolproof and the gun is more accurate with it plus I never had to readjust it in the 60 years I have had it.
If I was looking for another, I would try to get a old Browning 92 in .357 and mount a pad for LOP and a peep. (I have one in .44 mag, and a rossi in .357.)

Malamute · Post by **Malamute** » Thu Jun 09, 2016 4:33 pm

Canuck Bob wrote: ...My 92 is a joy to lever and I like that its guts don't dropout the bottom...

Ive not had any parts fall out of my 94s so far.

Ive seen similar comments, but it baffles me. The 92's have 2 locking bolts that "guts drop out" when the action is cycled, the 94 has 1 locking bolt and 1 link that "guts drop out" when cycled. Both use the parts lowering as a lever pivot as a means to make a very slim receiver for the length of the action and cartridges. Its a very smart way to keep the actions thin, elegant, nice to carry and relatively light weight. Marlin simply has a permanent lump on the bottom of the receiver as a lever pivot, and 1 locking bolt that " guts drop out" when cycled. One is stuck with the stuff always protruding out of the action of Marlins, rather than only seeing them when the action is cycled. Just my 2 cents worth.