Is there anything remarkable about a Winchester 94 made in their

Yeah, that was the year they hired an openly gay lead engineer. he only lasted a single year because of what he did. Take apart your gun as much as you can, and somewhere on it is an engraving of a huge, veiny cock. He hid them on tons of guns, and it's always in a different spot. Winchester scrubbed this from their records, but the legends are true. Tons of guns from 1974 have this huge cock hidden on them somewhere, and it's why you see a lot of 70s vintage guns for sale, because the owners found the cock and want nothing to do with the firearm. Sometimes it's wrapped around a screw, sometimes on the inside of the receiver, sometimes it's under the barrel, under the barrel bands, etc. It could be anywhere so pull yours apart and hunt it down.

>>33393483
this guy knows what's up. drove me away from an otherwise nice rifle

>>33393297
A lot of old-timers shit on Winchesters made post-64.
I know at some later date they got their shit back together and stuff made in the late-90s and on is good again.
They gun you're asking about sits right in the window considered shit by Fudds though.
>TFW inherent my grandpa's 1894 manufactured in 1897 and successfully hunted deer with it well into my 20s.

>>33393688
Is there anything fudds do like?

>>33394124
Pretending to be old timey wise folk who are just simple folk yet posting about it on Facebook

>>33394124
>Winchesters made before 1964
>Mossy Oak

Pretty sure that's it

>>33394485
They also like telling you "you don't need that" whenever they see you with a gun designed after 1900.

>>33393688
Are you almost me?

>Dad passed down his 94 to me. Made in 1898, 32 special, 20" octagon barrel, all original sans firing pin. Works like a fine old rail road watch.

>>33393297
Finish on the receiver is thin and shit, mine looks as it's gone through the wringer but no scratches are deeper than surface.

I've heard you can't reblue them becasue of some chemical magic but I call bullshit on that for a variety of reasons I'll probably find out myself when it gets warm and non windy enough to fire up my blueing tank.

>>33397539
OP again. I don't think my dad was exactly gentle with the thing and I'm not seeing an unusual amount of wear. Maybe I got lucky?

File: fuckyoudulite.png (138KB, 770x571px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 770x571px

>>33398020
nvm, I'm thinking from post 1964 through 1972

Yours falls in the okay territory before 1981 where they started using forgings and normal bluing again.

>>33398132
I kinda wanna see a plum-colored shootbang now.

File: 20160224162610-7478.jpg (218KB, 900x675px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 900x675px

>>33398252
Cast steels if not composed properly and blued look like this

I find the color nice but the finish is thin unless it is a thicker coating of a kind of paint.

>>33398357
Neat.

There's really nothing special. Post 64 they cheapened up their production process, so some of them were in fact superior, but if you get some dumb fucking fudd telling you that the pre 64 stuff is better than the modern stuff tell them to fuck off even though they're made in Japan doesn't mean shit.

>>33393688
pretty sure thats specific to the model 70 when they made design changes to the extractor