Winchester in response to decreasing profits and increasing costs of manufacture eliminated a number of firearms and redesigned the Model 70. The only firearm that Pre-64 really applies to is the Model 70 as the others have no Post 64 equivalent. -Dick

 

Actually there are several models that have pre64 and post 64 values that differ. The M94 in the post64 dress used stamped parts extensiovely on the inside and the pre64 versions will most certainly bring a premium. The Models 88 and 100 also had changes to stock styles and magazines at that point, that affect prices today. The worst part was that was the point at which winchester lost control to the bean counters.. People who were not gun enthusiasts. They made decisions based on cost not what would sell..and they were wrong. If you'd like a positive example simply study Bill Ruger. He was a great designer perhaps but mostly he knew what people wanted to buy..

 

Yep, the model 94 also saw a change in the receiver itself, they went to an alloy frame, which plays hell on hot tank blueing, and often comes out a purple color, rather than black. I believe the answer to that is a higher tank temp., but wear usually brings out the purple beneath. I rust blue post 64 frames, just because of that.
Jim

 

The ONLY Winchester that is properly characterized as Pre and Post 64 is the Model 70 which was totally redesigned.
Any changes made to Winchester firearms existing after 1964 were NOT total redesigns. Referring to them as Pre 64 is just a marketing ploy to sell the firearm that has started among sellers.
I have NEVER seen a Winchester Model 94 with an aluminum receiver. Perhaps someone would post a reference. -Dick

 

I certainly am sorry but the 94's were redesigned. Machined parts were replaced by stamped and the tolerances were loosened.. They weren't even made in the USA past that point.. The [problems bluing the post 94 receivers was due to material changes.. the steel used has a higher silicon content(silica??). It was not aluminum but was an alloy. There were many redesigns in 1964 but the real problem was the loss of quality. They were no longer interested in the desires of the consumer. The went for cheap and Savage beat them with a better cheap product. As to the M70 the chief difference was the deletion of the mauser style extractor..and a few cosmetic changes.. The safety, trigger and even the shape of the reeiver and magazine remained the same.. The stock was drastically altered but the changes that hurt the most was the loss of quality.,.

 

Well it only took 40 years of crap guns to fold them up. Look at a pre vs a post and you will see the differences.

 

I certainly am sorry but the 94's were redesigned. Machined parts were replaced by stamped and the tolerances were loosened.. They weren't even made in the USA past that point..

Then where the heck where they made?????

 

In the firearms industry, alloy typically refers to an Aluminum based material. In reality any combination of metals and elements is an alloy. That is why I interpreted 'alloy' as Aluminum.
ANY steel is an alloy, and as the knowledge and development have proceeded over time many new steels were developed and used. In general the change from one steel or steel alloy to another has nothing to do with quality. Sometimes older steels are not just available so because the composition of a steel was changed, does not make the firearm less.
Firearms continually undergo small design changes whether neccetated by material change, machining requirements or safety analysis does not make a firearm Pre or Post. If that were the case we would refer to many different Pre and Post Winchester Models as small design changes have been made over the years.
The Model 70 was the ONLY winchester that underwent a complete design chnage to where the only similarities were a stock, barrel and bolt but nothing stayed the same. The other firearms that people refer to as Pre and Post were changes due to normal evolution and not complete design changes. To charachterize as somehting other is to give a false valuation.
The change to a different steel can certainly alter the way the steel must be blued ot finished as some finishes are not a blue but because that causes a change for a refinisher does not make the firearm less.EOT

 

Budrichard: If a certain model gun was made from 1940 till 1964 and then had some minor, cost saving changes made, and continued to be produced, using the same model number, What better way could be suggested to distinguish between the two, other than pre 64 and post 64. If this is just Marketing hype, it is working better than any other attempt in the last 100 years.. Bushrod

 

Budrichard wrote;

Firearms continually undergo small design changes whether neccetated by material change, machining requirements or safety analysis does not make a firearm Pre or Post.

Yes, it does make the gun "Pre or Post", but for the reasons you gave, not, necessarily less desireable.
-
Natty wrote;

If a certain model gun was made from 1940 till 1964 and then had some minor, cost saving changes made, and continued to be produced, using the same model number,

"Cost savings" generally means cheaper, in this case. It does effect desireabilty, thus value.
I've had both Pre and Post 94's apart. While the design is essentially the same, the degree of fit and parts quality, to my mind and most others, is not.
BTW, I wasn't suggesting that the means by which they need to be refinished had a lot to do with value. Just stating one of the most obvious changes,[at first glance]. When you see a bit of purple showing through areas of high wear, you know it's post "64".
Jim

 

ShotgunT
The 94's were made in Japan. Don't remember the company but Miroku built a lot of guns for Winchester and Weatherby and Browning during the time period. USRAC brought some production back to the US but I don't know when. It's likely at the same point that the pivot hinge was made a pin again and the center retention pin on the accellerator link was returned. The reference to the change in alloy of the post 64 '94 was correct. I don't know why but silica was added to the mix and that is what made rebluing them a pain. I don't know when the silica steel was replaced but assume it to be when production resumed in the states..

 

ShotgunT
The 94's were made in Japan. Don't remember the company but Miroku built a lot of guns for Winchester and Weatherby and Browning during the time period. USRAC brought some production back to the US but I don't know when. It's likely at the same point that the pivot hinge was made a pin again and the center retention pin on the accellerator link was returned.

Wow, I can honestly say that in all my years as a dealer and collector I've never saw, or heard of, a Model 94 made in Japan. The only non-American ones I ever saw were some of the commemoratives made at the former Winchester/Cooey plant in Canada.
Can anyone else shed some light on this????

 

Whoops!!! The 94 didn't move to Japan, only those weapons NOT made by USRAC moved to japan... Just a bit of CRS I suppose. The statements concerning the cheapening and extensive use of stamped and sheet metal is true. There is a vast difference in the quality of the pre and post 64 weapons. Some more than others perhaps but the 94 took a long time to recover. It may really have never fully recovered. USRAC outsourced parts and evidently had a lot of problems with their suppliers. I replaced several lifters in 94's(44 mag) and parts were supplied by Winchester. They would snap across the middle..

 

to learn more about pre 64 winchester's go to the winchester collectors association at www.winchestercollector.org

 

Good evening everyone: Well since this is a "shotgun forum" I will speak of only the Winchester shotgun line. What models were made pre and post 64, the Md 21 and 12. The Md 42 and 59 continued production to the end of 1965, but that was mainly clean-up.

When you look at the Md 12, changes started in the late 50s. Going from machined parts to cast parts. (reduced machining time). 2 Pin and 3 pin vent ribs gave way to a soldered post rib by 1962 and this rib was continued with on the "Y's". While the Y gun, is good, when looking closely to fit and finish it doesn't compare to the pre-64 guns.

Now the Md 21 was a custom hand built gun start to finish. Even the post 64s (high grade 21s) had the same attention to detail as the pre-64s. After all it was John Olins pet gun!

Pre 64 guns were basically "hand built" with the assembly being best possible fit, and or file to fit. Post 64 guns with loose tolerances were "slapped" together. screws and threads gave way to pins and clips.

Gone were the days of hand selected walnut, and hand checkering, which gave way to that god awful pressed checkering. Hand engraving gave way to machine and or machine stamped engraving.

In a nut shell thet did away with the "craftsmanship" that built the Winchester name.

The Japanese Winchester's Md 101,23 which were built by the Winchester co-owned plant (Kodenisha, if I remeber right) were good guns, even the Md 12 and 42s built by Miroku, (sp) were fairly faithful to the original design.

It will be interesting to see what the "new" shotgun line will be now that Herstal, (they own Browning) has agrreed with Olin to a new licensing agreement, to continue the use of the Winchester line. It should be interesting!

Regards to all

Dave