Hi does any one out there know if the 94 is as strong as a 92.I have been offered a Winchester 94 [trade] in .44Mag. i have heard the 92 has a little bit shorter action. Any Help? Dan
Not sure about strength 94 vs 92. I do know that the 92 is a wonderful and elegant action and with the right bbl length is carries winderfully.
OTOH, you can or used to be able to get 92 clones chambered in .454 Casull.
FTR, my wife loves her Rossi 92 clone in .44mag.
No more Rossi 454 casull in the 92 action. They quit making them.
The 92 is a typical saddle gun with chambers matching most revolver cartridges i.e., 357 mag. 44 mag. These operate at 35K CUP and 36K CUP. The Std 94 runs 30-30 WCF at 42K CUP, the 94 AE XTR (made approx. between 1982-2004 has fat reinforced rear receiver is rated at 52K CUP. Chambered in 7-30 Waters, 307 Win, 356 Win, 375 Win and 444 Marlin. These cartridges are typically loaded from 42K CUP-44K CUP. The 450 Marlin is loaded to 44K piezo and offered in the new 94s. The 454 Casull operates in the 60K+ psi range, now you can see why they are no longer offered by Rossi, Puma or any other 92 knock-off. They will destroy that action over time. The 94 will take a bit more pressure in my estimation, neither should be used to push the 454 Casull. The Casull works well on heavy reinforced revolvers like Ruger, Freedom Arms and the BFR.
Assuming modern steel etc the 92 is a stronger design but both are more than strong enough for the 44 mag. The 92 was designed around short pistol sized cartridges and that size rifle proved to be very popular when it was introduced. Winchester asked Browning to retain the size and handling of the 92 but come up with a rifle that could be chambered for longer cartridges like the 30/30 and 38/55. The Win 1894 was the result and that size rifle along with the 30/30's performance proved to be extremely popular.
In the 60's the 92 was no longer produced but there was renewed interest in leverguns in pistol sized cartridges. Both Winchester and Marlin adapted their 30/30 rifles to chamber and operate in 44mag. Early attempts had some success but getting a long action to feed a short cartridge needed a lot more refining. Eventually over many years Winchester managed to get the shorter cartridges to work but for my money I'd look to buy a 92 type action. If you can afford it look for a Browning 92. Avoid the early 94's with the pressed steel shell lifters. I had one of those and it was nothing but trouble.
Yeah, the 92 is a good bit stronger than a 94, but it really shouldn’t matter. What you should actually be concerned with is how well the 94 chambers that short pistol round. I’ve heard that some of them have some trouble.
Show me a 92 load that exceeds a 94 load. “Good bit stronger”? All cartridges funneled through a Win 92 have a great deal less pressure than those pushed through a 94, especially the 94 big bore chambering.
The model 1886 is Winchesters strongest levergun. The model 92 is just a shrunken 1886. The model 94 lacks the twin vertical locking lugs of the other two. The 92 is stronger. For some reason the Rossi has been brought into this? That's like judging a S&W by the durability of a Taurus.
Yeah, the 92 is a good bit stronger than a 94, but it really shouldn’t matter. What you should actually be concerned with is how well the 94 chambers that short pistol round. I’ve heard that some of them have some trouble.
I’ve heard that off and on over the years. I have a model 94 Trapper in .44 mag, and it cycles just fine without any jams. I love my 94’s, but there’s just something about a 92 in 44 mag or 357 that’s just perfect.
Yeah hear this all the time about the 86. Ask Turnbull why his loads are held at 40k psi. The 86 has never been rated at pressures higher than at fat sided 94 Big Bore at 52K CUP. In fact show me any 86 loading greater than 40K-42K psi.
That’s good info, I stand corrected, thanks. The 454 Casull is a beast.
I’ve read in other places and it makes sense to me that the 92 is the strongest of the traditional Winchester’s in that it is a shorter 1886. Being shorter, there is less room for stretching of the steel. I doubt that there is much difference. But I know that .357 loads that my Rossi will digest all day one after the other will lock up a Marlin. I didn’t even realize that they were that hot as that they were simply book max loads and had no pressure signs in my Rossi at all. But they locked up my brother’s Marlin and you had to poke them out with a rod.
Yeah hear this all the time about the 86. Ask Turnbull why his loads are held at 40k psi. The 86 has never been rated at pressures higher than at fat sided 94 Big Bore at 52K CUP. In fact show me any 86 loading greater than 40K-42K psi.
All you've got is the 94 XTR Big Bore. 10 million 94's out there and you're going to act like the XTR Big Bore is the standard 94. What did they sell? 10,000 or so of those? The 94 had to be beefed up for a reason.
I’ve read in other places and it makes sense to me that the 92 is the strongest of the traditional Winchester’s in that it is a shorter 1886. Being shorter, there is less room for stretching of the steel. I doubt that there is much difference. But I know that .357 loads that my Rossi will digest all day one after the other will lock up a Marlin. I didn’t even realize that they were that hot as that they were simply book max loads and had no pressure signs in my Rossi at all. But they locked up my brother’s Marlin and you had to poke them out with a rod.
And the Rossi even has a smaller receiver than a Winchester 92!
Show me a 92 load that exceeds a 94 load. “Good bit stronger”? All cartridges funneled through a Win 92 have a great deal less pressure than those pushed through a 94, especially the 94 big bore chambering.
Agreed, the 92 has a stronger design in spite of being chambered for 14000 PSI loads originally ....
My puma 92 has about 5k hand loaded 300g 454. Rounds through it. Not a sign of loosening up.ymmv