Gunboards Forums banner

1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
950 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I was looking at what is advertised as an M-94 carbine with a 1916 date on the receiver. But it does not have the 94-14 bayonet conversion. And the wood to metal fit looks odd..(fairly noticable gap along side the action.)

Would a 1916 dated "TRUE" 94 have the 1914 underlug????
 

·
Moderator/Diamond with Oak Clusters Bullet member
Joined
·
8,614 Posts
M-94 carbines ??????

I have seen original M-94 carbines dated 1914 through 1918 . So , the M-94 carbine production did NOT stop in 1914 . The M-94/14 was adopted in 1914 , but it is unknown when it was implemented . ( just as the M-96 was adopted in 1896 , but not produced until 1898 ) There may have been mixed production of the 2 types of carbines from 1914/1918 or they may have been converted later . If you read one of " Carcano's " post on the weapons supplied to differant military units , you will see that M-94 carbines were specified for some troops and others with the bayonet lug . So , what you saw may be legit , if not worked on by Bubba .
 

·
Silver Bullet member
Joined
·
1,082 Posts
I have seen a M94 dated 1915 with no stock disc and the finger grooves were longer than a carbine's and shorter than a rifle's. The stock was beech. Nose piece and barrel band had no numbers on it. What do you think of it?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
750 Posts
serial # check . . .

Be certain to check the serial number. . . if it has six digits (as in over 370,000) it is actually a 1916-dated M96 that has been cut-down and slapped into a M94 stock. I cannot count how many M96 rifles that were "converted" into M94's in this fashion (there were a LOT of M94 stocks and small parts left over from the "sporterizing boom" of the 1960's).
 

·
Moderator/Diamond with Oak Clusters Bullet member
Joined
·
8,614 Posts
You need to look in the barrel channel for serial numbers ( probably none ) . Also , check your length of pull . The M-96 is about 14 inches & the M-94 is about 13 inches . I have seen a number of these fake looking M-94 stocks made of beech . They are fat in the wrist area , compared to a M-94 & have the pointed finger grooves . These are not M-96 stocks , as the rear band spring cutout would have to be filled in for use as a M-94 stock . They appear to be new M-94 stocks made on stock making equipment , possibly using a M-96 as a basis for the stock . Maybe done in the USA back in the 1960's or 1970's , as the stock finish has some age to it . I have seen 5 or 6 of these stocks and they are NOT typical M-94 stocks . All appear new looking . Whether they are original or not , I cannot prove it one way or another . My best guess is that they are not original . Give us more info on your carbine .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,734 Posts
I cannot count how many M96 rifles that were "converted" into M94's in this fashion (there were a LOT of M94 stocks and small parts left over from the "sporterizing boom" of the 1960's).
:) Bubba is alive and doing well.
In the 1950s and 1960, he was apt at "sporterizing" ugly military rifles with a hacksaw and a stock file. In the 2000s, he is busy at "restoring" ugly sporters into military rifles, in the way that Dennis describes above. But it's not that much of a difference, basically.
;-)

Alexander
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top