Winchester did indeed cast the receivers of the 94 in that timeframe. I thought this was rather common knowledge. Ever notice that they were not actually blued but plated?
Still looking forward to seeing the evidence that Winchester Model 94 receivers were cast instead of forged during the time period in question (1964 through 1983). Nobody argues that Winchester didn't "cheapen up" some of their firearms during this period of time (the loading gates/carriers of 94s during this period of time, for instance, were reportedly stamped instead of machined or forged) but to claim that the receivers
of 94s were cast instead of forged is an allegation I would appreciate seeing the proof thereof.
My 1981 Winchester catalog states: "Matched chamber and rifling are cold-forged in one operation for precise alignment and accuracy.High-strength receiver and major components are of machined
My 1982 Winchester catalog states: "All these Model 94 carbines are chambered for 30-30 Winchester. Major components are of machined
steel...The high-strength forged
receiver is beefed up with reinforcing side panels to handle the powerful .375 cartridge..."
My 1983 Winchester catalog states: "Modern Model 94 carbines have been developed and refined through almost a century of sporting use and technological advancement. Major components are of machined
I am not trying to prove an argument, just trying to ascertain the truth
of the question at hand. Until proven
otherwise, it's my continued opinion that Model 94 receivers were always forged/machined-never cast, no matter the "common knowledge" of others. I stand ready to be corrected in the face of verifiable evidence to the contrary.
And it should be noted that Model 94s were always
available with a blued finish as opposed (or in addition to) to a "plated" one.