Dad and I had a chance to inherit one of these from my Uncle. Made before 1900. After it slipped through our fingers, we kind of whined about it for a few years. It would have been a neat gun to have. But now Dad's gone and I got rid of my own guns, so.
I'm sorry but you are mistaken, you can see the sight rail is where the ejection port would be and the brass is coming out the side going to the left and not up toward the top of the screen
That's one of the John Browning designs that work differently from the earlier toggle-link models. The design is a lot stronger and handled the jump to more powerful smokeless powder ammunition with ease. The 1894 is just as historic as the 1873 and other Winchester models it followed, and you got one of the original models (the design was modified in the 1960s).
There is an ejector. Sometimes it's spring loaded, sometimes the extractor is spring loaded and the ejector pushes on the case until the extractor lets go and flings the case.
The model is inaccurate. On the Winchester the casing should be going out the top through an ejector port, with an extractor hook on the bolt pulling the casing out of the chamber, and the elevator pushing the casing up and out at the same time that it moves the next round into position.
Modern firearms are mechanically complex. At the same time, once you realize that they're all just slug throwers that grind a bunch of metal around and direct gasses about to work, it removes the mystique and puts them in perspective. The most miraculous thing about them is the bullet, really.
"It's perhaps a bit more complicated than what's shown."
"I don't think so, what's shown is just more simplified."
Sir/madam, I'm not sure how to tell you this but... One thing being more complicated than another is the same as the other being more simple than the one.
(Not trying to say anything you have stated/shared is incorrect, but the comment/response, as presented, is pretty funny to me and I felt the need/want to point it out.)
Regardless of how any of it was meant, "it's more complicated than shown" was still directly responded to with a "what's shown is simplified," which, on the face of it, was disagreeing by agreeing (ignoring implied/intended meanings). Just thought that part was funny.
phoony
Pew pew!
FurtiveGlancer
Killed millions of native Americans
themuffulettaisalsoaverygoodsandwich
Dad and I had a chance to inherit one of these from my Uncle. Made before 1900. After it slipped through our fingers, we kind of whined about it for a few years. It would have been a neat gun to have. But now Dad's gone and I got rid of my own guns, so.
SMarkt
ok, but is it dean or sam?
Racealistic
I prefer Dean
SkiptheMighty
This isn't an 1873, its ejection port is on the side, 1873s eject out of the top.
DaisyfromDownunder
Watch carefully. The ejection is from the top.
SkiptheMighty
I'm sorry but you are mistaken, you can see the sight rail is where the ejection port would be and the brass is coming out the side going to the left and not up toward the top of the screen
AK90
I prefer
Evenmoreuselessname
Well, it WAS designed over 50 years later...
azazyel
I own one! Mine was made in 1953 and is in great shape. I still haven't fired it though, it was my dad's.
azazyel
sorry, mine is a model 94.
Sakkura
That's one of the John Browning designs that work differently from the earlier toggle-link models. The design is a lot stronger and handled the jump to more powerful smokeless powder ammunition with ease. The 1894 is just as historic as the 1873 and other Winchester models it followed, and you got one of the original models (the design was modified in the 1960s).
misterCT
OMFGWhatHaveWeDONE
How is the old casing flug a mach speed out the side? (Honest question)
ThatOtherGirlYouKnow
It flugs because of mechanical pressure from the thing
dohcohv
There is an ejector. Sometimes it's spring loaded, sometimes the extractor is spring loaded and the ejector pushes on the case until the extractor lets go and flings the case.
PTKrieg
The model is inaccurate. On the Winchester the casing should be going out the top through an ejector port, with an extractor hook on the bolt pulling the casing out of the chamber, and the elevator pushing the casing up and out at the same time that it moves the next round into position.
rhalm
These woulve been more effective if they turned off the Counterstrike sound effect speaker.
lightfoot2
Pretty simple system there.
SomeDetroitGuy
Gotta start somewhere.
SinStar87
indeed, ingenious for the time but tech advances.
Trunkmonkay
It's missing probably 2/3rds of it's moving parts. This is a horrible example of how a lever action works.
ByThePowerOfSCIENCE
WackyWavingInflatableArmFlailingTubman
Turning you junk into pulp
GroovyCrowley
https://media1.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPWE1NzM3M2U1Mm45MDVmbHU1cmlueW5xeXFpOGxwZWs1d3BiNzBscjRkOTJsMGEzMyZlcD12MV9naWZzX3NlYXJjaCZjdD1n/PESXgIBml46WI/200w.webp
ScrippyChan
Modern firearms are mechanically complex. At the same time, once you realize that they're all just slug throwers that grind a bunch of metal around and direct gasses about to work, it removes the mystique and puts them in perspective. The most miraculous thing about them is the bullet, really.
ScrippyChan
cartridge*
Ecxusemeisthisnametaken
Dang, that's a long magazine. He's been shooting for 5 minutes straight, with no end in sight!
DukeDarkwood
That's because the end is off to the right of the image. Of course it won't be in sight.
NotInLimboAnymore
You just have to wait a few more minutes.
TinyLiehon
Just like in the movies
wadatahmydamie
Ah yes. Alien Ant Farm’s other song
yamsonyamsonyams
LowlevelRebel
The John Wayne clip.
Detacheddavid
Gun magazines are unlimited. Unless suspense is needed.
In this case it's necessary to reload them. Either this or a gun jams
CelestialSea
That's how you aim with those, poke your opponent in the chest with the magazine at 100 yards, that way you know you're on target!
BeaverOnFire
egoAristippos
You’re like …
TungstenOrbital
OhIfIMust
Load on Sunday and shoot all week!
IronCore
It's perhaps a little more complicated than that. https://imgur.com/Jyo2jUC
rhalm
That looks basically identical, it just shows the bendy part
SinStar87
doesn't seem so, there's slight design differences with the above being more simplified. https://packaged-media.redd.it/peprgs65r3j11/pb/m2-res_480p.mp4?m=DASHPlaylist.mpd&var=sgpssan&v=1&e=1781913600&s=9b965f575321e991cc96ef923ebfde068ee546da here's an actual cutaway.
NKato
The way the animation behaves implies the live round is pushing the spent round out of the chamber, when it's really an extractor that's doing it.
SinStar87
I mean they're pushed out by the feed if that's what you mean? biggest issue I see the above has the case launching out the side rather than top.
TheMentallyillist
What is causing the spent round to return from the barrel and exit
SinStar87
the extractor pulls the case out and the top of the feed pushes it out.
TheMentallyillist
Thank you!
SinStar87
https://youtu.be/mrlpBl5PiXs here's a disassembled extractor.
Bukoden
"It's perhaps a bit more complicated than what's shown."
"I don't think so, what's shown is just more simplified."
Sir/madam, I'm not sure how to tell you this but... One thing being more complicated than another is the same as the other being more simple than the one.
Bukoden
(Not trying to say anything you have stated/shared is incorrect, but the comment/response, as presented, is pretty funny to me and I felt the need/want to point it out.)
SinStar87
Took it as sarcastic 'that's not how it really works"
Bukoden
Regardless of how any of it was meant, "it's more complicated than shown" was still directly responded to with a "what's shown is simplified," which, on the face of it, was disagreeing by agreeing (ignoring implied/intended meanings). Just thought that part was funny.