[marktwain]

Firearms were created for the purpose of combat. To exclude “military origin” rifles would be to exclude every rifle on this list.

I think that would be a stretch. AFAIK, the Remington pumps were never considered by any military, and there are a lot of rifles that were designed specifically for hunting, even though any hunting gun can be used for military purposes. I do not know if any military ever used the model 94 Winchester or the 336 Marlin. The Savage 99 was produced in a military model, but I do not think it was adopted by any military. Maybe a militia unit in the U.S. bought some. I only know of one drilling that was adopted for military use as a survival gun for the Luftwaffe during WWII.

[Durus]

A stretch? I'm not sure I understand your logic. All firearms are military derivatives regardless of general use. It's not required for the individual rifle to be used by the military. Although I'm sure at some point the Model 14 was used in combat someplace and obviously the Winchester 94 was.

[SJackson]

I do not know if any military ever used the model 94 Winchester

You'll find "spruce" 94s, which were used by military (possibly privite security but don't think so) guarding the spruce forests in the northwest needed for aircraft production during WWI. Early in WWII Canadian militia forces organized to conduct guerilla actions in the event of a Japanese invasion were issued 94s. Interesting, the 95 was used militarily due to chamberings, but in NW Canada (US too), 30-30 would have been easier to come by for guerilla forces. Don't know if that was part of the decision, but the rifles are out there on the used market. Think I've read about 94s being exported under lend lease and to Central America, but don't know specifics. The National Rifleman has had a couple articles on the subject in the last 6 or 7 years.