Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
Ran across this excellent 5-page article while looking for something else, in the Feb. issue beginning on p. 10. Some rather surprising claims–that bores were hand lapped after rifling, then individually tested for uniformity with an upset slug. Cost of machining 82A sight was said to exceed cost of receiver. (I prefer that sight to the Lyman 48.) Stock was finished with shellac (esp. surprising to me), then rubbed with pumice & oil. Includes 6 large photos of different machining operations.
My copy is in a bound volume, so can’t be photocopied, but there are some Rifleman collections on line.
28 gauge said
Most interesting.Thanks for posting.
Thanks. Wish I could provide a photocopy, as little or none of this info appears in House’s 52 book, even though the article seems to have been supplied by the company itself, not written by Rifleman staffers.
tsbccut said
Has anyone found this online? If so, please provide a link………..
Google Books lists scattered volumes, but not ’28. But I know there are other sources, as I’ve seen them posted on-line. Didn’t bother to save them, as I had all but the earliest issues myself. One source I did save, because it contained years I lacked, was this one (which someone with computer research skills FAR above my own found & posted it on another website): https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/011249450 Unfortunately, there’s considerably more knowhow required in finding these kinds of on-line resources than merely searching Google.
So I was browsing eBay the other day and came across a bunch of American Rifleman magazines. I thought it was a long shot but I searched for Feb 1928 and there it was. Owing a nice 52B target (thanks twobit!) I figured it was the least I could do to buy it, scan it and share it with y’all.
Merry Christmas, everyone. Thanks for the education.
Steve
(I guess I can’t attach a pdf. Here is a link to the file I made in my Dropbox: https://www.dropbox.com/s/94b4jgtn7he48no/AMRiflman-ManufAndTestingOf22s.pdf?dl=0 )
Edit: Here’s a searchable PDF: https://www.dropbox.com/s/e5sxd3887uf4b26/AMRiflman-ManufAndTestingOf22s-searchable.pdf?dl=0
WACA Member. CFM Member. NRA Lifer.
supergimp said
(I guess I can’t attach a pdf. Here is a link to the file I made in my Dropbox: https://www.dropbox.com/s/94b4jgtn7he48no/AMRiflman-ManufAndTestingOf22s.pdf?dl=0 )
This works fine, but if your scanner gives you a choice of saving in jpg format, jpg can be attached…I think. Hope you think it was worth the trouble of finding it!
clarence said
This works fine, but if your scanner gives you a choice of saving in jpg format, jpg can be attached…I think. Hope you think it was worth the trouble of finding it!
Yea, I scanned as jpeg and then cleaned it up and put it in a pdf. I like all my personal saved references this way and I can do an OCR scan and store the keywords in the pdf (not done yet). I’d rather have one clean document than a bunch of jpegs for an article like this.
Steve
(Added the link to a searchable pdf to my original post)
WACA Member. CFM Member. NRA Lifer.
supergimp said
Yea, I scanned as jpeg and then cleaned it up and put it in a pdf. I like all my personal saved references this way and I can do an OCR scan and store the keywords in the pdf (not done yet). I’d rather have one clean document than a bunch of jpegs for an article like this.
Steve
Clearly, you know one hell of a lot more about the subject than I! Each time I use my scanner (every few months or so), I have to re-learn what to do, usually screwing up several times in the process.
Great article and information. Thank you for making it available to all of us.
Those who have read it–does the part about lapping the bore sound credible to you? Remember, this piece looks like it was written entirely by the company, not a report of a tour of the factory by a Rifleman correspondent, or I’m sure that would have been mentioned.
I have Winchester references to “lead lapping bore” right up until the end of 52 production in 1980.
Steve
clarence said
Those who have read it–does the part about lapping the bore sound credible to you? Remember, this piece looks like it was written entirely by the company, not a report of a tour of the factory by a Rifleman correspondent, or I’m sure that would have been mentioned.
Clarence, I have read that the bores of the Model 57’s were hand lapped, but I don’t recall the reference, so it would stand to reason to me that the Model 52’s were as well.
jwm94 said
Clarence, I have read that the bores of the Model 57’s were hand lapped, but I don’t recall the reference, so it would stand to reason to me that the Model 52’s were as well.
Yes it would…except that common sense forces me to reject out of hand any contention that it was done on a economy-priced model like the 57! Even if Winchester advertising claimed it was done, I wouldn’t believe it!
52s are a different story, of course, and I do not reject out of hand that it could have been done. Only, if so, I’m surprised that the 52 advertising I’ve seen (including everything in Houze) makes no mention of it. “Hiding your light under a bushel” is a practice not much honored in the cut-throat world of capitalist competition!
I have process sheets used on the later 52’s, and they specifically state “lead lapping and testing” as one of the operations performed on the barrels. It is also interesting to note that the blueprints for the model 75 barrels, both target and sporting, states”omit lead lapping” on these barrels.
Steve
Thanks Clarence and Supergimp,
Great article, thanks for sharing!
Merry Christmas!
WACA Life Member #6284 - Specializing in Pre-64 Winchester .22 Rimfire
clarence said
jwm94 said
Clarence, I have read that the bores of the Model 57’s were hand lapped, but I don’t recall the reference, so it would stand to reason to me that the Model 52’s were as well.
Yes it would…except that common sense forces me to reject out of hand any contention that it was done on a economy-priced model like the 57! Even if Winchester advertising claimed it was done, I wouldn’t believe it!
52s are a different story, of course, and I do not reject out of hand that it could have been done. Only, if so, I’m surprised that the 52 advertising I’ve seen (including everything in House) makes no mention of it. “Hiding your light under a bushel” is a practice not much honored in the cut-throat world of capitalist competition!
I’m good with that.
I see where Jeff has posted. He’s the resident authority on the 57, so maybe he has some info to add on this issue as well.
seewin said
I have process sheets used on the later 52’s, and they specifically state “lead lapping and testing” as on of the operations performed on the barrels. It is also interesting to note that the blueprints for the model 75 barrels, both target and sporting, states”omit lead lapping” on these barrels.Steve
That settles it, Steve–not too many of us (including Houze, apparently) have such important data at our disposal! Thanks for putting it “on the record.”
1 Guest(s)
