Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
I have a chance to buy a Model 52. What do you think? The price is not the tag that you see. It is more. I know that part of the sight is missing but a friend may have the parts.. Bore is excellent.
Built in ’33, which makes it a “Speedlock,” but buttplate doesn’t look right–should have a slight recurve at the toe. This one looks more like the plate on an “A,” which had a redesigned, fuller, stock. I think the two stocks might have been interchangeable, but don’t know for sure; in any event, the A stock is the best of all the different 52 stocks, in my opinion. Too bad the Lyman slide has been lost, but that’s what usually happened, eventually, after a scope was mounted. A Lyman scope should have steel mounts, which is why I like them better than Unertls.
Thanks Clarence. I’m completely out of my area of any expertise on this one.
Hoping to get a value and if I can buy it, the correct parts.
Chuck said
Thanks Clarence. I’m completely out of my area of any expertise on this one.Hoping to get a value and if I can buy it, the correct parts.
“Correct parts” not feasible. If stock has been replaced with an “A” stock, it makes it a better gun; not more valuable, but better handling. Main “detriment” of package is scope; non-original mounts cut value significantly. Better to buy it without scope, if possible.
While it’s hard to tell without actually having the rifle in hand, it seems to me that the rifle may have been re-blued. There are some dings in the metal which would normally result in bluing loss, and yet they are blued in the dinged portion. Also, the proof mark on the barrel looks to have had the edges of the oval polished away. None of the normal edge wear you might expect is there, which always makes me suspicious on a 90 year old rifle.
After handling hundreds of these and owning dozens of Model 52 rifles, this one just seems a bit off. Might just be computer pictures, but it doesn’t quite ring true.
BRP
Blue Ridge Parson said
While it’s hard to tell without actually having the rifle in hand, it seems to me that the rifle may have been re-blued. There are some dings in the metal which would normally result in bluing loss, and yet they are blued in the dinged portion. Also, the proof mark on the barrel looks to have had the edges of the oval polished away. None of the normal edge wear you might expect is there, which always makes me suspicious on a 90 year old rifle.After handling hundreds of these and owning dozens of Model 52 rifles, this one just seems a bit off. Might just be computer pictures, but it doesn’t quite ring true.
BRP
Having been reblued would not be too surprising if there was also some reason the stock had to be replaced.
If one has to make excuses for this rifle, It would be better to pass. A new rear sight would cost over $200. Granted, it is not needed with that nice scope, but you have heard from two experts who I think, in their kind way, are telling you to pass.
I also collected M52’s and still have a few of them, and can tell you from experience, if you are interested in accuracy, save your $$$ and buy a heavy bbl. M52-C, or an earlier model with a heavy bbl. In my experience, I find all my HB rifles shoot better, especially at 100 yards +. I use a 20X Lyman STS and Eley ammo. Big Larry
Thanks for the responses. I do see what you guys say about at least one ding and the proof marks. Should this gun have a finger groove stock?
Big Larry said
If one has to make excuses for this rifle, It would be better to pass. A new rear sight would cost over $200. Granted, it is not needed with that nice scope, but you have heard from two experts who I think, in their kind way, are telling you to pass.I also collected M52’s and still have a few of them, and can tell you from experience, if you are interested in accuracy, save your $$$ and buy a heavy bbl. M52-C, or an earlier model with a heavy bbl. In my experience, I find all my HB rifles shoot better, especially at 100 yards +. I use a 20X Lyman STS and Eley ammo. Big Larry
Larry, when did that type of stock come out? The seller has 2 other 52’s but each of these 2 have glaring problems. I need to get the book. These conversations are really helping me learn.
Chuck said
Thanks for the responses. I do see what you guys say about at least one ding and the proof marks. Should this gun have a finger groove stock?
No–that ended with introduction of the Speedlock, UNFORTUNATELY!
Chuck said
Larry, when did that type of stock come out? The seller has 2 other 52’s but each of these 2 have glaring problems. I need to get the book. These conversations are really helping me learn.
Came out with the Speedlock in ’29, & is the one that should be on gun in question, I think. If you will look closely at the toe, you will see that the plate curves in very slightly.
You’re better off asking questions for the present, as book is rather confusing until you’ve spent a lot of time with it, marked all over it, added notes, etc. Or, just make life simple for yourself by making Larry an offer he can’t refuse! Won’t need to ask questions about any of his guns. Trying to convince a dealer his gun has “problems” in the hope he’ll reduce the price is usually an exercise in futility; he’ll just wait for a buyer who knows less than you!
clarence said
Chuck said
Larry, when did that type of stock come out? The seller has 2 other 52’s but each of these 2 have glaring problems. I need to get the book. These conversations are really helping me learn.
Came out with the Speedlock in ’29, & is the one that should be on gun in question, I think. If you will look closely at the toe, you will see that the plate curves in very slightly.
You’re better off asking questions for the present, as book is rather confusing until you’ve spent a lot of time with it, marked all over it, added notes, etc. Or, just make life simple for yourself by making Larry an offer he can’t refuse! Won’t need to ask questions about any of his guns. Trying to convince a dealer his gun has “problems” in the hope he’ll reduce the price is usually an exercise in futility; he’ll just wait for a buyer who knows less than you!
When it comes to post 1898 guns most are a whole lot smarter than me. I have no idea what a Speedlock is or what it looks like? I am just smart enough to take pictures and let the experts here on the Forum educate me.
Chuck said I have no idea what a Speedlock is or what it looks like? I am just smart enough to take pictures and let the experts here on the Forum educate me.
Very simple: “Speedlock” (meaning faster lock time due to shorter firing pin fall) was the name given to the first major improvement since 52s were brought out in 1919. Now collectors call the original design “Slowlock,” which wasn’t a factory term, but is a logical way to distinguish the two models. Factory stopped using the “Speedlock” term when the “A” variant was introduced, but there was no change in design of lockwork. (Rcvr was changed slightly.)
Just found something in Houze’s book that may prove me wrong about stock of 52 in question. On p. 100, there’s a photo of the same buttplate as on this gun on another 52 dated to Sept. 1932. Yet on the same page, Houze states that this stock (“Special Target Stock”) & new BP was adopted in 1934. These two “facts” are obviously inconsistent. Explanation?
Chuck said
Big Larry said
If one has to make excuses for this rifle, It would be better to pass. A new rear sight would cost over $200. Granted, it is not needed with that nice scope, but you have heard from two experts who I think, in their kind way, are telling you to pass.
I also collected M52’s and still have a few of them, and can tell you from experience, if you are interested in accuracy, save your $$$ and buy a heavy bbl. M52-C, or an earlier model with a heavy bbl. In my experience, I find all my HB rifles shoot better, especially at 100 yards +. I use a 20X Lyman STS and Eley ammo. Big Larry
Larry, when did that type of stock come out? The seller has 2 other 52’s but each of these 2 have glaring problems. I need to get the book. These conversations are really helping me learn.
The book will be a big help if you intend on collecting M52’s. My book is worn down and has many notes in it, both on Post Its and on inside the cover. Clarence is a good point of reference. He is a very smart person and knows his stuff. Out resident SEEWIN, probably knows more about M52’s than anyone alive. He has yet to chime in. A bit of advice here, don’t ever buy a gun you have to make excuses for. M52’s have many variations, and you may make an expensive mistake. Lean on the guys here. There are lots f M52 collectors to steer you straight. Use them. Big Larry
Big Larry saidOut resident SEEWIN, probably knows more about M52’s than anyone alive. He has yet to chime in.
Yes, like to hear his opinion of that dating discrepancy on p. 100; my guess, error in ser. no. of rifle on that page.
Again, thanks. Please keep your comments coming. At this point that is the only way I may be able to learn. I decided not to pursue this gun. But, I think that I want a 52.
November 7, 2015
Offline
Chuck said
Again, thanks. Please keep your comments coming. At this point that is the only way I may be able to learn. I decided not to pursue this gun. But, I think that I want a 52.
I think you’ll like it, I am enjoying my 52C. I suspect you have the skill to experience the potential of these fine rifles, I wish I did. The one you’re looking for will come along soon.
Mike
1 Guest(s)
