Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
November 7, 2015
Online
Joe45c’s post on my 63 thread raised a question to which there is probably no right answer. I think one reason I seem to be focusing on collectible .22’s is that they’re fun to shoot, some more than others. I’ve recently added a couple of .22’s that are reputed to be lots of fun but because of their very high condition I’m reluctant to shoot them. I prefer bolt guns for casual range trips and my Target 75 is my current favorite because of it’s inherent accuracy and I’ll never hurt it’s modest collectible value no matter how much I shoot it. I wish it had as good a trigger as my Sporter 75 but I’ll remedy that someday. My other favorite is the 87 Winder Musket that wandered in a few months ago. I have no idea why I enjoy shooting this musket; it’s not particularly accurate or visually appealing and I haven’t been able to determine it’s taste for ammo but for some reason it’s usually in the truck when I get to the range and it generally spends a bit of time on the bench. I don’t much care for semi-auto or pump rifles but in the event I’m attacked by rogue pop cans or dirt clods I may change my mind but most days I’m happy punching paper, one careful shot at a time.
So, finally, here’s the question: what old Winchester .22 do you feel makes for the best shooter and why?
Mike
Offline
One of my personal favorites is the Model 56 Sporter. Extremely acurate in the LR chambering and is a bolt action repeating rifle. Lightweight with a classic schnabel forend and the LOP and pitch fit me perfectly. It can be had with some great open sights or a Lyman peep. It can use a 5, 10 or single shot magazine and is a joy to carry in the woods where quick snap shots on small game are beneficial. They are all made with classic pre-war fit and finish and are the epitome of the classic Winchester bolt action rifles. They remind me of a downsized Model 54.
Just my preference……
WACA Life Member #6284 - Specializing in Pre-64 Winchester .22 Rimfire
TXGunNut said
I prefer bolt guns for casual range trips and my Target 75 is my current favorite because of it’s inherent accuracy and I’ll never hurt it’s modest collectible value no matter how much I shoot it. I wish it had as good a trigger as my Sporter 75 but I’ll remedy that someday. Mike
Best remedy: a M52 with a standard wt. brl. (That’s the type with the brl. band, the look of which I love.) Would have to be 52, 52A, or 52B, because later models weren’t offered with that brl. wt.; which suits me fine, as the C & later are usually more expensive.
I have several RF ’85s that I use for small-game hunting, but since I almost always shoot offhand when practicing, reloading a SS from that position becomes too troublesome for an extended shooting session.
After getting use to the heft & stability of a 52, lighter wt. guns like, for ex., M90s, just seem too much like boys’ rifles; nor do I have much use for rapid fire plinking.
Clarence, just to clarify, the 52 was offered with the standard weight barrel right up to the end of “E” model production. It was popular in both the C and D models, albeit without the standard stock with exposed barrel band. The “C” models with standard weight barrels were all Marksman stocked rifles with a barrel band configuration similar to that used on the B models with Marksman stocks. The D & E standard weight models used the Marksman stock but did not have a barrel band.
I will say that a Marksman stocked rifle, even with a standard weight barrel is not real handy for carrying in the woods. The standard style stock you refer to would be a much better choice.
Steve
seewin said
Clarence, just to clarify, the 52 was offered with the standard weight barrel right up to the end of “E” model production. It was popular in both the C and D models, albeit without the standard stock with exposed barrel band. The “C” models with standard weight barrels were all Marksman stocked rifles with a barrel band configuration similar to that used on the B models with Marksman stocks. The D & E standard weight models used the Marksman stock but did not have a barrel band.I will say that a Marksman stocked rifle, even with a standard weight barrel is not real handy for carrying in the woods. The standard style stock you refer to would be a much better choice.
Steve
Thanks for the correction, Steve–had assumed that the military-style brl. band was always combined with the standard wt. brl. To me, the Marksman stock with any wt. brl. has all the styling of a 2 x 4!
Another vote for the 75 Sporter! Very accurate with the less expensive 22 ammo. Light and easy to handle. Then comes the 61s, 62s and the forever favorite 90. On second thought they are ALL my favorites. I too seem to drag out my 85 high wall a lot. Not much help here after all. RDB
For me i would say the model 52B that i bought off one of our members ( Clarence.) It’s the most accurate .22 i have. My others are a 1890, which is shooter grade and is just fun to shoot some shorts once in a while. My other 2 are pretty accurate because they are scoped. and are both in mint condition, Model 61 Grooved receiver made in 1954, and the 63 i previously posted about also has a grooved receiver. I usually shoot both out to 50 and 100 yds. The 52b at 50 yds for shooting paper. i can’t see much further with open sights. and the 1890 at 25 yds paper,or cans. But like has already been posted they are all great shooters and fun to get them out to the range.
Now that’s a tough question, since I enjoy shooting any of my 23 Winchester 22 rim fire rifles. But right now the one I’m enjoying more is my new-to-me model 47. I got in last month in auction along with a match model 69. The single shot 47 is fitted with a peep and the stock has a nice drop to it. Plenty accurate for my old eyes. I must shots the Match 69 some, because I may trade it to someone who’s collection is more deserving of a serial numbered 69. He knows who he is and he should PM me.
Vince
Southern Oregon
NRA member
Fraternal Order of Eagles
“There is but one answer to be made to the dynamite bomb and that can best be made by the Winchester rifle.”
Teddy Roosevelt
I have to agree with you Vince. I have 2 M47’s one open sighted and the other a peep, and I love the one with open sights. I am not a peep fan. This is my 50 yard money rifle. I can usually hit what I am aiming at with this rifle. Being a single shot maybe a little more care is taken when aiming and shooting. besides that, the safety comes on after you pull the trigger. Great for teaching youngsters. Big Larry
Vince said
Now that’s a tough question, since I enjoy shooting any of my 23 Winchester 22 rim fire rifles. But right now the one I’m enjoying more is my new-to-me model 47. I got in last month in auction along with a match model 69. The single shot 47 is fitted with a peep and the stock has a nice drop to it. Plenty accurate for my old eyes. I must shots the Match 69 some, because I may trade it to someone who’s collection is more deserving of a serial numbered 69. He knows who he is and he should PM me.
PM sent!
WACA Life Member #6284 - Specializing in Pre-64 Winchester .22 Rimfire
November 7, 2015
Online
Hmmm….I’d forgotten how much I enjoy shooting my 47 and 57. If I keep practicing with my Target 75 I may be able to move up to a 52. Maybe. Some really good points to ponder.
Mike
Most any Winchester .22 is fun to shoot. I really like pumps like the 1890 and 62A, but imagine my surprise when I took my newly acquired scoped model 57 to the range when I got it about 20 years ago and shortly thereafter laid my eyes on a three shot group of less than 3/8ths of an inch at 100 yards. That with extremely old Remington ammo, cloudy glass, and without making any adjustments to the Lyman 438 FIELD Scope that had seized-up windage and elevation knobs. I have some other period scoped .22’s that I have not tried as yet, one of which has a Malcom scope with clear optics, factory mounts and bases too! That’s going to be fun too!
James
November 7, 2015
Online
My 87 got to be a lot more fun today when I realized the rear sight aperture was threaded and my shooting buddy had an aperture to fit it. 
Still had a few fliers but most shots (50 yds) went into a group well under an inch, very close to half that. Dropped off the Target 75 for a much-needed trigger job so I’ll need to dig out something else for my next trip. I’m thinking a 57 will get the nod but maybe I’m missing something with the little pump guns. I may dig out my old 1890 to break up dirt clods and big pieces of clay targets in the backstop next trip.
James (jwm94) is right, tho. Most are fun to shoot but I’m looking to select a few of the best shooters and relegate the rest to safe queen status. Or not.
Mike
Ive owned a variety of .22 rifles all my life and the 62A that I own now is the most accurate of any of them. I think any Winchester 22 with a great bore/rifling will be an excellent shooter. I love the simplicity of the pump action too. Never was a fan of semi-autos. My great grandmother could hit a nat in arse with her old Model 1890 .22 short rifle. I lived next door to her for a few years and heard her unloading it one night out her back door. She had killed a bobcat in the tree in her back yard because it was keeping her from sleeping. That thing was full of 22 short lead! Unfortunately, I didnt inherit that rifle but I sure wish I had. It was mint. She traded some kind of animal (cow, goat, IDK) when she was a young girl and always kept it wrapped in her cedar chest. Had a few 22 shorts in an old Garrett snuff can.
November 7, 2015
Online
My 75 Match rifle is still in the shop but my 57 with factory peeps was near the top of the pile so it got the nod for today’s range trip. 
My 87 seems to stay at the top of the pile so it went along too. 
I’m finally figuring out how to use a rear peep and front post sights! It appears this 57 seems to like the CCI SV over the Tac and Match offering from Norma. It’s not an especially accurate rifle apparently but it’s certainly very accurate as sporter rifles go. Maybe I just haven’t found the ammo it likes. Speaking of ammo dislikes I got a little trigger time with my Winder and the HV Remington shorts. They don’t shoot well in my Winder so I wanted to shoot them up to clear out my shooting bag. Besides being very dirty I noticed quite a few were supersonic and a seemingly equal number were subsonic. Fired over 50 rounds and discovered I had two distinct groups, one slightly higher and to the right of the other, about an inch apart. Winder musket is shooting much better with the aperture swiped from my shooting buddy, can’t wait to find a load it likes. Getting the right aperture for the rear sight was a big breakthrough, maybe the CCI Target shorts will group better but I’ll have to clean out the grunge from the RP HV shorts first.
My shooting buddy’s 2nd Generation Winder musket is shooting quite well despite it’s 22lr chambering and Krag sights. I’m beginning to doubt the reports I’ve read about these rifles not being as accurate as the 22s versions but it could be that neither of us shoots well enough to see the difference. His bore is slightly better than mine so the comparison probably means nothing.
I’m thinking my little 57 may be tagging along more often in the future. It’s a handy little rifle with decent sights and a pretty fair trigger and as soon as I find the ammo it likes it could prove to be quite “interesting”, as Col. Whelen would say.
Mike
I haven’t shot this one much. But I plan on taking it back to the range from time to time
November 7, 2015
Online
Very nice, Dmc.
Mike
Lance Noble said
I have inherited what I think is a Winchester High Wall Winder Musket chambered in 22 Long R – S/N 117xxx. There are no markings on the barrel, receiver, or stock. Everything appears to be original.I’ve been surfing around for 3-days trying to learn about this rifle and haven’t gotten a lot. Apparently the Low Wall .22 Shorts are more desirable. Can someone give me the Cliff-notes version on this weapon, especially it’s age? Best I can tell it’s circa 1911??? Thanks.
Lance,
Please provide the complete serial number, as it will allow me to more closely determine the date of manufacture.
You state that “There are no markings on the barrel, receiver, …” However, that is not possible for a factory original Model 1885 Winder Musket. Specifically, the barrel should have Winchester’s address marking, the caliber designation, and a definitive proof mark on it. The receiver should have a definitive proof mark stamp (on the top of the frame ring), and the upper tang should have Winchester’s patent information stamped on it.
Can you provide pictures of your Winder Musket?
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
1 Guest(s)
