Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
clarence said
Big Larry said
Serial #? 1,4xx and I have had a couple of these rifles over the years and none had blocs.Big Larry
But were the brls tapped on those guns, if you remember? The early gun I referred to had blocks.
The 52 Rifle that I just picked up has the proof mark at 12 o’clock and just where the round of the barrel starts is the first block, then 5.25″ forward is the second block. My understanding is that 1924 was the start of when Winchester started installing scope blocks on these rifles. My rifle is a 1924 so this is making sense.
[email protected] said My understanding is that 1924 was the start of when Winchester started installing scope blocks on these rifles.
Not exactly–’24 is the yr they became standard on all 52s, according to Houze, whereas before they were optional, he says.
November 7, 2015
Offline
Big Larry said
Gunsmiths don’t give a rats #$%%. Big Larry
I respectfully disagree. The best gunsmiths never got rich, most were lucky to make a decent living doing excellent work. It is a labor of love. I’m actually a passable bicycle mechanic but I’d never be able to make a living doing it. I could (and may someday) stay busy working on wheelchairs at a nursing home but that, too, is a labor of love.
Mike
TXGunNut said I respectfully disagree. The best gunsmiths never got rich, most were lucky to make a decent living doing excellent work. It is a labor of love.
Believe what Larry meant is that most (excepting the few who specialize in restoration work) have no qualms about doing work on collector-grade guns, such as high-polish hot-blue jobs, that would horrify us here, & that much is certainly true; we’ve all seen those “how could they do it!” guns & I still own one. I’m referring chiefly to past attitudes (but not the distant past!), & think that over the last 30 or 40 yrs, many “average” gunsmiths have had their eyes opened, finally, to the value of preserving originality.
Of course, it’s only fairly recently that 52s began to be considered “collector-grade guns,” & they certainly weren’t at the time the blocks on this Slowlock were installed. As I said before, attaching the rear block to the ring was considered standard practice at Springfield Armory, so it’s not surprising that a gunsmith or customer who’d seen that done would considered it as “correct” a way as any other, though I don’t like it for aesthetic reasons alone.
I really meant that most gunsmiths will change or alter a fine collectible with no thoughts of ruining a fine firearm. Cutting stocks or bbls. Altering bolts. Poor blue jobs.
Many a fine, and valuable M1903 has been sporterized by Smiths on a customers whim. No, it’s not their fault, I’m just saying that they don’t mind it at all to chop up a fine, collectible gun. Being a collector, I have seen this first hand. I know they have to make a buck, but along the way, they have ruined many fine firearms. Big Larry
November 7, 2015
Offline
Not much we can do about the ‘smiths who butcher guns. They’re doing what the owners of the guns want them to do. The only consolation is that every modified gun is one less original gun and that makes every original gun more valuable.
Mike
TXGunNut said
They’re doing what the owners of the guns want them to do. The only consolation is that every modified gun is one less original gun and that makes every original gun more valuable. Mike
True, but any half-way competent gunsmith has more work than he can complete in a timely manner, so he wouldn’t go broke by declining the “bad ideas.” Hard for me to find much “consolation” in the increasing prices of original guns.
As part of the ongoing research and model survey for the Model 56 and 57 I was curious as to how many guns had been irrevocably altered from their original configuration. As of this year I have (with the help of Bert and others) logged about 3% of the total production of those models. The Model 56 is a Sporting rifle and the 57 is a Target rifle.
Interestingly, the modification percentages are identical for both models, 41% of each model has been significantly altered in the last 70-80 years. Most of the alterations were D&T for a scope, stock checkering, etc.
I am sure that alteration vs time curve is not linear and has probably slowed but it illustrates the diminishing availability of original collectable rifles and that, coupled with natural attrition such as fire, flood, theft, etc. drives the price higher, especially in those models such as the Model 56 where there were only about 8,500 produced and theoretically about 5,000 still in original (unmodified) condition, and then with an unknown percentage of those lost, damaged or destroyed over the years. It sure makes finding a nice Model 56 tough!
Anyway, I thought it was interesting that sporting shooters modified their rifles just as frequently as target shooters since I was always under the impression that target rifles were more often modified than sporting rifles but that is not the case with these models.
Best Regards,
WACA Life Member #6284 - Specializing in Pre-64 Winchester .22 Rimfire
Jeff,
Interesting information! Just for fun, I just calculated the same statistics for the Model 43. What I found is that of the (878) I have documented that are in the May 1948 – October 1950 range (pre factory D&T for a scope), (394) of them have been altered from original (primarily D&T for a scope). That equates to a 44.9% alteration rate. The Models 65 and 71 also have high rates of alteration.
Bert
WACA Historian & Board of Director Member #6571L
JWA said
Anyway, I thought it was interesting that sporting shooters modified their rifles just as frequently as target shooters since I was always under the impression that target rifles were more often modified than sporting rifles but that is not the case with these models.
That statistic surprises me too, but I believe a distinction should be made between the practical, common sense, mods commonly seen on sporting rifles vs. the more personal mods I see on on 52s (which I watch everyday on GB). Merely drilling for scope mounts, or adding swivels, are things which should have been done at the factory, whereas the peculiar mods I sometimes see on 52s can be far more interesting. Smart & well executed mods, such as checkering, I’d pay more, not less, for. So please let me know when you run across a nicely checkered Model 69! (There’s a beautifully re-stocked one on GI, but at $1000, I have to pass.)
Bert H. said
Interesting information! Just for fun, I just calculated the same statistics for the Model 43. What I found is that of the (878) I have documented that are in the May 1948 – October 1950 range (pre factory D&T for a scope), (394) of them have been altered from original (primarily D&T for a scope). That equates to a 44.9% alteration rate. The Models 65 and 71 also have high rates of alteration.
Bert
Very cool, thanks! I wondered what the percentage was for other rifles, interesting that it is in the same ballpark.
To Clarence’s point, those rifles that came D&T’d, checkered and with sling swivels from the factory probably have a much lower percentage of alteration.
Best Regards,
WACA Life Member #6284 - Specializing in Pre-64 Winchester .22 Rimfire
1 Guest(s)
