Darrin-

Not that my opinion adds anything, but IMHO Steve is right (as always)…    That looks like a very nice collector quality gun with only a couple minor/fixable issues…

FWIW… The under barrel stamps were applied when the barrel was chambered (before polishing) so got polished over twice.  They should never be rough and are often half polished out.  The exposed barrel roll marks were applied after first polishing but then polished again to remove any cratering from the roll die application.  So those should look polished over too.  Depth of the die impression is quite variable.  OTOH… The Winchester proof marks (and the electropenciled bolt serial number) were applied after the finished parts were assembled into a complete rifle and proofed.  So those should look rough/unblued.  I don’t see any issues with the marking on this gun…

The front sight should be a Win 103C 0.310″ tall.  Looks like that’s what’s there in the photo, but if not it’s another easy fix…

The problems with the gun, as Steve said, are that the 22G rear sight was replaced with a Lyman 16B, probably b/c a Win 22G would interfere with some scopes, and the trigger got polished, probably when somebody did the trigger modification job.  Both are easy fixes and would not stop me from buying the gun if I wanted it (which I don’t so no competition here!!!).  Good Luck!!!

Question for Gary (for the survey)…

Does your Hornet, S/N 293054, have a MC or low comb?  Also, is the bolt knob solid (type III-2) or drilled (type III-3)? 

Funny thing about the 22 HORNETs is that despite the fact that Winchester made a bunch of them in the 1950s, I don’t think I’ve ever seen one with a drilled bolt.  Based on documents in the McCrackin Library, it appears that the Hornet chambering got targeted for discontinuation as part of the “Firearms Simplification Program” of 1950 (too many specialized parts for too few sales).  I think that all (most???) of the ones made after 1952 (when drilled bolt handles started getting phased in) were made from parts already on hand…

Thanks Gents!!!

Lou

Thanks, Gary!!!

The closest S/Ns I have to yours in my survey (where I keep such details) are S/Ns 289804, 293367 and 294345.  All those have LC stocks, but there are a bunch in the 224XXX to 225XXX range with MC stocks (first year MC), so they were surely making both in 1954.  By S/N 3008XX everything I’ve got recorded in Standard Hornet is MC. 

The bolt knob thing fits my preconception…  I’ve seen them as late as 410XXX to 427XXX (1957-58) and have yet to see one with a drilled bolt handle.

Best,

Lou  

Hi Darrin-

So you got it???  Congrats… That’s a nice one once you take care of the things Steve pointed out.  And the price didn’t look bad at all for today’s market…

One thing I particularly like about that piece is the oval (not “looped”) pistol grip contour on a type III (oval tang) gun. All these changes were gradual, and the more aesthetically satisfying (to me) oval pistol grip contour was carried on well into the type III period.  Just glancing at the survey, the bulk of the transition happened in the 130K serial number range where your rifle falls.    There are looped pistol grip stocks as low as the 90,000s (even a few cloverleaf tang stocks with looped pistol grips – but that’s another story…) and after 140K it’s pretty much all looped…

Yes… That “Jack The Dog” listing has MUCH better than average photos, so I did get everything I like to record, even the under barrel markings.  If you will, check that the front sight is 0.310″ tall (it should be), but otherwise I’m good…   That S/N was not in the survey, but there are a goodly number close to it.

The closest Hornet’s I have to yours (meaning in my personal collection) are a couple of Super Grades at 127937 and 143711.  I also have an early SG that was formerly in vicvanb’s collection, S/N 26401, as well as early pre-war and 1948 transition Standard Rifles and a 1938 Carbine.  Too many M70 Hornets, I know, but I’m still looking for that elusive 22 Hornet Target rifle…  And I wouldn’t pass on a later one like Gary’s if it had the MC stock/Marbles 69 folding sight like his…

In reference to Ralph’s comments…  The M54 used the sear for a bolt stop and a beveled cut in the bottom of the bolt to catch it, such that the position of that cut determined the bolt throw (as in the clear photo he posted).  The M70 used a spring loaded lever for a bolt stop that hit either the left locking lug (for standard/H&H length cartridges) or a silver brazed on “bolt stop extension” attached to the extractor collar (for shorter cartridges requiring less bolt throw). M70 Hornet bolt stop/extractor collar (SG S/N 142692):

Integral ramps on the M70 were replaced by silver brazed ramps beginning in 1952.  ALL M70 FWT barrels (introduced 1952) have brazed on ramps, but the conversion of Standard barrels took a long time (due to barrel inventory) and was caliber-specific in that “slow sellers” can be found with integral ramp barrels quite a long time after the change.  Your gun has the correct #2 integral ramp (given the ’49 barrel date).  Lastly, after hardening, the roll marking dies used on the barrel were very brittle and often “chipped”.  So missing parts of letters/numbers are IMHO the norm rather than the exception.  I get worried when there AREN’T defects…

Best,

Lou

Hi Darrin-

Assuming that you want “period” optics, I did a little “virtual shopping” in the 1952 edition of Stoeger’s “The Shooter’s Bible”, which is the closest date to 1950 I have at hand.

For SCOPES; you can choose from the Lyman Challenger (4X; 26mm tube”), Lyman All Weather Alaskan (2.5X; 7/8″ tube), Stith Bear Cub “Master” series (4X or 6X; 26mm tube; NO INTERNAL ADJUSTMENTS), Stith Bear Cub “Double” series (4X or 6X; 26mm tube; WITH INTERNAL ADJUSTMENTS), Bausch and Lomb Balvar (2.5-4X; 1″ tube), B&L Baltur (2.5X) or Balfour (4X) (none of the B&L scopes have internal adjustments); Unertl Falcon (2.5X), Hawk (4X), or Condor (6X) (all 1″ with internal adjustments), Leupold Pioneer (4X; 7/8″ tube, no internal adjustments) or Leupold 4X Riflescope (4X; 7/8″ tube, with internal adjustments), Weaver Model J 2.5 or J4 (3/4″ tube, with adjustments) or K2.5, K4, K6, K8 or K10 (1″ tube, with adjustments) or KV (2.75 or 5X, with adjustments). 

So you can go anywhere from 2.5X to 10X in a period scope depending on your shooting preference.  The internally adjustable scopes all predate “constantly centered reticles” (like the Lyman “All American” and Weaver K60 series), however.  

For MOUNTS, assuming you go with internal adjustments, the most popular were the Redfield JR (one-piece) and Weaver detachable mounts.  The Redfield and Weaver rings were available in all the relevant tube diameters (3/4″, 7/8″, 1″ and 26mm), but I’m not seeing Redfield split rings, only the “solid” rings that would require you to remove the adjustment turret and ocular bell from the scope to slide the front ring into place.  So if I went Redfield, I’d “compromise” and get the “six-screw” (four on front ring; two on rear) horizontally split rings.  Buehler mounts were also available.  A good option on a light recoiling rifle like a 22 HORNET, if you go with a period scope without a constantly centered reticle, is the Buehler Microdial base, since it’s neat and compact but adjustable for both elevation and windage in the mount.  Personally, I’d want to get the rifle sighted in as close as possible using the mount adjustments and only move the scope reticle off-center for fine tuning.  Obviously, for scopes lacking internal adjustments you’d need something like the Buehler Microdial, B&L, Stith “Master” or Leupold “Adjustomount”.

So… You have LOTS of choices!!!

Let me know your preferences, as I have a good number more scope mounts for M70s lying around here than I will ever use.  

Best,

Lou