Louis Luttrell said
Hi Jim-
At present I have (4) of the 24-inch Featherweights recorded by serial number, one of which I consider "sketchy".  I know the location of another legit one, but I do not (as yet) have a serial number on it.  This is out of about (800) 308 WIN Featherweights recorded.  So I'm inclined to agree with you that they're scarce.
This is my 24-inch Featherweight.  Very early serial number for a Featherweight. Wayne Miller let me get this one from his collection a couple years ago.

Best,
Lou
  

Good stuff there Lou🙂

I think that's a nice rifle, like you say, a lot of the cost cutting had been rectified by '77. Hope you hunt a long time with it!

[Image Can Not Be Found]

[Image Can Not Be Found]

Louis Luttrell said

"Hi Zeb-
I'm sure you know that Winchester, having been involved in developing the T-65 cartridge (7.62 NATO) cartridge that they subsequently commercialized as the 308 Winchester, designed their "lightweight" rifle (the Featherweight) around the cartridge.  If I could only have one Featherweight it would be in 308 WIN.  I'm not sure you actually gain much from a 30-06 in a 22-inch barrel anyway... "
  

Even in 22" barrels, the Springfield is the more flexible and powerful cartridge. The current SAAMI maximum average pressure specification for the Springfield is 60k PSI and 62k PSi for the 308 WCF.  The smaller cartridge must be loaded to its pressure limit to reach within 100 foot seconds of the Springfield's muzzle velocity and then only with 150 and 165 grain bullets, according to SAAMI testing. At 180 grains, the velocity gap opens to about 200 fs. 

The smaller cartridge has insufficient powder capacity to produce useful velocities with a bullet heavier than 200 grains.

At present I have (4) of the 24-inch Featherweights recorded by serial number, one of which I consider "sketchy".  I know the location of another legit one, but I do not (as yet) have a serial number on it.  This is out of about (800) 308 WIN Featherweights recorded.  So I'm inclined to agree with you that they're scarce.

This is my 24-inch Featherweight.  Very early serial number for a Featherweight. Wayne Miller let me get this one from his collection a couple years ago.

Best,

Lou

Do you have any M70 Featherweights listed in your “registry” with the 24” barrel?

I’m thinking they are really scarce!

(My 6/52 Featherweight is to get some “exercise” later this week.)

Chris D said
I thought it would go higher than that. 
At Cody, 10 years ago, what would this trapper have sold for you think? 
  

Chris good point, and I can understand you're view on the possibility of going higher, but their are also a fair amount of collectors willing to go after the well used and abused "trapper's", as the use during the earlier times than the 1920's when this one was manufactured near the end of it's production life, saving it's condition and use during the rugged "Cowboy", and "Bandito", days, are a difference. IMO! 

Not taking anything away from this high condition specimen.

Tony

Chris D said
I thought it would go higher than that. 
At Cody, 10 years ago, what would this trapper have sold for you think? 
  

I agree. That site has far far less buyers than Gun Broker. As a buyer I seldomly visit it as the selection is small and their search function is the worst. I think the seller saved a $ to sell there only to lose more $$$’s by getting a lower sale price. Just my opinion on price but if I’m selling, I imagine more buyers is a positive! 

The stats on site traffic…

GunBroker gets roughly eight to eleven point five million monthly visits or sessions. GunAuction.com gets about sixty-one thousand to one hundred one thousand. That’s a difference of roughly one hundred times more traffic for GunBroker.

For those keeping score, that means for every 1 visit Gun Auction has, Gun Broker has 100!

Here's my later low comb 308 WIN Featherweight (late 1953 receiver, probably early 1954 assembly)...

My thought is that Winchester always preferred a "sporting" style rear sight with the low comb stock that their own literature described as being designed for use with metallic sights. Longer sight radius.  But, IMHO, in 1952 they didn't have a sporting style sight that would work with the skinny Featherweight barrel. Hence the "tall" 22K that came along in 1954-ish.  

I'm also inclined to think (agree) that by 1957 or so they didn't care anymore.  They also weren't making too many low comb Featherweights by then.  I too have seen later low comb Featherweights with the Lyman 16A flip sight and ZERO trace it had ever been anything else...

Hi Zeb-

I'm sure you know that Winchester, having been involved in developing the T-65 cartridge (7.62 NATO) cartridge that they subsequently commercialized as the 308 Winchester, designed their "lightweight" rifle (the Featherweight) around the cartridge.  If I could only have one Featherweight it would be in 308 WIN.  I'm not sure you actually gain much from a 30-06 in a 22-inch barrel anyway... 

The more interesting topic to research is the Model 80.  I'm looking into that one.  It never made it out of the R&D stage, but CFM has at least three of the prototypes.  It was what the Featherweight was supposed to be...

Best,

Lou

At Cody, 10 years ago, what would this trapper have sold for you think? 

steve004 said

safestuffer said
Hello everyone,
For those interested in current market value of these guns and curious to see what a high condition example sells for in a normal auction setting, the Trapper recently discussed here is now available
https://www.gunauction.com/buy/17416886
 
Apologies if this post violates any rules of the forum. I am the owner of this rifle, if that matters
  

Well, we ended up fining out what this one was worth - a bit over $11,000.
  

Worth, or what was willingly paid for it! Even if it's a little on the high side for a nice condition example, 'Maybe it was just bought a little early, at that price"!

Tony