Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
Hi folks,
So I am most interested in a 1950 Model 70 in 375H&H. The rifle is wearing a Pachmayr side scope mount with a Weaver K4.
So here’s my question, has the side of the receiver been drilled to mount that side scope mount or did it use existing holes in the receiver? Assuming it has had holes drilled in it would the term “unmolested” that I hear tossed about still be applicable to this rifle? I can’t really tell by looking at it but do you think they have cut the stock to mount that side mount?
So I understand the side mount is period correct and I can see its functionality, but it sure is ugly.
Rifle is in excellent shape and comes with a history of having been to Africa and sent quite a few DG to the promised land.
Like the dealer whose got the gun – he’s saying $3,000 – I’m thinking of showing up with a cashier’s check for $2,5000. What do you think? I sense the side mount hurts the value – but I’m clueless on such things.
Thank you in advance for your efforts!
[email protected] said
Hi folks,Assuming it has had holes drilled in it would the term “unmolested” that I hear tossed about still be applicable to this rifle?
Certainly not, & if the stock was altered it’s very “molested.” Sounds like too much too me, unless a collection of trophy heads comes with it.
Could never get past the extra holes.
“If you can’t convince them, confuse them”
President Harry S. Truman
I could live with the side-mount if I “had” to have a .375. Main question is, what does that do to its value? Cuts it in half, as far as I’m concerned.
Adding my voice… Holes are not “factory”. Yet, second precept… “Aftermarket holes are not created equally.” Aftermarket top mount scope hole(s) in the receiver bridge of prewar and early postwar Winchester Model 70 rifles are sufficient to defeat collector value. Still, not only many folks to live with them, but the facilitate scoping which the broad “user” market generally demands.
Side mount holes as described for that 375 H&H, for most of us are in a class by themselves. Such, about ‘the worst’ of postwar scope mounting systems. For me personally, whatever value is to be ascribed a comparable condition collector original specimen and perhaps halve such value. While the Pachmyr mounts did carry a comparatively favorable reputation among the side mount genre, the net effect nowadays remains a substantial negative hit. As also noted above, a stock alteration typically required to accommodate such G&H mount; compounding the negative. The Weaver 4K scope was a good one ‘in its day’. Now largely outclassed adding no real value.
No idea of its worth beyond to me and that context, not interested!
Best!
John
1 Guest(s)
