Commissioner said
I would have fired it to. A newly acquired USED firearm is not the same as a NEW firearm. You are comparing Apples to Oranges.You guys are trying so hard to be right, but make an honest comparison. When is the last time you bought a brand new High grade rifle that would not Fire? In my 75 years of collecting, it has never happened to me or anyone I know. I have never read of it either.
  

I would still carefully shoot a few cartridges through it. 

Zebulon said

Bert H. said
Dave,
Based on the single picture you posted, I do not believe that it is factory original bluing.  Do you have additional pictures you can post (or send me)?
Is it is Standard Rifle, or a Special?
Bert
  

Bert, based on your Model 71 articles in the  Collector, wouldn't a closeup of the proof marks be strong evidence? 
  

Yes, it would certainly help.

Bert H. said
Dave,
Based on the single picture you posted, I do not believe that it is factory original bluing.  Do you have additional pictures you can post (or send me)?
Is it is Standard Rifle, or a Special?
Bert
  

Bert, based on your Model 71 articles in the  Collector, wouldn't a closeup of the proof marks be strong evidence? 

I had a Stith Streamline mount for my 1951 Model 70 Standard style and found it rock solid. However, the front "cup" was sized for  Weaver 3 and the solid rings required you to completely unscrew and remove the ocular bell to install the scope. Not workable for any Nitrogen gas filled scope. 

I shined it on, along with the K3 and the rifle itself.  

I have operated but never owned the famous G&H side mount, for two reasons.

First, the cost of the mount itself and the gunsmithing fee to saw a chunk of your stock off to expose enough of the receiver wall to install several heavy duty screws and pins to hold the scope base in place for Eternity plus six months, against the recoil of up to a Bofors Oerlikon anti-aircraft piece. 

Second, I could not bear to see any bolt action game rifle I ever cared to own disfigured in the way necessary to accommodate the G&H mount. 

I suppose if I ever hit the jackpot of some huge lottery and grew bored enough to place an order with Holland for.one of their magazine rifles in 375 H & H, I might consider having them build one complete with a G&H detachable side mount. It is the only rifle thst would look "right" with one. Like the old Brit taxis, it would look charmingly ugly. 

Commissioner said

Paul H said
On GunBroker this week as listed by Lock Stock and Barrel is a later model “94” in the Trapper configuration. Looks to be legit but I’m not too well versed in “Trapper” models.  If anyone has the time after the 4th to check it out and render an opinion it might be educational and would certainly be appreciated.  The pictures aren’t great—ad says it’s been refinished. It’s late enough to have proper “walnut” stocks w/long forend wood—the pinned front sight looks correct in relation to the barrel band—a saddle ring is present. A few days remain on the auction and it’s already generated some interest.  Thanks for all your inputs and expertise.   PH
  

I Have a Winchester Model 1894 AE 30/30 Made in New Haven Connecticut. It is a 357 with a 16” barrel and a Saddle Ring. The front and rear sight is highlighted in White.the serial number is 6478312. It is like brand new. Don’t have a mark on it. I can’t remember where I got it or how much I paid, but it is an authentic Winchester. Does the 16” barrel make it a trapper? 
  

Anything shorter than the standard length (20-inches) is considered a "Trapper".

Based on the single picture you posted, I do not believe that it is factory original bluing.  Do you have additional pictures you can post (or send me)?

Is it is Standard Rifle, or a Special?

Bert

Nevada Paul said
It all comes down to personal opinion and objective.  I, too, have well over 100 guns, most of them Winchesters.  I have always made of point of loading for and shooting every new acquisition as soon as possible after I get my hands on it. That removes any questions or lingering doubts about the gun's ability to function properly.
The only firearms in my collection which have not been fired are some Colt SAA commemoratives. And I even fired one of those in 45 LC.
Just my way of collecting.  
P
  

I’m in the same camp. I’ve got to see how it performs. One time I discovered a newly acquired model 1894 in 32-40 had been rechambered to 32 Win Special when the fired cartridge case emerged “fireformed”.  I got my money back on that one. I would have likely not discovered the problem without shooting the rifle. 

The only firearms in my collection which have not been fired are some Colt SAA commemoratives. And I even fired one of those in 45 LC.

Just my way of collecting.  

P

I'll have to break out my Ouija board to answer that one!!!

I believe it had something to do with the state of optics as they were most often used on rifles at the time the M70 was being designed c.1934.  The two holes atop the front receiver ring are described in catalogs as being there to permit mounting of a telescopic sight block.  So I'm assuming they were thinking of the long telescopic sights with externally adjustable mounts, e.g. Lyman, Fecker, Litschert, and later Unertl.  Not internally adjustable low power scopes mounted close to the receiver using a top mount. 

Given that 1930's scopes were prone to fogging or failure, at the time the popular approach to installing what we think of as a "hunting scope" was the G&H side mount, b/c it allowed easy removal of the scope (or even using iron sights by looking under the scope).  Winchester would even install a G&H mount for you on special order, but it's not clear how many they installed compared to guns sent to G&H or G&H mounts installed by outside gunsmiths.  Yes, the Redfield JR mount (and it's predecessor) were available n the later 1930's...

As for where the front scope block was supposed to go...  Certainly the Target rifles (National Match, Target Model and Bull Gun) came with factory scope blocks on the barrel.  As for standard barrels the user had two options: a cross dovetail block (Lyman BK usually works) installed in the rear sight dovetail OR drill a couple holes out in front of the barrel boss for a scope block.  Because mount spacing determines the incremental change produced by one "click" of a micrometer adjustable mount, the serious scoped rifle shooter tended to opt for the latter approach.  Using the rear sight dovetail put the mounts a bit too close together, making the click adjustments more like 1/3 MOA than 1/4 MOA...

An interesting (to me) side note.  The factory blueprint for the 26-inch standard contour barrel (drawn 5-22-35) which at the time was for the M54 220 Swift barrel b/c 300 H&H Magnum was never a M54 cartridge, DOES show two D&T holes atop the barrel for a scope block.  They just never made them that way, except maybe (???) on special order...  But somebody was thinking about it!!!

When thinking about the "no-drill" scope mounts offered by Stith (Install-It-Yourself, Quick-Easy-Detachable, Master Mount) and Bausch & Lomb, I find it helpful to remember that when these products were introduced (some in the post-war 1940s) the vast majority of M70s out there (the first 60,500 or so) were not drilled.  It wasn't until 1949, when M70 serial numbers reached 120,000, that the number of factory drilled M70s in circulation equalled the number of undrilled pre-wars.  So there was a market niche to be filled...

In short, Hellifino what they were thinking...

Lou