Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
I recently acquired a beautiful model 70 National Match rifle and stumbled into a confusing situation. After studying several NM’s online I see many that have the rear bridge tapped for one hole and than see equally as many with 2 holes. Both have been referred to as “all original”. My gun has 2 holes and was made in 1950. Any ideas?
Earl, you did not mention what the s/n’s are on the subject rifles, but I am going to take a stab. Prewar NM’s should not have any holes in rear bridge. If they do, they were put in after the fact. I have owned 2 NM’s in the 1949 range that have type 3 receivers and have only 1 hole in rear bridge. I am certain these guns are original and both are just a few numbers apart. I also own and have owned several later mid 50’s NM’s that had 2 holes in rear bridge. So, to answer your question. Depending on date of manufacture, all the rifles you mentioned could be original. What is the s/n on your 1950 rifle? I will compare it with mine w/1 hole to see how close they are.
Steve
November 5, 2014
Offline
Hi Earl-
I’m afraid I can’t help much beyond saying that the three NM rifles I have currently all have two holes in the bridge. S/Ns 333432, 405045, and 506314. But they are later than yours, the earliest being 1955.
I’m curious to hear what Steve has to say about yours.
Best,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
From internetting only, no hands-on experience here:
SN 159520 (barrel dated “49”) has one hole in rear bridge.
SN 159872 – which seems to have taken up permanent residency on GunBroker – has one hole in rear bridge.
Doesn’t make much sense then that mine being an earlier sn. would have 2 holes originally. Doesn’t bother me either way since the rest of the gun is correct. Thanks a bunch guys.
The 2 earliest I still own are 146164, and 159740. I was going off memory earlier when I stated the dates, these are both 1950 rifles and both have only 1 hole. I do have blueprint specifically made for the NM receiver dated 1949. It has a revision dated 11-28-50 stating “Added 2 Rear Sight Holes”. I can only assume it means changed from one hole to two holes.
One aspect to keep in mind, is that Winchester didn’t necessarily build these rifles in strict s/n order. So a slightly earlier example such as Earl’s could easily have been built later than a slightly later s/n’d rifle, such as mine and others noted, and thus received the 2 holes while slightly earlier rifles only had one hole. I would check your rifle carefully and see if the second(front) hole appears to have been added subsequently at some point after manufacture. Look close for centerline alignment, correct c-c distance between the 2 holes (should be .435″ c-c), and correct distance from rear bridge front hole to rear hole in front ring (should be 4.225″). I really think the gun sound’s fine, but check it to ease your concerns.
Steve
Thank you Steve, I will measure it. It does have a barrel date of 49 but there is also a 1906 stamped next to it. No clue on that one.
Earl, the “49” is barrel date and “1906” just stands for 30-06 (30-1906) cartridge. Does your NM have a rear dovetail for sight or non-machined?
Steve
1 Guest(s)
