Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
I’ve always wanted one in .22 Hornet (and .250 Savage). Here’s a Hornet. I’m sure this one is not for me. Opinions?
Online
The front sight arrangement is not factory.
If you can’t convince them, confuse them
Calling the amputated barrel a “special order” takes some nerve! Though on the other hand, what madness would drive some former owner to commit such butchery? Might be a chance to buy it cheap, if you can live with this defect. In fact, wouldn’t be greatly surprised to see it show up again in a year or two in another auction with a correct barrel, since according to Louis the manufacture of fake barrels has become a cottage industry!
November 5, 2014
Offline
Steve-
That is a 100% refinished rifle with a shortened barrel. It’s tragic, really, since the barrel appears to have started life as an original M54 22 HORNET. When made, the barrel would have been 24″ long. Since it’s a CMS barrel, the original ramp would have been the integral #1 or #2 (same as on the pre-war M70s).
The earlier Nickel Steel barrels had the pinned blade type front sight in an integral base (they still didn’t look like that), but the 22 HORNET was added to the catalog well after the change to CMS in ’32.
Except for the refinish, the SG stock appears to be properly inlet for the M54 bottom metal, so I’m guessing it started life as a M54 SG stock. I personally would question the “SUPER GRADE” stamp on the floor plate, but don’t hold me to that.
Just my opinion…
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Louis Luttrell said
I personally would question the “SUPER GRADE” stamp on the floor plate, but don’t hold me to that.
Actually, the little irregularities in the lettering make it look more “original” to me than if they were perfect; but you’ve seen a thousand times more of them than I have. But how about that mirror-polish of the trigger guard! What seems bizarre to me is that anyone would go to the trouble to carry out a complete refinish job on a gun that, due to the barrel, was so flagrantly suspicious.
Has anyone contacted the seller and called Him out on this?
W.A.C.A. life member, Marlin Collectors Assn. charter and life member, C,S.S.A. member and general gun nut.
Henry Mero said
Has anyone contacted the seller and called Him out on this?
Waste of time–if he’s so deluded as to believe the crown “proves” the barrel’s originality. Might be interesting, though, if one has time to kill, to inform him that according to the Winchester Museum, such work was never done at the factory.
Another case of “…Pants on fire!” Good to see the ‘volunteer force’ here jumping into action! 🙂
A sad case indeed of a Model 54 in distress! Of course principally the ‘custom’ barrel length, lopping off a great integral front sight ramp as noted above. Also some weird band sight replacing. Have no idea what it is, but apparently the story line would necessarily be factory furnished without front sight… Only a lyman 48 receiver! And speaking of such there apparently a 48WJS which wasn’t in existence at the alleged date of production. Evidently a post-factory addition with stock so modified from ‘none’, upon installation. Concur that metal presumptive refinished, pending only better pix possibly controverting.
With the ‘mix n’ match’ capabilities of the Model 54 (& 70) components difficult to say if the stock is original. Without anything notably to contrary, assuming so. (Question of whether the SG models with “S” underside barrel breech area in such era.)
External to this rifle, scrolling to the bottom of the listing page, same suspect barrel chop listing. A Model 70, 1960 vintage with barrel something about 19+inches long… From 25″ in 338 Win Mag! That’s an hurtful-earful but dandy flamethrower!
This seller appears to have excellent+ ratings. Would hate to see any of his gun sales associated with a mediocre rating! 🙂 🙂 🙂
A few pix below of my 1935 vintage Model 54 Standard Rifle as illustration.
November 5, 2014
Offline
Hi John-
Thanks for photos. Good illustration of what a M54 22 HORNET with factory Lyman 48W should look like, including the integral ramp and correct Lyman 31W front sight. Because the Hornet was added in 1935, in standard grade it only came with the “NRA standard stock” like yours, not with the slender schnable tipped fore end that characterized the M54 First Standard rifle (the stock I think most people associate with the M54).
The Lyman 48WJS was, I think, first available in 1936 and one might (???) have found its way onto some parts clean-up M54s made at the very end of production (???), but the 48W on your gun is the right factory receiver sight.
As for the stock on the GB rifle, the main difference between the M54 and early M70 SG stock is the inletting for the bottom metal. One could “adapt” a M70 SG stock, but it would leave some ugly and obvious gaps around the front of the M54’s fixed floor plate. As Clarence pointed out, the “SUPER GRADE” stamp looks OK insofar as the little irregularities in the spacing/alignment of the letters. I wasn’t sure about whether the “G” in GRADE should be in Helvetica font (as on pre-war M70 SGs) or not.
Best,
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
I have really appreciated all the comments and photos that have been posted. Not only have I enjoyed it all but I have learned as well. Which, is also enjoyable 
Steve, thank you for posting! I too, always learn!
Lou, thanks as usual for your ever kind & amazing expertise! Below a pix of my SG Mod 54 floorplate. Very little chance it’s faked. Bought the rifle from a guy who had no idea what an SG was. Decades ago, seller of old Winchester with ‘pretty face’, small premium for unloved model.
Best!
John
Interesting discussion. I have always liked the Model 54, especially those with the Schnabel fore end.
James
jwm94 said
I have always liked the Model 54, especially those with the Schnabel fore end.
I consider that the best thing about it.
November 5, 2014
Offline
Hi Steve-
The first one (Shooting Investments) looks legit but obviously well worn. The disproportionate wear to the bottom metal is typical of M54s. That one used to have a Lyman 48W sight on it, hence the “T” shaped inletting for the long slide receiver sight.
The second one (Custom Shop) looks to me like a fairly nice restoration. The metal has certainly been redone. Even the most mint condition original survivor doesn’t have that much blue on the floor plate. The Unertl scope is a nice touch but is notably later than the rifle itself.
The third one (also Custom Shop) is a nice G&H upgraded gun. The stock is upgraded, the G&H side mount added, etc. At least it’s described as what it is, and it has the correct Lyman 48W that’s missing from the first gun. The period Zeiss scope is a nice touch.
Just my opinion, or course… 
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
1 Guest(s)
