Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
Offline
Several years ago I started collecting pre war sporters of all types. I had a chance to buy a real nice Model 54 30-06 locally and fell in love with the nimble feel of the Schnabel type stock. I have since acquired several 54’s as they have become my favorite sporter along with the Model 70 and Sedgley’s. Although the 54 has it’s shortcomings they can be purchased for a reasonable price and seem to be plentiful. Some may look at the 54 as Winchester’s “Rodney Dangerfield” because it has never gotten the respect of the 70. I just wanted to put a plug in for what I believe is one of the greatest sporters ever made and get some opinions from other collectors.
I share something of your appreciation of the Model 54. I’d not characterize it quite as you. The Model 70 was a considerable advancement in many ways, ‘in context’. But important part of that context, era related. As the Model 54 was appearing on the market in 1925, its main competition Remington Model 30. Such as Oberndorf Mausers ‘out there’, but such entire class of ‘foreign’ imports from “overseas”, yet something exotic and US markets not well established in context of average American buyer. So there was the Model 30. Available ‘theoretically’ from 1921. Yet viewing serialization versus “barrel dating”, its sales were relatively minuscule even by the time the Model 54 making appearance. In that time, the 54 bore a “clean sheet” design. Retaining basic mauser heritage, but “Americanized”. That competing against the 30 Enfield legacy/baggage and yet military components on hand. Removal of Bugs Bunny receiver ears and pot belly, minus additional round magazine, yet not making exactly a svelte sporting rifle per se. As of the 54 introduction, the 30 also yet retaining “cock on closing” striker function.
The point here, that Winchester did a pretty good job; perhaps outstanding, considering the ‘home court’ advantage of Remington sitting yet on loads of P17 parts then yet employed in 30 production. Every 54 part, newly manufactured. Yet again emphasizing, the real advantage of not hamstrung with remnants of strong military heritage.
In its era, I’d argue the Model 54 a considerable advancement. Not particularly in putting bullets downrange. But in lighter sporting context. The 30, yet something of Enfield tank by comparison. Any 54 criticism needing to be within era considerations. The 54 also, as you note, better bargains than to be found in comparable head on, model for model, comparison with the 70. Part certainly in consideration of a superior all-round rifles. But much ‘retrospect’ view, due to the extensive shadow of Model 70 aura. When you buy that nice 54, taking advantage of a very shootable gun needing to be evaluated on its own merits rather than the Model 70 it isn’t. I like the Model 54 for what it is and of course that including the very point made, of acquisition economics. Yet more, for what it is, as representing an era. The sidebar that I also very much like the Model 30 too. About a dozen of each brand. Interestingly similar in both electing to “modernize” stock design away from the “schnabel”. Actually, ‘it’ simply a handy identifier, from old to new & improved. Entirely other non-ergonomic features needing improvement and the so-called “NRA” stock resulting for each model. Sights improving a few clicks too .
In chamberings, Winchester the clear winner with the 54 compared to Remington 30. More chamberings and yet even greater consideration, more relevant ones taking advantage of the respective bolt rifle potential. I’m with a Model 30 in .25 Remington. Big action, small cartridge. While the 54 did in latter production offer the .22 Hornet – something of an anomaly to my mind, yet a lot of productive chamberings visiting the gun’s capabilities. In the end, production figures for competitors perhaps the best analysis of “success”. Winchester 54 over about decade span, excess of 50K rifles. Remington over almost two decades production, a bit over half such in total Model 30 production. Figures here based on serialization.
The postscript of the Model 70 in year ’36, as noted a definite improvement. For Remington the Model 720 in ’40, something of “Err…”. A reworked Model 30, finally losing the Enfield “dog leg” bolt handle & redesigned ejector box style. Whoopee! Like Henry Ford’s Model “T” in any color desired… as long as black. So the 720 in any chambering desired… as long as 30-06 + handful allegedly in 257 Roberts.
Other than one 54 Super Grade and a couple of (early & late) 7mm rifles, my 54 Models pretty pedestrian. I do like the 30 WCF chambered carbines very much and have several. My Models 30 rifles, all pretty pedestrian, but I do like very much the earliest rendition, achieving some kind of mixed aesthetic elegance, such to my (warped) vision. I’m with 3 Models 720, none pristine-original, including all being tapped for scopes. Interesting! Little more to be said. War interrupting embarrassment of 720 likely falling flat in sales.
My aged Ford Excursion SUV – no Tesla! But love it yet for what it is and the happy miles it’s taken this old man and comparatively, quite younger family. For me, ‘era’ vehicle! 🙂 An analogy!
Just another ‘wordy’…
My take
John
Earl, I share your appreciation for the Model 54. I only have one that one is a very nice unaltered example chambered in .250-3000 Savage. What I admire about the gun is the high quality of the fit and finish. Mine was assembled in 1933 in the darkest period of the Great Depression when few could afford a gun of any kind, let alone a high quality gun such as a Model 54. The finest cars ever built in America such as the Classic Packard, Pierce Arrow, Duesenberg, Marmon and Cadillac among others occurred during the same period when competition for the few wealthy buyers was fiercest so my feeling is that in order to sell guns Winchester produced some of the finest guns in this era as well. With so few Model 54’s produced compared to the Model 70 and now so few that are still in unaltered condition it is not surprising that this model has such a small following since there are so few unaltered examples left to collect. They don’t come up for sale very often where I live. I looked for a long time to find one that wasn’t drilled and tapped for a modern scope etc.and thanks to the excellent advice of Louis Luttrell when the one I purchased became available I am proud to have it in my modest collection.
Dave K. said
What I admire about the gun is the high quality of the fit and finish. Mine was assembled in 1933 in the darkest period of the Great Depression when few could afford a gun of any kind, let alone a high quality gun such as a Model 54. The finest cars ever built in America such as the Classic Packard, Pierce Arrow, Duesenberg, Marmon and Cadillac among others occurred during the same period when competition for the few wealthy buyers was fiercest so my feeling is that in order to sell guns Winchester produced some of the finest guns in this era as well.
Your theory could be correct. Smith & Wesson was doing the same thing during the depression, with the introduction of the Registered Magnum.
How much did the Model 54 cost during the Deoression? A price of $39 for the Registered Magnum represented a discount for law enforcement personnel, USRA membership, NRA membership, etc. Without such a discount, a Registered Magnum sold for $60.
Online
Dave K. said
The finest cars ever built in America such as the Classic Packard, Pierce Arrow, Duesenberg, Marmon and Cadillac among others occurred during the same period when competition for the few wealthy buyers was fiercest so my feeling is that in order to sell guns Winchester produced some of the finest guns in this era as well.
Uh…if such legendary symbols of no-expense-spared quality & elegance as Pierce-Arrow & Duisenberg are going to be invoked, I’m not sure a gun having a stamped trigger-guard & floorplate makes a realistic comparison. I mean, if the M54 represents one of “the finest guns in this era,” what’s left to say about the work of Griffin & Howe, Hoffman Arms, Bob Owen, & the like? For the money, the 54 was a good value, but it was built to sell for a competitive price, very far from the marketing philosophy of the makers of these luxury cars.
mrcvs said
How much did the Model 54 cost during the Deoression?
In 1933, the catalog price was $61.40 for the standard rifle; other variants were higher.
clarence said
mrcvs said
How much did the Model 54 cost during the Deoression?In 1933, the catalog price was $61.40 for the standard rifle; other variants were higher.
So much for my theory! Everyone touts the Registered Magnum as the finest Smith & Wesson ever made with attention to detail, expensive standard features, and many, many options available. And it cost less than a Model 54 did two to six years later (1935 – 1939). Today, it’s hard to find a decent Registered Magnum for under 5k. You could buy several Model 54s for that price.
clarence said
mrcvs said
How much did the Model 54 cost during the Deoression?In 1933, the catalog price was $61.40 for the standard rifle; other variants were higher.
That is the equivalent of $1,177.65 in 2019 dollars. Not much different cost than a good hunting rifle today.
Regards,
WACA Life Member #6284 - Specializing in Pre-64 Winchester .22 Rimfire
“Uh…if such legendary symbols of no-expense-spared quality & elegance as Pierce-Arrow & Duisenberg are going to be invoked, I’m not sure a gun having a stamped trigger-guard & floorplate makes a realistic comparison. I mean, if the M54 represents one of “the finest guns in this era,” what’s left to say about the work of Griffin & Howe, Hoffman Arms, Bob Owen, & the like? For the money, the 54 was a good value, but it was built to sell for a competitive price, very far from the marketing philosophy of the makers of these luxury cars.”
Clarence, Perhaps not the best comparison to invoke the name of Duesenberg with it’s $9000 chassis only price but the other automakers didn’t just produce V12 and V16 top of the line vehicles for the nouveau riche and old money folk. The 1932 Packard “900” one year only model was created to bring Packard quality to the masses or at least the upper middle class. Packard lost money on that venture but in 1935 introduced the”built to a price “120”” which was truly a middle range car that saved the company from the fate of all of the remaining independent luxury makers who were all gone by the late 30’s. . The “120” was nevertheless a high quality car much as the M54 was a high quality gun. The point I was attempting to make was that during the Depression manufacturers had to compete very hard for sales and that in order to complete successfully they had to produce a quality product and in my opinion the Model 54 although built to a price is nevertheless a fine example of that Depression era quality.
Dave K. said
The point I was attempting to make was that during the Depression manufacturers had to compete very hard for sales and that in order to complete successfully they had to produce a quality product and in my opinion the Model 54 although built to a price is nevertheless a fine example of that Depression era quality.
Not only was the Depression crippling all manufacturers of “best quality” products, but WRA was laboring under the additional financial burden of its foray into the hardware business; only 6 yrs after introducing the 54…bankruptcy in 1931. That’s why I think such efforts at cost-cutting as the 54’s use of stamped parts weren’t the result of mere oversight, but evidence of a rather desperate attempt to keep the company afloat. Thank God for the vision & business acumen of John Olin, leading to creation of the Model 70!
JWA said
That is the equivalent of $1,177.65 in 2019 dollars. Not much different cost than a good hunting rifle today.
Regards,
All these programs for calculating inflation rates produce variable results, depending on the cost factors taken into account. For ex., here’s one that translates $61 in 1925 into $890 today.
clarence said
Dave K. said
The point I was attempting to make was that during the Depression manufacturers had to compete very hard for sales and that in order to complete successfully they had to produce a quality product and in my opinion the Model 54 although built to a price is nevertheless a fine example of that Depression era quality.Not only was the Depression crippling all manufacturers of “best quality” products, but WRA was laboring under the additional financial burden of its foray into the hardware business; only 6 yrs after introducing the 54…bankruptcy in 1931. That’s why I think such efforts at cost-cutting as the 54’s use of stamped parts weren’t the result of mere oversight, but evidence of a rather desperate attempt to keep the company afloat. Thank God for the vision & business acumen of John Olin, leading to creation of the Model 70!
Clarence, Excellent points! I couldn’t agree more that improving on the Model 54 by creating the superb Model 70 was a very astute decision. Thank you for your insights and sharing your knowledge.
A quick perusal of the 1929 WWSG&A suggests that at the time, all Winchester bolt guns were made with stamped trigger guard assemblies. The Models 02, 04, 56, 57, and 58, as well as the flagship models 52 and 54 were thus equipped (anything with a one-piece wood stock).
So rather than being strictly a cost-saving measure, I suspect the stamped bottom metal of the M54 was originally designed that way just b/c that’s the way Winchester did bolt guns at the time.
It took a while (and maybe the lifting of the Great Depression) before they went to stronger (and better looking) milled bottom metal like on the Milsurp Mauser, Springfield, and Enfield bolt actions of the day or the Remington M30.
Just my opinion… 
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
Louis Luttrell said
So rather than being strictly a cost-saving measure, I suspect the stamped bottom metal of the M54 was originally designed that way just b/c that’s the way Winchester did bolt guns at the time.
Very plausible, but if so, I think it was an example of the “inside the box” mentality that contributed to bankruptcy; especially after examples of what top-quality bolt guns should look like had been produced over many years by the builders of rifles based on the ’03 Springfield–from which the 54 had itself inherited features like the coned breech & clover-leaf tang.
Whereas the 54 had had the advantage of being introduced at the peak of Roaring Twenties prosperity, the Depression was far from over when the 70 came along in ’36.
Hi Clarence-
I totally agree with your “inside the box thinking” posit!!! At the time it was introduced in 1925, I doubt the Winchester executives (dinosaurs) had thought of the M54 as much more than a utilitarian gun that would appeal to WWI Veterans. The idea that high powered bolt guns were going to be the product of the future would have been an anathema to the traditional lever gun oriented Winchester execs. Think of the fate of the poor Model 51…
Since “Black Thursday” was October 24, 1929, Winchester’s timing with the M54 could not have been too much worse. The M54 was a somewhat radical departure for the hide-bound company. At least the Winchester factory finally got it closer to right on the M70… Even though the M70 was designed in less prosperous times than the M54, maybe they finally decided there was a market for high quality bolt guns???
You’re sure right that the Great Depression was still far from over in 1936. My late Dad was born in ’27 and I’m pretty sure the family (in rural VA) was still dirt poor in ’36!!!
Best on Memorial Day!!!
Lou
WACA 9519; Studying Pre-64 Model 70 Winchesters
I have a lot of respect for the M54. I recall my grandfather shot the biggest deer of his life with one chambered in .30-06. I believe he considered it the best deer rifle he ever owned. I’ve owned one in .257 Roberts. It was in very high (original) condition with one exception – the barrel was cut. I think to 20 inches. It was still very accurate but ultimately I just couldn’t abide the cut barrel. I mainly bought it for the condition and the chambering.
For me, my real soft spot for the M54 is with the rarer calibers. I’ve been tempted by .220 Swifts, .250-3000’s and a couple others.
Louis Luttrell said
You’re sure right that the Great Depression was still far from over in 1936. My late Dad was born in ’27 and I’m pretty sure the family (in rural VA) was still dirt poor in ’36!!!
I’m sure mine were–as both my parents were born during WWI in Oklahoma, where the agricultural Depression began several years before the Crash of ’29. Not until late ’39, when war-orders from Europe began flooding into this country, did the Depression really break.
A few points please, not in particular order. Just as recalling various statements.
First, comparing big name custom gun shops (aka custom gun houses in England) to mass produced guns; strictly apples to oranges. Little application I can see to the points here. Production guns at ‘average consumer’ prices; versus bring your dollars and ideas, we’ll create as great the masterpiece as your dollars to buy!
Second, Winchester wasn’t the first, nor even the first successful, manufacturer of high power rifles adopting stamped bottom metal. That honor to Savage with their Model 1920 rifle. That species hanging on until the Depression finally taking it out. For the economies it embraced, a great gun itself!
Third, while I agree completely that Doughboys of the Great War were part marketing impetus for high power bolt action genre. I believe that Winchester was principally forward-looking. Expanding and capturing market share as noting mausers taking over world military markets and infiltrating sporting markets as well.
Fourth, excuse the reiteration, but in context of Model 54 apparent economies, the firm betting big on entering a market largely dominated by Remington with, as noted, all the cards provided by surplus components, machinery, tooling, skilled workers – plus fours years in the market. Careful balance in 54 design seeming prudent. Playing in ‘most for consumer money’ in marketplace. Jake Consumer, in those twenties probably not even noticing bottom metal. Rather focused on sleek, lighter, less bulk, plus proliferation of bolt-capable chamberings. Remington had the field to lose… And did! Argue with success if you wish, but kindly remember Winchester of nineteen twenties or thirties, not playing to a critic-audience better part of a century later!
Sixth and postscript. Winchester springboarding from the nice 54 to the 70. For many of us the best ‘balance’ of production model design, materials, workmanship; overall quality. Enduring in admiration of ardent proponents, to the present. For the Model 70, pickey point to me, bit clunky stock designs. Seeming there, point for arguing room for “Standard Model” improvements; such reflected only in pricey Super Grade iterations.
Nothing’s perfect!
Even me! 🙂
iskra said
Winchester wasn’t the first, nor even the first successful, manufacturer of high power rifles adopting stamped bottom metal. That honor to Savage with their Model 1920 rifle. That species hanging on until the Depression finally taking it out.
That rifle retailed for $45 at the time the 54 listed for $61; a significant price difference at the time.
1 Guest(s)
