Old School Boltguns

[Char-Gar]

Ed Harris has sucked a bunch of us into playing with old school boltguns to see just how much accuracy these rifles can give. These are 10 to 20 shot groups, with excludes BS and lucky 3 shot groups. Rifles must have been made prior to 1964 with no plunger ejectors allowed. Preferred caliber is 30-06 but I don't think that is hard and fast.

I have a number of rifles that qualify, but Ed is campaigning a recently acquired Winchester 54. I remembered in my safe is this 1954 Winchester 70. I rescued it from a pawn shop about 6 years ago and I have never fired it. I have been waiting for some true and noble purpose to put it to use. I think this is it.

Thus far, looks like sub-sonic plain base bullets are at play. Lots for me to learn.

[Scharfschuetze]

Sounds like a lot of fun! I guess I'd grab one of these to shoot if I was down your way. Note the original Weaver 330 in a Korth mount and the Leuopold Pioneer with its adjustments in the sight base. They really compliment these "old school" rifles. The Featherweight enjoys a Lyman aperture sight.

[Char-Gar]

Those are "old school" lovely.

[texassako]

I like those old school bolt rifles, especially with period scopes. That Korth mount looks a lot like a Stith mount.

[opos]

Don't know if "milsurps" qualify...the first one is a K98 that was "sporterized" in the 60's...still 8mm and shoots great...second one is sort of a milsurp but not...it's a Sears "Ted Williams" 30-06 that is in fact a "sporterized" 1917 Enfield by Winchester...No targets for right now...just got the Sears rifle and the K98 is undergoing "load work up" ....I am old with arthritis so working up some loads with Trail Boss powder to keep under a couple hundred yards...probably do the same with the 06...I hear it works well with little recoil..The Mauser is about to "sport" an old Weaver 4x on a Weaver base and rings and the Sears has a 4x Ted Williams sight on Sears rings and base...I think they are Weaver but not sure.

81827
81828

[merlin101]

This sound like fun! But what is a " plunger ejectors "? Whats the range? I have an old Argie Mauser 7X57 and K98 in 7mm mag and I'll have to do some digging I know there's more around here somewhere.

[Outpost75]

Reading the thread over on the CBA forum, sporterized mil-surps are OK.

This isn't anything "official" but just a bunch of dinosaurs chewing the fat.

Pre-1964 bolt deer rifles, essentially.

If you have a Remington 720, 721 or 722 with a spring-loaded plunger ejector, rather than a rotating claw type, made before 1964, you can shoot it. They wanted to exclude the later Remington 700s and 788s or Savage 110 or 112 which remain competitive in the current production class.

A .22 Hornet would not make it , as it isn't a legal deer caliber, but 6mms, .243s and. 25s, etc. are OK. This isn't an official match, just people showing their 10 or more shot groups, shot at 100 yards, either with iron sights or a hunting scope, not exceeding 6X. They are simply talking about the rifles and loads and posting pictures of the eye candy.

[bikerbeans]

Would a sporterized 1903 Springfield, vintage 1944, be okay? Has an old "TV" style (wide view) Redfield 3x9 with a range estimating recticle.

BB

[Outpost75]

Yup! It fits the profile, if you tape the old Redfield variable at 6X.

[williamwaco]

My first "varmint" rifle was a Winchester 54 in .22 Hornet.
On a perfectly still day. It would cut holes shot after shot after shot after . . . .

This was in the 1950's. Of course, even a mild wind would play havoc with it.

[merlin101]

My first "varmint" rifle was a Winchester 54 in .22 Hornet.
On a perfectly still day. It would cut holes shot after shot after shot after . . . .

This was in the 1950's. Of course, even a mild wind would play havoc with it.

What , is the wind stronger nowadays?:bigsmyl2:

[wch]

Reading the thread over on the CBA forum, sporterized mil-surps are OK.

This isn't anything "official" but just a bunch of dinosaurs chewing the fat.

Pre-1964 bolt deer rifles, essentially.

If you have a Remington 720, 721 or 722 with a spring-loaded plunger ejector, rather than a rotating claw type, made before 1964, you can shoot it. They wanted to exclude the later Remington 700s and 788s or Savage 110 or 112 which remain competitive in the current production class.

A .22 Hornet would not make it , as it isn't a legal deer caliber, but 6mms, .243s and. 25s, etc. are OK. This isn't an official match, just people showing their 10 or more shot groups, shot at 100 yards, either with iron sights or a hunting scope, not exceeding 6X. They are simply talking about the rifles and loads and posting pictures of the eye candy.

It depends on where you live as to whether a 22Hornet is a legal deer hunting round- I found out that the caliber IS legal for deer in PA.

[koehlerrk]

I have a pair of old Savages... one a Model 342 in 22 Hornet, no S/N, but Savage stopped building the 342 in 1955, and then I have a 340 in 30/30 Winchester, also no S/N, so it's pre-1968... unless anyone here can tell me different. Of course, I could always pull out my preferred deer getter, a 1942 vintage Swiss K31....

And in NY, any centerfire rifle is a legal deer rifle.

[NoZombies]

Pretty neat stuff. I may have to dig in the safe and see what I've got...

Any CF is deer legal in FL as well.

[fouronesix]

The pre-64 rule is OK, but "no plunger ejectors" is kind of silly. The pre-64 Win M70 is my idea of the classic sporter bolt rifle and I have more than one. But for pre-64 out-of-the-box bolt rifles, the Remington 721 (produced 1948-62) would likely outshoot most of the Win M70s of the same era- at least the two 721s I've had in '06 would outshoot my '06 pre-64 Win M70s, Win M54 and FN Sporter.

[Outpost75]

It isn't an official match. If you have a Rem. 721 you can shoot it, but not a 700 or 788.

[Scharfschuetze]

That's the kind of fun match we should consider at my club. Lots of guys shooting cast bullets now.

While I always think of a 25/20 as a lever rifle cartridge, this 25/20 might be kind of fun to try, a Savage Model 23a. Like the 22 Hornet though, it is seriously challenged in a mild breeze. While the trajectory of this rifle wants to mimic the proverbial rainbow, it is quite accurate out to 200 yards.

[nekshot]

now I must dig out my mauser .318 bore octagun barrel sporter. I only have 1 mold that works in it so I don't have to wonder which mold to try next! A rcbs 32-170 works fine in it.

[W.R.Buchanan]

Ok this sounds like fun.

Here's some pics of my 1943 03A3 Sporter Conversion/work in progress.

I am building this gun specifically to shoot cast boolits for groups and Short Range Silhouette.

So far it holds and points very well and I am sure it will be a joy to shoot.

This is what I personally think a Springfield Sporter should be . IE in the tradition of Griffin & Howe and the other rifle makers of the 20's and 30's.

Note the Lyman #48 rear sight with Merit adjustable aperture , also note the Lyman XNB front sight that I had to pay too much for on Ebay!

The stock is a Richard's Microfit that doesn't really fit and is the reason why this gun has been a work in progress for a couple of years now. When finished it will look pretty nice as the wood has good character, but until I get the thing fully bedded I can't finish it.

I want it done by next Feb. so I will get on it.

Randy

[Sgt Petro]

That looks like a fun little gun to shoot! Would keep me occupied most of a weekend anyway.

That's the kind of fun match we should consider at my club. Lots of guys shooting cast bullets now.

While I always think of a 25/20 as a lever rifle cartridge, this 25/20 might be kind of fun to try, a Savage Model 23a. Like the 22 Hornet though, it is seriously challenged in a mild breeze. While the trajectory of this rifle wants to mimic the proverbial rainbow, it is quite accurate out to 200 yards.

[Char-Gar]

Interesting little factoid, with some bearing on this thread. I have been wanting to hunt up a good click adjustable receiver sight for the above pictured Model 70 Winchester. Yesterday there was a Lyman and a Redfield on Ebay that ended about the same time. The Lyman (48) went for $157.00 and the Redfield (70) went for $61.00. For my purposes the Redfield is just as good as the Lyman and I was the high bidder.

Sometimes people pay lots of money for a name and that is all they get for their money.

[Harter66]

Any time frame ? 1908,1943,couple of 41's, a 1945 (had it 3 yr haven't shot it). Mauser lg ring carb and sm ring rifle, GI 03 w/bubba stock,Carcano (ringer) and a Arisaka pro-bubba sporter.

As devils advacate , except for a couple of bolt head tweeks and recently a larger front ring the Sav 110/10 platform is unchanged really since 1957. Just as a gee wiz to poke fun at a rule date and be able to say ''but it was built pre-64'' bwahahah.......

[W.R.Buchanan]

. Sometimes people pay lots of money for a name and that is all they get for their money.

Nothing could be more true. "Snap On Tools" come to mind.

My #48S cost me around $125 and the Front Sight Lyman XNB cost me around $100. I bid on several of each before actually winning these .

Neither were perfect by any means. However I am pretty good a refinishing metal stuff so they will suffice.

The Front Sight can be interchanged with a normal Springfield front sight if I want to use the gun for hunting, by simply punching out the pin that holds it in place on the barrel. Probably have to re-sight it in after that as I doubt it would repeat it's position exactly. No big deal.

Both of these sights are were considered "top of the heap" in the years before the 1960's when Telescopic optics started to become more affordable and more reliable. Prior to that if a scope was mounted to a hunting rifle, chances are it would have a Lyman or Redfield receiver sight mounted as a back up system in case the scope cacked.

The Lyman #57 was a less expensive version of the #48 and was used mostly on "Generic" hunting rifles and shared many parts with the #48 series. In fact it should not be surprising just how many parts are common thruout the full range of Lyman Receiver Sights.. Even some of the new ones still use some older parts. When they made the change to Aluminum main parts they pretty much kept all the small parts as they were. This is why I have chastised them so vehemently since the difference in making a steel part over an aluminum part is not even worth talking about, but the quality of the end result is definitely worth talking about. and people do. This is why a used Steel Lyman sight is twice as much as a new aluminum one.

The beauty of the #48 series is the ability to Quick Release the vertical slide to remove it or quickly reposition in a large amount of elevation, and then go right back to Mechanical Zero by simply pushing the release button and pressing the vertical slide back down to it's stop. For people using these sights on service rifles used for target shooting, this was a big advantage.

I have several of these sights mounted on various guns and they repeat perfectly right down to a single click on the knobs. Once you learn how to use one effectively (use a ballistic calculator to develop your range card and then verify) They can be manipulated easily and like I said above they repeat perfectly . This is a confidence builder in any shooting situation.

Randy

[Char-Gar]

The Lyman 48 is a great sight and I have a number of them on rifles. I think they are the high water mark of click adjustable receiver sights. But I won't pay 3 or 4 times as much for one as I will for a Redfield. I won't shoot smaller groups with a Lyman. I also don't remove the rear sight windage arm on most rifles. I do on my Krags and that is why I have Lyman 48s on two of them and an old Pacific, with a screw that contacts the top of the base on the other.

You can remove the slide on a Redfield and put it back to zero, but it requires a little more attention and effort.

[W.R.Buchanan]

The Redfield target sights are way up there. The Olympic, and the Palma especially are some of the best ever made. I really like the curved knurling on the adjustment knobs. It is a little bit of class you don't see often.

The only issue with these sights is mounting them on a Springfield or Mauser. There are special mounts that "Were Made" and they are like Hens Teeth now. Both of these actions require the sight to be mounted on the right side of the rear ring or in the case of these mounts on the top of the rear ring.

One guy had both up for sale on Ebay once a few years ago. (I actually printed the pics for future reference.) The Mauser one went for $250 and the Springfield one went for over $400! Which was pretty crazy,,, I was done with both by $100.

The higher end Redfield's are just as accurate as the Lyman's are, they just don't have the Quick Release feature. The lower end Redfield's are just as good as the lower end Lyman's as well.

On a sight for a hunting rifle that you are not going to change the zero very often, if at all, there is no advantage one over the other.

Both are quality American made equipment. Too bad they are still produced as they were.

Luckily, many were made, and we have Ebay to find the used ones if we are willing to pay the going price.

Randy

[jaysouth]

What , is the wind stronger nowadays?:bigsmyl2:

Don't know about wind, but gravity is definitely stronger than it used to be back in the 50s.

[Reverend Al]

It depends on where you live as to whether a 22Hornet is a legal deer hunting round- I found out that the caliber IS legal for deer in PA.

Same up here in British Columbia (Canada) actually ... only it's even worse. I can legally hunt a 1000 pound Moose with a .17 Hornet, but I couldn't legally shoot an 80 pound Island Blacktail Deer with a Vetterli or a Spencer rimfire. In BC ANY centrefire cartridge is legal for ANY big game animal and there is no minimum bullet diameter requirement or any foot pounds of energy requirement (which they do have in Alberta) so theoretically I could convert a Stevens SS falling block into .32 S&W centrefire and then hunt big game with it if I had a mind to ... (which I don't of course) ... Ya just gotta love un-educated "University nerds" writing fish and wildlife regulations; they might have a degree in their hand, but they don't have any practical knowledge.

[Char-Gar]

In Texas it is legal to hunt deer with any center fire, but not with any rim fire. While folks can pick around and come up with outlandish reasons why this is stupid, and draw extreme and ridiculous scenarios, I feel it is as workable and reasonable as any written caliber restrictions are likely to be. It has been this way for many generations.

[338RemUltraMag]

Hell I am game, I have a 1954 M70 featherweight 30-06 that I can enter, it has a Lyman 48 reciever peep with an adjustable peep. It shoots great with the lee 312-155-2R but we do need to know distance.

The sight was sold to me by FortyRodRay, here on CB

http://i1270.photobucket.com/albums/jj609/joshaaronelli/gun%20and%20game%20pics/20130924_151317.jpg

http://i1270.photobucket.com/albums/jj609/joshaaronelli/gun%20and%20game%20pics/20130924_151336.jpg

[Eddie2002]

I've my dad's sporterized Sedgley Springfield in 30-06 along with the original 2 3/4 X scope on it. I've only been shooting the "J" word bullets in it so far. All my castloads have been to work up plinkers for my Remington 700 in the same caliber. Maybe it is time to expand my shooting.

[W.R.Buchanan]

Eddie: you have one of the classic rifles for this game. Pics please.

Randy

[dondiego]

These are what real rifles are supposed to look like!

[gnoahhh]

I plan on using my Savage M1920 in .300 Savage, just for kicks. It'll drop 10 #311466's into a quarter sized group at 100 yds., with its Lyman 54 bolt sleeve sight- if I knuckle down and do my part. If not that, then my Winchester 54 in .30/30. Now there's a cast bullet shooting fool!

The 54 wears an old Lyman 57. I would love some day to put a 48 on it, but like stated earlier it won't make it any more accurate. It was d/t'ed long before I got it for Unertl scope blocks. I'm too bashful to tell you how it groups with the NEI 180RN (old style) when I put the 20x Unertl on it.