I have a M75 and with irons, it was accurate enough to hold the ten ring of the standard 50 yard A23-5 target. My rifle however has a problem that I have not fixed, the firing pin has dented the breech end of the chamber.
A real issue with a M75 and a M52 is sights. Irons are expensive and no one uses them anyway for hunting. My M75 and M52 were set up for the long scopes of the period. This is an example.
View attachment 1104869
I did find a EGW rail scope mount for my M75, but it is so high, and the buttstock is low (for irons) that it is really a kludge. And the mount is only held on by two screws. To acceptably use modern scopes, you would have to pay a gunsmith to make a custom mount. That costs $$$$.
A M75 with a low mounted scope would make a dynamite squirrel rifle.
The H&R M12 is a product improved M52, you can see how I scoped the thing
View attachment 1104870
I do have M52's
View attachment 1104871
The 52D is close to the end of production. I saw a M52E and except for the recessed muzzle, could not tell the difference. The M52, through out its production, was considered an excellent rifle. Winchester and Remington both put top designers on their rifles till the 1960's when both dropped their target 22lr target lines.
This ought to give an idea of the competition between Remington and Winchester in the NRA competition world, pre WW2.
View attachment 1104872
One shooter I know, his factory new 52D had a crappy barrel that needed replacing, but complaints like this are rather unique. The action is an outstanding action, very well designed, and much smoother in operation that the M75. The trigger was better in the M52, but a total pain to function in removing the bolt. You have to push the trigger forward to get the sear to drop, which allows the bolt to remove. You cannot see the sear drop, and it does not always drop, which leads to sear denting issues. I had to take apart my M52 trigger to polish on the trigger parts because of this. The H&R M12 has a positive bolt release, otherwise, it is a copy of the M52.
There are a number of models of M52's, the very early models have primitive sights, but have magazines. The best of the magazine fed series is the M52C. After that, single shot only.
These rifles are obsolete for small bore prone, the stocks do not have adjustable cheek pieces or butt plates. The triggers are heavy, as per NRA rules. The Army commanded the NRA rules committee and they wanted civilians shooting rifles similar in configuration to military rifles. The M1903 was safe with a 3.5 lb trigger, and so, that was the trigger pull weight for small bore rifles. Thankfully the service rifle did not have a frizzen and a flash pan, as the Army troglodytes would have required a flintlock mechanism. The rules requiring a NRA smallbore target rifle to closely resemble a M1903 did not change until the Russians repeatably kicked US butt in Olympic competition. The Russians used the most modern technology they could, and they won. Then the NRA rules were revised so the rifle configuration could deviate from a pistol grip M1903. Kenyon used to modify the M52 trigger so the pull could be reduced from 3.5 lbs to ounces. A Kenyon trigger is highly collectable, that is, way over priced.
Anschutz buried Remington, Winchester, and BSA. This is a 1963 owner's manual
View attachment 1104873
This is very high tech compared with what Winchester, Remington, and BSA were offering, and the Germans continued to modify and improve their product. This is a 1976 model, much more stock adjustments.
View attachment 1104876
Catalogs would show what is offered now is even more advanced; truly space age rifles.
Look at the 1976 Anschutz, and then the 1983 H&R M12. I really wonder how H&R thought their rifle could compete in 1983 with what was out on the firing line. Truly an example of someone bringing a knife to a gun fight.
A M52 with good ammunition and a good barrel is an accurate rifle. If the rifle is mechanically tight I don't see a reason it cannot be as inherently accurate as any modern rifle. The ergonomics are back there with the flint and frizzen, but there is nothing wrong with the basic action. Every so often I see a shooter with a customized M52, and they do well, they are not really rifle limited. Some of the absolute best shooters are using copies of Rem 40 actions in small bore competition. The rest of the rifle is totally modern, stocks, sights, triggers, etc. I think they are not using M52's because the M52 action is more complicated and expensive to make.
