Basically, this is a pretty simple single shot .22LR rifle that I picked up used on the cheap- $90 including sales tax. While browsing at a local gunshop, I found this little gem sitting on a rack with a number of other inexpensive, used .22 rifles. I like peep sights and aside from the price, I have been sort of interested in the new Savages that come so equipped. After checking the chamber, I "accidentally" snapped the trigger, while feeling the fit (I don't believe in dry firing rimfires, without something for the firing pin to hit). Trying to convince myself I didn't need another rifle, I returned it to the rack. (I may have fondled it a couple of more times). After getting home, I couldn't stop thinking about this rifle, and decided to research the model a little bit. I couldn't find much info. Needless to say, I couldn't stop thinking about it and I called the gunshop back and had it put on hold. Returning at my soonest possible convenience, I drooled some more and brought it home.
From what I have found, this model was made from 1945 or 1946 (depending on the source) to 1947. Mine is serial number 1xx (a little over one hundred).
Compared to many .22's, the action is nice and heavy, The bolt seems very over built and is very simple to tear down for maintnance and repair without tools (I should have taken a picture when I had it apart).
The barrel is 22". The rear portion is a heavier target profile- appx. .85". At its narrowest, it is about .6. Near the muzzle, it tapers rapidly.
The rear sight is a Lyman model 55H.
I mentioned that I liked the trigger. To clarify, it is about 1 to 1.5 pounds
The stock is a nice piece of Walnut. Unfortunately, the original buttplate was replaced with one from a JC Higgins. When I bought it, the rear sling swivel was frozen with rust. A little bit of Liquid Wrench fixed that problem. The pictured sling (prewar Finnish M-39 sling) did not come with the rifle. I had it laying around and stuck it on there as an interim measure, until I get something more fitting. I'll probably go with a 1" military-style leather strap sling.
The pictures do not do the wood and metal justice. While there is some honest wear on the metal and a couple of dings in the wood, I don't believe that they are anywhere near as bad as they appear in the close up.
I only have two complaints with the design of this weapon. The first is that it lacks a feed ramp. The cartridge must be started into the chamber directly. The actio. is not cut out for a mag well, it is almost like the action was designed for a magazine- something that I have found out H&R realeased later on. The other thing that could be slightly better is the trigger placement. However, understanding the unique (yet simple) design of the bolt as I do, placing the trigger further from the grip would have been impossible.
(Firing pin impressions- should detonate even the Peskiest Russian primers)
(Action Close Up)
(Overall view)
From what I have found, this model was made from 1945 or 1946 (depending on the source) to 1947. Mine is serial number 1xx (a little over one hundred).
Compared to many .22's, the action is nice and heavy, The bolt seems very over built and is very simple to tear down for maintnance and repair without tools (I should have taken a picture when I had it apart).
The barrel is 22". The rear portion is a heavier target profile- appx. .85". At its narrowest, it is about .6. Near the muzzle, it tapers rapidly.
The rear sight is a Lyman model 55H.
I mentioned that I liked the trigger. To clarify, it is about 1 to 1.5 pounds
The stock is a nice piece of Walnut. Unfortunately, the original buttplate was replaced with one from a JC Higgins. When I bought it, the rear sling swivel was frozen with rust. A little bit of Liquid Wrench fixed that problem. The pictured sling (prewar Finnish M-39 sling) did not come with the rifle. I had it laying around and stuck it on there as an interim measure, until I get something more fitting. I'll probably go with a 1" military-style leather strap sling.
The pictures do not do the wood and metal justice. While there is some honest wear on the metal and a couple of dings in the wood, I don't believe that they are anywhere near as bad as they appear in the close up.
I only have two complaints with the design of this weapon. The first is that it lacks a feed ramp. The cartridge must be started into the chamber directly. The actio. is not cut out for a mag well, it is almost like the action was designed for a magazine- something that I have found out H&R realeased later on. The other thing that could be slightly better is the trigger placement. However, understanding the unique (yet simple) design of the bolt as I do, placing the trigger further from the grip would have been impossible.
(Firing pin impressions- should detonate even the Peskiest Russian primers)
(Action Close Up)
(Overall view)
