Winchester Model 62

Status
Not open for further replies.
loose noose

loose noose

Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
3,456
Location
Southern Nevada
Well now my title is corrected, I had Model 92 earlier and had a bunch of notices but no response, as I meant a model 62, dang keyboard.

Anyways I went and checked it out this afternoon an had to pass on it. The barrel looked like it had shot quite a bit of "rock salt" thru the barrel. Further the crown on the muzzle is a bit rough and whitened, from what I presume is due to the rack salt having gone thru it. The rest of the gun looked like it was in pretty good shape other than the handling scratches on the stock. The bluing was in pretty good shape though.

Oh well I've got another Winchester Model 62 to go look at on Wednesday so until then I'll keep ya all posted.
 
It seems real unlikely anyone shot rock salt through a Model 62 .22 RF rifle!

Most likely years and years of aluminum cleaning rod wear at the muzzle.

Rc
 
rc, according to records the gun was manufactured in 1941, I do believe that Federal made a lot of .22LR, filled with a substance looking like fine grained rock salt , with a crimped end in the early '50s-'60s it looks like the previous owner shot an abundance of this stuff thru that rifle as the bore was really pitted and white and the rifling was actually intermittent.
 
Ok I stand corrected, any way I'm going to check out that other Win Model 62 come Wednesday. After looking at that one with the bore appearing to be shot out (ate out) in areas I was kind of hesitant to even shell out $400.00. I'll let ya all know how I fare come Wednesday, on that other one.
 
It isn't rock salt and it probably isn't lead shot unless the gun was a smoothbore.
What you saw was the effects of potassium chlorate priming compound when a rifle isn't cleaned at the end of each day.
While it isn'y really possible to completely shoot out a rimfire barrel unless made of really inferior steel, and some were, it is completely possible to rust one out in fairly short order and many many were over the years.
 
My dad has a 62A that he got when he was 10 (is 87 now). Carried it in the woods his whole life. Says he never cleaned it as a kid, and as I remember only cleaned it once a year at the end of season in his later years. Looking at the cleaned bore with a bore light, rifling looks to be in great condition.
 
Corrosive .22 ammo was being phased out in the 1920's by Winchester & Remington.

The Winchester 62 was introduced in 1932, and was replaced by the 62A in 1940.

So it is unlikely they had any corrosive ammo fired through them.

rc
 
ford8, The one I had was made in 1958 or thereabouts. But like a dummy I went and sold it to get money to buy a Remington Nylon 66, a semi auto so I could shoot more rapidly; yeh I know. Now I don't have either and am drooling over another model 62 to add to my collection. What can I say!:banghead:
 
Photos of Winchester Model 62

Below are the photos of that 1941 Winchester model 62, note the serial number is 124xxx, however the fore piece appears to be the longer 17 groove such as after WWII.
Not sure if the wear marks came out in the photos on the stock, the bore is pristine nice and sharp. I took it out and shot it, brought it home and cleaned it. Couldn't tell if it was very accurate as the wind was blowing pretty heavy, but it did shoot everything I fed it. Did something wrong I'll try again in a little bit.
 
Well took out the Winchester Model 62 out to my range this morning along with my Rossi Model 62G. Needles to say I was a bit disappointed in the overall accuracy of the Winchester. That Rossi definitely out shot the tail off of the Winchester in just about every brand of .22LR ammo I carried.

It did seem to like the Remington Thunderbolt the best, I didn't have any CCI ammo however I did have some Federal JHP, Winchester Dyna points, and American Eagle. The first three shots using Remington would group right at 1/2" at 25 yards however the next two would open up quite a bit to 2+". I don't believe the barrel was getting heated up all that much to make such a dispersion.

Next I'll do my best to get some CCI .22 ammo and try it. Like I said that little cheap Rossi puts 'em all in tight little group regardless of the ammo used especially in a 5 shot group (3/4").

Any suggestions or experience with such a gun? Also what are the thoughts on re-doing the stock, would it detract from the value? I paid $400 out the door for it, and I consider the stock in good condition.
 
Man I feel like the red headed step child, doesn't anyone have any opinion on the Winchester model 62? :eek:

Took it out again this morning as I acquired some CCI Tactical .22LR, not quite as bad as yesterday, but can tell I'm going to have to do a trigger job on it, it's takes two men and a boy to squeeze the trigger on it.
 
I don't have any experience with the 62, but the favorite in my gun safe is it's daddy, a Model '06. It was the first firearm that I ever shot at age 8, and was my first choice when my Dad started giving away his guns a few years ago. Fun gun, but it wasn't designed to be a tack driver.
 
loose noose - IMO the Model 62 is a terrific little rifle. (And very handy in that its a take down). Very accurate & will feed S, L, & LR without a problem. One of my favorite 22 rifles.

Guess they can be pretty spendy now (for a .22 field rifle, anyway)

Good luck in your search.
 
Last edited:
You might want to do a through action cleaning and lube.
And clean the bore throughly with a bore brush & solvent.

A poor / heavy trigger, or poor accuracy on any of the old Winchester pumps would be totally out of the norm.

My 06 with a stove-pipe looking black bore will do tiny groups at 25-50 yards all day.
So will my 62A, and 1890 .22 WRF.

And all three have very easy to manage trigger pulls.

As have all the other dozens I have had come through the shop over the years.
I've never ran across one with a trigger as bad as you described on yours.

rc
 
Thank ya guys, RC I've already did a complete take down and thorough cleaning of the bore and the internals of the gun. Still quite a nasty trigger pull, which I believe is the main reason for the terrible accuracy. It sure doesn't look like it has been shot much, as the rifling is very pristine, as is the blueing on the outside of the receiver where it should show some wear from being carried. (definitely has not been re-blued) The only major wear on the gun appears to be on the stock as it looks like it has been dragged around from place to place and shows some minor scratches and wear.

What do you folks suggest?
 
Put some Outers Gun-Slick graphite grease on the hammer notch and shoot it.

It will get better.

Rc
 
RC just got the gun back together after putting some Gunslick graphite grease on it where the hammer and sear meet, noted a slight burr on the hammer notch and just polished it just a bit to smooth it out. Now the trigger and hammer seem really smooth, once that dang wind stops I'll have to go out and try it. But it is really smooth now, so I hope I've got that problem solved.

Also what are the opinions on re-doing the stock, to get the surface scratches off of it? Would it reduce the value of the gun, which I never intend to sell in the first place?
 
I would rather have some minor scratches and the orginial Winchester 'red' finish left.

It is very difficult to duplicate it during a refinish.

And then they just look refinished, no matter how nicely done.

Touch up the scratches with Tru-Oil, very lightly applied with a finger tip.

rc
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

loose noose
  • Locked
Winchester Model 92
Replies
0
Views
332
loose noose
loose noose
CMV
  • Locked
Cleaning up a Winchester 62
Replies
6
Views
755
P5 Guy
P5 Guy
J
  • Locked
Win. Model 62 or 62A?
Replies
1
Views
282
d2wing
d2wing
GunnyUSMC
  • Locked
Old Winchester 22 pump
Replies
20
Views
2K
Driftwood Johnson
Driftwood Johnson
G
  • Locked
Sears Model 53
Replies
4
Views
953
Dienekes
D
Back
Top