Springfield 22 Not Marked as a 1922

I just picked up a Springfield 22 yesterday that has me a little confused. Here is exactly how the receiver is marked.


U.S.
Springfield
Armory
CAL. .22 M2
1242x

No Model 1922 anywhere. It is in a finger groove stock, but there is something a little strange there also. The bolt is NS marked, but it is not like the others I have seen. It turns down and towards the back, so much that there is a large relief cut into the stock for the bolt handle. It looks original, just different.

Any ideas on this one? I will have to wait on a little better light conditions for pictures. I am going to shoot it this morning and see what potential it has.

Now for the bad part. It is scoped and the front receiver holes are mis drilled, shallow and off center. A bad job at best. I can live with that as I plan to find a Lyman 48 and use it anyway.

Well, I asked to soon I guess. After posting, I found my Poyer book and found the receiver marking is normal. I still find the bolt and recessed stock a little confusing.

The bolt was bent for use with a scope. The stock was altered to allow the bent bolt to close.

Common gunsmith work. Cheap little .22's and guys had them worked-on.

If the bolt was done aftermarket for a scope, they sure got it wrong. The workmanship is excellent, but the design does not help for a scoped rifle at all.

I believe that is the first time I have ever heard a of 1922 being called little or cheap. I think we may be discussing different rifles.

I agree - the .22 sold by Springfield Armory, was hardly "cheap". The cost was pretty close to that charged for their M1903 service rifles.

Finally got it cleaned up and back together. Here are the pictures. The more I look, the more I agree it is after market, but it works.


[IMG]http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/n...H/102_0194.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/n...H/102_0195.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/n...H/102_0196.jpg[/IMG]

Yes, someone did drill it (attempted) for scope mounts and they did a horrible job.

Does anyone happen to have a spare Lyman 48C w/ screws laying around that they wish to sell?

---------- Post added at 06:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:43 PM ----------

Just for show, I picked this one up also.

[IMG]http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/n...H/102_0191.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/n...H/102_0192.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/n...H/102_0193.jpg[/IMG]

This one is going to be my Standard Class Small Bore Silhouette rifle. The one up top is going to be my Hunter Class rifle once I can find the Lyman 48C.

For a short period of time in the 1930's the nomenclature of the third variation of the 1922 series Springfield rifles was "1922M2" after that time the 1922 was dropped from the nomenclature and the rifle was marked as and called simply the M2 Rifle. The incorrect term "1922M2" is almost universally used when describing the M2 Rifle on the internet auctions and forums.

Bruce, pm me on the Lyman 49C

Kurt

Thanks Herchell. I am trying to get better educated on the M2's. Never had one until now and don't see many in this area. I am a big fan of the 03-A3 and try to learn all I can about them. They are my go to rifle(s).

One thing I can say about these M2's, they are very accurate. I have tried Walther's, Remington's, Winchester's and CZ's, but these are more accurate from what little I have shot them these past few days.

---------- Post added at 08:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:35 PM ----------

Kurt,

I sent a PM.

Bruce

Hi Rick,
I agree that most knowledgeable people would not consider the M2 .22 to be a cheap rifle. However when I bought mine through the DCM in 1956, the M1’s & M2’s were selling for $30 for “serviceable” and $15 for “unserviceable”. Some may have thought of this as an obsolete army rifle like the M1903 or 03A3 and bought it to convert to a nice “squirrel rifle”. An “unserviceable” M1/M2 could be one missing a rear sight or other parts and was maybe fair game for “sporterizing”. There were a lot of spare parts available from dealers just after WWII. I do not know for sure, but I believe that these spare parts were sold by the army as surplus scrap, for spare parts were never offered through the DCM after WWII. I believe that the M1/M2’s were (unlike the M1903 or 03A3 rifles) declared “obsolete” and no supply of spare parts were maintained in the supply system.
During WWII, the M1/M2's had been superceded by commercial .22 target rifles and were probably not manufactured, nor repaired by army facilities. It was cheaper to repace them with the commercial versions than to maintain a logistics chain for either or the SSA .22's. They were probably probably put into storage and sold off.
JMHO

Maybe I'm splitting hairs, but just about all 1903s and "derivatives" were "cheap" by the late 1950s. I guess I got the feeling the term "cheap" was still being used as a descriptor today, which is definitely NOT the case! :)

[/COLOR]Kurt,

I sent a PM.

Bruce[/QUOTE]

Bruce, you have email.

Kurt