M1922 M1 magazine

[Cosine26]

Bit of Trivia
The following info is quoted from War Department Technical Manual TM 9-280 entitled “Caliber .22 Rifles All Types”, dated 16 March 1944:
“b. U.S. Rifle, Cal., .22, M1922. As initially produced this rifle was designated as RIFLE, U.S. Caliber .22 M1922. Successive improvements have been indicated by the designations M1922MI (later changed to M1) and M2. [Note that initially an capital “I” was used in lieu of a “1”].
Later on in the same paragraph the following notation appears when addressing the M1922’s:
“Most of these rifles were assembled with the NRA type of stock (stock M1922 assembly) and shotgun type of butt plate (plate, butt M1922). Nearly all of these rifles not have the later type of bolts and magazines, and the sights have been changed to the No. 48C Lyman receiver sights in general use on subsequent models.”
“c. U.S. Rifle, Cal. .22, M1. This rifle, formerly designated as the M1922MI, ….” [Again note the use of the capital “I” in lieu of the “1”]
I cannot verify the accuracy of this info but this is an official WD TM and not a reproduction, that was given to me by an Army armorer.

[Herschel]

Cosine26, That is an interesting comment about the War Department changing the nomenclature of the 1922M1 Rifle to simply .22 Cal. M1. I have both the 1940 and 1944 editions of TM 9-280 and had never noticed the changed nomenclature in the 1944 edition. The 1940 edition shows the nomenclature as 1922M1. Of course none of the receiver markings were changed to obliterate the 1922 from the 1922M1. Well, I had best not say "none" were changed as many non-standard things happened at SA. Unfortunately this gives false hope to those among us who have cobbled up parts guns and think they must have a limited edition, prototype or special order item.

[Johnny Peppers]

As far as I know all the 1911 and 1911A1 pistols sold through the DCM in the 1960's were noted as Unserviceable on the form DD 1149, but most of the 1911 pistols were fresh from arsenal overhaul, and the 1911A1 pistols were from excellent to a few that were new in the original factory shipping boxes. Their price was $17.00, luck of the draw.

[Cosine26]

Hi Herschel,
I just went and looked at my DCM acquired “M2” and I had never noticed that it has the capital “I” instead of a “1” for M1922M1. It is in the below 2000 S/N range and was evidently originally manufactured as a M1922MI and converted to an M2. The annotation on the receiver is in 6 lines read from the right:
U.S.
Springfield
Armory
Model of 1922
MII CAL. .22 (the second "I" is an add on, by SA I presume)
1xxxB
It has a SA 5 42 barrel.
The bolt itself is just marked “1XXX” and is equipped with the slotted headed screw.
If interested contact me and provide me an e-mail address offline and I shall provide the complete S/N offline.
Cosine26

[MK111]

Thanks for the new information on 1922MI. I just check my two rifles and indeed both have a "I" following the "M". Never noticed that before. My 1922MI converted to "M2" the second "I" looks like it was put on with a chisle just a straight line thicker at the top. But I guess we will agree that the "I" does stand for "ONE".

[Loy Hamilton]

anyone show a M2 SN 11633?

[bmorrill]

Just to add to the thread - I have an M1922 (127xx) that had a number "2" struck over the "I" when it was upgraded to M2 specs, instead of a second "I". Barrel date is 11-26 and there is no "B" following the s/n.

[emmagee1917]

The mag was mine. Triple K out of Calif. It would feed if loaded with 2 , maybe 3 rds ( too long ago to remember) , if loaded with 5 it would not work at all. The guy who sold it to me at the Phx. SAR show said lifetime warrenty , but would not do it. Told me to ship it to the factory. Did that , they said it was bad , but never sent a replacement. Asked for my old one back so as to place on a table and tell everyone about my dealings with them , they refused. I was out 35-45 dollars on the mag , 5-10 dollars UPS , and maybe 20 dollars on phone calls. Ended up running into a seller who had several ( 4 to 6, don't remember )orig. ones for a little more. They all work perfectly. But I will never buy a triple K mag again and I still turn people away from that seller when I can. Chris