Help Identifying SPRINGFIELD ARMORY MODEL 1922 TRAINER 22 LR

[thuggishmage]

I recently inherited a model Springfield Model 1922 and was hoping your expertise could help me identify which one I have. It does have holes drilled I believe for scoop, I assume by a gunsmith and I haven't seen any other ones with this stock. I believe it's one of the 2020 made that isn't a m1 or m2. It still shoots true ( had it out today shooting ) and is in good shape. Low serial # to. I just don't want to be shooting it if it's like a super rare and valuable gun. So any idea's on what it is worth would be helpful as well.

Any help would be appreciated

Here are some pics :

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[thuggishmage]

Here is links since pictures didnt post correctly.

CX

CX

CX

CX

CX

Thanks again

[emmagee1917]

Well , it is an early and rare gun . It has been drilled for a scope and I think the stock has been replaced or has been checkered and buttplate replaced. These changes would destroy the collectors value . Herschel is the go-to expert on these to be sure , just to be sure it's not a variation I'm not aware of . You have a well made and prob'ly accurate rifle. Take it out and have fun , I do with my minty M2 and others.
Chris

PS
Most were not drilled on the reciever ring , a few were. Early ones had groved forends , yours may or may not be early. Smooth forends were later production , but don't know cutoff range . No checkering that I'm aware of. Buttplate should be steel , your's looks to be a rubber pad , but I may be wrong . Bolt should be un-numbered and have dual firing pins in the face ( hits the rim twice ) .

[Cosine26]

I believe that you have an early M1922 “Sales” rifle in a modified NRA style stock. The “sales” rifles, I understand, were drilled and tapped at the armory. The Lyman 48 appears to be a very early long slide 48B; probably before the 48C was available, or the armory was using up “old stock”48B’s. The stock has been reshaped and checkered.
Herschel is THE expert in this area.
FWIW

[Cosine26]

Follow On
What has me a bit mystified is the headless cocking piece. This appeared on the M1922M1, as I believe that the the M1922 had a headed cocking piece. The pictured rifle has the extended magazine indicitive of the M1922. I have looked carefully at the picture of the receiver ring and can see no sign of either the "MI" or "M1" added to the M1922 marking so would believe that the receiver is an original M1922. It may be that someone has exchanged the original M1922 bolt with a later M1922M1 bolt. I do not know if the M1922M1 bolt will functioin correctly with the M1922 magazine. The original M1922 had a dual firing pin and required a bolt head with dual firing pin holes.
According to TM 9-280 dated 16 March 1944, the majority of the M1922's were originally equipped with the NRA style stock and the Lyman
48B sight sight with five "clicks" per revolutioin of the elevation knob. The TM also states that all M1922's had been brought up to the lator configuratiions except those which had been sold. I do not see an "A" or "B" added to the serial number, so would believe that if the rifle were updated it was not done at the armory. I believe that the receivers were not modified and were interchangeible with all models of the M1922. and M1922 could be upgrded to either the "M1" or "M2" configuration by ordering the correct bolt parts.
I am sure that Herschel will have the answer.

[thuggishmage]

Thanks for the quick reply's. Alot of good info there.

The butt stock is metal not rubber. So everyone thinks it's not for collectors because it's not original then?

Thanks again

[emmagee1917]

I THINK the original had a headless cocking piece , the M1 introduced the head. ( Were are you Herschel ? ).
Here you go , look at reply 4 .
Model 1922 identification help?
HTH , Chris

[Cosine26]

According to Brophy the illustration in the TM 9-280 is not of the M9122 but is of the prototype M1920. The M1922 was manufactured with the headless cocking piece. I believe that the bolts in total are interchangable but of course the headspace would have to be checked. It is indicated in Bropjhy's book that rifles returned to the armory for repair were brought up to the latewt configuratiion. If your rifle has the double pointed striker, it may well be original.
According to Brophy, the M1922 scope blocks were mounted on the barrel at the armory, not the receiver. From your pictures, it looks as if there are scope block holes in the barrel just forward of the receiver. If so, the receiver mounted block may added after original manufature.
I still believe that your stock may be the original stock, "reworked" by a gunsmith.
The Lyman 48 is a very erly 48
I am not a collector so do not know how much the "modifications" detact from the rifle. Some M1903 sporter conversiions are works of art and command a nice price, even if modified. It is still a nice rifle and a relative (I think) piece of history.

I hope this clarifies my previous posts. I was relyig on government publications to be correct. Evidenlty it is not. I have both the 1 Oct 1940 and the 16 March 1944 editiions of TM 9-280 and both have the same description of the M1922.

[thuggishmage]

A little background on the person who owned the rifles is. He was in WWII and one of his friends was a gunsmith ( His friend actually did the ivory grips for Pattons 1911 ). He did himself mod the Springfield 30 6 which I'll include links to pictures below. It almost looks like the stock from the 30 6 might have been the stock that had gone with the 22 but not sure. He also was a mechanic and did some of his own metalwork so it's possible he did the mods as well.

He died at 98 in Jan 2013 RIP

Here are links to his Springfield 30 6 and Springfield double barrel 12.

CX

CX

CX

CX

Thanks again for all the info. Quite interesting stuff

[Cosine26]

The 30-06 rifle that you show in the above mictures is a M1917 commonly called enfield. The stock with this and the M2 Springfield are not interchangable.