The stock work on this MS 350b here: https://www.gunbroker.com/item/761151641
Sure looks a lot like the stock work on this Amarillo, Texas Hoffman Arms Co rifle listed here: https://www.gunsamerica.com/99...TOM-MAUSER-30-06.htm
What do you guys think?

Definitely similar.

The style is similar, but I don't think the inletting on the Mauser nor the checkering is up to Hoffman standards.
Lots of miscues in the checkering, gaps in the inletting, rear tang sits high, ect.

Nice looking rifle though.

Gunhill stocks (and probably some others) offer a semi-inlet for this particular Mauser for less than a couple hundred and will add the forend tip, needed wood in the grip cap area ect if you want.
Not saying that's what it is, but that's one way to get to what you see..

Just my opinion of course.

quote:

Originally posted by 2152hq:
The style is similar, but I don't think the inletting on the Mauser nor the checkering is up to Hoffman standards.
Lots of miscues in the checkering, gaps in the inletting, rear tang sits high, ect.

Nice looking rifle though.

Gunhill stocks (and probably some others) offer a semi-inlet for this particular Mauser for less than a couple hundred and will add the forend tip, needed wood in the grip cap area ect if you want.
Not saying that's what it is, but that's one way to get to what you see..

Just my opinion of course.

I agree that it’s not up to Cleveland or Ardmore standards, but could be considered as being to Amarillo standards.

Have you ever messed with an Amarillo Hoffman?

quote:

Originally posted by Jmbrown:
Have you ever messed with an Amarillo Hoffman?

Just my own. Incredibly accurate shooter with handloads.

I know yours is outstanding Frostbit. I was just wondering if ismith had ever messed with one since he made it sound like quality was less on the Amarillo one. I've never got to play with one of the Cleveland or Ardmore rifles, but I can't really find anything to pick on my Amarillo rifle that would say the quality standards weren't all there.

quote:

Originally posted by Jmbrown:
I know yours is outstanding Frostbit. I was just wondering if ismith had ever messed with one since he made it sound like quality was less on the Amarillo one. I've never got to play with one of the Cleveland or Ardmore rifles, but I can't really find anything to pick on my Amarillo rifle that would say the quality standards weren't all there.

No, I've never messed with an Amarillo Hoffman, only a Cleveland Hoffman action. I did however read, and have seen pictures that have backed up my assumption, that while the the Cleveland rifles were the best of the Hoffmans. The talent they had building those rifles was incredible.

It was likely stocked in the 50's or 60's so not a Hoffman. Sure looks like whoever built it was either a former Hoffman stockmaker or copying a Hoffman.

Both look similar to a whole lot of other stocks. And the cheekpiece is totally different.

I guess I'm just not seeing it...

If its an Amarillo Hoffman it will be so marked on the barrel...

Ive owned both and the quality of either is excellent and the same, made by the same fellow..Ive heard that that BS that quality went to hell with the Amarillo, but that's not right, He just moved there for his health..

Damn I didn't know they had an internet back then, but apparantly nothing has changed!

Not positive i's a fake, but certain lines just don't look right and I'd be very surprised such crappy wood would be used

Not 100% positive i's a fake, but if's i's genuine, it's a poor example of their work.

It’s not a Hoffman and the wood is plain (and probably black walnut)but not a bad looking rifle all in all.

This particular 350 is a long way from perfection. However, a 350 is a great gun.

Ive seen a lot of HOffmans that, like some high dollar English rifles, that have well laid out and cured wood, but no a lot of marble cake and that bothers me not! workmanship does however..I've also owned several Hoffmans over the years. I think Jack Belk has a Kornbrath engraved Hoffman and the wood is very good but not what most Americans like..To some purest a lot of figure is gaudy. What I am sure of is Hoffman didn't checker that gun or put the ebony FE on it.

The stock on this rifle does not resemble any Hoffman Ive seen...your first clue is that overly long forend that was popular in the mid 50s and 60s, and its an add on with glue showing or a repair?...and the abundance of wood still on the gun, Hoffmans were leaner and meaner, at least the ones I owned were. My final decision is if I were buying it I would not buy it as a Hoffman, just another nice .22 Rifle, and I wouldn't buy it in the first place.

Additionally the metal work, sights etc. are not Hoffmans work or styling IMO...but without gun in hand I would not swear to it..If its a Hoffman it will say Hoffman on it, end of story.