I ran across a beautiful rifle in a "back alley" gun store. It is supposedly a "pre war Griffin & Howe rebarreld post war to 257 Weatherby"

The stock looks like French Walnut, (reddish) staight grained with a lot of fiddleback. The lines are obviously European with a rounded comb and oval cheek-piece. It has an ebony forend tip. Checkering is tastful, but looks a little worn. The wood to metal fit is outstanding as is the finish. The fit is perfect. When the gun is mounted, I look right through the center of the rings while the cheek is in firm contact with the cheek piece.

The blueing is high luster and very nice. The mount (not rings) is similar to a color case hardened finish. The bottom metal seems military in origin, (the floorplate release is similar to M98K) but the trigger bow has been nicely streamlined.

The barrel is a Weatherby barrel. 26" in a medium varmint weight.

The reciever is not drilled or tapped on top, but wears a side mount, detachable Griffen & Howe camlock mount and rings that dove-tail in from the front.

Overall condition is nearly like new. There are no nicks, scratches or rust, just a little wear (very little) on the blueing and the aformentioned checkering.

This is very nice albeit not ornate or fancy rifle. Workmanship is as good as I have ever seen short of a full blown "custom".

My question is: Is this for real? The front receiver ring has the Springfield armory markings. Did Griffen & Howe use surplus or possibly new "03" actions?

The asking price is $995. Is it worth it?

I was considering building a .244 Ackley Improved for a long range varmint gun with a secondary use for Whitetails from elevated stands over large hayfields. I think this weapon would do that job nicely

Wildcat Junkie---

G&H used mostly 03 actions with a generous helping of commercial Mausers thrown in.

It *sounds* like a G&H gun but being rebarrelled, which lost the G&H inscription on the barrel, AND being rebarrelled in that, severely un-classic, caliber, REALLY kills the value.

You say "The blueing is high luster and very nice", is troubling, too.

G&H used the Neidner rust blue formula before the war. It should be a gray/blue matte finish and NOT black. If it's been reblued along with re-barrelled *I* think the absolute max to pay would be half of what they're asking.

The side mount, while normal for rifles of that perion, are a deal killer in most modern guns unless it *has* to have one......Mannlicher-Schonoaur, etc.

BTW-- If you want to go back to a standard (.473) cartridge you'll have to have a new bolt.

You didn't mention the normal furniture found on a G&H stock......horn or steel grip cap and buttplate, horn or ebony forend tip and super grade M-70-style inletted sling mounts. I've never seen a pad on any G&H of less than 350 Rigby caliber. I've never seen anything but a red Silver's pad on a G&H, either.

If there's an added pad or Uncle Mike's sling mounts on the stock you can trim another $200 off the offered price.

I fear a fine old gun was Bubba-dized. If original it would certainly be worth the money ask. As it is the deductions take more than half, in my opinion........but I haven't seen the gun, either.

If it was origional it might be worth it. After a rework and rebarrel to 257 Weatherby, I doubt it.

The bolt face and rails have been obviously modified for a magnum cartridge so converting the rifle back to a standard head size and case as you desire is no longer feasable. It's not worth much anymore because if it was a Griffin and Howe, it ain't anymore.

Wildcat Junkie.....

Here's a couple pictures of original G&H Springfields. Between the two, it will give you an idea what furniture and finish would look like.

I fear Jack is right. The re-barreling....particularly to that caliber....causes value to plummet.

My only addition would be.....an original G&H rifle value isn't hurt by the G&H sidemount. Jack is certainly correct that they aren't popular or preferred in a rifle of current configuration.

It also begs the question about open sights on that rifle. A G&H quick-release sidemount typically indicated open sights. Most popular on G&H Springfields was the Lyman 48 receiver sight and G&H band front. Those might have been discarded when re-barreled.

GV

http://www.hunting-pictures.com/members/GrandView/G&H%20Springfield.jpg

http://www.griffinhowe.com/gunpics/ACF146.jpg

Grandview ! (to the music)Memories, Memories...
Neat Pix !
One other thing, When G& H installed one of their side mounts they typically did NOT use the 2 dowell pins plus three screws to attach the base. The screws were specials, dummied off and hidden on the face of the base and in the race way inside the receiver. A classic way of fitting to look as if machined as part of the receiver. So impressive a job that from the 2nd one I installed through to "No WaY!" I used the same system. ( Well,on pre war G &H anyway) Those
pre-war G&H '03 s had a "look" and if with side mount that installation was a seamless part of it.

GrandView,

Great pics!!!! I have always wanted one of the period Springfield sporters, but I have yet to have the opportunity to acquire one. Well, maybe one of these days .

Jim

Grandview: Nice rifle, made for a shooter! Looking at the checkering lines on the right side of the grip- does this stock have one of Alvin's Wundhammer swells?

GV--

That's thin shelled walnut for sure. I'd guess Circassian (S. Russia) or Turkish. Nice stick, too. It sold for TEN DOLLARS in the twenties and thirties. The most DEE luxe, sho nuff DNA leak good blanks were up to FORTY DOLLARS... James Howe, I think it was put an exclaimation mark behind the price......that was a LOT of money for a block of wood. Redwood was two cents a foot at the time.

I like your term "rather imprecise" regards the worm track. Fisher dryly commented that there, "aren't many neutrals when it comes to wormtrack".

I'd sure like a good close-up of that extractor for my collection.

Jack...

Here's a closeup of the extractor.

http://www.hunting-pictures.com/members/GrandView/worm_extract.jpg

The "worm-tracking" used here is just crossed lines. It's a bit finer than this example of an absolutely beautiful Griffin & Howe Oberndorf Mauser pictured in Jon Speed's fine book.

http://www.hunting-pictures.com/members/GrandView/worm_gh_mauser.jpg

The Oberndorf example is pretty coarse.

Lest we give anyone the impression that it isn't acceptable.......it was certainly the accepted work of that period. That I don't particularly like it is hardly germane. To me it looks like an attempt to make free-hand symmetrical patterns that failed miserably. However, it was a common Griffin & Howe option of the era.

In all respects the Linden wouldn't fair well in a direct comparison with the work of the modern day craftsmen........a 32 Ford roadster is hardly the technical equal of a modern day convertible. But I wish I owned one.

I suspect "worm-tracking" could see a renaissance.........with some Jack Belk refinement.



GV