Take a look at the top of the front ring! This one is not quite as bad as one in CT where they cut so deep that the bolt lugs can be seen.

The bolt looks like it was switched also.

http://www.gunbroker.com/Auction/ViewItem.asp?Item=34474708

Hey Savage, I looked at that one too. I think a person would have to be willing to shell out some serious $$$ for a par of claw mounts and rings to fix it. Of coarse a new stock would be in order to justify the new mounts and then a reblue for the rifle because you spent all that $$$ on a new set of claw mounts and a new stock. Before you know it the $600 for the rifle isn't that great of a bargin after all.

Well, that was my take when I hit the browser back button.

Terry

Wow, what a great rifle ruined

here's the total deal killer



$150 bucks for the stock and barrel.. it's not a $600 collector.. it's $50 clunker in a super stock and barrel...

it's ruined, what a shame

jeffe

Replacing the dovetail with a blank and then truing up the receiver isn't that difficult. The sad part is that you have to remove the factory checkering (or have an engraver match it).

It is not really checkering or stippling. The pattern consists of little diamond-shaped holes that are rolled into the reciever, creating the illusion of checkering.

Kurt,
I think it's knurled. Think of pressed (impressed actually) checkering.. yeah, slipping something in to cover it up isn't hard, but the "22f" is ruined.. now it's just a 98 in a nice stock

jeffe

I would like to know what exactly it is that you think has ruined the rifle - is it the drilled holes som moron put on the reciever (I agree on that one!) or is it something else??
//K9

quote:

K9_75: I would like to know what exactly it is that you think has ruined the rifle

Aesthetics aside, which is enough to turn me off, a hole and a dovetail through the top locking lug weakens the action.

quote:

Originally posted by K9_75:
I would like to know what exactly it is that you think has ruined the rifle - is it the drilled holes som moron put on the reciever (I agree on that one!) or is it something else??
//K9

I illustrated the slot on the top of the front receiver ring. It looks wrong to me.

Go ahead and explain why it is good.

Well, to me it is just all about aesthetics and tradition – a gun of this type should have either no scope or one mounted in a traditional European mount. The slot is there for the front base of a claw mount which is perfectly suited to this rifle. When it comes to weakening the action – what do we know -> are there any “good†examples of rifles like this going bad (firsthand please)? From what I have gathered, picking the brains of a few knowledgeable smiths – one of them being one of Sweden’s best (maybe even the best) builders/smiths – is that it doesn’t weaken them enough to cause any harm as long as it’s properly done. There’s been a few other rifles like this pictured on AR before (most with the base sitting in the dovetail) but I can’t remember noticing any comments like this about the strength/aesthetics etc? - JMO
//K9

I happen to have a 22f much like the subject except that it's only drilled and tapped on the rings. The diameter of the front ring is about 1.3" and the diameter of the locking lugs on the bolt is .97". I dont have the dimension of the inside of the action where the bolt turns the lugs to the vertical position but I would allow at least .015" clearance on a side. Perhaps someone will come up with this dimension for us?

Adding that .015" to the bolt diameter twice makes a 1.0" hole in there. That means there is only, in theory, .30/2" of metal or .15" on the top of the ring before the slot is cut!

My estimate of the depth of that dovetail slot is .125". That means that there is .015" of metal left over the top locking lug.

Such a gun might work but in my opinion it looks wrong. By the way there was a similar gun for sale in CT and the slot went a little too deep and the top lug can be seen! One of the clerks borrowed the spoon bolt and at first I thought it was the poor gun in CT.

I have seen many and owned a few bolt guns with only one lug in contact. Plenty of margin under the circumstances.

I don't think there is any safety issue at all though I agree that I prefer side mounts if one of these is to be scoped.

Also, one often sees the area over the chamber treated with the same dovetail and even though I know academically it is safe, the idea just bugs me no end.