fbpx

Holy Grail rifles: Hang onto one if and when you can find it

In a previous column I wrote about “Holy Grail” pistols and revolvers.

I have had requests for the Holy Grail rifle version, so here we go…

The first one that comes to mind is the Winchester Model 94. The pre-’64 Winchesters are legendary, but I believe there are newer versions that are better. Somewhere in the early-mid ’90s U.S. Repeating Arms Company (which licenses the Winchester name for its branding of items, including firearms) brought back an improved version of the Winchester Model 94 that had many of the classic old features of the old model.

In 1964 Winchester “cheapened” up most of its line of firearms. Some, like the Models 100 and 88, just ended up getting cheaper “pressed” checkering on their wood stocks. Others, like the 94 and 70, were changed substantially, with not only cheap “checkering,” but complete redesigns and stamped and/or cast parts replacing forgings and milled steel.

Since we’re concentrating on the ’94, I’ll point out that the carrier/lifter was replaced with a stamped sheet steel part and the receiver was changed to some strange alloy (I think it’s even a casting?) that turns brown or purple (or both) if you try to blue it.

Winchester plated this alloy with layers of different finishes to give it a black color. It didn’t take very long for the company to see the error of making the carrier out of sheet steel and it was changed back to a forging. The receiver took much longer to get updated and changed back to the older, better, ways.

About a decade after USRAC took over production, the HG rifle arrived. Unfortunately, they only made them for a couple of years in the mid-’90s and then added a hideous cross-bolt safety to the upper rear of the receiver and ruined its classic lines, in my eyes. A decade early, USRAC made the first big improvement by turning out the updated AE model, which stood for “angle eject.” This rifle was changed to kick the ejecting cartridge/casing at an angle up and to the right.

The old rifle ejected straight out of the top, which made scope mounting problematic. (As an aside, this is the first rifle I ever purchased, in 1984.) The AE model had four 6-48 holes drilled and tapped in the top, then the scope could be mounted directly over the bore, as it should be. When the new, old style, action came back it kept all of the AE improvements and blended in the desirable features of the pre-’64. The result was the best ’94 they had ever produced.

It’s relatively easy to recognize one of these rifles. If it has an upper receiver with parallel top receiver rails, it is not one of these rifles. If the right side has a lowered section (or the barrel is stamped AE), you have one of the two necessary characteristics.

The main one to determine whether it is one of these HG guns is to look at the bottom of the receiver. The link is the plate on the bottom of the action that drops down as the action is worked. If this link pivots at the front on a screw, it’s the mid-model, not the one we’re looking for. If that link pivots on a pin that is retained with a set screw that goes right through the front center of the link, bingo, you have one. Nice!

Do I own one of these rifles? No, I like Marlins better. I sold that first rifle long ago when I started my shop and don’t miss it. If I somehow got it back, I’d sell it again. It was only an AE only, not the HG version.

Now on to the aforementioned Marlins. The HGs here are mostly just any version that is pre-safety. About the same time USRAC was adding the Angle Eject feature, Marlin was putting a cross-bolt safety on their rifles. It’s not NEARLY as ugly as the Winchester version that came along a decade plus later but why there needs to be a safety on a lever action with an exposed hammer is beyond me.

There are also pre-Micro Groove collectors. Marlin brought out a rifling system a long time ago that used a series of very narrow and numerous lands and grooves in the bore.

There seemed to be some advantages to this system with jacketed bullets, but has a reputation for poor performance with lead bullets. Weirdly, it seems to work well with .22 Shorts, Longs and Long Rifles, which are always lead and usually soft as well.

Marlin has since made many editions of its rifles with what it calls Ballard rifling. It’s essentially just standard rifling.

Remington’s parent company, the Freedom Group (which is not, not, not owned by Georg Soros!!!), bought Marlin many years ago. When they moved the factory from the Northeast to the South the rifles received a reputation for poor quality, mostly fit and finish, which affected performance.

The problem came from the fact that the Marlin rifle builders from the Northeast had been building rifles with worn-out machinery for many years and knew all of the tricks of the trade to building a functional firearm with this deteriorating machinery and kept up with the necessary modifications.

I’m assuming few, if any, employees went South with the machinery, so a whole new group of rifle makers were trying to learn as they went – and keep up with demand at the same time.

The demand was huge as the production of Marlins was nonexistent while the move was made. The newer Remington-made Marlins got a really bad reputation, really quickly. As a result, the pre-move “JM” marked Marlins became instant collectors items as well.

Obviously the Freedom Group is around to make money and they know it takes money to make money, so they invested in all-new, updated machinery. Now they are making functional rifles again. The finish is not nearly as nice as what Marlin did when it was independent and the service is not what it used to be (they won’t work on the older firearms, much less warranty them), but the rifles work.

While we’re on the subject of lever actions and buy-outs, let’s move on to Rossi.

Decades ago, Rossi quality was questionable at best. In the ‘80s that was changing fast, to the point where they made some finely finished guns, mostly revolvers. Since we’re focusing on rifles, we can really only deal with the model 92. As the name implies, it is a virtual copy of the Winchester Model 1892 – many parts from each can be made to work in the other.

During that time frame the Rossi was called a Puma and actually had a raised cougar head medallion on the side of the receiver. As a whole, these rifles were well fit and finished. My wife has one in .38/.357 and it works very well.

This seemed to be the pinnacle of their quality, as after that it slipped some, but generally they were pretty serviceable.

Not too many years ago Rossi’s fellow countrymen over at Taurus bought the company. Since then the chances of getting a functional Model 92 has decreased substantially, in my experience. The good thing about Taurus’ patronage is that Taurus will always get a gun working.

Sometimes it may have to go back more than once to be worked on, and you may have ammo type restrictions, but eventually it will work if you don’t get a good one the first time. Shooters “in the know” want that Puma model. The steel MIGHT have been a little soft, but the rifle worked well.

Now let’s go modern, to the semi-automatic.

The Ruger 10/22 is now officially the most popular and numerous sporting rifle ever made. Practically every gun owner has one or two and I can name quite a few shooters/collectors with between 10-20. All 10/22 rifles chambered in 22 Long Rifle have been good. Oh, occasionally a bad apple slips through but I’ve never seen one that couldn’t be fixed. The vast majority are good-to-go right out of the box. About 10-12 years ago Ruger started making major parts of the 10-22 out of plastic.

At first they made a “Winchester” mistake and really cheesed them out. The receiver was wrinkle- painted black instead of the anodizing, and then later epoxy finish, which they had had before. The barrel looked to be a casting, and a pretty poor one at that. The barrel band around the forend and barrel was now plastic, but even worse, the complete trigger housing was made of plastic.

This is a terrible idea, but try to find a new Benelli, Beretta, Browning or Remington shotgun with anything but a plastic trigger guard/housing now.

I guess they were just ahead of their time, at least the price is in congruity with the plastic, unlike the more prestigious brands. Luckily, the wrinkle paint and cast barrel were quickly discarded. These rifles might eventually become a collector’s item in and of themselves as an example how far a great product can be taken to the bottom.

A book could be written about collecting 10/22s, if it hasn’t already, but pre-plastic 10-22s are coming towards HG status. The only problem is that there are literally millions of them so lack of rarity might keep it out of this category on a technicality.

I’ll throw in one last lever action and then save the bolt actions for another time.

The Savage 1899/99 has been collected for a long time, and again, the intricacies are immense.

To simplify, there are, however, two features many 99 buyers stay away from.

The first is the most egregious: the detachable magazine. The idea itself is fine, maybe even advantageous, but the 99 was always linked to its elegant rotary magazine.

Much like the Austrian Styer bolt action, this feature is linked to the aura of the 1899 Savage. When you take that away, a lot of the magic is lost.

But there is an even more sinister problem. When a big chunk of the bottom of the receiver is cut away, the rigidity of the action is compromised and the accuracy suffers a great deal in most cases. Being a conventional lever action rifle with two piece stocks, the receiver only has itself to rely on for stability. Too much of the rigidity was lost with the inclusion of the big window in the bottom of the action.

The second makes much less difference and may even be an improvement from the perspective of the user but collectors have not jumped on board.

The original rifle had its safety down by the finger lever on the receiver. This was a little inconvenient to get to, but worked well and smoothly. It also locked the lever shut. The tang safety is in a more convenient location, but is fairly rigidly attached to the upper and lower tangs. This can make the operation stiff, or if the tangs are bent or tweaked, inoperable.

Another reason the tang safety 99s are less popular could also be that they are later production guns from the 70s and 80s and the fit and finish just wasn’t as well done.

If you own any of these Holy Grail rifles, by choice or on accident, hold onto it. History has proven that buyers eventually recognize and seek out the “best of breed.”

Total
0
Share