Questions about my 1922 .22

[Dragon 5 Actual]

I got sent over here to ask the experts on this forum from Rimfirecentral. I just received a 1922 from my dad today who got it from his dad who was a rare gun collector and gunstore owner. Thank god I got it when I did, he was going to add a scope to it and thread the barrel and all kinds of bad things. I am working on pics but do not have a useful camera at this location so they will have to wait til I get back to FL.
I am really trying to figure out what I have.
What I know- It has the National Match buttplate with trapdoor.
-Springfield armory on the barrel followed by their ordinance symbol followed by the dates of 03-26.
-The bolt is the Nickle Steel M2 bolt
-The stock I think is original, although it has no emblems in it at all. In fact it still has what I think is cosmoline on it.
-Entire weapon still has quite a bit of cosmo.
-Mint condition
-There is no Engraving at all stamped on the receiver. No serial number, no armory marker or name. The bolt is the only thing that has any info which leads me to believe that part was added during the later upgrade Springfield did.
-Original peep sites I see on all the pics is the same.
-Magazine has no number stamped on it and has the toothed plate at the bottom.

Based on this info and/or the lack there of, what do I have? Dare I shoot this thing? Shelve it, and find a more user friendly bolt action target rifle with easier to find and eject magazines?

[Dan Shapiro]

I'm sure Herschel will weigh in. He's the M1922 guru.

[n64atlas]

Glad you made it over here Dragon, and wellcome to the forum. Herschel is the man to ask, as I told you on Rimfirecentral. There are one or two others as well as MkIII on rimfire and he does post here. Here is a link back to your post on http://www.rimfirecentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=479145
So otheres can see the cell phone pics

[Herschel]

Dragon, From the information you have provided and the pictures you posted on the other forum (thanks n64atlas), I can tell you a little about your rifle. If the barrel is original the rifle would have been made as a 1922M1, probably in 1926. The fact that it has no serial number on the receiver almost certainly means it has been removed. If it was indeed made as a 1922M1 then the M2 bolt and M2 stock are replacements. The bolt, if installed by a govt arsenal, will have the serial number of the rifle etched on it, not stamped but hand written with an electric pencil. It will not hurt the rifle to shoot it. They were one of the best, if not the best, .22 target rifles available in the 1920's. If the magazine does not have an M2 stamped on the top left side, then it is for a 1922M1. The 1922M1 magazine does not extend quite as far into the receiver as the M2 magazine. The result may be that the bolt might over-ride the top round in the magazine. M2 magazines show up frequently on gunbroker and ebay. They usually sell for a little more than $100. It is not unusual to find that the magazine is binding. That should be easily corrected. Beware the aftermarket magazines as they have a poor reputation for reliable functioning. The aftermarket magazines will not have the three little teeth on the sides of the floorplate.

The person who responded to your question about the flat lever on the other forum was talking about a similar switch on a 1903. This is a 1922M1. The switch is moved down to allow removal of the bolt from the rifle. The comment on the other forum about the stock being modified are correct. The shaping of the pistol grip is aftermarket work and the rounding of the grasping grooves indicate it has been sanded. The stock would have come from Springfield Armory with no cartouches, except for a possible M2 on the bottom of the pistol grip. The cartouches that sellers proudly describe on the internet auctions as "correct cartouches" are actually rebuild cartouches. They would not have been on the stocks when they were new.

It might be easier to email me photos than to post them. I can be reached at hsgarner@tds.net.

[Johnny P]

The rifle also falls under the "removed or altered" serial number.

[Dragon 5 Actual]

Its not either as there is no indication of there ever being any serial number in the first place. Its not scored at all with any sign of filing. I am going to get in touch with the Archives over at Springfield and see what they have to say about it.

[Johnny P]

" I actually got a piece by piece ID done by Hershal over at Jouster. He also is of the agreement it is not a filed off serial number, it just flat out isnt there like it is supposed to be."

Best read Herschel's reply again. I think you are misquoting him on the other forum.

"The fact that it has no serial number on the receiver almost certainly means it has been removed."

[Dragon 5 Actual]

Actually from his email the exact words are " From the photo I can see absolutely no evidence of grinding or filing."

I sent him pics of it in an email and that and he gave me some piece by piece IDs on a variety of parts which makes it even more confusing what the hell it is I am dealing with. Springfield told me to call back when the historian is in the office as he had already left for the day today.

[Johnny P]

"The fact that it has no serial number on the receiver almost certainly means it has been removed."

Herschel just said it showed no evidence of grinding or filing, not that it never had a serial number. I have known Herschel for a long time, and have always known him to be extremely polite.

[MK111]

I'm not going to jump in on this one. Just following it on both forums.
However I do have both M1 and M2 orginals magazines available.
Frank

[Dragon 5 Actual]

Well I talked to Springfield and they are left scratching their heads but the mystery is mostly solved. I have a nice shooter and interesting conversation piece. Ill give details of it to anyone who requests them such as I have them.

@MK111 Thanks, let me do a bit more research and figure out which one I need and get a wedding paid off and I might take you up on it.

[Johnny P]

As long as you are happy with it, you don't even have to ask for different opinions.

[Herschel]

I may have contributed some to the confusion as to what I said as I have been sent pictures by Dragon and have also corresponded with him by email. As best I can tell from the photo of the receiver ring, there is no evidence of grinding or filing. It appears to be perfectly smooth. A precise measurement of the receiver ring diameter and comparing it to a similar measurement from a 1922M1 would tell us whether or not metal had been removed. I believe some custom gunmakers removed receiver ring markings from 1903's and put their own names on the barrels and new serial numbers on the rifles. I believe Sedgley put serial numbers in the area behind the sear. I am not an expert on custom rifles and my opinion is based on somewhat limited observation of actual rifles. I said I could see no evidence of the receiver ring having markings removed. That is a long way from saying they never were there.

Additional: There is one thing I can say for certain. The rifle has an M2 Bolt and needs an M2 magazine.

[m1903rifle]

I'm not going to jump in on this one. Just following it on both forums.
However I do have both M1 and M2 orginals magazines available.
Frank..................... I can use a M2 magazine. Please email me details at everett156@knology.net