I acquired the rifle shown on page 124 of Petrov's Book Two from the auction last fall, item 663. Michael had further identified the gun after the article in the book was written. I picked up what I think is another rifle by this maker at Tulsa from Monte. Fred will be on this evening to post some photos of the two guns, anyone agree or disagree on the maker?
Dan
Cool pick-up and neat to see two of them together and the 'tricks' he used in making these up. Thanks for posting!
Interesting job of "sporterizing"! You get a custom hunting rifle that still shows its origin as a military rifle. So you get to be proud of both!
Never seen anything quite like those. Thanks to you both for posting!
Dan, why do we thk that both rifles were the product of the same person? Not saying they are not just want to know why we thk they are? I dee some similarities but wondering the proof, for example both are signed
Dan, Michael really liked that rifle and was excited the day he got it (as he was all of them). I think you are correct on the attribution. Sure another will or may argue otherwise. 'Think' is the operative word here and there are certain instincts to looking at these old rifles. Most folks want to guard and preserve their integrity and reputation and you have certainly done so here. The attributes are strong, and the source is extremely reputable. I would not be able to make a case otherwise, so I am in agreement with you on the maker. Something about that 150 Lyman slide makes a Springfield look like it should to my eye. Very nice, hope you enjoy them.
LRF,
The similarity of the forearm shaping thru the finger grooves, the front swivel studs, the similar diamond shaped checkering panels on the forearm and the same way he filled the barrel channel (not shown in the photos).
Of course like most of these early sporters, there is no identifying signature.
Dan
Gary,
I know that Michael had a real like for the NRA sales guns made into sporters and especially those that remodeled the issue stocks. That was my first contact with him when I sent him some photos of these type sporters and our friendship grew from there.
Dan
I have always thought that an 'armory custom rifle' only collection would be a great pursuit and narrow down the field some. There is plenty to learn there as well.
I guess my experience is that of a Johnny Come Lately to the custom 1903 Springfield world. I have Michael's first book, but haven't been able to afford his second.
In regards to the straight stocked sporter stock, would it be possible for you to show the barrel channel where he filled them? I have a few sporterized straight grip stocks laying around and that might be fun to try. Thanks!
Dan,
I don't know if it is camera angle, old eyes or real; but the pistol gripped stock appears to have some rounding applied to the trigger guard/magazine to blend in with the trimmer, IMHO, lines of the stock. Is this the case or is it just the flat on the straight stock gives the illusion? Could these be an example of an early and later version of Wolf's work or just the extremes of his style? Looks good, and I think that is a fine pair to draw to.
Thaine
Thanks for posting Dan. Looks to me like they very likely came off the same workbench. Do you know of any complete stock jobs by Wolf?
John
Thaine,
Yes, he did thin the stock with the added PG, notice that he dressed into the stock bolt on that stock on both sides while the straight stock is close to issue.
John,
I don't know of any complete stocks by Wolf, I will have to ask Joe if there was a Wolf file.
MB,
I'll try to get a photo of the barrel channel filling but it may take a few days.
Dan
Thank you Dan. I have several butchered military stocks laying around and its interesting to see an old sporter utilizing a straight stock.
I see enough stylistic similarities that if both stocks were not worked on by the same hands, then someone tried awfully hard to duplicate the work of another. To me the differences are likely only a matter of being done a number of years apart.
Did anyone notice the patch of wood directly behind the top tang of the pistol grip stock? I wonder if that was done to repair damage from improper inletting that caused a piece of wood to split off, or to repair a checkering mistake.
If you are looking at the line just ahead of the comb, then I believe what you are seeing is the forward end of the wood that was added to raise the height of the comb. A piece of wood was added to the top of the comb and terminates just forward of the comb nose.
John
Thaine,
I see what you are seeing, that the rear tang of the trigger guard has been shaped (rounded) a bit to better fit. However I would say that work is more the results of adding the wood for the pistol grip and then trying to shape it all back to smooth lines. Who ever did the work it was nicely done.
Fred will be on later to post a photo of the filling of the barrel channel on these two guns plus a Sedgley Mod 39. Top is issue stock, then Sedgley 39, then the straight grip Wolf and the bottom is my new rifle with PG added. This particular Sedgley is the same one that Brophy has shown on page 245, I bought it from him after he wrote the book.
Dan
Here it is
??? Am I missing something here, I thought it was said there was similarity of the barrel channel treatment between the Wolf gun and the new one, I do not see this.
Thank you for the picture.
My apologies, I had forgotten what the original one looked like under the metal but they do look similar with the metal in the stock.
I do have some more info now about how Michael identified it as Paul Wolff (I also need another f in Wolff). There was an article in the 1995 Guns & Ammo Annual about '03s and sporters. The article showed another gun made by Paul Wolff for a certain person in CA soon after 1910. This rifle has the same forearm checkering and front swivel while having the long slide 48, added PG and comb with a recoil pad. It also still had the rear sight base on the barrel. I'll try to get a copy of the photo to post.
Dan
