|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics39,488
Posts561,983
Members14,584
| |
Most Online9,918
Jul 28th, 2025
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,336 Likes: 76
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,336 Likes: 76 |
I was following two rifles on gunbroker last week and wondered what others thought. They came from the same seller, and perhaps had been together for a long time. I wonder if they were stocked by the same person 1903 SpringfieldWinchester Model 56
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,510 Likes: 567
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,510 Likes: 567 |
I am amazed that they sold for so little. Did you buy either one?
_________ BrentD, (Professor - just for Stan) =>/ ![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/qclHjMQ.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 604 Likes: 29
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 604 Likes: 29 |
That is a nifty little 22. Sure look like they could have been done by the same hand.
John
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,336 Likes: 76
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,336 Likes: 76 |
No, but I didn't bid, I liked the 56 a bit better than the 03.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,510 Likes: 567
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 7,510 Likes: 567 |
I liked them both. I think the buttstocks are very similar, so it seems reasonable that both were made by the same person.
An interesting thing, to me anyway, is that the 56 has Unertl-like scope blocks without the quarter moon cutouts for many scope mounts. I assume this had a Winchester A5 on it, which does not use those cut outs but there are usually a divot for those mounts on the left side of the blocks. Anyway, just a detail that made me wonder what was on it for a scope.
_________ BrentD, (Professor - just for Stan) =>/
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 311 Likes: 12
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 311 Likes: 12 |
Fred & I had talked about these guns while they were still alive and the '03 was a DCM sales national Match rifle which in the past I would probably have bid on. I'm trying to be more selective these days.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,336 Likes: 76
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,336 Likes: 76 |
I asked the seller of the 1903 to post a picture of what was behind the trapdoor, but he didn't. I thought the trapdoor buttplate was homemade. It would be great
if someone from the forum got one of these and we could learn more.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 824 Likes: 32
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 824 Likes: 32 |
The buttplate on the Springfield is from a Mannlicher-Schoenauer 1903. There is typically room under the trap for 3 cartridges. Sometimes a cleaning kit.
The clip on rear barrel sight is not an improvement.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,336 Likes: 76
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,336 Likes: 76 |
The buttplate on the Springfield is from a Mannlicher-Schoenauer 1903. There is typically room under the trap for 3 cartridges. Sometimes a cleaning kit.
The clip on rear barrel sight is not an improvement. I disagree with you about the buttplate it is not from an Mannlicher-Schoenauer and looks homemade, but I agree with you on the rear barrel sight. I was bothered by the 20 inch barrel and the non-matching sling swivels.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,447 Likes: 278
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,447 Likes: 278 |
Clip on rear sight? I don't know whether I agree with that description.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
