|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,469
Posts545,147
Members14,409
| |
Most Online1,335
Apr 27th, 2024
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 297 Likes: 1
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 297 Likes: 1 |
1903 Springfield The results speak for the interest. N***o had it up until the actual bidding and then hit his max around ~750-800. Hopefully someone here got it, because it raised a lot of questions in my mind(not hard to do). I have a hunch based on SWAG not knowledge and am really curious. Thaine
It ain't ignorance that does the most damage, it's knowing so derned much that ain't so! J. Billings
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 5,533 Likes: 169
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 5,533 Likes: 169 |
What happened to the front receiver ring?? What are all those beating marks?? You think that it is a Neider or Wundhammer?? http://www.finegunmaking.com/page25/page25.htmlMike
Last edited by skeettx; 08/15/15 06:14 PM.
USAF RET 1971-95 ![[Linked Image from jpgbox.com]](http://www.jpgbox.com/jpg/57865_80x60.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,156 Likes: 23
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,156 Likes: 23 |
Given the bidding, my guess is that the two bidders had a pretty good idea who did it. With the premium, it was a lot to bid for unknown sporter. Neither bidder was onsite so they were just bidding on the photos and whatever else might have been communicated via phone prior to the auction. The action is too late to be a Wundhammer and the tang doesn't look reshaped either. My guess is a Mielcarek, based on some similarities that I see from this prior thread. Mielcarek
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 297 Likes: 1
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 297 Likes: 1 |
Mike,
From the pictures, I get the impression that the rifle was originally stocked with the issue sight. If I am seeing correctly, it looks like there are gaps where the sight fit in the stock. I could be dead wrong. However, if I am correct, perhaps some ham fisted individual banged up the receiver ring removing it with the Lyman being installed at a later date. I just can't tell for sure from the pictures. Neither of those makers were my SWAG.
PhysDoc
Joe's post from a couple of months ago was the only thing I could find similar after a day of searching this site and going through Michael's books and others. Swag was what I have to term it, since I didn't have much else to go on. I had hoped the receiver and other minor issues might have kept bidders away. LOL, good thing I didn't play the ponies on the same hunch. The odd inlay on the left made me pause but I could find nothing else to tie it to. Hope we find out.
Thaine
It ain't ignorance that does the most damage, it's knowing so derned much that ain't so! J. Billings
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,156 Likes: 23
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,156 Likes: 23 |
Yeah, unfortunately in this game, we don't always have too many examples to go with. Here is a link to Michael's Mielcarek which, if I understand things correctly, is unmarked. I gather that Michael attributed it to Mielcarek because it is virtually identical to the drawing that Joe posted from Michael's collection Mielcarek
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 282
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 282 |
The action is too late to be a Wundhammer and the tang doesn't look reshaped either. My guess is a Mielcarek, based on some similarities that I see from this prior thread. Mielcarek Wundhammer, I agree but I can't get past the shape of the grip, comb, and cheek piece to agree on Mielcarek.......unless you see something I don't.
Last edited by texraid; 08/15/15 11:11 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,156 Likes: 23
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 1,156 Likes: 23 |
The action is too late to be a Wundhammer and the tang doesn't look reshaped either. My guess is a Mielcarek, based on some similarities that I see from this prior thread. Mielcarek Wundhammer, I agree but I can't get past the shape of the grip, comb, and cheek piece to agree on Mielcarek.......unless you see something I don't. Hi Art, Every time, I have a theory, I try to find faults with it. You've hit on every major fault, especially the cheekpiece. Also, Michael's Micarek also had a barrel band, which the one on proxibid lacks. As for why I think it could be a Mielcarek, I am basing that on the overall similarities in overall stock shape, both also possess a dip in the stock on the left side of the receiver ring like found on Winchester Model 70 stocks. Both have early very long Lyman 48, both have hook swivels, both have some sort of plug to cover a recoil lug. Though on Michael's rifle, the recoil lug is located almost directly under the bolt release. On the rifle on proxibid has an inlay a bit further back which I presume covers a recoil lug. Please bear in mind, that I am only offering my opinion, which I hold at best loosely. Feel very free to disagree with me.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 48
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 48 |
My thoughts on the plug that is just in front of the rear action screw is that it's either a wooden dowel installed there to repair an internal crack or check , or more likely, since it doesn't go through to the right side, a wood screw installed for the same repair, and the head covered with a wooden plug.
The recoil lug on Springfields is under the front receiver ring, as in the picture of Michael's Mielcarek
|
|
|
|
|
