Skip to main content
Help Center Community Shop

Model 54 Winchester

dodge69
i posted before about this rifle,i have a model 54 winchester in .270 caliber. the serial number is 352. would this be the 352nd .270 made or the 352 model 54 made ? no big deal just curious
0

Comments

12 comments

Date Votes
  • dodge69
    OK First let me say sorry! Here I go again, My mother in law was cleaning her closet and found a Winchester 54 30GOV'T06. It has a scope that says Bear cub(4x) and the mount is by griffin and howe. Been sitting for YEARS. Gun looks GREAT Came in a leather (saddle bag?) looks like it would be connected to a saddle ..Serial number 515xxA any help would be Great! also was given a Mossberg 42M in 22 s, l, lr. can't seem to find a # but I will look farther..
    Harold
    0
  • rufe-snow
    "Upgrades", like this are commonly done to increase value. To guns that have been bubbaed. The key is to have a pro do it. So that it appears to be as factory original as possible.

    Given that Model 54's, were last made 80+? years ago. Not likely that the finish and wear on the replacement barrel. Would match that on the receiver. Because of this, it's unlikely, IMHO. That a knowledgeable Winchester collector would be fooled.
    0
  • Kenneth Stuart
    Wouldn't even call what was done to the rifle "An Upgrade" - maybe an Abomination for the following reasons: 1) hornet twist is too slow to stabilize the heavier 0.224 bullets fired at .222 Rem velocities - usually not conducive to accuracy, and 2) rechambering to .222 Rem involves not just reaming a new chamber but modification of the bolt face and extractor, magazine, etc. The rifle should have just been alone.
    0
  • dodge69
    Thanks guys that is what I needed to know. I will just leave this one alone. From what I read the 54 was not drilled for a scope anyway. I do not need another hunting gun.
    0
  • MIKE WISKEY
    just to note; the m-54 should have 2 holes in top of the front receiver ring and 2 holes in the side of the rear 'bridge'.

    "Mike, so are you telling me the m 54 could still be a collectable gun if it has a scope?"............short answer = yes. I believe Stith made a mount that used these holes
    0
  • dodge69
    Mike, so are you telling me the m 54 could still be a collectable gun if it has a scope? Are you aware of a mount that uses the holes? I have never seen one without a scope which is a little strange in my part of the country, Missouri. In a lot of the southern part of the state a scope is a pain in the rear as the average kill is not a long shot and open sights are pretty common.
    0
  • dodge69
    OK, I found a m54 on gunsinternational that shows very clearly the holes that Mike is talking about. The rifle shown has a peep sight mounted in the holes in side in the rear. Never paid much attention to bolt guns.
    0
  • rufe-snow
    quote:Originally posted by dodge69
    Mike, so are you telling me the m 54 could still be a collectable gun if it has a scope? Are you aware of a mount that uses the holes? I have never seen one without a scope which is a little strange in my part of the country, Missouri. In a lot of the southern part of the state a scope is a pain in the rear as the average kill is not a long shot and open sights are pretty common.



    Not Mike. But Stith made a 2 piece mount back in the 50's. That could be installed, without drilling any holes in the receiver. Just using the receiver sight holes in back, And rear sight dovetail.
    0
  • dodge69
    What few m54's I have seen were drilled on top. The majority of my guns are lever guns so I have very little experience in bolt guns.
    You guys saved my rear on this deal, I was about to pay way to much for the gun in question, the converted Hornet. I have learned to ask.
    0
  • RCrosby
    Something else to consider. A number of years ago I picked up a 54 that started life as a Hornet and became a .222. I don't recall if it was simply rechambered or if a .222 barrel was installed.
    Didn't matter. Problem was in the feed rails of the receiver.
    Load 5 (as recall) rounds in the mag, close the bolt on round # 1, fire, and when bolt was worked to extract and eject the fired case, all live rounds below it flew out like a covey of quail. Dealer took it back, no questions asked. I was told at the time that the feed rails could be successfully altered for the .222 but I'm just as glad I didn't try.
    0
  • Ambrose
    There are a couple of other things that haven't been mentioned in this discourse: If a conventional scope is to be mounted on a 54, the bolt handle would have to be altered to clear the scope as had to be done to Springfield 1903's and Mauser 98's. And if a useable safety is desired, that would have to be changed, too. The slow rifling twist @ 1-16" has been mentioned but the bore dimensions have not. Per Roger Rule's book, the Model 70 specs for the Hornet are: bore, .217" and groove diameter, .222". Of course the 70 is not a 54 but since the barrels are interchangeable, it is likely those dimensions were carried over from the 54.
    0
  • dodge69
    The gun still has hornet on the barrel and all that was said is it was chambered for a 222. I already said the heck with it. We have a real shortage of good gun smiths in my area, most can replace a part. Any real gun smith work is extremely expensive for example I just got a price not long ago to reline a 22 1885 was $ 600.
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Recent Activity