Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Savage Collectors Did all the Speigels have...

You could possibly letter that rifle.
It is believed ~371xxx is the low cutoff for the gap in the ledger.
Mine is 377xxx so I haven't tried. (yet)

"i before e except after c"

Gene , Wondering if there has been a conclusion on scope blocks or was it belding and mull?

When did Spiegel close down? Did they sell guns until the end? Did anyone here ever actually buy a gun from them?

We never had a Spiegel catalog in our house. We were a Sears and Monkey Wards family.

My 99R in 250 with the holes is 369,5xx. Been meaning to letter it..

My conclusion is no, others still think yes. The Spiegel catalogs have no mention of Belding & Mull, the pictures show Mossberg scopes, the descriptions say "drilled & tapped for standard scope blocks" - Belding & Mull took special blocks and the examples of their front blocks I have seen do not look suited to the hole spacing on a Spiegel. The few examples seen of blocks that fit these holes would not work with a Belding & Mull. If you look at the Spiegel catalog pages all of the guns drilled & tapped for scopes could be ordered with one of a couple special Mossbergs scopes already mounted.

Looking at the catalogs, although Spiegel never seemed to have guns made under their own name, they had manufactures make models with special features only offered by them, this is very apparent with the Stevens & Mossberg 22's they sold, They also had Mossberg make scopes with special features exclusively for them - I do not see them drilling & tapping their guns for a odd scope mount that they did not market themselves (Belding & Mull had been making scopes for about 10 years before the Spiegel's came out).

That ad shows scope blocks way out in front of the rear sight. I thought all the Spiegels had the holes under the rear sight. I'm confused.

That is an artists rendition, and is wrong. The instructions for the Spiegel Mossberg scopes (I have a copy courtesy of Groogle Deluxe) say the mounts should be about 7.5" maximum spacing (from memory, my not be exact but I know that's close) - that would put the front holes under the rear sight.

The B&M scope was very expensive so they would have surely mentioned it?

Interesting. If the hole spacing is 7½" it would be a simple matter to mount a Unertl/Fecker/Lyman (if the bases are compatible and if not, have custom ones made up). The spacing is compatible with the 7.2" required of those scopes to achieve 1/4MOA per click adjustment offered by those scopes. If the size of those vintage target scopes is a deterrent, scout up a 4x or 6x Small Game version of the Unertl and Fecker- rugged and short with excellent optics (but not tremendous field of view- but not worse than hunting scopes of the 30's-40's).

I have a B&M (no laughing) scope and mount that came off a Super Sporter and, though I am sure they made more than one type of mount, mine looks nothing like those in the ad. If B&M made expensive gear then I am perplexed as to why someone would have put one on a "hardware store" class rifle such as the 40/45 - given that the mount was purchased when B&M was still making them.

We've noted before that those scope bases shown don't match with what came on the Spiegel rifles.

And love "Groogle Deluxe"!!!

Gene, a few notes:

I asked about the D&T'd because the earliest 99 I've seen that has the odd D&T holes is a 1934 R (no others till 1936).

The 99-H that ctw referenced is one of 3 that I have in my 99-H data, all made 1936. This is of a sample size of 1934,12 ea; 1935, 14 ea; 1936, 19 ea and 1937, 13 ea. I also have one from 1938.

I had a Spiegel set up with Lyman blocks and a Lyman 438 scope using the odd D&T holes at Rick's Savage Fest. Lyman made a rear block that was designed to be mounted where the back two holes are located. It has allowance for the cocked indicator which it mounts over.

The earliest roll engraved rifle I have data on was shipped 11/1936. The major group of roll engraved rifles are from 1938, 1939 and 1940. I have a few non-roll engraved 99's in the 1938 data but non in the 1939 0r 1940 data.

Hey Gary, I've got 10 1899's, and if you throw out the two I got for under $200, and the 2 I got for over $1000, I'm within a couple bucks of that average, good calculator, Joe.

I picked up my 99F with 3x9 Redfield scope for less than $400, I feel lucky.

Not bad, I like the Redfields, I have a 2-7 on my 250 R, Joe.

That 99H in the ad for $40 was pretty pricey for its day. In today’s $, that is right around $750. Not a cheap rifle.

In the "real" world of collecting, $750.00 is chump change.

Yeah, I agree. No offense to anyone, but in the real world 750-bucks is no chump change for anything. Selling new firearms in the Great Depression must have been a great challenge.