Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Winchester Collectors Saw a nice 22 Hornet yesterday at the gunshow

Well, I went to a small town gunshow yesterday looking for miscellaneous reloading supplies. Wasn't even going to look at the rifles. Having just bought 2 earlier a few weeks ago. Still waiting on the background check to go through on the classic stainless in walnut stock. Fugging thing has taken 2 weeks and 5 days!!!! But that is a different story. Any how, the hornet caught my eye. For a couple reasons, it was a Hornet and you don't see them much and another, it was a transition model. Forgot to mention it was a model 70. You guys probably figured that anyway. So, as far as the rifle went, condition was a true 80%, but it appeared to be all original. Stock showed honest wear matching the barreled action. Luckily I had a model 70 aficionado standing next to me. A local guy I've bought model 70's from in the past. The serial # reflected its transition period at 68xxx. I was fishing to see how much the seller knew about the rifle and asked if he knew when it was made. He said, "well its a transition model, I believe it was made in '51". At that point, I was calling bs. He didn't know what he had. I said, are you sure it wasn't made in '48? He said, "no, it was made in '51". I say, oh ok. "Is this rifle yours" or are you selling it for someone else?". He said, yeah it was his buddies. Well that explains why he didn't know jack about the rifle. I asked the guy that knows model 70's better than I do if he thought it was the real deal and he says yes, but that he sold one in better condition last year for $3,800.00. He said it was mint though. He said this guys asking price was alright, but condition plays a big part in collector value. The guy was asking $1,850.00 for it. I decided to pass and then later I saw my old retired gunsmith that had a table there. I wanted to get his take on the rifle and figured I'd get a kick out of sharing what the guy told me about the rifle with my old smith friend. Well as luck would have it, his partner came along and bought said rifle. Which was cool. At least the rifle was now at his table and we could discuss when it was made and originality and such. I said, "Floyd, can you tell me what year that rifle was made? I'm thinking it was made a year before you were born".... He gets out his readers and looks at the serial number and says, "yeah that looks about right. But to be sure I'll check it with my cheat sheet". He pulls out his laminated card he's carried around for years and says, "we were both wrong. It was made in '47"... We both get a kick out of being off by a year... That happens, but to think it was made in '51 was a flat out joke.....Good day at the show yesterday though. Walked away with some good reloading components at very fair/honest prices. Most old timers there were enjoying the heck out of socializing and giving someone a good deal. There were a few tables that were price gouging, but no one was buying from them. So, if you guys were to see that Hornet, would you have walked away like I did, or would you have ripped out the ol wallet?

If it was legit and in good shape I would have bought it

It was probably a good buy. I'm thinking a guy would have been happy with the purchase at that price point. I don't think it was a huge "money maker", but a good buy nonetheless...

Yeah, I would've bought it. I need another "shooter" Hornet like I need another hole in the head, but a man can't have too many. Maybe.

Originality and condition are everything.

Yes sir they are.

I'd have bought it in a heart beat. I have a mint one that I paid around $3800 for a couple of years ago. It only lacks the box basically. I took it prairie dog shooting once and was worried the whole time it might get a scratch or something. I take it to the range occasionally but thats it. So yes I'd have paid the $1800 and had one to shoot.

It would have been a great gun for that, for sure. I forgot to mention that with the rifle was a baggie with a piece of once fired brass. Brass looked great, so I'm assuming the chamber was in tip top shape. Was that an issue with these Hornets?

K Hornets are the issue with the chamber.

NICE! and Dang, that may have made you a fun little popper Big Buddy, I need to get mine out of the safe and check the serial number tomorrow, think it's a 1947 too, I have learned from You and men like Pocono I have an incorrect rear sight on my rifle, it has a folding rear sight, that not correct, may need to call Justin to see what the correct sight is and see if he has one for sale.

All depends on the purpose of a gun. If it's an investment or an addition to a "collection", then yes originality and condition are paramount. May even be for someone who wants to shoot the hell out of it- it's their business. Some guys like me consider a rifle for its shootability or history first and condition and originality second (within reason- a KickEase recoil pad on a 70 Hornet would have me sniffling, unless the guy only wanted $500 for it). I'd rather have an 80% gun with maybe even a couple extra holes in it over a museum piece because I'll likely be able to afford it better than the nicer one, and I can use the money I saved for brass, dies, bullets, optics, etc., and to take my sweetie out on the town- all of which is better than having the museum piece and none of the other stuff!

I have a 54 Hornet that's well over 90% that I shoot fairly regularly. If I weren't gacked up I would even crawl about the Pennsylvania pastures with it for groundhogs, which was a passion of mine "back in the day"- and take care not to scratch it but if I did it would be an excuse for a second shot of whiskey to either drown my sorrows or to toast the gun. The fact that it's now a K-Hornet is a plus as far as I'm concerned- it allowed me to afford it, it came from a helluva nice guy here on the 'Fire, plus it was rechambered by none other than Lyle Kilbourn himself, the inventor of the K-Hornet. (God, why didn't Winchester cut right to the chase and make their Hornets K-Hornets right from the get-go?) And truth be told I'm more of a M54 guy than a M70 guy, but that wouldn't have stopped me from reaching for my cash if the gun the OP described were offered me!

Having museum pieces is ok- I sure like looking at them. But venerating them, and locking them away in a dark vault and not using them is kind of like having clear plastic covers on furniture- why keep it nice for the next guy?

I'm in agreement with both of you guys. Although, to me, rifles don't have to be collectors pieces to be useful. One of my most cherished rifles is my 300WBY that used to be a 300H&H. I take that one out and shoot it more than any of my other pre 64 model 70's because it's a shooter. I packed that rifle around for 4 out of the 5 days of my last elk hunt. As I type this, I am in the middle of packaging up and sending my friend 79s here a great shooter 30-06 fwt (made in 1958). I can only imagine the adventures John is going to use this rifle on in Alaska.

Originality is great and that is where collector value comes into play, but I think if I were to ask 79s if he wanted this rifle with a mint 1958 Aluminum butt plate fwt stock, or the one that is on it right now I think I know what he would say. Of course the price would be adjusted since that stock would bring $450.00 these days by itself. This stock is not original to this rifle, but fits it like a glove:


I found this little beauty hidden away in some old gunsmiths shop at the coast last year. Same era as the rifle I'm selling to 79s. I know what pocono is saying in that originality and condition is everything, but that is for the true collector. Guys that can take and use these rifles and appreciate them in the woods or at the range know that there's also great value in a shooter as well.. Sometimes I get a kick out of the ones that can't differentiate between the 2. I have a buddy like that. He has a low comb fwt stock that came off of his 1953 fwt and he assures me it is worth $400.00, even though the finish is flaking off and it has "never been glass bedded". It has to be worth a lot of money right? No not really. That's where condition comes into play and where I will totally agree with Pocono. An example of my friends train of thought: We were at the gunshow saturday and ran across a pre 64 model 70 stock that had a ventilated recoil pad, poorly added to the stock. Not a professional job at all, the finish was flaking off and there were scratches on it. Not pristine in the least. It didn't even have the original hardware on it. The guy wanted $150.00 for the stock and my friend was all excited, saying, "you should buy that and sell it on ebay!!". I said no Mark, the stock is only worth $150.00. Why would I want to put time and effort into something that I'm not going to make any money on? He responds like, well it's not glass bedded. I said, yeah, that doesn't make one damn difference. Its been cut and a recoil pad haphazardly installed by bubba. All the value went out the window with that one. Some guys just don't get it, and my buddy is one of those guys. I told him if he wanted to open an ebay account and try to sell it, have at it. I wouldn't touch it with a 10' stick...

I have a quite nice Model 54 .22 Hornet with Lyman 48 receiver sight. Bottom metal, Achilles heel of many an 'otherwise' nice finish Model 54; too often with worn brown patina. Same with mine. Per SN, 1934 mfg. Wearing an era-correct Lyman 48 sight with what appears also factory correct dovetail filler. Pix of my 'gal', below.

Not particularly imbued with the small Hornet chambering in full sized actions. 'Mismatch'. That said, one 'walking around' a gun show soliciting offers. We'd chatted but viewing the chambering I'd passed. Prodded, lowball as telling him so. His retort, better than offers from any tables. Leaving me wondering, 'it' became 'mine'. That, in summer of '88 & to date, never fired! Just to note, such an era as the Model 70 'pre', gathering aura steam; the Model 54, increasingly moving toward history's 'also ran' dust bin. Definite buyer's market those days! Such my war story.

Enjoy that Model 70. There's a segment of that wide following ever seeking that less common chambering. Parts can be a problem so hopefully complete.

Best & stay safe!
John

Nice model 54 John. Thanks for sharing..

Very nice!!

Gunner500. If you do indeed have a 1947 era 70 the correct rear sight for that rifle is a Winchester 22G. BCM

BCM, Thank You, i checked serial number on my rifle, 116xxx, turns out it's a 1949 year model, I took a pic of the rifle, rear sight, included the serial number, and texted it to Justin at pre-64win.com, the sight on my rifle is a Marble 69, correct sight he said, I love it when things like that happen, also glad to know bubba hasn't been ahold of it.

Yep, should be a 22G rear sight on that one. Someone probably pulled it off and sold it on ebay. Those were going for an easy $120.00 there even 10 years ago. The flip up could be had for $25. The nice thing about those, though, is it gives you more clearance for a scope.

LOL, now I'm really confused ; ]

I’d text back for a confirmation, per Rule the Marble 69 was introduced with the Monte Carlo comb and was used from 1952-1954.