Hey Jerico... Knock, knock... Walls tumbling??? Any chance you could repost the listing link. Not a bidder on any such but I'd have enjoyed viewing the listing. I have two, both original rifles without either the infamous pads or +holes! Mine one each, early & NRA stock models. Also would like to know what the ref listing went for. I'm something of a 7x57 commercial sporter addict. Not that many in number, but some quality ones. Keep trucking with sharing those listings! Best & Stay Safe! John
If it had an extra, non-factory, holes in the receiver ring, I wonder if it has 2 extra, non-factory, holes in the receiver bridge?
It has a Buehler style replacement safety lever, so I wonder if it has had a scope mounted on it at some point in time. While the Buehler style safety lever would have been a useful change with any style of sights, it would have been necessary if a low mounted scope was installed. More questions than answers.
RE the 7mm Model 54 “Carbine”. Question of where to begin! Perhaps first just the summary term. “Fake!” Subjective term “A mess!” Altered components, removed from collector status: Receiver, Bolt, Stock & Barrel!
Receiver with hole(s) noted. Whether more than one, comparable to “little bit pregnant”. Bolt, handle altered for scope and lousy aesthetics at that! Stock, inletted for referenced bolt handle. Barrel… Where to start. Perhaps just the net, net. Nomenclature content and placement, for early style barrel, carbine & rifle. Front sight ramp itself exclusively later "Short Rifle" style. Almost incidental under circumstances, receiver serial number stated as year ‘32; too early for the Short Rifle barrel, intro’d in ‘34! Lyman 48 ‘appears’ a put together & fitment problem. Fair to say… “Terminal tilt!” Possibly yet a shooter, nothing more and not even something I’d want in my zany ‘Bubba rifle’ portfolio!
Not to exit here without a plug. David Bichrest’s recent book: “Winchester Model 54 Bolt Action Rifle”. The only dedicated Model 54 work out there. Had bidders here invested & heeded this work, a seventy or so dollar book as great investment insurance! My own disclaimer, no interest in this book beyond enthusiastic purchaser and desire to see David get a reasonable return for a his obvious efforts and expertise reflected!
So re this 250 Savage chambering... Viewing the listing, raising the ethical question of "Do Not Resuscitate" tags for such rifles? Seller description, sounding more like a postmortem! Perhaps just cutting to the chase.,, For bidders & buyer of such guns, "DNR" tags, all round! Rationale? Analogy of something like weird bragging rights of having such 54 chambered rifle? But always the tactical issue of your listener making further embarrassing inquiry. Sort of like bragging rights over your daughters beauty contest First Prize. Avoiding pesky details... Locale, City Zoo. Prize, year supply of peanuts! Those 'nitty' details...!
Why buy a POS "formerly collectible" rifle? Beyond me!
RE the 7mm Model 54 “Carbine”. Question of where to begin! Perhaps first just the summary term. “Fake!” Subjective term “A mess!” Altered components, removed from collector status: Receiver, Bolt, Stock & Barrel!
Receiver with hole(s) noted. Whether more than one, comparable to “little bit pregnant”. Bolt, handle altered for scope and lousy aesthetics at that! Stock, inletted for referenced bolt handle. Barrel… Where to start. Perhaps just the net, net. Nomenclature content and placement, for early style barrel, carbine & rifle. Front sight ramp itself exclusively later "Short Rifle" style. Almost incidental under circumstances, receiver serial number stated as year ‘32; too early for the Short Rifle barrel, intro’d in ‘34! Lyman 48 ‘appears’ a put together & fitment problem. Fair to say… “Terminal tilt!” Possibly yet a shooter, nothing more and not even something I’d want in my zany ‘Bubba rifle’ portfolio!
Not to exit here without a plug. David Bichrest’s recent book: “Winchester Model 54 Bolt Action Rifle”. The only dedicated Model 54 work out there. Had bidders here invested & heeded this work, a seventy or so dollar book as great investment insurance! My own disclaimer, no interest in this book beyond enthusiastic purchaser and desire to see David get a reasonable return for a his obvious efforts and expertise reflected!
Best & Stay Safe! John
Also wasn’t the 7x57 one of the more rarer chamberings in the 54?? I’m talking less than a few hundred? I read an article few years back I wish I would’ve saved it. I know where I nice 1930-31 made 54 is at in a 06 unaltered. Next gunshow I’m going to buy it, I wish I would’ve got the gentleman name.
Originally Posted by Bricktop
Then STFU. The rest of your statement is superflous bullshit with no real bearing on this discussion other than to massage your own ego.
@iskra; No problem. Everybody’s who is serious about collecting anything has to start somewhere. At least in this case there were obvious signs. Much harder when restored. Even then, the simplest of thing like an incorrect barrel stamp can be missed when an expert would know right away.
Appreciate the reviews of both as there are some things I missed which you brought to light. Pictures captured, notes added and now a bit wiser. For new collectors, this and the WACA site are gold mines of information. Combined with patience and anything is possible.
Three day inspection. Perhaps lucky for the buyer(s). For the impatient like I was early on, even a lucky roll of the dice will eventually turn up snake eyes. Getting burned which happened to me sucks, but the hard way is very effective.
TIME SPENT + OCD + patience is a recipe for betting on sure things instead of throwing darts at a board.
Hope this kind of posts help others when directed by a Google search.
Can’t believe I missed the bolt mod. Seconded on David’s book.
Well carbinecol... Disagree with your likely majority "caveat emptor" viewpoint. There are always the big bucks types; high rollers. But most of us not that category. A buyer should be entitled to rely on the seller description. Not speaking "law" here so much as ethics. My "opinion" and only that, the indicators were in the listing suggesting unethical. That view as someone able to analyze the listing and photos. The seller exhibiting sufficient moxie to suggest factual knowledge of fake nature. Buyer, not equipped to make such analysis. More as poor sap, "relying upon ethics". Far as I'm concerned a ethical duty of professional behavior and disclosure. I find such business behavior disgusting. That and also distinguishing the subject 7mm from the other referenced .250 listing. Latter, pretty obvious defects.
Concerning 7x57 chambering rarity in Model 54, I'd say yes, definitely. Simply from personal experience over many decades of collecting. But not "into hundreds", likely into thousands. Roger Rule in his Model 70 book has an intro chapter on the Model 54. There he pegs 7mm fifth most rare amongst 10. No supporting numbers however. I've managed to acquire both original and so-called later "NRA model", in this chambering. Happy to have them!
A last point and similar whether speaking of Model 54 or Model 70. While small matters may take a rifle out of "collector status", that doesn't stop me from considering one with some mods. Extra holes my most common compromise and "not to kick one out of bed" so to speak, but consider the 'overall situation'. My lowest number Model 70, SN 39xx all original but for bridge holes and also showing her wear. Great rifle in common '06 and smooth as silk. A great shooter! I'd recommend such for anyone looking for such category. Just not to pay the "collector" premium for the "little bit pregnant" category!
More than 'nuff said' here! Best & stay safe! John
I forgot to finish about the article I read but one could send their 54 back to Winchester and they would upgrade them to model 70 style bolts etc. obviously it cost money to do this, but it was a thing.
Originally Posted by Bricktop
Then STFU. The rest of your statement is superflous bullshit with no real bearing on this discussion other than to massage your own ego.
Those prices astound me considering the mods on the rifles. Go figure.
Makes me feel better about the M54 30WCF I got last year for about 25% of the 250-3000 price. It has two holes in the rear of the receiver and the Lyman 48's staff was missing, but everything else is in great shape and the bore is in pristine condition. I wanted a shooter so none of the shortcomings mattered to me at all. I fitted another staff to the Lyman. Although it is backwards (it came off a M98 Mauser sight), it works just fine using it as a ghost ring aperture. And, the rifle is a real shooter! I just couldn't get a whitetail to cooperate when I was carrying it last season.
If it's the Model 54 rifle version in 30-30, then termed "30 WCF", it's uncommon. The anomaly in that chambering; the carbine version outsold the rifle! Have you noted the receiver is fabricated uniquely for the 30 WCF chambering; including the omission of receiver clip guides? My 54 Rifle 30 WCF below, few pix plus one of the 30 WCF carbine. I do like the 30-30 chambering in bolt rifles! Besides the Winchester 54, I'm with a Remington 788 & Savage 40. Enjoy that rifle! *** 79S, re your comment concerning Winchester "upgrading" Model 54 rifles to the Model 70 bolt. The situation wasn't intended or billed as an 'upgrade'. Winchester ran out of Model 54 bolt inventories yet with demand from 'whatever' cause. They did offer modified Model 70 factory retrofit replacement bolts in the prewar era. The bolt handle resembled the normal era 70 bolt. Notably too, the stock required alteration to accommodate the new essentially low-scope bolt handle. It seems quite possible too, that there may have been some non-factory Model 70 bolt adaptions. The model 54 era from 1925 to 36, not unlike the prewar Model 70 era; these weren't mainstream "rifle scoping" cultures. Most 'extra scope holes' observed in Models 54 & 70. more likely are postwar era adaptions. Best! John
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/6kFulhCl.jpg)