Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Gunsmithing .22 K Hornet X 2

Pretty sure those old guns are 16 twist. So, you may really get good groups and terminal performance with the Shock Hammer 33 gr. It's an expanding mono and short enough to work really well with that rifle.

DF

That is a sweet rig DF!

Yeah, it's a 1-16 twist with .223" groove diameter. Pretty standard dimensions for Hornets in the 1930's. I'm not too concerned about terminal performance, my groundhog hunting days are fairly behind me except for the handful I pop in the backyard where a .22RF suffices. Paper is what I mainly kill these days!

Hammer driving ring design allows for adaptation to tighter and looser bores. Lots of good info on You Tube, one great one on the Wby site when Adam Wby interviews Hammer owner/founders. Check it out.

DF

Dirtfarmer

What is the "Wby" site ?

Hal

I’ve always thought the K Hornet ruined a lot of old classic rifles. At the time of “improving” the Hornet, few people worried about the gun being a collector’s item. I bought a model 70 Super Grade in 22 Hornet and the first thing I did was fire it and cautiously open the bolt to inspect the case for the K Hornet shoulder. Thankfully it was still the original chamber.

Years later, even some of the early K Hornet guns have a certain collector’s value. SDH here on the Campfire, did an article on the latest issue of Sports Afield on my Hornet…

i have a couple of Ruger #1`s in 22 Hornet those will never be a K-Hornet ,but i do have 2 Ruger 77`s rechambered to the K-Hornet both shoot well and better since i rechambered them to the K-Hornet. i agree rifles from the past like a pre 70 Winchesters in a Hornet are worth more if not rechambered to a K-Hornet as are Ruger # 1`s in just a plain old Hornet . but if i had a chance for a pre-64 model 70 or a Ruger #1 that was rechambered as a K-Hornet for a good price i still would buy it . Pete53

I'll agree about choice rifles losing value when chambers are altered from originality, but there are a few exceptions to that rule. In my case I didn't mind one bit that my M54 Hornet was altered to K-Hornet because it was done by Kilbourn himself - it doesn't increase its value but to me it doesn't decrease it either. The trick upon reselling it would be to find a guy who feels the same way about it (not that it'll ever get sold under my watch). Therein lies the lone exception to the rule, my personal opinion only. (And it doesn't extend to no-name gunsmith work.)

There were more than a couple great wildcatters/experimenters/innovative gunsmiths back in the 30's-40's whose work paved the way for what we now enjoy today. To the cognoscenti of such stuff their names on barrels bumps values, usually back up into the realm of where it would be if in original configuration. Admittedly the market for these things is definitely limited - the average collector would turn his nose up - but that means all the more for guys like me!

Another example, not as farfetched as you might imagine, would be a Stevens/Winchester/Ballard target rifle from 120 years ago that had its barrel rebored/rechambered by someone like Harry M. Pope, Shoyen, Peterson, Niedner, et al. Such a thing would be exponentially more valuable today compared to if it were bog stock original.

This is a similar modification that you refer to. This is a customized 22 Hornet from another pre 64 Model 70 in 22 Hornet that had the action cut down to 22 Hornet length. A pre-64 Hornet is scarce enough, but cutting it down does ruin the originality of this rifle. The improvement, however, makes it worthwhile…

Outstanding, Shrap!

Do you know who did that metal work?

In Jim Carmichel's book, "The Modern Rifle", he mentions that Ron Lampert, "one of the country's top metal specialists", had taken two standard length actions, cut them, removing part of one, added that part to the other.

The result was a Magnum length and a shorter length action. One he chambered in .375 H&H, the other, .250 Savage, those were built for Jim. Guys with that level of skill could weld those seams such they couldn't be seen, actions true, not warped form the heat. And I'm sure the temper was right.

I have a .257 Roberts, Brux barrel on a LA M-700 built by Ron. Even though the action is 3.4" and the Roberts round shy of 3", it's one of the slickest feeding bolt guns I have, no matter how you place the rounds in the magazine.

I don't know if Ron is still around, as that was a while back: the book has a 1975 copyright. The cover jacket has acknowledgments by Warren Page, Jack O'Connor, Byron Dalrymple, etc. and was published by Winchester Press, NYC.

When I saw your gun, Ron Lampert came to mind, knowing he could do that level of work. I'm sure there are/were others.

Thanks for sharing.

DF

Here's Jim's book.

Steve Heilman, here is a picture of the bolt that he cut down to shorten that action compared to the original bolt from a Super Grade Model 7 22 Hornet...

Thanks.

Super work.

Gunner500 has a Super Grade Hornet.

Great rifles.

DF

I wonder why no one has ever standardized the K hornet and came out with rifles already chambered as Ks? Seems like a nice mini action bolt gun from the factory in k hornet would sell.



Bb

Excellent question.

DF

Weatherby site. Wby has a great YouTube series. Check out the one, Adam Wby interviewing the Hammer founders. Google it. Lots of good info.

DF