First let me say I am looking for an English style rifle and have posted questions about several different ones. I am trying to decide which to buy but have not handled any of them. OK who can tell me about the BSA? It looks good but has a strange concave cheekpiece. It appears to be a Mauser style action and it also has a factory muzzle brake. It is under 7 lbs with scope. Is $500 a good price?
IF, it is one of the few made during 1960-61, with STEEL bottom metal AND an adjustable trigger, it is one of the VERY finest sporters ever produced. These were probably a derivative of the Brno-21H/ZG-47 rifles from Chechoslovakia and they are fabulous. I would kill to own one of these in 7x57 for conversion to a .280 Rem.
I do not care for the pushfeed version that replaced the CRF one I mention, but, $500.00 is very fair for the CRF is in good shape. Parts for these are not available, if that matters to you.
What about the majestics from the 50's kutenay?The rifle sounds alot like the details you are talking about.I have a line on one in 308win.Original owner rifle bought in 1956,looks great for a 50yr old rifle with probably 2 boxes tops through it.RB
There is a LOT of variation among these and I cannot tell exactly what a given one is without actual examination. If, you are coming to Vancouver and can bring it, I would be happy to examine it for you and then I can tell more.
There are a number of .243s floating around and .222s on a really tiny action; I have NEVER seen a .308 and that rifle SHOULD be CRF-steel bottom metal. If so, I would GRAB IT unless the price is exhorbitant. These are a fine action and worth building a light mountain rifle on.
The picture you have posted is not a "Majestic" it looks very much like the 7x57 "Hunter" model I have in my safe, it has been my main rifle for more than 20 years. It is a CRF action, with a steel floorplate but almost certainly will have have an alloy trigger bow. The trigger is adjustable, and while not in the same class as a really good model 70, is very satisfactory. All other things being equal, with a free floated barrel it will shoot well, around moa easily with handloads. I favour it because it is very smooth, lightish (the barrel contour is akin to the Model 70 featherweight style) and the balance is like nothing you'll put to your shoulder "off the shelf" these days.
The "Majestic" came after the Hunter and was a push feed - not 1/2 the rifle IMHO.
There was a Royal model at the same time as the Hunter, superb is the only word that comes to mind, I have ever only seen photos, I belive they were very similar to the Hunter but much better wood etc. All these are detailed in the De Haas book, although for some reason his chapter on these I find a little hard to follow. If it is minty, at $500 you have a bargin IMO.
The version with the integral muzzle brake is very rare, I have ever only seen one, and it was in .222 "mini lenght" action (why anyone would want a m/b on a .222 is beyond me).
If you want more info, these were "comomwealth era" rifles, so most of them will be in New Zealand, Australia and Canada. I'be be inclined to ask over at the Aust/NZ board at AR if you want further opinions.
I�m getting a bit hazy on all the names now, but I recall clearly that from the mid 1950s to some time in the early sixties, BSA produced what they called the �Royal� series of rifles. They had names like �Majestic� and �Viscount�, and others that I cannot recall. Three different action lengths � a �shorty� for the Hornet and 222, a medium for the 243, 308 and 7X57, etc, and a standard for the 270, 30-06, etc. There were featherweight models and also some heavier models. The featherweights WERE very light, and had about 22 inch barrels with the intergral muzzle brakes � rows of vertical slots along each side that looked a bit like the gills of a shark. The �standard� weight jobs had more metal left in the receiver sidewalls, 24 inch barrels with no muzzle brakes, and more substantial stocks. It�s my recollection that it was the latter models that were known as the �Hunter� series, but I�m open to correction on this. Various other models followed.
What I can say quite positively is that the muzzle-braked featherweights produced the loudest, most intolerable muzzle blast of any rifle I have ever been near!!!!! All the ear plugs and ear muffs know to man couldn�t keep it out. A member of the club I belonged to in the mid sixties had one of these rifles in 30-06. If he ever appeared on the firing line at our range with it, everybody else left the line within minutes � retreated to the range hut for a cuppa, or went home. Another member had one in 243 which was almost as bad, and he used it in our match shooting for a while, to the dismay of everyone else. After threats of lynching and other forms of retribution, he had an engineer friend make a clamp-on metal sleeve to cover the muzzle brake section of the barrel, but it only lasted one shot. Split apart on the second shot, and one piece of it was never seen again. Then he had the barrel shortened to remove all the muzzle brake portion (and re-crowned, of course) but this left the barrel not much over 18 inches long, so it was still not exactly �nice to be near�, as the deodorant advertisement went. He then took it back to his gunsmith and had a 24 inch Douglas barrel fitted to it, to everybody�s huge relief.
For brief period about 7-8 years ago I owned one of the small action BSA's in 222......it was a very nice small controlled feed action perfectly sized to the Hornet and the 222(only two cartridges they were made in)...made a CZ527 look like a Cooey(nothing against Cooeys). The do have a double square bridge receiver with dovetails. Mine had a 24" barrel, no muzzle brake. Just last year I had one of the longer actions in 30-06 with the brake. These are great rifles.
"after the bullet leaves the barrel it doesn't care what headstamp was on the case" "The 221 Fireball is what the Hornet could have been had it stayed in school"
