Springfield Model of 1922

Picked up what was suppose to be an excellent condition Model of 1922, SN 165, with just a few safe dings. Well, seller's interpretation of excellent is not the same as mine, but it was a lesson learned.

Attachment 42745

Anyway, SN 165 looks to be 1651. Funny that the seller did not mention the last digit was ground off.

Attachment 42746

Can any one comment on why a receiver / barrel would be D&T'ed this way?

Here are more pictures: https://photos.app.goo.gl/FF4YaATn79huClN93

Your comments are appreciated.

Art

Unaware of any reason for such mutilation of the rcvr ring, but at least it retains its correct magazine, impossible to replace. Rare enough model to justify restoration of the metal damage, but the master-grade workmanship required to do it justice wouldn't come cheap.

The liar (or imbecile) who called it "excellent" ought to be exposed.

Just throwing out a guess, but with there being another set of punch marks on the top of the receiver, could it be that someone was going to drill and tap for a scope not realizing what they had?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marty T.

Just throwing out a guess, but with there being another set of punch marks on the top of the receiver, could it be that someone was going to drill and tap for a scope not realizing what they had?

---

Can't imagine what kind of mounts would be so closely spaced. Anyway, the brl is supposed to be tapped for blocks.

Thanks for the input.

This is the listing I responded to:
Attachment 42750

Art

The only possibility that I can think of is the action was used in the M6 or M7A1 subcaliber training device and the unit could not get the brass fittings to stop moving. Obliteration of one of serial numbers would be an Army no-no unless it was restamped.

Just a thought.

Cheers

Sight also very difficult to find. Sometimes you pay for lessons learned. Just remember-better sins of commission than omission!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kragrifle

Sight also very difficult to find. Sometimes you pay for lessons learned. Just remember-better sins of commission than omission!

---

Well, maybe, but I think it would be easier to find the correct sight, if necessary, than undo the sin of drilling those ugly holes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fjruple

The only possibility that I can think of is the action was used in the M6 or M7A1 subcaliber training device and the unit could not get the brass fittings to stop moving. Obliteration of one of serial numbers would be an Army no-no unless it was restamped.

Just a thought.

Cheers

---

You might be on to something. Brophy's book, pg 246, mentions using .30 and .22 cal as sub-caliber training devices. As ugly as those holes are in the receiver, the ones in the barrel look very professionally drilled and filled. Maybe some of this was done at an Armory level?

Anyone with a picture of a 22 assembled as a sub-caliber device?

Art

Like this:

Attachment 42754

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by artd

Brophy's book, pg 246, mentions using .30 and .22 cal as sub-caliber training devices.

---

He only specifically mentions M2s being used for this purpose, though it's not impossible there were "exceptions." Also says they were returned to rifle configuration when sub-caliber devices were scrapped. Still, surprising if Armory didn't clean up & restamp receiver, and covert it to MII.

The ultimate sniper-rifle--a scope sighted 37mm anti-tank gun! And they were reputed to be as accurate as a rifle.

I have never read or heard of any Springfield Model of 1922 or Model of 1922M1 being used as subcaliber device. In my years of collecting and studying the Springfield .22's I have learned to never say "never" or "always" when describing what happened at Springfield Armory. I have a Model of 1922 that has scope blocks mounted on the barrel on 6.5" centers. An Ordnance Officer memo in Brophy says when ordered, both scope blocks were to be mounted on the barrel, I have no evidence that those on my rifle were done as special order by SA.

FM 23-75 "Basic Field Manual 57 MM Gun, AntiTank" describes both .22 Cal and .30 Cal scalier devices. The .22 Cal units seem to have been primarily for marksmanship practice on the 1000 INCH range.

I have learned to never say "never" or "always" when describing what happened at Springfield Armory.

I have often wondered if some employees at the Armory didn't do something, saying "50 or 100 years from now, gun some collector is going to go nuts trying to figure out why we did this!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dan Shapiro

I have learned to never say "never" or "always" when describing what happened at Springfield Armory.

I have often wondered if some employees at the Armory didn't do something, saying "50 or 100 years from now, gun some collector is going to go nuts trying to figure out why we did this!"

---

Dan--

I was thinking along the lines of an "unauthorized" modification to a rifle in a Reserve or National Guard unit for support a local gunnery training mission. Back in the day just about every National Guard unit had the .22 versions of the Springfield rifle and 25 yard ranges in their basements in which to practice. A Model of 1922 escaping conversion or upgrade would not be unheard. The one particular NG unit I belonged to had three M1922s which were kept on the inventory roster as Winchester 75s to escape "detection" by gun collecting higher ups. That was in the late 1970's and early 1980's, of course no magazines.
Given the particular mods to the rifle in question to me it would be a non-collector rifle due the "bubba" gunsmithing of the rifle. The other point would be whether the rifle was stolen and the last number obliterated by a screw hole and grinding of the rest of the number. Fortunately, the last number can be recovered even with the grinding and screw hole. You also run the serial # through NCIC and the military with the last number starting 0 and then run the serial through the last number being 9. Taking another look at the serial number and the style of the numbers. I am thinking the last number is a 7 given the small bit that was unground. A Springfield service check of serial number 1657 for a Model of 1922 Springfield should enlightening a bit.

Just my thoughts and two cents worth.

Cheers

--fjruple

I do not buy that this might have been a stolen rifle and someone attempted to obscure the SN because there are to areas that are ground and they are geometrically in the same place but on opposite sides of the receiver. Also, the holes do not look like those made from a punch. They look like they were made by a pointed locking screw that was continually tightened over time as the rifle became loose. The grinding could have been done initially to provide a flat surface for the locking screws or after the fact to remove the metal that rolled as the locking screws were tightened. There's also the issue of the repair of 3 of 4 holes. Maybe the 4th hole was not done because it would have totally obscured the SN.

Art

I checked my SRS data base for sn 165 and the ten rifles serial number 1651, 1652, 1653 on through 1659 and none were listed. This not surprising. Of the 5 Model of 1922 rifles in my collection there are only two serial numbers that show up on the SRS list. The model of 1922 was made by Springfield Armory for the NRA to be sold to NRA members and for issue to rifle clubs by the NRA. Later some of these were returned to Springfield Armory as it was determined they would have value in military training. I have been unable to learn how many of these were returned to govt inventory. Of these Brophy says maybe as few as 80 were upgraded to M2 by the govt. It is my opinion that most of the 1922 were sold to NRA members or issued to gun clubs. Many of the 1922's are found in original finish and configuration. I am confident that these were not in govt inventory or they would have gone through upgrade to M2 and refinishing. My interest in the 1922 Series goes back to my ROTC days in the late 1950's when I was assigned one of the four M2's our ROTC unit had in inventory. After I became proficient enough to shoot on the rifle I was issued one of the New Winchester Model 52C rifles our unit had received. I was glad to move up to the much better rifle but I had a desire to own a Springfield .22. It was 30 years before I could afford my first one. Which was an M2. After I owned the one I wanted a better one. After I learned of the different variations my goal was have one of each. You all know of that thought pattern.

Trying to email you but having problems. If interested in selling the rifle please contact me at
kragrifle@suddenlink.net

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kragrifle

Trying to email you but having problems. If interested in selling the rifle please contact me at
kragrifle@suddenlink.net

---

Reply sent.

Art

GunBroker Auction:
https://www.gunbroker.com/item/747102935

James

Another GunBroker auction:

https://www.gunbroker.com/item/748592666