Mystery Rimfire

F

Fast996

Inactive
Hello I have a clone or something like a winchester 52. The kicker is it is not a repeater and has british proofs.

I am hoping somebody can tell me if the receiver was made in Britain.

The receiver has the BV and BNP Birmingham marks. The barrel has only a BNP mark.

The receiver came to the U.S. and a barrel fitted by Eric Johnson sometime after 1953. Shouldn't the receivers origin have been marked upon import?

Anyway take a look at the odd duck and tell me what you think. Thanks in advance. Roger

http://www.gunauction.com/buy/13288112
 
If the receiver came to the US and a new barrel was installed, then why does the barrel have British proof marks? It is very confusing any way you look at it. Could it be a real 52 receiver that went to England and was imported back?? Beats me, as Spock would say, doesn't compute.
 
Ron,

The action was imported into the U.S. back in the early 1950's I believe. Then Eric Johnson fit it with his barrel. It was then later exported back to Britain. Again it was imported into the U.S. fives years ago by MT arms(Mac Tilton) and is so marked on the barrel.

There's a lot of confusing things about this gun. Maybe someone can tell me why it was never marked when it was imported the first time.
 
If it was fully marked with the name and address of the British maker when it was first imported, it would not need to have any "import stamp". That was/is only required for guns (like milsurps) that have no manufacturer's name or address. If the British marking was on the barrel, then it would be gone when the gun was rebarrelled in the US.

Jim
 
"If it was fully marked with the name and address of the British maker when it was first imported, it would not need to have any "import stamp". That was/is only required for guns (like milsurps) that have no manufacturer's name or address. If the British marking was on the barrel, then it would be gone when the gun was rebarrelled in the US."

James, So your guess is the gun was originally made in Britain?
 
I am inclined to think that, unless there is a marking that indicates otherwise. "Something like" a Winchester 52 is not a Winchester 52 and the 52 would be marked "Winchester" on the receiver. The British made (and AFAIK still make) some very high quality small bore rifles, so a British rifle would be entirely possible.

Jim
 
I have come to find out that this model 52 was a Winchester made in 1931 a Pre A model.Modified by a Brooklyn Gunsmith by the name of George J. Hyde .
He was the machinist and shop foreman for Griffin & Howe.Hence the markings
"GJH" on the bottom of the receiver & "H" on the bolt.
The rifle made it's journey across the pond and back hence the proofs.There is more to the story but that's the jist of it.
Pre A Winchesters didn't have there name on the receivers only on the barrel.
 
I would be interested to know more of the story about a M52 single shot prior to the D series.
My "pre A" was, like all the other older 52s I have seen, a repeater.
 
"I would be interested to know more of the story about a M52 single shot prior to the D series.
My "pre A" was, like all the other older 52s I have seen, a repeater."

Jim. from what I have found is that George was good friends of Arthur Jackson. Hyde was a excellent well known smith having been brought over by Griffin & Howe from Germany and given to be shop foreman. Hyde later joined a fellow named Leonard who was a stockmaker trained at Purdey & Sons,their company was in New York City.

Hyde was a designer machinist his most famous design was the M3 "grease gun" Hyde was introduced to the Winchester 52 by the world & Olympic shooter friend Arthur Jackson. With and through Jackson,Hyde had access to services of Winchester in the 1930's and 40's maybe beyond. Hyde rebarreled Jackson's 52 with a barrel of his own design and modified the 52 to improve it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Hyde_(gun_designer)

http://www.iowahighpower.com/rem37/ArtJackson.pdf

Eric45_zpsl2b6i0dp.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top