I am writing this in a technical style to do my best to communicate what I know about this rifle. However, I have only begun to “learn the curve” and what I belief to be facts, or correct terminology, may likely be in error.

A Short Provenance
The rifle was purchased by my father's father in the 1940's. He purchased the rifle second hand. It was used on his (“gentleman's”) farm in Nashville, TN, for varmint control and target shooting. My father has gifted the rifle to me.

The rifle's caliber is a .22 Hornet. The serial number is in the 23,000's with an “A” suffix, indicating, respectively, a barrel manufacture year of 1929 and an improved extractor in the Moser 98 style bolt. The barrel is topped with a [H. R. Preth ???... the name escapes me at this late hour] scope that may predate the rifle.

The rifle is a Model 54, with the sub-category of “Super Grade”. It has custom checkering, including what might be best described as a Fleur De Lis styled leaf design. The stock grade is superior, of maybe a 3 or 4 rating. A wooden inlay is missing from the top of the pistol grip rise, just posterior of the bolt. My father remembers it coming out and we are presently searching our home of 40+ years, in the hopes of find it. The 1” sling appears to be original.

I have read of the Model 54 being specially commissioned by customers and by prior company owners for gifts. Of those that I have viewed on the Internet, though they may have been checkered by the company's head carver, none has had this ornate of checkering, or a grip rise inlay.

I believe this a one-of-a-kind and very special manufacture of the Model 54.

Any information you have to offer is appreciated.

From what I can see of the checkering it does not look like factory. You need to post better pics of it.

Thanks for your interest, Pauline. I grabbed a couple of pictures with my cheap cell phone camera. I was in a hurry to get out of town and just took them at the gun shop. I am having the rifle cleaned and inspected. I will post better pictures, when I can.

I do believe that the checkering was done at the factory, because the Fleur De Lis could not be added over checkering that would have been done when the gun was originally produced. It does not seem likely, to me, that the stock would have been custom ordered without checkering and then the owner having the checkering added by an individual artisan.

Thanks!

I have learned that the scope is a J. W. Fecker brand.

How do you know that the stock was custom ordered from the factory?

I am working from the assumptions that I made in my reply to your first post. (I understand that assumptions are dangerous.) The checkering is not a modification of the checkering that would come on a typical Super Grade stock. The checkering is completely original and unique. If there was some process by which the checkering could have been created, other than through the factory "custom shop," I would be glad to know of it.

I would like to point out, again, that I am just now learning about this rifle. So, please know that I do not have an extensive knowledge base. That's why I am posting, here. So that learned folks, like yourself, can guide me along.

I have just spoken with the gunsmith to inquire as to any markings on the underside of the barrel. There was not anything of special interest. He also reported that the strapping over the barrel at the front sling swivel is a part of the front sling swivel mount. Also, he observed that the "barrel action has been glass bedded by an old method." He feels that both of these features are likely original to the gun. Now, all I have to do is surf the net to learn what is meant by the term "barrel action glass bedded.":-)

The gun is ready for me to pick it up. So, I am excited that it will be available, when I return from my trip.

Well for starters Winchester would not have glass bedded that gun. It is starting to sound like an old outside custom stock.

Well, I think that there may need to be some consideration of possibility verses probability. I am familiar with the axiom of some experts that any non-conforming 54 is to be considered as a non-factory customization, unless 100% proven otherwise, for monetary appraisal purposes. So, via this dogma, the burden of proof is on the owner; that would be me. So much for the possibility that the rifle may have dubious lineage.

The probability of this type of modification is another matter. As per its serial number, the barrel was produced in 1929, a year having significance to our consideration of probability. The Stock Market Crash occurred in this year and the Great Depression ensued. Accordingly, average individuals did not have the disposable income to take what would have been a serviceable gun and upgrade it. The time needed for the economic recovery to come to fruition would have likely inhibited this expense prior to the rifle coming into our family. I know that our family did not change the stock. Additionally, the very thinking of individuals was changed by the economic collapse such that people did not spend money on frills and any serviceable item would be maintained in its present state to leverage every bit of use from it. The economic decline also lends credence to the idea that the rifle was a presentation item for an elite who only departed with it as a consequence of his loss of wealth.

As the barrel was produced mid-production run, it seems less likely that the rifle was cobbled together from left-over parts.

Probability also begs questions. Why would a second tear company make an exact reproduction of a Super Grade stock, complete with its black highlights, when there would only be a limited market for it... And, that limited market being further hindered by Winchester still selling the stock? Why would an individual invest so much scarce wealth in what would have been only a useful varmint gun?

I do not offer my observations to develop a fictitious provenance for economic gain; regardless of its value, the gun will remain in our family for the foreseeable future. I am only trying to think things through.

I did call the gunsmith yet one more time. He graciously checked the metal butt stock plate. It does not have any type of maker's mark.

I do readily yield to your expertise. I would much appreciate you giving me a bit of history as to the circumstance that commonly led to stock customizations and what companies did such work. If there are any identifying marks that would point to a particular firm, that would be wonderful, too.

The fact remains that Winchester did not do glass bedding on these guns.

The fact that Winchester did not do glass bedding on their rifles does not preclude the rifle from having a factory custom stock. That fact is just one of many indicators, both positive and negative, that will need to be sorted out in their sum total. I look forward to working through that process with the members of this forum.

Post better pics of the checkering and I can tell you whether it is factory work or not. If it was a factory custom stock it would not need the glass bedding.

Yea...I would like to see the pics too !

Pauline, thank you so much for your gracious offer to give it a look! I am back in town, now, and I will pick the gun up from the gunsmith in the morning. I will do my best to post additional pictures, tomorrow evening. However, I need to come up with a better camera. The one on my cell phone is rather poor. Would a video be better? If so, can I post a video directly on this forum?

Shooter13, thank you for joining in the conversation! I have read some of Pauline's and your postings on this forum. I am grateful to have the both of your extensive expertise on this treasure quest:-)

Well, the plot thickens... I have spoken with my uncle, my father's younger brother, who was still at home at the time my grandfather acquired the rifle. My father was off to military school.

My uncle believes the rifle was assembled by a Mr. Hicks, gunsmith, in a gun shop located on Green Hills Drive, in Nashville, TN. Mr. Hicks also did the checkering. The rifle was used for general plinking and not even so much for varmint control. He has fond memories of shooting it with his dad.

The additional photographs were, again, made with my cell phone camera. They are still of poor quality. Hopefully, you can make them out.

The J W Fecker sight has a spring loaded vertical float mechanism and the ability to slide fore and aft to adjust the distance to the shooter's eye.

The picture of the trigger guard is not stamped "Super-Grade." So, it is likely that the hardware was from a lesser model. I still wonder how Mr. Hicks would have acquired a blank Super-Grade stock... at least the stock looks like a true Winchester to me...

The bolt does not have any inscription on it at all, re: the matching serial number.

Note the inlay to the rear of the trigger. I believe the missing inlay on the top of the pistol grip would have been a match for this detail.

The strap broke on me as I was taking the pictures. I did not realize that it was dry-rotted. What a shame.

So, what I think I end up with is a nice gun that is not so valuable that I can't drag it through the woods to shoot viscous squirrels, fanged bunnies and other scarey varmints.

More Pictures

More Pictures

More Pictures

More Pictures

I forgot to mention a couple of things...

The butt plate is steel. It has horizontal lines across it and no other markings.

I would also like to know about the sight. If someone would tell me where to look for identifying marks, I would be glad to look for them.

Here is a link regarding the operation of the Fecker:
http://www.texas-mac.com/Fecker_Scope_A ... pairs.html

My Fecker Specs:
Length Overall: 22-3/8"
Objective: 1-1/4"
Eye: 7/8"
Serial Number: 84I7 The serial numbers appear to have been individually struck. They are not precisely aligned. What I typed as an "I" is what I think is a "1" that was struck twice and elongated vertically.
The elevation and windage knobs are click adjustable.
The objective cowling is slightly dented.
The elevation knob is dented, but is operable.

The checkering is not factory. Probably done by the guy you mentioned.

P.Muerrle wrote:The checkering is not factory. Probably done by the guy you mentioned.

Yes, that is my uncle's rememberance.

Do you have any observations about the gun? Am I correct in thinking that it is not so valuable as to not hunt with it? Do you have any leads on where I might find information about the scope? Do you know anything about "Mr.Hicks", of Nashville?

Thanks!

I am not familiar with Mr. Hicks. Maybe try contacting some gunsmiths in that area. Someone may recall him. I would hunt with it. I don't care how valuable a gun is. Guns were made to shoot and that includes hunting. Enjoy the gun.

Greetings all.
What's going on with the stock at the tang in the second photo of both sets? It looks like Mr. Hicks didn't have the right stock.

5thShock wrote:Greetings all.
What's going on with the stock at the tang in the second photo of both sets? It looks like Mr. Hicks didn't have the right stock.

Hi, 5thShock,

The piece missing in the area of the tang is a piece of inlay that has been lost, over the years. My father remembers that it was on the rifle.