New M81-B, Pre-war

Posts about the Model 81~Woodsmaster~
Post Reply
DWalt
Posts: 513
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 1:18 pm
Location: San Antonio & Brackettville TX

New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by DWalt »

I just bought this one today. It is in .300 Savage, and from SN it has a 1941 DOB (just like me). It's in very nice condition with only a little bluing wear on the front of the receiver adjacent to the fore end. As you can see, it is missing the factory rear sight but it has the screws. My question concerns the wood fore end. It does not seem to match the pictures of the B grades shown, rather it is of the Schnabel type with finger grooves. I suspect it is not original or has possibly been modified from the original. Whichever, it is well-done. I probably went too high at $650, but B-grades don't show up around here. Any thoughts?


Image
User avatar
jack1653
Posts: 984
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 7:52 pm

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by jack1653 »

Hey Dwalt,

The rifle looks pretty good to me. The metal looks to be in very good shape. I can't really see the stock checkering well enough to say if it is factory checkering. If it has a double border around the checkering it may very well be factory. The forearm that is on the rifle does not go with this model 81. You can always check on the inside of the forearm to see if it has been stamped with the letter "B", but I doubt that you will find one on this forearm. However it is very well done and I would have to agree with your assessment that it is a modified Schnable. I can't recall seeing such a modification with the finger grooves. If it fits your hand when shooting, then I would stay with it. You can always get a model 81 forearm if you change your mind. The old style "beaver tail" would look good on this rifle.

Regards,

jack1653
DWalt
Posts: 513
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 1:18 pm
Location: San Antonio & Brackettville TX

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by DWalt »

It does have a double border around the grip checkering. I am sure the wood is of the correct quality level for a B grade as it is very nicely figured. Plus of course, the receiver is stamped as 81-B. I have not yet removed the buttstock to check if the serial numbers match, but at present there is no reason to suggest they don't.

Regarding the fore end, there are no markings or stampings that I can see on the interior channel. However, there are some paper shims glued in, front and rear, and I did not remove them to see if there are any markings present beneath. Where would the B be stamped? As I said earlier, the fore end exterior shaping work has been very professionally done, and it could well be a factory job - what factory that might be, I couldn't say. But it is most definitely NOT a Bubba rework of a standard factory fore end. Has anyone else seen a fore end of that shape? I am thinking it might be an aftermarket fore end from someplace like Fajen, etc.

The aging of the existing fore end finish matches that of the buttstock, so has not been recently installed or altered. I really like it, except for the high probability that it is not factory original. The previous owner knew nothing about its history.

I plan to strip it down to its components for a thorough cleaning and lubrication this coming weekend if possible.
User avatar
jack1653
Posts: 984
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 7:52 pm

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by jack1653 »

Hey Dwalt,

I failed to see the "B" in the topic heading so I didn't know the rifle was stamped 81-B. :oops: It would have factory checkering for sure on the stock. My comment was directed to the B grades that weren't always stamped with the 81-B. This is another inconsistency with Remington. :? You may or may not find a B stamped in the forearms. Again, I have rifles that show the "B" and some do not. Beats me. :?: I agree with you that the forearm isn't a typical "bubba" job.

I always enjoy taking the rifle down and cleaning them. Like so many have said, if you are going to be shooting it, then make it to your own liking. Refinishing the wood will certainly make the wood look more consistent. It doesn't appear to be oil stained so refinishing should be easier. What finish are you considering? Be sure to show us the finished product.

Regards,

jack1653
DWalt
Posts: 513
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 1:18 pm
Location: San Antonio & Brackettville TX

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by DWalt »

Unlike my previous Model 81s which had considerable finish defects, the wood finish on this one is pretty good. Therefore, I am not planning to strip it clear down to the wood. What I plan to do, when I get around to it, is to wipe the wood finish down with mineral spirits to clean off the surface crud, then polish it some with 0000 steel wool, then apply a coat of Watco Danish Oil Finish and see how it looks. I have used the Watco DOF similarly on other stocks (and furniture) with good results. Or, instead, I may just apply some Johnson's paste wax to see how that looks before using the DOF. Previously, I have used Tung oil as my favorite finish (not the imitation Tung oil more often seen, which is actually boiled linseed oil).

Just how unusual is the 81-B receiver stamping? I previously thought that there was no special -B marking on them, just nicer wood, until I saw this one. That was one of the reasons I bought it at the price I paid. Without the -B stamp on the receiver, I would have tried to get it for maybe half that.
User avatar
jack1653
Posts: 984
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 7:52 pm

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by jack1653 »

I think you got a real bargain for this rifle even if it has a different forearm. That makes it more unique. The 81-B's, in my opinion are very hard to find. I have seen asking prices up to $2K but not many sold at that price unless they are 98%. Somewhere on the forum there was some topics about the 81-B and the prices. I think very good rifles can fetch a $1000 very easy. Another strange thing about the 81-B, is that seem to be made only in the .300 Savage. Rem8&81 may have some more insights to the 81-B. I think you did very good with this purchase. ;)

Regards,

jack1653
DWalt
Posts: 513
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 1:18 pm
Location: San Antonio & Brackettville TX

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by DWalt »

Nice to know I didn't screw up on the price too badly. I put the first coat of DOF on the fore end earlier as a test. It looks great, but is a little blotchy in spots. It will take at least one more coat which I will apply tomorrow. DOF is very thin, unlike the boiled linseed oil products such as Lin-Speed, etc. which I don't much care for.
User avatar
81police
Posts: 2613
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2009 12:12 pm
Location: TEXAS

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by 81police »

Dwalt,

I would concur with Jack that the forearm is not a factory piece. From the factory it should have looked similar to the "flatside" style depicted on this page (http://thegreatmodel8.remingtonsociety. ... ge_id=1051). The "-B" stamp on the side of the receiver, as far as I know, was a standard procedure by Remington to mark the "B" grades. I have seen B grades, most commonly, in 300Sav, but have also seen a handful in 35Rem as well. If Rem8&81 is around I'm sure he can add a lot more useful info than I.

I too think you fared well on the purchase Dwalt. 81B's can go for upwards of $1500 depending on condition. What I found most unusual on your rifle was not the forearm but the modified trigger. What can you tell us about it?
Cam Woodall
Site Co-Administrator
DWalt
Posts: 513
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 1:18 pm
Location: San Antonio & Brackettville TX

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by DWalt »

It's not a modified trigger, merely a trigger shoe held on bu two setscrews.
User avatar
jack1653
Posts: 984
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 7:52 pm

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by jack1653 »

Okay, I'll bite. What does a trigger shoe do? :? Does it make a big difference in pulling the trigger? I don't know if I have seen one or heard of one. It is another day where I learned something new. :lol:

Regards,

jack1653
DWalt
Posts: 513
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 1:18 pm
Location: San Antonio & Brackettville TX

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by DWalt »

Maybe they are not particularly common now, but at one time trigger shoes had the purpose of providing a wider grooved surface for the trigger fingertip pad to engage. That had the effect of providing a feeling of a lighter trigger pull. They were most commonly used on target guns. I have a Winchester Model 52-B .22 target rifle and a customized Colt Model 1911 .45, both of which have trigger shoes. I assume they are still manufactured, but I don't know. It does seem strange that this one has a shoe, as they were not really intended for field-type guns, but I did not think much about it as I have two other guns with shoes.
User avatar
jack1653
Posts: 984
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 7:52 pm

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by jack1653 »

Thanks for the explanation. I do have some rifles that have the grooved triggers and I can say that I like the feel and the ability to get rightdown on the finger tip without the risk of slipping. It makes good sense now that you explained it for me.

Regards,

jack1653
User avatar
imfuncity
Posts: 1208
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 2:44 am
Location: 2hrs N of Sac., Tehama Co. CA

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by imfuncity »

I really appreciate when folks post what they do, how they do it, and what they use to do it. I am and always will be very new to this game.

Thus, not to create a problem or start an argument but...
I have a few "wide" triggers that I am sort of happy with sometimes but when I got one that had a trigger shoe I couldn't wait to get it off. Also, I have never finished or refinished a stock, but I have a friend who does and he could not find his Lin-Speed - he wouldn't consider doing a stock without it - I order it for him on the web, his stuff looks and feels very good.

I say if it works, to each his own... and like others have said, "that is why there are so many different kinds of guns."
Enjoy
Though defensive violence will always be “a sad necessity” in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men. - St. Augustine
User avatar
Rem8&81
Posts: 71
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:03 am

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by Rem8&81 »

DWalt,
Congratulations on your purchase, it's always nice to pick up an 8 or 81 in the higher grades, especially when they are still in good condition. I think Jack and Cam have already provided great information, but I will try and add a couple of things to the conversation. 81 B's or C's are both very rare, with the C's it would seem being the rarest of the two as they were produced first in the early years of the 81's and then replaced with the B's in 1939. Essentially the same grade, but the type of wood used changed as a result of availability problems in getting the English Walnut used on the C’s, so it was switched to American Walnut used on the B’s. While they claimed it was the same grade, having owned a few of each, I will tell you that the wood on the C’s is generally nicer with more figure.

It is fortunate that your rifle is stamped with the “B” as It is my belief that all C’s and B’s were stamped or at least supposed to be stamped. There may have been a couple which somehow missed the stamping process, but it is more likely that unstamped rifles which have checkered wood were simply standard grade rifles which were ordered with a hand checkering upgrade to the standard wood or may have received better checkered deluxe wood once down in the custom shop. Although, the upgraded checkering was supposed to be done on the standard wood, it was acknowledged that sometimes a higher grade of wood already checkered may have been pulled from the selection box and assembled to the rifle in its place, if it was not convenient to simply checker a piece of standard wood. I have seen rifles which demonstrate both these situations. I believe my brother owns an 81 which is not receiver stamped, yet has deluxe wood stamped with a “B”. I believe this was a case of the purchaser receiving the bonus of upgraded wood along with his order for checkering.

Your rifle probably would have left the factory with a 2nd generation (not beavertail) American Walnut checkered stock. I doubt that forearm on your rifle currently is the original wood which left the factory, regardless of the alteration which have been done to it. Although it looks nice, the alterations or replaced wood drastically affects the rifle’s collecting value. As both Cam and Jack have mentioned, prices for nicer B rifles are typically over a $1000, more like $1500 to $2000 for high condition rifles. I have seen some sell for as high as $2500, but that is really the exception and on the best of condition. I have seen the C grades fetch higher values as they do tend to look nicer and there does seem to be far fewer both in existence and which come on the market. While many collectors would be thrilled to own the B grade rifle, just like you are and should be, many collectors would only collect an original condition rifle for their collection or would be less likely to purchase your rifle at a higher values. It may be worth more in the long run to replace the forearm with a checked correct 81 forearm. Although it still won’t be the original, it would be closer and a bit less distracting from the original look.

Your have purchased a nice conditioned rifle and you got it at a good price. I would be excited to own it. I bet it shoots well. Let us know how it shoots and enjoy it.
[color=#004000]COREY CREAMER[/color]
User avatar
Rem8&81
Posts: 71
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:03 am

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by Rem8&81 »

DWalt, I forgot to mention the finish on these rifles since there was some talk about refinishing. The original finish on most 81's was actually a new finish to the 81's replacing the finish used on the 8's at the time of transition. While most 8's had a finish that was similar to the results achievable with Tung oil or TrueOil, the 81's received a spread lacquer finish which was quicker to apply and to dry at the factory. Although this finish did not prove to hold up well to either heat or moisture, as evident by the many original flaking, peeling, and hazy finished 81's out there, it seemed like a good choice to the factory at the time. Notes from the factory indicated that the C’s and later the B’s received three coats of this lacquer finish. While it is a lacquer finish, it is different from the lacquer finishes used today and the results look different than the shiny lacquer finishes you see on some guns today or on guns where guys refinish them and the metal to a spit shine. Good luck should you try to enhance the finish on your rifle.
[color=#004000]COREY CREAMER[/color]
DWalt
Posts: 513
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 1:18 pm
Location: San Antonio & Brackettville TX

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by DWalt »

Thanks for the forestock information. I knew it was not original when I bought the rifle, but I figured a -B marked receiver with an original -B buttstock, plus the peep sight, made it worth the price, especially with the metal finish looking pretty good. Both of the other M81s I have (1950 in .30 Rem and 1949 in .300 Savage) actually have better metal finish than the latest, but the wood finish on both was fairly poor, mainly scratched and chipped. Plus both rifles had a muddy brown wood finish appearance. I stripped both using Acetone, did a bare minimum of sanding, and applied Tung oil. Those looked good afterward. On this one, the wood finish (both pieces) was good enough that I did not want to remove it, so I just wiped everything down with mineral spirits, polished with 4/0 steel wool and went over them with a surface coat of the Watco Danish Oil Finish. So far the wood looks great and does not have a refinished appearance at all, just a bit shinier than it was. I have the second coat drying now. I'll paste wax everything tomorrow. I also applied a black baked-on Teflon coating to the checkered aluminum buttplate, as most of the original black finish was worn off, and it did not look good. It looks fine now. My wife never likes me using her kitchen oven for such purposes, so I waited until she was gone.

I did have one problem, as I really wanted to remove the buttstock for the cleaning and oil treatment, and also for receiver disassembly. That stock screw is in tighter than Scrooge, and my efforts to loosen it with everything I have available to me have been useless, so I gave up for the time being in fear I might twist off the head, as there is no way to use penetrating oil, etc. on the threads which are obscured by the stock. Any suggestions aside from leaving it alone?

I read the information about the higher grade 81s here, and I am a little puzzled about something. Regarding the later -B grade buttstock:

"This change meant the Special Grade was now delivered with a 20 lines-per-inch hand checkered stock and forearm of select American walnut, the new “flat-side” forearm, and a stock without wrist “cheeks”

I do not know just what a wrist cheek is. I don't know the nomenclature, but my stock may have the wrist cheeks, i.e., if the high point of the comb above the grip has a concave relief on either side, those are cheeks. Mine does have them.

Looks like I'll need a buyer for my 81A in .300 Savage. I really don't need two of them, and I'd like to recoup what I paid for this one.
User avatar
Rem8&81
Posts: 71
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:03 am

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by Rem8&81 »

DWalt, The cheeks they are referring to the 81 B's not having are cheeks similar to the cheeks found on the wrist of the rifle where it butts up to the receiver, like on the early model 8's or higher grade rifles. Your rifle does not have these cheeks. It is fairly uncommon for a 81 B to have them as they transitioned away from them when they went from the 81 C to the B. The 81 C's that our family own have them, as do only a couple of B's, but they are rare as most don't. The 81 D's we own seem to all have them, but one of the F's does not. I have forwarded some photos to Cam and asked if he could do me a favor if time permits and add them to the posting for some clarification.
Last edited by Rem8&81 on Wed Sep 05, 2012 2:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
[color=#004000]COREY CREAMER[/color]
User avatar
81police
Posts: 2613
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2009 12:12 pm
Location: TEXAS

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by 81police »

Dwalt, here are some photos from three different rifles with "cheeks". Top rifle - 81D, middle rifle - a very early 81B, bottom rifle - 8C. It doesn't take much sanding for the crisp edges of these cheeks to fade.

Image
Cam Woodall
Site Co-Administrator
User avatar
imfuncity
Posts: 1208
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 2:44 am
Location: 2hrs N of Sac., Tehama Co. CA

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by imfuncity »

Ah.... pictures!! Gotta love good looking cheeks and great looking rifles!!
Though defensive violence will always be “a sad necessity” in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men. - St. Augustine
User avatar
Rem8&81
Posts: 71
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:03 am

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by Rem8&81 »

Thanks Cam for taking the time to post a few of the pictures. I hope this helps. Also, refer to Cam's posting on the home page about the different 8 and 81 grades. Much of the article is based on the wood variations and upgrades. It has several good photos of high grade 8's and 81's showing these cheeks and rifles without them.
[color=#004000]COREY CREAMER[/color]
DWalt
Posts: 513
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 1:18 pm
Location: San Antonio & Brackettville TX

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by DWalt »

Am moving along on my cleanup of the stock wood. I did notice something stamped on the receiver, at the bottom in front of the magazine. It appears to be "+ B B" (without quotes). Any idea what that might mean? It doesn't seem to be a dating stamp. Maybe another designation of a B grade? Characters are spaced fairly widely apart.

And the oddities keep on coming. The receiver SN on mine is 156xx, indicating 1941 manufacture according to the SN list. I have just checked the barrel code (stamped on the left side, where the barrel tube goes into the part that fastens to the receiver). It appears the code is ouu, but the letters are sideways - sideways o, sideways u, sideways u. This would indicate July 1949, not 1941, which would be K. But hold on - just below the ouu is stamped the same last three digits of the receiver SN, 6xx. So what's going on here? Could that have anything to do with the +BB stamping on the receiver as mentioned above? Maybe a replaced barrel tube but matched to the original SN at the factory? I don't know it means anything, but the uu letters are oddly shaped, sort of a script.

Something else I just noticed is that there are two tang sight apertures having different diameter holes. The front one swings down. The rear one is (or seems to be) fixed in place. I don't think I have seen anything like that before. I have only one other rifle at present with a similar tang sight (on a Savage 1899) and it has only a single aperture. Is this an unusual feature? (I am not much of a sight historian).
User avatar
Rem8&81
Posts: 71
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:03 am

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by Rem8&81 »

DWalt, Some of the Lyman tang sights had an aperture with a little lever on them which allowed them to be folded down to change the size. Some had simply fixed holes with no folding apertures, while other Lyman/Marbles tangs had threaded apertures which allowed the user to select from a variety of aperture disk of different sizes, both in the size of the disk and the hole. Not sure if yours is one of the flip down sights I described first, but I hope this helps.
[color=#004000]COREY CREAMER[/color]
DWalt
Posts: 513
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 1:18 pm
Location: San Antonio & Brackettville TX

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by DWalt »

I believe the tang sight I have is a Lyman 1A-AT. I removed it from the rifle for a thorough examination and can find no markings on it. eBay was helpful as there are several 1A sights made for other rifles listed for sale, with good pictures. I can't find any specific mention of the dual aperture feature of the 1A sight however. I expected to find at least several websites having lots of information about older tang sights, but there is not much. As the 1A was made by Lyman until 1955, I suspect that's what I have.

Just a bit of clarification. The tilt-down aperture is on the front side. It is pivoted on the bottom and there is a small nub that can be moved with a fingernail.

Any enlightenment about the stampings I mentioned previously?
texassako
Posts: 139
Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2011 7:27 pm

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by texassako »

I always thought the letter codes on the barrel jacket head were factory repair codes, ie. repaired in 1949. I remember seeing that on here somewhere, but not in Henwood's book which I just finished reading.
User avatar
jack1653
Posts: 984
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 7:52 pm

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by jack1653 »

The barrel codes can mean a factory repair if the letters are followed by the number "3". It is my understanding that there was also a "2" issued on some but I have never seen one. I believe someone onthe forum mentioned the "2" meant the rfle was returned unrepaired. Maybe REM8&81 can tell us what the records at Remingon revealed.
DWalt
Posts: 513
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 1:18 pm
Location: San Antonio & Brackettville TX

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by DWalt »

The sideways "ouu" is not followed by anything. The only other stamping is the last three digits of the SN, below the ouu.
Wisner's website provides the following about Remington's numbers.

BARREL DATE CODE - stamped on LH top rear of barrel after 1920

R.E.P. Remington proof mark (this mark will also be there)

the following will only be stamped where applicable

#2 Part order barrel (not originally assembled to firearm)

#3 Service section received

#4 Return as received

#5 Employee sale
If a gun is returned to the factory as a fire damaged, or blown up firearm, the factory will stamp it with a #4 on the barrel & return it un-repaired. Then if the gun is ever subsequently returned to a warranty center or the factory by ANYONE, they will refuse to work on it as an unsafe firearm.
User avatar
jack1653
Posts: 984
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 7:52 pm

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by jack1653 »

The "OUU" would sugggest the rifle was produced in July 1949.

jack1653
User avatar
81police
Posts: 2613
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2009 12:12 pm
Location: TEXAS

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by 81police »

Post a picture of the stamps if you can Dwalt. When the factory hand stamped date codes, repair codes, fitters, and assemblers marks they weren't always done perfectly symmetrical, notoriously on Model 81's. I've seen quite a few repair codes with the "3" upside down and backwards even.
Cam Woodall
Site Co-Administrator
DWalt
Posts: 513
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 1:18 pm
Location: San Antonio & Brackettville TX

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by DWalt »

OK, I attempted some pictures. Not great, but I have only a $80 point-and-shoot camera. The first one is of the left side, showing the sideways ouu and the last three digits of the receiver serial number is below it (which would normally be covered by the fore end). The ouu is hard to read even with a magnifying glass, sort of a script u. There is no #2, #3, #4, or anything else anywhere.
Image

This is the + B B marking on the bottom of the receiver ahead of the magazine. To me, under magnification it looks more like Bs than 8s. Characters are widely spaced:
Image

The last is one of the buttstock after I cleaned it up. Definitely B grade wood:
Image

Note that the SN on the receiver is definitely in the 1941 range, not 1949 (as the ouu would suggest). So what has happened here?
Last edited by DWalt on Sat Sep 08, 2012 5:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
jack1653
Posts: 984
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 7:52 pm

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by jack1653 »

Hey Dwalt,

I am confused. Your first post about the barrel codes read;
"The sideways "ouu" is not followed by anything. The only other stamping is the last three digits of the SN, below the ouu."
There are no barrel codes for "CC". The "OUU is a valid barrel code and as previously stated that represents: O stands for July and the UU is for the year 1949. I had difficulty reading the letters in the picture. Is it possibe the code is "CC"? If it is "CC" then it means April of 1934 which would be a Model 8 and that would not be correct given the picture is a model 81.

Regards,

jack1653
DWalt
Posts: 513
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 1:18 pm
Location: San Antonio & Brackettville TX

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by DWalt »

The stampings do not, to me, resemble the letter c at all, much more like a sideways u under magnification. Then there is the matter of the matching last three numbers. It would be an enormous coincidence to have the same last three numbers as those of the 1941 receiver SN had they not been stamped there at the factory at a later time. Has anyone ever seen a Remington c stamp that looks like that, with a broad top side and sort of a squiggly tail on the bottom? Surely someone can identify whether it is a c or a sideways u. Plus there is the leading letter o. And no .300 Savage Model 8 barrels existed in 1934.
DWalt
Posts: 513
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2010 1:18 pm
Location: San Antonio & Brackettville TX

Re: New M81-B, Pre-war

Post by DWalt »

I took the M81 Grade B out to play for the first time today. I used my more-or-less standard load for the .300 Savage which is 37.0 grains of Hercules HiVel #2 and a 150 grain .30 M2 military bullet (I have LOTS of those). I also fired some lead cast bullet loads (165 grain spitzer, with gas check, over 23 grains of 2400). A total of 28 rounds (combined) were fired, and no malfunctions were encountered. I fired only two measured groups (@50 Yards from bench) using the M2 bullets. One 5-shot group was 2.4", one 3-shot group was 1.1". This was using the Lyman 1A tang peep sight. I also fired one 5-shot group, about 3.5" with the lead bullet loads - not too bad, considering my previous bad luck with cast bullets. The rest was mainly sighting in shots and random functional shooting. Those cast bullet loads were much more pleasant to shoot, but I did not chronograph them.

I did discover something. That tang sight had an affinity for hitting my right thumb at the joint under recoil, and it hurts. I had to adopt a non-natural grip further back on the stock to prevent it. I didn't have a glove, or I would have worn it (just a glove thumb would have worked, I suppose). Has anyone else experienced this?
Post Reply