Anschutz stock quandary.

[mike mccormick]

Does not look like a wing safety as the bolt cap looks more like my 18xx series. The firing pin indicator also has the relief cut for the red color.
I was wondering if it was a “16xx” transition rifle.

ken

Looks like a 1607

 

[Ned Ludd]

Below is an image of the Evolution Gun Works bag rider that was designed to level the toe of A2 stocks. It may not be the exact "fix" you're looking for, but may give you some ideas. If you do a search for "rear bag rider", you will pull up quite a few images that might be of help in terms of ideas if you plan to design your own.

FWIW - I shoot F-TR and started early on with rifles having McMillan A5 stocks, which also have a steeply angled toe. Because I really favor the feel of the A5 stock, I am unwilling to change, and I also am not a huge fan of the idea of having to re-stock multiple F-TR rifles with expensive stocks. Fortunately, due to my my shooting style, which consists of preloading an LRA bipod (which is basically a grossly over-sized Harris/Atlas-style bipod), and a large rear bean bag, the angled toe is not an issue. However, I may be the last dinosaur on the planet still using such a setup in F-TR. It works for me, but most F-TR shooters have gravitated toward a ski-type bipod and an eared rear bag. Commonly referred to as shooting "free recoil", it is a very different style of shooting than what I use, and having a steeply angle toe means the muzzle will be pointing 30 feet above the target at the end of the recoil impulse. I also have such a bipod and have played around with this shooting style from time to time, hence my prior interest in bag riders. Over time, I simply decided to stick with what has worked for me in the past (i.e. preloaded bipod, rear bean bag).

Given that the bullet dwell time in the barrel is more than twice as long with the slower rimfire cartridge than most centerfire cartridges, the forgiveness for shooter gun handling errors is even less when shooting rimfire. You may get away with using a stock that has an angled toe, or you may find that designing some kind of bag rider will work well enough for the time being. However, I would suggest that best time to consider purchasing a stock with a toe that is more appropriate for the type of shooting you intend is now, while you only have the one rifle to worry about. It may be more painful ($$$) in the short term, but in the long term you will likely be better off getting a stock that is purpose-built for BR shooting. In doing so, you can also choose an eared rear bag that is perfectly mated to the stock toe of your choice, and end up with a setup that should never be the limiting factor in your shooting. This is just my opinion, but having been down the same road, I suspect I might have been better off in the long by switching to a more appropriate style of stock for F-TR shooting. Had I done so, that style of shooting would have long since become my "new normal".

 

[Tim Slater]

Does not look like a wing safety as the bolt cap looks more like my 18xx series. The firing pin indicator also has the relief cut for the red color.
I was wondering if it was a “16xx” transition rifle.

ken

Ken,

I'd agree. The bolt cap is clearly the later screw-fit, not the bayonet lug of a 14xx. I did wonder if it was an early 1807, but the bolt handle is straight not cranked. I'd say a 1607 from 1977 or 1978.

To the OP (and anyone who isn't an Anschutz geek), the 1607, and 16xx* rifles, were a major redesign of the Match 54 made between 1977 and 1980. The receiver is basically the same, but the firing pin was lightened and two springs used to decrease lock time. Anschutz even cut a slot in the bolt, exposing the firing pin, to prevent the firing pin acting as a piston and slowing itself. The trigger was a new design,capable of fine adjustment. 16xx barrels enjoy an excellent reputation and have attracted a few legends. Someone pointed out that 16xx heavy barrels are fractionally thicker at the muzzle than 1413.

When Ken (1813Benny) calls this a transition model, he means it was a step between the original 14xx Match 54 and the later 1813 and 1913. Anschutz clearly thought they could improve on the 16xx, and lightened the firing pin and main spring further (obviating the need for the open slot in the bolt), and tweaked the trigger, bent, and cocking cam geometry in 1980 for the 1813. 16xx is a retrospective designation. These rifles were still advertised and sold as 14xx, and barrels were marked still "Anschutz Modell Match 54". The only identifying mark was an X at the end of the serial number, so X-barrel is often used as shorthand for 16xx.

*16xx covers the 1607 ISU Standard 1609 and 1610 , 1611 Prone, and 1613 Supermatch.

 

[nagantino]

It has an X after the serial number.

 

[dutch14]

Anschutz marked the year of proofing on many of their rifles as well as the model number. So a picture of the markings on the barrel and receiver might be worth while if it has the original barrel.

 

[Thauglor]

That one has the 5071 trigger, same as the 5018 except for the cam for the firing pin. That is a nice rifle, if the bore and price are good, then get it and get a new stock. Eventually you might need to rebarrel.

 

[SBS]

Does not look like a wing safety as the bolt cap looks more like my 18xx series. The firing pin indicator also has the relief cut for the red color.
I was wondering if it was a “16xx” transition rifle.

ken

You were right; I just had never seen a 1407-U9 trigger on the transition "1600" series -- guess they changed a lot of parts gradually.

 

[Tim Slater]

You were right; I just had never seen a 1407-U9 trigger on the transition "1600" series -- guess they changed a lot of parts gradually.

I believe a 1407-U9 trigger will cock with a 16xx bolt as the sear/bent geometry is the same*. However, I have never read or seen anything to suggest the 507x triggers were not standard on all 16xx rifles. Any 14xx triggers would be retro fitted.

Anyway I am certain rifle pictured does not have a 1407-U9. The blade appears to be the straight-ish black one Anschutz used for forty years on the 50xx triggers. I believe it would be the standard 5071 trigger.

*I know of a 1409 trigger being used on an 1813, and jammed forwards enough to catch sometimes.

 

[Hi-NV Shooter]

I believe a 1407-U9 trigger will cock with a 16xx bolt as the sear/bent geometry is the same*. However, I have never read or seen anything to suggest the 507x triggers were not standard on all 16xx rifles. Any 14xx triggers would be retro fitted.

Anyway I am certain rifle pictured does not have a 1407-U9. The blade appears to be the straight-ish black one Anschutz used for forty years on the 50xx triggers. I believe it would be the standard 5071 trigger.

*I know of a 1409 trigger being used on an 1813, and jammed forwards enough to catch sometimes.

Tim,

Any 1400 and 1600 trigger will inter-change among the two actions. just for the heck of it I put a 5039 on a 1613 once. the trigger on the OP is a 1407U9 most likely. here is a close up of the trigger, clearly the trigger blade is from a 1407U trigger

Lee

 

[Hi-NV Shooter]

To The OP the slant of the forearm is not a big deal. my best shooting 1411 is in a Edge style stock where it will raise the POA up on recoil. the biggest thing that will affect tracking with the factory stock is cast -off, if you look from above and at the bottom of the stock you will see that it curves and is not straight. this will be the biggest problem on making it track well when shooting BR. shooting off a 1-piece rest is not a problem, off a 2-piece you will need to align front and rear as perfectly as you can.

Lee

 

[Tim Slater]

Tim,

here is a close up of the trigger, clearly the trigger blade is from a 1407U trigger

Lee

Lee,

Yes, that is a 1407-U9 trigger, but I don't think that's the OP's rifle. The second photo he posted shows his rifle, and that is a 1607.

 

[Hi-NV Shooter]

Lee,

Yes, that is a 1407-U9 trigger, but I don't think that's the OP's rifle. The second photo he posted shows his rifle, and that is a 1607.

Tim,

You are correct, I didn't see the second picture wonder why he posted the first one? straight bolt handle has to be the first year production.

Lee

 

[nagantino]

The rifle is not in my possession so, in my ignorance of Anschutz models, I found a photo that had the sloping stock, which was my original question. The second photo is the actual rifle I intend to buy. A wide vista of models and variations of models has opened up to me now.....and I thought I knew a little about firearms.

 

[Tim Slater]

Tim,

You are correct, I didn't see the second picture wonder why he posted the first one? straight bolt handle has to be the first year production.

Lee

Dunno, the two are similar enough that it's probably an honest mistake. Let's not forget, the OP was initially asking about the stock rather than the action.

I'd say first year or so. I've seen both 77 and HI (1978) proofed 16xx rifles with straight bolt handles. Either way it's the earlier part of production.

 

[nagantino]

So, here is a photo of the left side of the rifle action. It might help identify the rifle with some certainty and has a clearer view of the trigger. Appreciating all the info.

 

[USMCDOC]

So, here is a photo of the left side of the rifle action. It might help identify the rifle with some certainty and has a clearer view of the trigger. Appreciating all the info.

yes it is a "1600" series rifle.

I have one that is a hammer

 

[Hi-NV Shooter]

So, here is a photo of the left side of the rifle action. It might help identify the rifle with some certainty and has a clearer view of the trigger. Appreciating all the info.

With the X at the end of the serial number it clearly shows it is an Match 54 1977-1979 production. these as has been stated in previous posts are called 1600's series, but never by Anschutz. the barrel profile suggest it is an 1607 (1407) and the straight and solid bolt knob also suggest it is an early 1977 production. first 3-digits of the serial number is mostly below 150 xxxX. they are exceptional shooters if the barrel was taken care of properly. the trigger is a 5071 or 5075 the 71 being the 2-stage and the 75 being a single stage.
for bench shooting the 5071 is more desirable as you can set it as a single stage with a 2-oz release. the 5075 can only go to 14-oz, but can be modified to go as low as 2-oz. by replacing one of the springs with one from a 5018 trigger.
how to tell the difference between the two, looking at the bottom of the trigger the first screw will be a larger flat head screw on the 5075, the 5071 will be a slotted set type screw. the example I attached shows a 5072, but it is the exact same trigger as a 5071.
firing pin springs are only available from Wolff (.220), firing pins themselves are very scarce and the only known source that I know of is in Australia and they don't ship to the US. good news I have never seen one break.
as far as buying it, if you can shoot it first use the results to make your decision to buy it.

Lee

 

[Tim Slater]

Lee,

Anschutz do describe these rifles as 16xx now, they just didn't at the time.

 

[Hi-NV Shooter]

Lee,

Anschutz do describe these rifles as 16xx now, they just didn't at the time.

Tim,

Thanks I didn't know that. funny they would now call them 1600

Lee

 

[Tim Slater]

Tim,

Thanks I didn't know that. funny they would now call them 1600

Lee

Lee,

I don't know if it was a factory decision after the fact, or they just followed common parlance. Someone with more time in their hands, and access to contemporary journals, might be able to pin it down. That said, 1600 seems the obvious answer to describe something between 14 and 18.