New Model 65

[levallois]

Just picked it up - I haven't even cleaned it yet. There is either a little bit of surface rust or cosmoline on the receiver - no pits that I can see. Parked finish looks pretty good otherwise. Stock my have been refinished but it's got it's fair share of handling marks? Perfect bore and everything functions the way it's supposed to, at least by hand. Serial 18489 - so probably not used by the Marines if the 17000 cutoff is real?

 

$376 out the door, which I thought was pretty good.

 

 

 

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v248/Levallois/DSC01560.jpg

 

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v248/Levallois/DSC01561.jpg

 

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v248/Levallois/DSC01563.jpg

[dalbert]

levallois,

 

That was an excellent price for your Model 65. I think it will end up being cosmolene, or other old grease that will clean up off the receiver. Congratulations!

 

I know I've seen the 17,000 figure mentioned somewhere before, but I don't recall where. Where did you find that information? Does your Model 65 have any stock cartouches?

 

David Albert

dalbert@sturmgewehr.com

[levallois]

David,

 

Thanks - I can't wait to take her to the range. I read about the 17000 number cutoff somewhere, probably on the internet? I've also seen 6000 as the limit for USMC used Model 65s, probably also on the internet? Are there any definitive facts supporting either number?

 

No stock cartouches that I can see. However, stamped under the buttplate and on the wood under the plate are identical letter/numbers - not the seria. The serial is written in pencil inside the stock forearm section.

 

John

[dalbert]

David,

 

Thanks - I can't wait to take her to the range. I read about the 17000 number cutoff somewhere, probably on the internet? I've also seen 6000 as the limit for USMC used Model 65s, probably also on the internet? Are there any definitive facts supporting either number?

 

No stock cartouches that I can see. However, stamped under the buttplate and on the wood under the plate are identical letter/numbers - not the seria. The serial is written in pencil inside the stock forearm section.

 

John

 

John,

 

I think I might have seen the 17,000 figure mentioned on another board, as well. I can debunk the 6000 number. My USMC National Match marked Model 65 is in the 10,000 serial number range.

 

I've only seen 3 Model 65's wth stock cartouches. I'm not sure why some were marked, and some were not. I suppose it could be that some have been marked after the fact, but I don't think that adding/faking such a marking would have much effect on the Reising Model 65 market. That being said, an original cartouche punch of the type I have seen on stocks of 3 Model 65's was available recently for sale on Ebay.

 

David Albert

dalbert@sturmgewehr.com

[emmagee1917]

Well , I don't have the figures in front of me , so I'm flying by the seat of my pants.

The WW2 Marine Corp was rather small , so they would not have a very great need for a ton of .22s. The M65 was made at thier request , so logic would dictate that thier contract would be filled first. It is not known where the serials began , but no one has been able to show me one with less than 4 digits , so let's assume 1001 was the first. In the '50s the Marines had more made for them , the MC58s , the serial #s started at 6,000. It would be logical that they started here , at thier request , so as not to duplicate the earlier number block.This would then mean that they purchased 5,000 , running between 1,001 and 6,000.

After the contract was filled , M65 production continued for civilian use. At the end of the war , the Marines approached H&R for a match rifle and had some changes they wanted. They built around 50 for them , and prob'ly added the improvements into the line. These improvements show up in the late 9,000 / early 10,000 range and continue till end of production. Main changes are a spring loaded beak on the action arm and a screw adjustment in the trigger group leg.

Now , this is all guess work based on the limited facts we have and the size of the WW2 Marine training facilities. I belive it to be close and true for now , but I won't be upset if the records , when/if found , prove me wrong.

Chris

[levallois]

Interesting discussion but I have some questions. First, why would H&R continue to park these guns after the Marine Corps order was completed? Civilians wanted blued guns as demonstrated by the model 165 which was blued. Second, the Marine Corps was small before the war but ballooned out to about a half a million men during the war. You would think 5000 trainers would have been inadequate? Also, from a business standpoint, it seems strange that at least 11500 of these model 65s were produced without a contract after serial number 6000? My 2-cents and worth every penny.

 

John

 

[emmagee1917]

Well , there was a war on. The civilian production level was controled by the Defense Supplies Corporation ( DSC ) and the reason it was allowed at all was the military connection. Why parked ? That's what was set up and what they had chemicals to do. A war was on , screw what the civilian's perfered , do with what they had or do without. I do not think the .22 part of the training lasted a long while before they moved on to bigger calibers , maybe a day or two at the most . Most trainees who had fired a rifle before prob'ly never shot one , they went directly to the .30s. So , yes , a lot of men could have been trained with 5,000 rifles. Finally , even with a war on , there was a need for .22s and other guns in the civilian market. The DSC controled that to control waste , therefore only a few brands of .22s were allowed . Those that were allowed were built to fill an already known need with DSC approval. Nothing strange there at all , just getting the most use out of your limited resources.

But still , as I have said , this is all best guess deduction looking at the whole picture of war-time need , production , and operation.

Chris

[NavyEngineer]

Well , I don't have the figures in front of me , so I'm flying by the seat of my pants.

The WW2 Marine Corp was rather small , so they would not have a very great need for a ton of .22s. The M65 was made at thier request , so logic would dictate that thier contract would be filled first. It is not known where the serials began , but no one has been able to show me one with less than 4 digits , so let's assume 1001 was the first. In the '50s the Marines had more made for them , the MC58s , the serial #s started at 6,000. It would be logical that they started here , at thier request , so as not to duplicate the earlier number block.This would then mean that they purchased 5,000 , running between 1,001 and 6,000.

After the contract was filled , M65 production continued for civilian use. At the end of the war , the Marines approached H&R for a match rifle and had some changes they wanted. They built around 50 for them , and prob'ly added the improvements into the line. These improvements show up in the late 9,000 / early 10,000 range and continue till end of production. Main changes are a spring loaded beak on the action arm and a screw adjustment in the trigger group leg.

Now , this is all guess work based on the limited facts we have and the size of the WW2 Marine training facilities. I belive it to be close and true for now , but I won't be upset if the records , when/if found , prove me wrong.

Chris

 

Chris,

 

The Marine Corps expanded greatly during the war - from approximately 65,881 on 30 November 1941 to approximately 485,000 Marines by the end of the war. I've only heard anecdotal stories about .22lr training, however, and it seems much remains unknown at this late date about how many of the M65s were used, how much they were used, and how long they remained in service. I wish I knew something about the history of mine (serial 3721).

 

http://img688.imageshack.us/img688/2306/hr65.jpg

 

 

 

 

[emmagee1917]

Well , as an update , on another forum a 3-digit M65 stepped forward. So , let's assume a full 6,000 rifles were made. I've read some accounts that .22 training lasted only a couple of days for the basics before moving on to the .30s. However , let's say it took a week before moving on. A two to three hour session at the range would prob'ly be about max. per day , so three "shifts " , ie 9 hours of range time would be easy to do. So , 6,000 rifles being used to train three shifts per week equals 18,000 trained men per week , or 936,000 men per year or 2,808,000 in three years. And that's being very conservitive. If you figure 3-1/2 days training ( still more than people's said) and 4 shifts ( 12 hrs ) you get 7,488,000 trained.

So , as you can see , 6,000 can train a lot of people. Also , don't forget , the Marines pick a lot of thier men from "outdoor" types ( loggers , trappers , hunters ) early on and as much as they could later. Many said they never even seen a M65 during basic. Prob'ly only one out of every 5 or 10 used them , so now your numbers jump to 30 to 70 million trained.

Also , many of the rifles under 6,000 are in preaty good shape. Handled a lot , yes , but not shot to pieces , so again , I don't think they were used as much as one might first think. Yours looks to be a good example of this point , mid-run of military use and in good shape .

Chris

[wwiifirearms]

U.S. Martial .22RF Rifles by Thomas Batha lists the following estimates: 6,000 in 1943 and 3,450 in 1959 total of 9450

However, I spoke to Batha a few years ago when building my OGCA display ( picture below) and he acknowledged the data on this model was sketchy. He actually mentioned wanting to publish an updated version with some additional data he gathered, particularly on this model.

http://i584.photobucket.com/albums/ss281/wwiifirearms/a6bf1c27.png

-wwiifirearms

Ps- I have serial numbers 5974 and 7215, both are marked 65, I'd love to find an MC58.

Edited December 3, 2010 by wwiifirearms

[levallois]

What a great display!!! I wish that I could have been there and examined it in detail.

[dalbert]

That was a good display at OGCA! I always look forward to the OGCA Shows, every other month. If anyone has considered becoming a member, but has not followed through yet, I can assure you it is well worth the effort. You have to be sponsored by a member to join.

 

David Albert

dalbert@sturmgewehr.com

[wwiifirearms]

Glad you liked the display. I may do another display this year, but different theme.

 

Little story about these guns. I had the chance to have dinner at the home of the then Director of Civilian Marksmanship and two time Olympic Gold Medal winner Gary Anderson. His home is filled with shooting awards and Olympic uniforms, but he had only one firearm on display... ...you guessed it... ...a Reising Model 65. He told me it was the gun he learned to shoot with and he dry-fired it many thousands of times until it would no longer chamber a round.

 

I thought about starting to dry fire mine and see if my match scores improved, but I couldn't bring my self to risk damaging the gun. I am sure if I had done it I would have at least two or three Olympic Golds. :-0

-wwiifirearms

[copdoc]

You guys might find this interesting.

 

Dad bought his M65 after WWII on base at Ft Bragg. He said they had a truck load of them they were selling to GIs with a case of ammo for $25. (I think he said 25) It was new when he got it. No cartouche on the stock and 4 digit number. I told Dad it was a training weapon for the Marines and all he said was well "they didn't have all of them". ??????? He never saw one until after the war and did not remember any AB units using them for training.

 

Why would the Army be selling them after the war? Serial number 7xxx so after the 6000 cut off even if numbering started at 1000. ?????

 

It still shoots great and I shoot it every few months.

 

[wwiifirearms]

Just a theory, but after the war they had a lot of material to deal with and I suspect many small arms from various branches all went through US Army Ordnance back to Arsenals like Aniston, AL, Rock Island, and Springfield. I have Navy marked Mossberg and Remington .22 rifles that I think went through the arsenal system at some point and were eventually sold by the DCM/CMP.

How they made it to Bragg would be interesting to know.

-wwiifirearms

[10XXX]

I have two wartime Model 65's with all of the correct features with; U.S. NAVY marked about one inch forward of the serial number.One is serial number 5739 and the other is serial number 9787. Has anyone seen this before?, 10XXX.

[emmagee1917]

I've never seen nor heard of a US Navy marked one , but the Navy and Marines worked together alot . They ( the Navy ) might have aquired a few for training or for recreational use overseas at liberty . I've written about my first one I picked up at a gunshow for $100 that was modified by the Marines for a Maxim suppressor ( pest control in island supply dumps ) that were freed by front line units pulled back for R&R and used to control 2 legged " pests " on patrols and raids . A couple of rows later I met a Marine who had carried one and removed the thread cover ( I hadn't noticed it ) and told me about them . I figured I just never knew about them , but most people have never heard of them .

Chris