Bullseye .22s

In the golden era of bullseye shooting—1950s and '60s—the great 2700 aggregate matches were fired on ranges all over this country. A 2700 was actually three different 900 aggregates fired with three different guns—a .45, a centerfire of some kind and a .22 Long Rifle.


While many shooters in fact used three different guns, a great many chose to use only two. Their .45 also filled the bill as “any centerfire,” so that gun did double duty. In the .22 field early matches saw Colt or S&W .22 revolvers in frequent use. Typically, they were fired by thumb-cocking the hammer, single-action style. But, the inherent advantage of a self-loader eventually caused most shooters to use them for the so-called “mouse gun” third of the long program.


Obviously, if the .22 pistol was shaped like the .45, the more familiar feel was an advantage. Colt made the Ace model on the 1911 platform, but its accuracy was not up to the competition. Early on, it was mostly the Colt Woodsman (particularly the Match Target version) and several High Standard models. Both guns were decently accurate, but neither had the feel of the 1911. Their grips were more steeply angled, probably to facilitate feeding from the more efficient raked magazine.


As the competition progressed, Smith & Wesson entered the fray with the Model 41, a pistol with a very 1911-like butt and blue-chip accuracy. In no time at all, the Smith was the gun to have. Colt never responded to this challenge, so their beautiful little Woodsman lost heavily in popularity and eventually disappeared from the catalog.


High Standard took a different tack by modifying their basic frame to a more 1911-like feel and retaining the same magazine. The magazine now angled through the frame, rather than running parallel with the frontstrap, but it worked beautifully. It quickly became a battle between the S&W Model 41 and the High Standard Military Model. And contrary to whatever else you might hear, a pistol shaped like a 1911 is going to shoot better than an angled butt design when you are using the sights in deliberate aimed fire.


Share |

Comments

ADD YOUR COMMENT

Enter your comments below, they will appear within 24 hours


Your Name


Your Email


Your Comment

3 Responses to Bullseye .22s

Bruce Pierce wrote:
February 23, 2011

Wiley is spot on about the High Standards. I shot two examples both old and very used. Both are still respectably accurate, even with bargain ammo.

Warner Anderson MD wrote:
February 21, 2011

I would like to see info and impressions on the Ruger. I think it's been around long enough to have gained respectability. I don't own one but wonder how it compares to my S&W 41?

Jerry Schnur wrote:
February 17, 2011

In the 50s and 60s I preferred the feel and lack of internal machinery in my S&W model 25 for .45 and center fire in the 2700matches. The High Standard with the rear sight mounted on top of the chamber produced gold medals and Green stamps galore. Of course there is a WW1 springfield 1911 in the rangebox that participated in "hardball" and is still one of my favorites with a new life given to it from a stainless magazine. Today I marvel at the difference in recoil between the 1911 and my officers model Colt 45 using the same ammo. Thanks for the chance to hear from this 83 yr old benefactor member that still enjoys the range. Compliments to Wiley on his continuing excellent articles.