140gr is a bit light
I use Norma 156gr Oryx for Moose and Deer
They also make Alaska and Vulkan in 156gr
Kenogami gun shop sells them
Husqvarna......would you?
- Thread starter Dorian Gray
- Start date
140gr is a bit light
I use Norma 156gr Oryx for Moose and Deer
They also make Alaska and Vulkan in 156gr
Kenogami gun shop sells them
H4831,
As Jethunter pointed, it looks like a M/640 made on a late FN 98 (post-49).
With the S/N we can easily determine the year of manufacture. In fact, .220 Swift, .270 Win and 30-06 Sprgd were only introduced in 1949 (production stated somewhere in 1948).
CG,
if you want to really be technical, then, you have to say this;
HVA model M/46, 46A and 46b were made from Carl Gustav (brand new) M/94 actions (the bent bolt handle makes it be a M/94 - the M/96 had a straight bolt handle).
The later civilian HVA models (post WWII, made by HVA) made on M/94 derivatives (the "commercial" M/38) have a solid left side wall (no thumb cut-out).
Husqvarna did not make the M/38 actions before 1941. In 193 aand 1944 they also produced (rebarreled) the M/96-38.
Calum,
Yes, that's what I mean. The new Swedish hunting rules ask for a tad more energy than the old 6.5X55 can produce with factory ammo. One of the many reasons the Swedes get rid of their good 'ol Huskies.
Their rules now ask for a mimimum bullet weight of 10 grams and more (154 grains) to have an impact energy of 2000 Joules (1500 Ft-Lbs) @ 100 m and a bullet of 9 to 10 grams (139-154 grains) needs 2700 Joules (2000 ft-lbs) @ 100m.
Find their rules here;
http://www.jagareforbundet.se/en/Hunting-in-Sweden1/Who-can-go-hunting/
As Jethunter pointed, it looks like a M/640 made on a late FN 98 (post-49).
With the S/N we can easily determine the year of manufacture. In fact, .220 Swift, .270 Win and 30-06 Sprgd were only introduced in 1949 (production stated somewhere in 1948).
CG,
if you want to really be technical, then, you have to say this;
HVA model M/46, 46A and 46b were made from Carl Gustav (brand new) M/94 actions (the bent bolt handle makes it be a M/94 - the M/96 had a straight bolt handle).
The later civilian HVA models (post WWII, made by HVA) made on M/94 derivatives (the "commercial" M/38) have a solid left side wall (no thumb cut-out).
Husqvarna did not make the M/38 actions before 1941. In 193 aand 1944 they also produced (rebarreled) the M/96-38.
Calum,
Yes, that's what I mean. The new Swedish hunting rules ask for a tad more energy than the old 6.5X55 can produce with factory ammo. One of the many reasons the Swedes get rid of their good 'ol Huskies.
Their rules now ask for a mimimum bullet weight of 10 grams and more (154 grains) to have an impact energy of 2000 Joules (1500 Ft-Lbs) @ 100 m and a bullet of 9 to 10 grams (139-154 grains) needs 2700 Joules (2000 ft-lbs) @ 100m.
Find their rules here;
http://www.jagareforbundet.se/en/Hunting-in-Sweden1/Who-can-go-hunting/
In the 1950s we were on a hunt with horses for mountain caribou. We were packing up camp to leave, with the horses tied to a horizontal pole. I had that rifle with me as I went between the horses to get my saddle horse. Was just about to untie him, when I was called away for something. So I leaned the rifle against the pole and went to help.
Was gone a few minutes and when I returned my rifle was no longer leaning against the pole. There had been a lot of rain, and there lay my this rifle, in the mud, and a pack horse standing on it, with it's big front foot right on the barrel! It took a good push to get the horse off of it.
I cleaned the mud off it and took it home, where it got a good cleaning and with visual inspection, couldn't see any bend in the barrel.
A week later I was on a goat hunt in the mountains. My partner, Milt Warren, for those of you who have read my book, and I spotted four goats on a mountain side and were making our way to them, when I realized I hadn't shot the rifle since the horse episode. About two hundred yards away was a white rock, smaller than a goat. So I had Milt watch it with his binocular while I took a shot at it. "Good hit," he called, so we carried on. Later in the day I shot one of the four goats with it.
I guess all the rain that caused the mud, saved my rifle!
BigUglyMan
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- New Scotland
1) Ammo is easy to find for the 6.5 Swede, 7x57 and 9.3x62.
2) I have a Stevens too
Yah, but that's just a ten yard rifle!
Ted
Moose Masher
CGN Regular
- Location
- Oak Hammok Manitoba
H4831, thanks for sharing. I have a rifle very much like yours, also in 30/06 that was made in the early fifties. I picked it up at a gun show a few years back. I often wonder where it has been and what it has done.
There's a book?!!
I would love to get my hands on a copy.
What is the title and where do you think a fellow could find one?
There's a book?!!
I would love to get my hands on a copy.
What is the title and where do you think a fellow could find one?
Sako used two arrangements for their "Hi-Power" rifles.
The early one was exactly the same as the late HVA and the other was the Surpeme action, assembled with the then new Sako trigger.
Sako used these actions from 1951 to 1960, but they continued selling their remaining stock well after the introduction of their L61R action in 1962.
Serial number for the Hi-Power serie started at 100001.
I have a "late" arrangement, and Trade Ex have (had) two of the early arrangement on their website.
264 Magnum,
HVA did not make the "Hi-Power", or, Model of 1951 with beech stocks. They were all walnut. The 640 wich was fitted with both Walnut (mostly for export) and beech.
In reality, both "Hi-Power" and 1951 are unofficial denominations, made out by Tradewinds and does not exist in any HVA publications, at HVA they were intended for export and were called 1000, 1100 and 2104 and their serial range is mixed with the 1640 of the same time period.
Basically, they were the same as the 640 line, but with better finishing and selected wood, sharing stock design with the 1640 line.
Some picture for comparison;
Left is a Sako-Hi-Power, a HVA 3000 Crown Grade, a Brno 21H, a M/649 (M/38) and a M/46 (M/94)
Sako Hi-Power (late, 1956, on a Supreme Action) and a late HVA M/648 made on a post 1949 action (rifle made in 1952)
Sako Hi-Power on a FN Supreme action, bolt shroud and safety details.
The early one was exactly the same as the late HVA and the other was the Surpeme action, assembled with the then new Sako trigger.
Sako used these actions from 1951 to 1960, but they continued selling their remaining stock well after the introduction of their L61R action in 1962.
Serial number for the Hi-Power serie started at 100001.
I have a "late" arrangement, and Trade Ex have (had) two of the early arrangement on their website.
264 Magnum,
HVA did not make the "Hi-Power", or, Model of 1951 with beech stocks. They were all walnut. The 640 wich was fitted with both Walnut (mostly for export) and beech.
In reality, both "Hi-Power" and 1951 are unofficial denominations, made out by Tradewinds and does not exist in any HVA publications, at HVA they were intended for export and were called 1000, 1100 and 2104 and their serial range is mixed with the 1640 of the same time period.
Basically, they were the same as the 640 line, but with better finishing and selected wood, sharing stock design with the 1640 line.
Some picture for comparison;
Left is a Sako-Hi-Power, a HVA 3000 Crown Grade, a Brno 21H, a M/649 (M/38) and a M/46 (M/94)
Sako Hi-Power (late, 1956, on a Supreme Action) and a late HVA M/648 made on a post 1949 action (rifle made in 1952)
Sako Hi-Power on a FN Supreme action, bolt shroud and safety details.
Last edited:
Your close up of the bolt, etc, of the Sako Hi Power, FN Supreme, shows the checkering to be hand done, anyway, even if he did have a wobble moment!
The first Husqvarna 3000 Supreme I saw also had very poor checkering. Flat topped, without pointing.
I don't mean to badmouth your fine rifles, but after all, you are just showing what somebody else has made, and I would say the same thing about my own rifles.
The first Husqvarna 3000 Supreme I saw also had very poor checkering. Flat topped, without pointing.
I don't mean to badmouth your fine rifles, but after all, you are just showing what somebody else has made, and I would say the same thing about my own rifles.
Husqvarna did not use the FN Supreme action. The 3000 Crown grade (and Imperial) used the 1640 action, or, if you better like, the HVA "Improved Mauser".
my Sako was "refreshed" by the orignal owner, who used it for seal hunting. These rifles are rare enough so I decided to leave it that way. It gives her some character.
I suspect that if you saw a Husqvarna with bad checkering it suffered from the same type of "crafting" than my "repaired" Sako.
The Crown grade have hand-made skip-line checkering, and I still have to see one original with bad checkering.
my Sako was "refreshed" by the orignal owner, who used it for seal hunting. These rifles are rare enough so I decided to leave it that way. It gives her some character.
I suspect that if you saw a Husqvarna with bad checkering it suffered from the same type of "crafting" than my "repaired" Sako.
The Crown grade have hand-made skip-line checkering, and I still have to see one original with bad checkering.
Since it was a long time ago, I may be out on a model number, but I will never forget the incidence. We were in the gun retail business and a sales representative brought in this new Husqvarna, which I remembered as a Crown Grade. The year was 1965, or early 66 and this was a new model Husqvarna.
The sales rep handed it to me and asked me what was wrong with it. I looked so close at the action, wood to metal fit and so on, which was good, that I told him it looked good to me. He then made me feel 2 feet high, when he said, "That checkering looks good to you?"
Msde me feel worse when he said he couldn't let that rifle go to a dealer.
Baribal,
You are correct that the "Hi Power" designation was not a Husqvarna term. I have always been under the impression that the early export models were stocked in beech as the walnut stocked 1000,1100 didn't come out until a couple years later. The Husqvarna bible mentions the export models with the walnut stocks but it sticks in my mind I have read about earlier export models that were beech stocked. Also, I looked at a NIB beech stocked 220 Swift a few years ago and I am sure it wasn't marked 640 on the box. This was a gun that was bought new in the 50s in the US. One thing about Husqvarna, they make for interesting research and collecting. Maybe Ted knows a bit about the Hi Power designation???
You are correct that the "Hi Power" designation was not a Husqvarna term. I have always been under the impression that the early export models were stocked in beech as the walnut stocked 1000,1100 didn't come out until a couple years later. The Husqvarna bible mentions the export models with the walnut stocks but it sticks in my mind I have read about earlier export models that were beech stocked. Also, I looked at a NIB beech stocked 220 Swift a few years ago and I am sure it wasn't marked 640 on the box. This was a gun that was bought new in the 50s in the US. One thing about Husqvarna, they make for interesting research and collecting. Maybe Ted knows a bit about the Hi Power designation???
BigUglyMan
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- New Scotland
Yah, but that's just a ten yard rifle!
Ted
Ten-FOOT old man! Even with those fine spectacles of yours!
I have 3 1600s, 2 of them were purchased from Tradeex. Absolutely beautiful rifles. The M-98 and M-96 are also good choices but are not as refined as the 1600s. I would not hesitate to recommend either the rifles or Tradeex.
Good choice.
Good choice.
Ten-FOOT old man! Even with those fine spectacles of yours!
Ten-foot, right.....RIGHT! Ten-foot, sorry. Uh.... ya, ten-foot, right.....uh, sorry!
264Magnum,
Actually, FN introduced the 'HI-Power" with their "redesigned" M/98 action in 1949. The mutation already started in the post-war production, the early actions showing charger clip lips removal and beyond other (minor) changes. Then, from 1949 until the introduction of the Supreme (a.k.a. DeLuxe or 300 Series) action about 1956 (the year my Sako rifle was made). The 1949 era actions are easy to identify because they had an extended floorplate release latch and they also show a "flat" rear receiver bridge.
Anyways, No-one really knows what happened between HVA and FN, but HVA started to work on their own action design. Since they did not have the liscence to build "real" M/98, they made a mix between their M/94 and the M/98, using all the M/98 non-protected patents they could on it. They started to work on their own design around 1950/51, wich coincides with Sako's introduction of their FN-actioned "Hi-Power" rifle. The relation between Sako and FN seemed to be quite warm, because FN was offering their actions fitted with the Sako triggers... even after 1962 (introduction of the Sako-designed L61R).
As for the beech vs walnut stocks, it's correct, the earlier FN actions used by HVA had a beech stock, but these were correctly named as 640. And it is widely accepted that Tradewinds helped a lot to the model designation confusion.... They may also have put 640's into their m/1000 boxes, too.
H4831
The "Crown grade" (another "invented" denomination by Tradewinds) was introduced around 1959, as the model 1640MC (for Monte-Carlo) and were also named 3000 and in Tradewinds litterature.... one more confusing denomination...
At first they had a rounded bakelite foretip and later (1964 if memory serves me well) they changed to the square type, rosewood nose like mine pictured above.
So, it matches your observations.
Actually, FN introduced the 'HI-Power" with their "redesigned" M/98 action in 1949. The mutation already started in the post-war production, the early actions showing charger clip lips removal and beyond other (minor) changes. Then, from 1949 until the introduction of the Supreme (a.k.a. DeLuxe or 300 Series) action about 1956 (the year my Sako rifle was made). The 1949 era actions are easy to identify because they had an extended floorplate release latch and they also show a "flat" rear receiver bridge.
Anyways, No-one really knows what happened between HVA and FN, but HVA started to work on their own action design. Since they did not have the liscence to build "real" M/98, they made a mix between their M/94 and the M/98, using all the M/98 non-protected patents they could on it. They started to work on their own design around 1950/51, wich coincides with Sako's introduction of their FN-actioned "Hi-Power" rifle. The relation between Sako and FN seemed to be quite warm, because FN was offering their actions fitted with the Sako triggers... even after 1962 (introduction of the Sako-designed L61R).
As for the beech vs walnut stocks, it's correct, the earlier FN actions used by HVA had a beech stock, but these were correctly named as 640. And it is widely accepted that Tradewinds helped a lot to the model designation confusion.... They may also have put 640's into their m/1000 boxes, too.
H4831
The "Crown grade" (another "invented" denomination by Tradewinds) was introduced around 1959, as the model 1640MC (for Monte-Carlo) and were also named 3000 and in Tradewinds litterature.... one more confusing denomination...
At first they had a rounded bakelite foretip and later (1964 if memory serves me well) they changed to the square type, rosewood nose like mine pictured above.
So, it matches your observations.
There are many choices in caliber for a "Moose Gun " and several have been mentioned.
That choice is yours and that if you re-load or not that might be a deciding factor.
Now, for your choice of reading item description, how many say 'cracked or pinned stock'??
Just food for thought ....
I like the look of the Husky, it doesnt matter , there is some fine craftsmanship in that steel .
Rob
That choice is yours and that if you re-load or not that might be a deciding factor.
Now, for your choice of reading item description, how many say 'cracked or pinned stock'??
Just food for thought ....
I like the look of the Husky, it doesnt matter , there is some fine craftsmanship in that steel .
Rob
