darktemplar
New member
- Location
- Sayabec (QC)
hello I have a midland 270 win model 2100 and I wondered that price I could sell it in good general condition (some SCRATCHED on wood and the blue barrel is good to 90% may be more) an approximate price
midland
- Thread starter darktemplar
- Start date
Personally, I think you're a bit high. Especially sight unseen. Many of those old Midland rifles were made up on surplus Mauser 98 actions. I bought several of those actions/barrels/stocks that they dumped when they went out of business in the early seventies.
One thing they did that disturbed me was they weren't very fussy about the receivers and bolts they used. Allen Lever bought up most of their stuff at auction for pennies on the dollar. They had a mix of receivers and bolts. All in bins. The barrels were already threaded and chambered in different configurations. They came with standard 98 trigger assemblies or if you wanted to pay $20 more, a Sherwood clone of a Timney trigger.
They made a big mistake by removing a lot of metal off the top of the receiver. They did this for two reasons. They wanted to remove the crests and stamps as well as to align them with the re machined rear bridge.
I made a deal on a dozen complete sets with Allen and in the end, after magnafluxing the receivers, I turned three of them into paperweights. I was lucky enough to pick the receivers I wanted. All were Fabrique National and made in Herstal Belgium. They looked good and magnafluxed beautifully but, when I had the receiver tops tested for hardness, three of them were dead soft. Maybe they would have been OK. I wasn't willing to take the chance. They received a cut through the soft top and became paperweights.
Over the years, I have checked several more with similar results.
I would cut that price by at least one hundred fifty dollars.
Just before Christmas, a young fellow brought one to me that was finished by Midland, which is just the model name. He complained it was shooting patterns like a shotgun. It was in 243Win. We took it to the range, tied it into my lead sled and let loose. He was right.
We took the rifle back to my shop and I made a light scribe mark on the front of the receiver, just under the scope. It was soft. I told him it was his rifle but it would likely never shoot well because of the flex in the soft receiver. Yes, I know, the inner surfaces were hardened and the rifle wasn't in danger of a Kaboom. It just wasn't stiff enough to shoot well.
I had an old D&Ted receiver on hand that I told him he could have for a hundred bucks and that I would install his parts onto it, making sure everything was square and centered as well as headspaced. He is a good guy and has done more than one favor for me in the past.
That barrel tenon was as square as any I've seen. I screwed it into the receiver I had, fully expecting to have to headspace it one way or another. It all came together like it was done for that specific job. The original scope bases were wrong for this receiver and we fitted new ones, then mounted the scope.
We then took the rifle to the range, about ten minutes from the bench to set up. Yes, I am lucky to be so close. We bore sighted it and it was close enough to start. Tied into the sled, it grouped into 2 moa. All looked good so the owner decided to shoot it off bags. He tightened up the group enough so that he was happy. His crappy scope may have had something to do with his 1.5 moa groups as well as the 20 year old box of WW yellow box ammo.
Now, I am not saying the rifle darktemplar has will be the same. Not all Midlands are. I have come across four of them that were though and that's why I wouldn't pay more for this rifle.
One thing they did that disturbed me was they weren't very fussy about the receivers and bolts they used. Allen Lever bought up most of their stuff at auction for pennies on the dollar. They had a mix of receivers and bolts. All in bins. The barrels were already threaded and chambered in different configurations. They came with standard 98 trigger assemblies or if you wanted to pay $20 more, a Sherwood clone of a Timney trigger.
They made a big mistake by removing a lot of metal off the top of the receiver. They did this for two reasons. They wanted to remove the crests and stamps as well as to align them with the re machined rear bridge.
I made a deal on a dozen complete sets with Allen and in the end, after magnafluxing the receivers, I turned three of them into paperweights. I was lucky enough to pick the receivers I wanted. All were Fabrique National and made in Herstal Belgium. They looked good and magnafluxed beautifully but, when I had the receiver tops tested for hardness, three of them were dead soft. Maybe they would have been OK. I wasn't willing to take the chance. They received a cut through the soft top and became paperweights.
Over the years, I have checked several more with similar results.
I would cut that price by at least one hundred fifty dollars.
Just before Christmas, a young fellow brought one to me that was finished by Midland, which is just the model name. He complained it was shooting patterns like a shotgun. It was in 243Win. We took it to the range, tied it into my lead sled and let loose. He was right.
We took the rifle back to my shop and I made a light scribe mark on the front of the receiver, just under the scope. It was soft. I told him it was his rifle but it would likely never shoot well because of the flex in the soft receiver. Yes, I know, the inner surfaces were hardened and the rifle wasn't in danger of a Kaboom. It just wasn't stiff enough to shoot well.
I had an old D&Ted receiver on hand that I told him he could have for a hundred bucks and that I would install his parts onto it, making sure everything was square and centered as well as headspaced. He is a good guy and has done more than one favor for me in the past.
That barrel tenon was as square as any I've seen. I screwed it into the receiver I had, fully expecting to have to headspace it one way or another. It all came together like it was done for that specific job. The original scope bases were wrong for this receiver and we fitted new ones, then mounted the scope.
We then took the rifle to the range, about ten minutes from the bench to set up. Yes, I am lucky to be so close. We bore sighted it and it was close enough to start. Tied into the sled, it grouped into 2 moa. All looked good so the owner decided to shoot it off bags. He tightened up the group enough so that he was happy. His crappy scope may have had something to do with his 1.5 moa groups as well as the 20 year old box of WW yellow box ammo.
Now, I am not saying the rifle darktemplar has will be the same. Not all Midlands are. I have come across four of them that were though and that's why I wouldn't pay more for this rifle.
The Midland 2100 was an economy rifle made by assembling assorted available parts on a cast receiver that accepted a surplus Springfield 03A3 bolt. There is nothing special about them. I would suggest $275 tops, if the rifle has scope bases.
I own a Midland 2100 in 30-06 made in Birmingham England. It outshot my PH Safari and has some pretty incredible groupings. It has the Springfield bolt and is a smooth as some of the economy rifles on the markets today, except with a heavier stock. To me, $400 seems fair if it is a UK stamped rifle. I paid a little more for mine, and I feel it was fair - mine had pristine barrel - as opposed to the entries today. It came with iron sights as well.
RJOK, I bow to those who have broader experience with them than I have.
I was involved in selling them in the 1960s and I don't recall any problems with them. They were just a lower priced 98 Mauser with normal stocks that people bought and shot moose with, just like they did with any other 30-06.
I was involved in selling them in the 1960s and I don't recall any problems with them. They were just a lower priced 98 Mauser with normal stocks that people bought and shot moose with, just like they did with any other 30-06.
Bruce,
You may be talking about the 1000/1100/1200 Series (Safari, Standard, Target, Super and all), as the Midland 2100 was introduced early '80s 'til '89-'90.
They built the rifles with investment casting receivers around leftover Springfield bolts they gathered as surplus. The Midland was intended to be a low-end cost cutting to complete the 1200/81 line.
The Midland was also made as 2100 Magnum, , 2600 special and 2700 Lightweight.
I agree with the 300.00 $ / 350.00 $ range, 400.00 $ for a top condition Magnum, maybe.
You may be talking about the 1000/1100/1200 Series (Safari, Standard, Target, Super and all), as the Midland 2100 was introduced early '80s 'til '89-'90.
They built the rifles with investment casting receivers around leftover Springfield bolts they gathered as surplus. The Midland was intended to be a low-end cost cutting to complete the 1200/81 line.
The Midland was also made as 2100 Magnum, , 2600 special and 2700 Lightweight.
I agree with the 300.00 $ / 350.00 $ range, 400.00 $ for a top condition Magnum, maybe.
I bought my 2100 in, I thought '79, but may have been '80...old guy + CRS.
Anyways, it is a 308 and is quite accurate, BUT ejection can be problematic. The case used to hang up on the action.
I had to do a little buffing on the corners to fix it. I heard that this is a common problem.
As for price, I am thinking in the 300$ range as well. At least that is what I have seen them go for.
Later.....
Anyways, it is a 308 and is quite accurate, BUT ejection can be problematic. The case used to hang up on the action.
I had to do a little buffing on the corners to fix it. I heard that this is a common problem.
As for price, I am thinking in the 300$ range as well. At least that is what I have seen them go for.
Later.....
