LolaPP, you've made the assertion that the Lakefield action is specifically modeled on the Anschutz 64, rather than simply being a similar design not unlike those of other rimfire manufacturers.
Yes, that's a perfect summation of exactly what I'm saying.
Similarity in design doesn't necessarily mean that one is a purposeful or specific copy of the other.
Absolutely. I'm sure we can both think of several similar designs in firearms development that were examples of convergent evolution. I'm not saying the designs are merely similar though, they're near identical from a design and manufacture perspective. Both based around a tube receiver, with a three piece bolt, with the same spring loaded striker that drives a seperate firing pin, mag well and trigger group as separate modular assemblies, etc etc. The exploded views look near identical. The biggest difference is that the Mk II design takes a lot of the precision machine work out of the bolt construction and arrives at the same end by simpler and less precise manufacturing methods. It's very smart.
Is there any published information -- in print or online -- that corroborates the contention you make?
No, absolutely not. Or more precisely, none that I know of. I don't know of anything published that directly covers the history of Lakefield Arms specifically, rather it's indirectly through their eventual relationship with Savage or via Cooey. That's not surprising, really, they were a small manufacturer of budget .22s for less than a quarter century before they were acquired by Savage.
It's unfortunate, given the story of the company's ongoing success. It's a unique story of a world class Canadian arms manufacturer arising from the loss of another industry, and not only surviving but prevailing to this day. That's pretty cool.
To answer your question as best I can, I don't recall where I first read or heard that. It's just something I always understood, and I thought was also widely understood. My father worked in the firearms business in that part of Canada during that time period, so it's possible it was from him.
Krico and Voere have made rimfire actions that are very similar to the Anschutz 64 and, like the Lakefield, all lock with the bolt.
Indeed, but that fact alone has no bearing on what I'm saying, unless the Kricos and Voeres predate the 64 action and it's actually the 64 that's modeled on them. I don't know if that's the case or not, or even when Voere and Krico started making rifles, except that they definitely aren't pre war manufacturers.
This kind of rimfire action is very common.
Is it? Apart from Savage and Anschutz plus Voere and Krico, that's all we've identified. I guess I would say it's very common because of Savage now, and the 64, but that's kind of it. Still relatively uncommon compared to the ubiquity of Brno type .22 actions or dare I say the Marlin 60/10-22 type actions.
At the same time, it seems that the Anschutz 64 is a refinement of the widely used Flobert action, which also locks with the bolt and were in wide use in German rifles of various makes and in Anschutz production up to the 1980s.
I think there's a definite design history there, from Flobert II to 64. My understanding of the 64 action though is that it wasn't so much refinement as a cheaper way to make accurate rifles than the 54 action. Much like the Rem 700 of the exact same time period. Also perhaps an example of convergent manufacturing methods for CF firearms.
Regarding the CIL and Savage relationships with Anschutz, they existed to provide Anschutz with wider North American distribution.
Yes, absolutely, and vice versa, that's exactly what I'm saying.
North Americans interested in target rifles
Which is to say a very small minority, even among rifle shooters,
would certainly have been familiar with Anschutz by 1960 because of a gold in prone in the Rome Olympics in 1960. Canadian shooters could certainly buy Anschutz rifles without the CIL association. Many Anschutz models had no CIL equivalents such as the Anschutz 54 match rifles.
Americans were not unfamiliar with Anschutz sans Savage, as this early 1960s ad from an American publications illustrates (see below)
Agree to disagree on what constitutes familiar... or at least "not unfamiliar." Not sure an ad here or there qualifies.
Beneath is a 1960 ad in an American publication for sporter rifles, including Flobert and 64 action rifles. Later there was, of course, Savage-Anschutz advertising.
Yeah, that's what I said. I'll quote myself for clarity...
It wasn't until well post WW2 that Anschutz got the reputation and fame it has today
The 1960s is well post WW2.
Had a 13B in a Mazda RX3. Pass anything but a gas station, but handled like a pig on stilts! LOL! It was fun!
