Watchnguns wrote on Jan 14^th, 2018 at 6:19pm:


More than a little, I suspect, if it's one of those purchased by AF during WW II for use as survival weapons by aircrews shot down in enemy territory.  These guns had plastic stocks, which were used when they were being made by Stevens before the war.  Those made by Savage after the war used wooden stocks.

Watchnguns wrote on Jan 14^th, 2018 at 6:26pm:


But even us know-it-alls find it hard to keep track of guns produced in foreign countries for native usage, which might account for lack of markings.  My wild guess would be Latin America, as even the cheapest-made US guns sold by hardware stores, mail-order catalogs, etc., were given some kind of markings.  Can't believe it's a home-workshop project, either.

Redsetter wrote on Jan 14^th, 2018 at 7:20pm:


It’s just crazy that I can’t find anything on it.  I’ve google copy, reproduction, no markings etc. and have come up empty.  You would think if it was produced in any sort of numbers, I’d find something. The mystery of it is intriguing to me.

From the peculiar color and the general fit and finish, I'm inclined to say that's a heavily reworked Stevens 44. Tang trimmed to allow the pistol grip, spring moved to allow the trimmed tang, enough material removed from what was probably a badly pitted surface to disappear any markings. Small parts were probably all re-made from scratch. This definitely has the looks of advanced mid-century home workshop gunsmithing. 

Watchnguns, if that one top tang screw is the only thing that secures the action to the stock, be careful not to let it lever itself apart, as that's definitely be a weak point in the redesign. Pushing down on the wrist of the stock while pushing up on the muzzle could likely bend or break that tang. If you're shooting from the bench, you probably shouldn't lean too hard on it with your cheek.

Marlene wrote on Jan 14^th, 2018 at 9:24pm:


Stevens rcvrs. had no markings on the sides until Savage assumed control after 1920.  But this rcvr. does exhibit a stamped number on one side, so it hasn't been ground down to remove pitting; and even if it had been badly pitted, there would have been no need to obliterate the Stevens model no. markings on the front face of the rcvr.  The forearm stud on the front face of the rcvr. isn't Stevens either, nor the lever & trigger. The upper tang isn't D&T for a tang sight, as all Stevens-made rcvrs. were. 

Hard to get the scale from the photos, but if it’s a 44, it’s an old model, with screws instead of bolts for the block and lever.

I would guess, from the screws and the wide hole that used to hold the takedown screw, that somebody took an 1894 Favorite receiver and block, adapted a 1915 Favorite hammer and trigger to fit, cut or dressed the lower tang off (removing the code or serial number thereby), welded a Stevens lever top to a Marlin lever action lever (or maybe copied the whole thing; from the bluing, it’s all real steel rather than malleable iron), adapted a Marlin 39 buttstock to fit, (maybe) made the forend out of matching wood, repositioned the mainspring to the top tang, mounted a scope on the side, rebarreled it and responsibly stamped a new serial number (or maybe the old code number) on the side to satisfy the ATF people.

Does the buttplate say “Stevens” or have a scrolled “S” on it?  Or does it say “Fajen” or “Marlin” or maybe nothing?  It looks to me like a pretty impressive example of home-shop work; even admirable in some respects.  That locating stud on the front of the receiver for the forend is actually a good idea.  Is there a metal block in the top of the grip to fit the one screw left on the upper tang?  I would think that the builder would have done something like that to ensure the integrity of the buttstock fitting as well.

My first gun-building effort started with a 94 Favorite action, a scrounged barrel and a walnut board from Austin Hardwoods.  It taught me a lot about Single Shot riflesmithing.  There’s some inherent Coolness in that model that induces amateurs to bring them back from the junk pile.  If the local specialist with the buffing wheel and the bluing tanks didn’t exactly know what he was doing, well, that’s the luck of the draw.

All speculation, of course.  How does it shoot?  If it closes up tightly, Standard Velocity LR should be OK.  Avoid Hi-Speed.

Bent_Ramrod wrote on Jan 15^th, 2018 at 9:54am:


Wow....this is why I posted this here.  If someone could help identify it, it would be you guys. There were no markings/letters on the but plate.  I think whoever built this was fairly good, not a hack job like I’ve seen with some guns.  I did not pay much attention to the stock when I removed it, but I did notice a brass sleeve was used on the foregrip for the locating stud...which is a little detail.  When I get home this afternoon I’ll take some more pictures.