It looks to have been re-barreled, I believe a later roll mark. Serial number 10044, Same as the tang. Reasonably early rifle with side extractor and lower number. 
Would be kinda fun to have just for the serial number.
(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)

What I found interesting is the lugged hammer on a rimfire. 

I'm guessing this was likely converted from centerfire?

photo #136
(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)

#30
(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)

#84
(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)

#106
(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)

#113
(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)

#123
(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)

If I remember rightly, full-round barrels were a cataloged option.  But in addition to the unexpected lugged hammer, doesn't this gun have an ejector?  Were ejectors always standard on .22 RFs?

Bill Lawrence

marlinguy wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2018 at 4:00pm:


Certainly true while Stevens was still (really) Stevens.  But after Stevens became merely a part of Savage, round became standard on 44s, at least after the inventory of half-oct. was exhausted.  Would guess that was when this rebarreling job was done. 

To me that looks like a 44 1/2 action. In what I would think is in nice condition. So if it was a Center fire caliber that would explain the Lugged Hammer. Now I am not an expert by any means on Stevens. I could real easily be wrong. Maybe some one with more knowledge might step up and answer my observations. FITZ. OLD TUCK

Well when it comes to Stevens I usually am. FITZ.

Ken beat me to the post.  I second his question, since not only does the action have them but the serial number seems way too high to be an early 44 action that should have them.  Is it possible this rifle was thrown together sometime after WWI using some really old left-over parts?  In other words, might Savage have in a sense really cleaned house?  There are plenty of examples that I could detail; but since they're from the tool world (where I most heavily collect), I won't bore you with them.

Bill Lawrence

Bill Lawrence wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2018 at 9:46pm:


All the long-established gunmakers (the ones with large inventories of superannuated parts) did this, esp. Winchester.

s/n 10044 places the action middling early, but certainly prior to 1900.  We know that the "44" designation started in 1896, and that the s/n range at that time was about 3000.    

The "bolt" pivots start about 12000, and there is a stretch up to about 17000 where they have the bolts but still have the side extractor.  

It's a bit vague as to when the central extractor started.   Lowest s/n I have logged with the central extractor is 17108. Judging by catalogs it seems to have been about 1901 to 1903.  

The barrel is without any doubt whatsoever post WW1, by the rollstamp alone. Savage omitted the "and Tool" when they restarted the plant after the war.  Although I find examples with the old inscription with serial numbers that are certainly "Savage era".   

Because Stevens 44 barrel threads were never "clocked", so each barrel is necessarily matched to its' action, and thus they are always marked if the rebarrel job was done by Stevens.  

About all I can say about it.  I've logged it in anyway, even though it doesn't add anything to the known timeline.  

If anyone ever comes up with a 1901 or 1902 catalog, I want to know of any mention about the extractor change.  

Add: The lugged hammer does indeed suggest that it was originally a .32-40 or .38-55, IMHO.  In that s/n range there are not many .22s.