Have you looked under the forearm yet for any extra marking?
Too bad that there isn’t a serial number on the lower tang, it would solve some of the mystery of this rifle.

I do know that a full octagon barrel is going to be a scarce one on a Stevens, it only cost an extra $2.00 as listed in catalogs, I am surprised you don’t see more of them around.

Nice rifle. Thanks for posting.

Regards,
Powderman

Your barrel appears to be a #3 or probably a #4 weight barrel, certainly not a #1. Stevens  mis-marked barrels must be relatively common, I have a #45-44 1/2 in .32 ideal that is marked a #2 that is obviously a #3, and a 44 1/2 in .25-20ss that is marked a #1 that is actually a #2, and I think another one that is also marked a #1 that is a #2, but I can’t remember what it is without digging some rifles out.

Does anyone have pictures or drawings of the Pope mounts?
I might try to make a set for this rifle if I had some info. My machine shop is similar vintage to Pope’s, so if he could do them I’m pretty sure I can too. I plan to mount one of my older Stevens or Lyman scopes anyway, it would be neat to use the Pope notches rather than the blocks.

Sorry, that would be neat but I have no line shafts in the ceiling.  Probably my oldest mill is a Van Norman no. 1/2 duplex from the late 90’s early 1900s period. But even it got converted at some point, by hanging a motor on the side with v-belt step pulleys. All my old machines got re-done with independent drives at some stage to extend their usefulness. One really old neat looking no name horizontal mill I use, got a vertical Bridgeport M-head installed in place of the over-arm. I think that was a common thing to do back in the 30’s-40’s. It does get hard to find collets for this stuff sometimes! I do have some lineshafting with clutch and plain pulleys and hanger bearings. I always intended to set my oldest lathe (F.E. Reed 1890’s) and some others up like that. But, it was converted to overhead motor drive too so I probably never will. Too many projects and not enough time is my problem.

Steamtractor wrote on Jan 13^th, 2021 at 5:52pm:


I have a Zettler Bros. Ballard #6 Schuetzen with Pope mounts, and as far as I know the only Pope bases I've ever seen to use his mounts without using his cuts in the barrel. The bases are made with semi circular edges to allow the Pope mounts to clamp them. 
Pope mounts were unusual as the rear ring has a backwards left hand thread for windage so that it adjusted the same rotation for windage adjustment as a typical iron sight did. Pope said this made it less confusing to switch from iron sights to scope with his rings.
The cuts are seen frequently on Pope barrels, and Stevens-Pope barrels, but not on all. And I have proof that these cuts were also found on other barrels too. I own a Schoyen Ballard that has a very heavy #5 weight .32-40 barrel with the Pope cuts in it.
This particular Ballard had all sorts of extra dovetails and holes for various scope mounts, showing the owners must have tried all sorts of mounting styles from the Pope mounts, to dovetail mounts, to plain old scope mounts of various spacings. I fixed all the extra holes and dovetails, but left the 7.25" spaced set, and the Pope cuts before I had Al Springer rust blue the barrel.

Sheesh!  It looks like someone experimented with three different types of mounts on that Stevens barrel.  The semi-circular cut is like the one Pope mounts use, but it seems a bit deeper than expected and to have been cut slightly off center.

Bill Lawrence

I agree with Bill. While they're Pope style, they certainly don't look like what my guns have, nor like the smaller and cleaner cuts done by Pope.