American Rifleman K22 Error?

[Speedo2]

This month's magazine has a nice article (April, 2020, page 41) about a reader's first experience with a 1941 K-22, called "A Cattail and a K-22". Nice story, but the accompanying photo does not appear to be a 1940-ish K22; neither an Outdoorsman nor a Masterpiece. Rather, it appears to me to be a post-war, improved I-frame 22/32 kit gun with some anomalies. Specifically pre-war grips, a Shared front sight, main spring tension screw with a fifth screw in front of the trigger guard (I thought that Imp-I's had coil springs). No big surprise and no big deal that NRA may have applied an incorrect photo, but with so much time on my hands what with this CV19 virus quarantine business, such errors provoked my curiosity. Am I wrong with my assessment of this photo? Hopefully some kit-gun and/or K22 experts will opine. Thanks - S2

 

[red9]

You are correct. The gun pictured is a pre-war 4" kit gun.

Bob

 

[merl67]

I would have to agree the grips, and front sight are a dead giveaway it isn't a K22 or a Outdoorsman.

 

[Speedo2]

You are correct. The gun pictured is a pre-war 4" kit gun.

Bob

Thanks Bob, but a couple of things are still unresolved: 4-line "Marcus Registradus" stamping and straight barreled extraction rod make me think it's a post-war, rather than a pre-war kit gun. Perhaps some post-war modifications? Likely that AR simply attached the writer's photo of his gun that he may have incorrectly identified as a K22. Regardless, I would have hoped that AR would have done better research. -S2

 

[rockquarry]

It's important to remember the NRA has not had a technical staff in a good while, I think since the days when C. E. Harris and others in his league were there. They likely have a few fairly knowledgeable people, but I'm unaware if they have any true experts on anything now, other than Bruce Canfield, but his specialty is military stuff.

 

[DWalt]

I caught those errors immediately and intended to make a posting here. But I never got around to it. I imagine the AR staff has already received many notifications about it.

 

[kennethg]

I have noticed a lot of errors in the last few years in several firearms magazines that I subscribe to. There seems to be a lot less proof reading being done before the magazines go to press. Seems to be another sign of the times.

 

[hkcavalier]

Funny, they don't seem to get Rugers wrong much...must be that large check every year

I only get two gun magazines anymore, Firearms News and AR. Since the loss of the gunsmithing articles, even FN is less interesting though still a great publication. I think print's days are numbered though. By 2030 they'll all be history in paper form.

 

[Green Frog]

I join you in mourning the loss of real gun experts writing in real gun magazines. I've completely discontinued my market targeted gun magazines and only get AR (because I'm a life member) and journals from the various specialty groups to which I belong. It's gotten so bad that even a couple of these journals call on me for the occasional article. Talk about scraping the bottom of the barrel!

My current research method is to first scan the InterWeb and ask questions on specialty sites, then go through my library of old AR and other magazines, then look through the few old books I own for other info. Current mass market magazine? Not so much.

Froggie

 

[handejector]

I noticed that.
It is not an improved I frame.

It is just an early Post War Kit Gun. They made some Post War Kit guns that are virtually the same as the Pre Wars. I'm not sure if they had the new hammer block or not. It obviously has the 4 line address, so 48 or later.
Jim will be along to discuss all points including the metallurgy.

 

[rockquarry]

I join you in morning the loss of real gun experts writing in real gun magazines. I've completely discontinued my market targeted gun magazines and only get AR (because I'm a life member) and journals from the various specialty groups to which I belong. It's gotten so bad that even a couple of these journals call on me for the occasional article. Talk about scraping the bottom of the barrel!

My current research method is to first scan the InterWeb and ask questions on specialty sites, then go through my library of old AR and other magazines, then look through the few old books I own for other info. Current mass market magazine? Not so much.

Froggie

It appears these people are struggling to stay in business with paper publications and I hope they succeed because a number of us prefer reading paper. AMERICAN RIFLEMAN, ironically, will outlive the others, and certainly not because it's a worthy gun magazine as it once was.

 

[Muley Gil]

It appears these people are struggling to stay in business with paper publications and I hope they succeed because a number of us prefer reading paper. AMERICAN RIFLEMAN, ironically, will outlive the others, and certainly not because it's a worthy gun magazine as it once was.

Yeah, I hate dragging the monitor to the "reading room." I don't have a tablet nor a smart phone.

 

[rockquarry]

Yeah, I hate dragging the monitor to the "reading room." I don't have a tablet nor a smart phone.

I never thought about that. It would be most inconvenient.