Anschutz 1914 Experience - RimfireCentral.com Forums

Go Back   RimfireCentral.com Forums > >

Notices

Join Team RFC to remove these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-27-2020, 09:51 PM
AManWearingAHat

Join Date: 
Mar 2020
Posts: 
6
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Anschutz 1914 Experience



Log in to see fewer ads
Anyone here have experience with the 1914's?

I'm getting back into 50m Prone and 3P and I'm looking to do it with an Annie (its what I shot in college). I saw the 1914's in stock at Champions and Creedmoor and it raised my interest. How do they compare with the 13's?

I'd like to stick with that style of stock as my 300m free rifle is bedded into an Anschutz 1813 3 position stock. I'd like the fit and feel to be as similar as possible.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-28-2020, 02:35 AM
tim slater is online now

Join Date: 
Apr 2005
Posts: 
3,872
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
The 1914 is smaller. It is a development of the 1912; back in 1997 the UIT finally allowed women to use a Free Rifle, but to a lighter 6.5kg limit, calling it a Sport Rifle. Anschutz created the 1912 to meet this, and which was pretty successful. The 1914 updated the cheekpiece from the old spring loaded type used since the 1970s on 1413s, 1613s, 1813s and some 1913s. EDIT Later 1912s had the same cheekpiece hardware as the 2213 alu stock.

Some men use 1912 and 1914 stocks very successfully. If you want a smaller lighter rifle than an 18/1913, the 1914 would do that. However, if you want the new Smallbore to feel like your 1813 300m rifle, why not look for a second hand one? A 1907 barrel would drop straight in*. Anschutz no longer list the 1913 walnut, but a dealer might have one on the shelf.

An alternative would be a the Walther KK500 in the Anatomic stock. It's still wood, but the grip adjusts, and the KK500 action is more ergonomic than a 1907 and seems to shoot very well, with a much greater presence at top level than Anschutz. The medium 650x22mm barrel is equivalent in weight to a 1907.

*If the stock was bedded for a heavy xx13 barrel, and bedded under the barrel, you'd have to remove some of the bedding compound. The 1907's breeching nut is wider than a 1913 barrel. This job should only take a few minutes though.

Last edited by tim slater; 04-05-2020 at 11:25 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-28-2020, 12:05 PM
AManWearingAHat

Join Date: 
Mar 2020
Posts: 
6
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Tim,

I am not at all against looking for a used wood stocked 18/1913 and have been searching quite actively. Little luck thus far unfortunately but the search continues. How do the 2013's compare? Ive seen a couple of those for sale but I am totally uniformed as to the cost / benefit of the three screw barrel clamp system vs traditional mounting.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #4  
Old 03-28-2020, 01:24 PM
tim slater is online now

Join Date: 
Apr 2005
Posts: 
3,872
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
A wanted ad on the Target Talk forum won't hurt. It's much more focused on Smallbore than this forum, although some people are active on both sites. If you aren't wedded to buying a 1907 barrel, you could ask for a complete 1813 or 1913 rifle; you may find a rifle more easily than a stock.

There's nothing wrong with the 2013. It has been used to win five Olympic Gold medals and both US and UK championships, but is it vastly better than the 18/1913? Here in the UK, or at least in my part, 18/1913s outnumber 2013s. I suspect the price premium is the deciding factor. We don't change barrels very often, so a DIY change isn't a big thing.

I'm not sure there is a disadvantage to the 2013 split receiver,when fitted with a factory barrel. There are suggestions that the receiver is sensitive to bedding, but the most informed replies I've seen suggest this only applies when changing the barrel. Fractional differences in the diameter of the tenon between barrels could stress the receiver as it clamps down, and that stress affects the interface with the stock. BSA made the later Martini Internationals with a split-receiver, and those shoot well. The obvious advantages are DIY barrel changes with a pre-fit, and a longer tenon for greater support.

Practically the 2013 receiver is a little heavier than a 1913. Theoretically, I've heard a plausible argument that the extra metal would have been better used making the receiver taller not wider, as that plane enhances rigidity more. Still a 2013 with a good barrel can shoot well.

Last edited by tim slater; 03-29-2020 at 10:38 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-28-2020, 11:14 PM
1813benny
NRA Member - Click Here To Join!

Join Date: 
Apr 2005
Location: 
between here n there....
Posts: 
854
TPC Rating: 
0% (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by AManWearingAHat View Post
Anyone here have experience with the 1914's?

I'm getting back into 50m Prone and 3P and I'm looking to do it with an Annie (its what I shot in college). I saw the 1914's in stock at Champions and Creedmoor and it raised my interest. How do they compare with the 13's?

I'd like to stick with that style of stock as my 300m free rifle is bedded into an Anschutz 1813 3 position stock. I'd like the fit and feel to be as similar as possible.
Where are you located? In the US?
Regards
Ken
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:49 PM.

Privacy Policy

DMCA Notice

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 2000-2018 RimfireCentral.com
x