Differences with Anschutz rifles

[galt11]

Would anyone be able to point me to a resource for researching the differences in the target rifle models? Specifically, I'm trying to learn what is different between the 1903, 1907, 1913, etc. Thanks

Adam

[Tim S]

Adam,

Have a look here: https://www.rimfirecentral.com/forums/s ... ?t=1213761

And here: https://www.rimfirecentral.com/forums/s ... p?t=433342

The 1903 is Anschutz's current (since 1989-ish) junior/basic club rifle. It's built on a single-shot Match 64 action, with a 25.6in barrel and a two-stage trigger. The stock has basic cheekpiece and butt adjustment built in. Weight is about 9lb. There is a smaller/lighter version for younger shooters who struggle with a 9lb rifle, the 1903Jr.

The 1907 and 1913 are Anschutz's current (since 1987) Match 54 rifles. Anschutz started making the Match 54 back in 1954, and it quickly dominated smallbore matches until the last 10 years. The action is bigger and heavier than the Match 64; the bolt has two locking lugs vs one for the 1903, and is overall more durable. The 1907 has a 26in (66cm) barrel. The 1913 has a 27.2in (69cm) heavy barrel. The 1913 barrel is around 300g heavier than a 1907. The actions are otherwise identical. Both have the same trigger, a very nice fully adjustable two-stage, that was the gold standard for many years; arguably Anschutz's competitors now offer better triggers, but after 40+ years that's not surprising.

Originally the 1907 was the Standard rifle (a basic ladies/club 3-P rifle weighing 10-11lb), and the 1913 was the Free Rifle (fancy 14lb 3-Position). There was also the 1911, a 1913 barrel in a prone-optimised stock, but this was discontinued twenty years ago. Today, you can still have a 1907 rifle or a 1913 rifle, or you can mix-and-match with stocks. Anschutz will sell both the 1907 or 1913 barrel with their top of the range aluminium 1918 Precise stock. The 1914, effectively a scaled down 1913, is pretty popular with shooters who want ergonomic adjustment, but less weight than the 1913 or aluminium stocks.

Anschutz's flagship, the 54.30 is based on the 1907/1913. The bolt is 3cm shorter, and the barrel is seated deeper into the receiver. There are some internal differences in how the barrel is secured.

Most adult shooters buying an Anschutz pick a 1907 or 1913 (or the older 1813/1807, 1613/1607 1413/1407 equivalents) over a 1903. That's not because the 1903 isn't accurate; it is. But the 1903 stock is pretty basic, and many adults want something better. The 1907/1913/54.30 offer more options, both factory and after market. Also a Match 54 is more durable if you fire 5K-10k rounds through the one rifle year after year.

[Richard144]

Tim S.
Very nice informative response which is appreciated. I never quite understood all of that before even though I have a 1907.
Rick B.

[galt11]

Tim,

Thank you very much, this is exactly what I was looking for.

Adam

[James Storm]

This was a very welcome post. Can you do the same for the Anschutz stocks? Many of the recent stocks seem to me to be fancy and expensive variations on a few basic models. I have been surprised that so many of the early wooden stocks had no provision for adjusting the cheek piece position, the grip position and size, and the length of pull.

[Tim S]

This was a very welcome post. Can you do the same for the Anschutz stocks? Many of the recent stocks seem to me to be fancy and expensive variations on a few basic models. I have been surprised that so many of the early wooden stocks had no provision for adjusting the cheek piece position, the grip position and size, and the length of pull.

James,

A full breakdown of the stocks would take a little more time and effort, as Anschutz have tweaked their stocks pretty often: for example a 1988 1913 is not the same as a 1998 1913, or a 2008 1913! However, very roughly speaking, some models occupy the same functional niche:

xx07: since 1970 the ISU Standard model. All variants have a deep wedge-shaped fore-end, and a pistol (not thumbhole) grip.

xx11: (1954-2000-ish) dedicated Prone model, has a long-ish butt with minimal drop, a pistol grip, and a broad straight fore-end. Cheekpiece adjustment from 1973 onwards.

xx13: Supermatch/Free Rifle - all micro-adjustable for LOP. Cheekpiece adjustment from 1973 onwards.

xx09/××10: simplified supermatches. 1960s rifles have no LOP adjustment. 1970s onwards have LOP adjustment, but made of beechwood not walnut, and deep xx07 type fore-end to avoid an expensive palm rest.

xx12/xx14: ISSF Sport rifles, scaled down 1913/2013 stocks introduced to meet ISSF women's Sport rifle rules.

In terms of adjustment it helps to consider the origins of our sport. The Free Rifle (Olympic 3-P) developed from German/Swiss target rifles, and always embraced an appreciation of individual ergonomics. In contrast British/American prone matches were influenced by service shooting, where you got what you were given; both countries maintained a minimum trigger weight for many years (slowly dropped from the 1960s). The Standard rifle was also influenced by service shooting (here UIT 300m Army Rifle), but also by a deliberate intent to reduce cost and technical complexity in order to encourage new shooters. Adjusting LOP with wedges was considered perfectly acceptable, especially for Prone-only matches where it would often be a one-time job. Adjusting the cheekpiece (or grip) meant breaking out a rasp and chisels, or slapping on plastic wood. Also, practical user adjustable grips only appeared with aluminium stocks in the 1990s.

[reservebastard]

Can anyone explain what separates a 2013 from other models (1913)?
4 screws/bolts.
Square action?
Are these appropriate for high school 3 position?
Thanks

[Tim S]

Can anyone explain what separates a 2013 from other models (1913)?
4 screws/bolts.
Square action?
Are these appropriate for high school 3 position?
Thanks

Yes to all.

There are two main ways that the 2013 and Match 54s differ: receiver shape, and barrel retention. A 2013 has the same bolt and trigger as the 1913/1907 Match 54; Anschutz had updated these only a few years before working on the 2013, so clearly felt there was nothing to be gained there.

All Match 54 rifles have a round receiver with two bedding screws. But, in the 1980s Anschutz seem to have thought they could improve on this, and came up with the 2013. The 2013 receiver is longer and wider than the 54, and flat based. The 2013's bedding footprint is larger, and there are four bedding bolts (M5 thread vs M6x.75).

2013 barrels also fit differently. All Match 54 barrels are pressed into the receiver, and secured with one or two pins. The front of the 2013 receiver is split on the left, and clamps the barrel with three Allen headed bolts. Anschutz advise against touching these, but I gather US shooters consider it allows DIY barrel changes (Lilja offers pre-machined drop-in barrels). As far as I'm aware 2013 and 1913 barrels are made in the same way, and to the same standard; although these aren't interchangeable as the 2013 has a longer tenon. The first 2013 barrels were 50cm with a short extension tube, but later Anschutz added the usual 69cm heavy and 66cm standard weights. 2013s are often said to be fussy over the bedding. This is thought to be related to the clamp-fit barrel; if the barrel isn't a perfect fit, the receiver can warp as it clamps around the tenon. There are posts on this forum (and others) from US national champion and gunsmith Kevin Nevius, sharing his experience of fitting 2013 barrels for a stress-free fit.

Would a 2013 be suitable for a high school shooter? It depends on the shooter and stock/barrel option. A 69cm barrel 2013 will weigh 12-14lb. That's fine for a large 15-18yo, but probably too much for a 4ft 11in 12yo. But there are 2013-compatible stocks that fit smaller shooters, and shorter barrels too; Jamie Beyerle, the Olympic 3P Champion in 2012, is tiny. During her International career she shot a 2013 action in 2012 wood and 2018 Precise (aluminium) stocks and with short (21in?) Lilja barrels.

[reservebastard]

Well Tim S, thank you very much for the in depth answer.

My son is only 10; tall but but thin so a long and heavy rifle won’t work for some time yet. Tempted to just beak down and buy him a 1903 Junior then donate it to the team when he out grows it.

The 2013 I was considering is for sale here
https://targettalk.org/viewtopic.php?f= ... 90ffd63f16
It might be fine later but would sit for awhile.

Thanks again

[40xguy]

Tim S ............

Thank you for an EXCELLENT article on these differences.
Have always wondered about this but the Anschutz line is so varied and confusing.
Anschutz ought to have this article on their website for all of us who are confused by the many choices !!

[Tim S]

Well Tim S, thank you very much for the in depth answer.

My son is only 10; tall but but thin so a long and heavy rifle won’t work for some time yet. Tempted to just beak down and buy him a 1903 Junior then donate it to the team when he out grows it.

The 2013 I was considering is for sale here
https://targettalk.org/viewtopic.php?f= ... 90ffd63f16
It might be fine later but would sit for awhile.

Thanks again

You're welcome.

I would agree. At 10, a 2013 (and indeed pretty much any adult sized rifle) will be too big. It's the size of the stock, as much as the dead weight. A junior at my club struggled with a BSA Century, because the stock was too long; the surprisingly heavy barrel didn't help either. Cranking on the sling to hold up a muzzle-heavy position isn't great for a growing body.

That 2013 (technically a 2313 with that older alloy stock) is a fine rifle, and would be a great choice in 5 or 6 years (maybe more if he's slight). Barrel looks to be the 69cm/27.2in heavy, but could be the 66cm/26in medium. The 50cm barrel is only a little longer than the stock.

[Pat McCoy]

You might also look for a 1907 in a 1912 stock. Several of our smaller junior shooters did well with these (I even got to like it better than my 1413 as I aged and my long time back problems got worse). About 10.5 pounds with good adjustments on the stock (IF it still meets the rules).