Choosing a pump action 22

[gregp74]

I'm trying to decide between a couple pump action 22s. Looking at either a Remington 121 or a 572 (The 572 would probably be pre-80s, not one of the newer ones.)

As I understand it the 121 is probably a better gun. All steel and built like a tank. They've been out of production for like 66 years though, so I'm thinking parts could be hard to come by if and when I break something. The 572 is still in production though so in theory parts should be readily available.

Just curious on peoples thoughts or experiences with either one.

 

[rule303]

The 121 is definitely better built. I love the looks and handling of the 572, and they can be very accurate, but they get very loose with much use.

 

[gregp74]

The 121 is definitely better built. I love the looks and handling of the 572, and they can be very accurate, but they get very loose with much use.

I had a new production 552 for a little while but ended up trading it toward something else. It felt good and I assume the 572 is pretty similar. Whatever I get is going to get some use not just be a safe queen, so I'm thinking the 121 is the way to go. Are there any parts that need replacing frequently? Just wondering if when I get it I should keep my eyes open for spare to stick in a drawer and have ready just in case.

 

[I6turbo]

I like the 121 a lot. The one I have is the one my Dad had when I was a kid, and best I recall, is the first non-BB gun I ever fired. And it's surprisingly accurate, will shoot with my open sighted CZ 452s.



They are ruggedly built, and unless you are planning to put a LOT of rounds through one, I'm not sure there is a particular part that you should stock up on. With a little patience and searching (more for some parts than for others), parts are fairly available. So even if you break something you can likely find it in the near future.

 

[gregp74]

I like the 121 a lot. The one I have is the one my Dad had when I was a kid, and best I recall, is the first non-BB gun I ever fired. And it's surprisingly accurate, will shoot with my open sighted CZ 452s.

View attachment 945176

They are ruggedly built, and unless you are planning to put a LOT of rounds through one, I'm not sure there is a particular part that you should stock up on. With a little patience and searching (more for some parts than for others), parts are fairly available. So even if you break something you can likely find it in the near future.

Nice that you still have that. The first gun I ever shot was a pump action 22 that my grandpa had. It's probably been 35 years since I've seen it and I don't know exactly what it was. My guess is either a Remington model 12/121 or the Winchester that's similar. Thinking back it might have had an octagonal barrel but I'm not sure. Doesn't matter either way. These old guns remind me of him and I'm feeling nostalgic these days, hence this purchase.

I probably won't be putting a TON of rounds through it but I want it to be ready to go. Whenever I do get one I plan on doing a detail strip and checking the condition of all the parts while giving it a thorough cleaning. Does anyone make new springs for these old guns? Seems like replacing those might be a good idea for something that's gonna be 70+ years old. (That was one of the reasons I had the 572 in mind also. Brownells and Midway have springs and they're current production so not expensive.)

 

[earlthegoat2]

If you want to mount a scope, I would go with the 572. If not, then either will do.

I have no experience with the 121 but have owned a dozen different 572 from all the eras. Every one of them were more or less the same in handling, accuracy, and function. Some were finished nicer with gloss and checkering but I preferred the smooth stock with the slotted lines forend.

Not sure about them loosening up over time as I think they come from the factory that way. Either way all of these felt the same.

I am a big fan of both the 572 and 552.

Why have I had so many? The sickness... I actually got rid of most of them by selling them to people who lived in suburbia looking for a rifle that would shoot shorts well enough for some urban pest control. We all have to do our part.

 

[gregp74]

If you want to mount a scope, I would go with the 572. If not, then either will do.

Chances are I'll be adding a scope. My eyes aren't what they once were.

I actually have a bid on Gunbroker for this 121 made in 1953. It's pretty low and it has a week to go so I kinda don't think I'll be the winner, but it's drilled and tapped and for a scope. Looking closer It looks like there's 2 screws that go in the receiver but I'm not sure where the other mount goes. Having second thoughts about this one now.

 

[earlthegoat2]

That one has probably been refinished too. Not a big deal if the price is right.

 

[gregp74]

That one has probably been refinished too. Not a big deal if the price is right.

Another place I've dealt with a few times has this one. Looks like that may be some kind of weaver base that screws into the top of the receiver. Might make mounting of a more modern scope a little easier if I wanted to.

Like you said though it looks like the 572 lends itself better to being scoped up.

 

[I6turbo]

Does anyone make new springs for these old guns? Seems like replacing those might be a good idea for something that's gonna be 70+ years old.

I have two 121s from 1950 and neither of them have needed any new springs as they work perfectly well in all regards. If after 70 years they are good, I doubt they're going to suddenly start failing.

On the subject of "needs new springs," the requirements cited on the internet are often overblown, IME. I've had about 80+ guns, only replace parts if I'm trying to improve the function vs. factory parts, or if they start malfunctioning. I can recall a Ruger MK pistol needing a new hammer spring to reliably light off all primers, and a Yugo Mauser 24/47 needing a new firing pin spring for the same reason. Otherwise, the hundreds of original springs in these guns haven't caused malfunctions for me. Maybe I'm just lucky, but that's been my experience. In fact, with almost all of the springs I've replaced in guns, I went for lighter springs (to improve actions or trigger pulls) instead of heavier.

EDIT: I just looked back at my notes from several years ago that reminded me that the 24/47 turned out to have some cosmoline inside the bolt body that I suspected was slowing the firing pin down. So, it's questionable whether or not it actually needed a replacement spring.

 

[Monac]

I don't have any advice, I just like pump .22s and I am glad other people do too. My pump 22 is one of the Rossi/Taurus Winchester Model 62 copies. I like it a lot, but either of these Remingtons are probably better made, easier to put a scope on, and have a better manual safety catch.

 

[gregp74]

I have two 121s from 1950 and neither of them have needed any new springs as they work perfectly well in all regards. If after 70 years they are good, I doubt they're going to suddenly start failing.

On the subject, the "needs new springs," the requirements cited on the internet are often overblown, IME. I've had about 80+ guns, only replace parts if I'm trying to improve the function vs. factory parts, or if they start malfunctioning. I can recall a Ruger MK pistol needing a new hammer spring to reliably light off all primers, and a Yugo Mauser 24/47 needing a new firing pin spring for the same reason. Otherwise, the hundreds of original springs in these guns haven't caused malfunctions for me. Maybe I'm just lucky, but that's been my experience. In fact, most of the springs I've replaced in guns, I went for lighter springs (to improve actions or trigger pulls) instead of heavier.

You're probably right. My overly cautious engineering brain sometimes gets the best of me. I'm sure over the years I've replaced a lot of springs in older guns that didn't need to be for fear that they've lost their spriginess.

 

[eastbank]

we had four remington 572,s that we used at the youth shooting programs and they didn,t hold up(they were however shot quit a bit). i also owned a few reminton 121,s with no problems at all. but the one pump .22 i now own is a 1940 winchester 61 in very good condition that came cheap due to being D&T for a older weaver side mount, i mounted a older baby redfield 3/4" tubed 4x and its been a super .22 rifle. and i think the remington 121 is just as good a pump .22 rifle as the winchester 61.

 

[gregp74]

we had four remington 572,s that we used at the youth shooting programs and they didn,t hold up(they were however shot quit a bit). i also owned a few reminton 121,s with no problems at all. but the one pump .22 i now own is a 1940 winchester 61 in very good condition that came cheap due to being D&T for a older weaver side mount, i mounted a older baby redfield 3/4" tubed 4x and its been a super .22 rifle. and i think the remington 121 is just as good a pump .22 rifle as the winchester 61.

Those Winchesters seem to be really popular but when I was looking at them a while ago they were pricey.

 

[eastbank]

my win 61 with the side mount on it. i have head shot squirrles at close to 60 yards with it resting against a tree.

 

[Sav .250]

If you haven`t all ready, do a "review' on both. As on here you`ll get comments from owner/users. Nothing beats what others think.
Looks always seem to play a role in purchases. .

 

[Hookeye]

Pops had a 121 that shot great. But it had been relined. If your eyes good enough for iron sights, an old classic might be the way to go

Even an 80s era 572 may be shot out, but a replacement bbl will be easier to find. Prices on 572s have gone silly IMHO and they are not worth it.

If i did want a current production pump
22 thatd be the way to go, and id only get one w a high comb stock. All of mine ( had 3 over rhe years ) were low comb. Usable but not ideal.

My first one wore a Leupold 4x and w CBs shot pretty decent. Was a blackbird slayer supreme.

 

[SwampWolf]

In the 2020 issue of Gun Digest, Wayne Van Zwoll wrote an interesting and informative article about the Remington Model 121 rifle and its ilk and kin.

 

[Hookeye]

I passed on a Browning pump .22 mag yrs ago.

Still haunts me

 

[Hookeye]

Biggest groundhog i ever shot, was while squirrel hunting w my dads 121.

Fed solid lung shot next to den. About 50 yards. He ran in hole.

About 25 yards from the den he comes back out and i pop him again. Down he goes.

Running to the den he comes back out and takes one to the noggin at spittin distance.

The first two were in and out, lung shots, about an inch apart. Solid 20# or maybe a little more chuck.

He didnt like those "bees" stinging him.

My stepson was little and could barely hold the chuck up. LOL....his eyes wide.....youd have thought Id taken a grizzly.

I shoulda had that thing full mounted.

 

[Hookeye]

Big chuck and cool old .22 rifle made for a great memory. Pops sold that rifle a few yrs later.

Kinda bummed me out since id whacked my biggest chuck w it. He never told me he was gonna sell it ( or id have bought it ).

 

[Picher]

I had a 552 and the tinny sound when dry-firing made it seem like a cap gun. I finally couldn't take it anymore and traded it in for a Marlin 39A. The only good thing about the 552 was that it was great shooting aerial targets. It pointed beautifully! The Marlin 39A didn't, but it was more accurate and solid. Loved that little rifle!

 

[gregp74]

Big chuck and cool old .22 rifle made for a great memory. Pops sold that rifle a few yrs later.

Kinda bummed me out since id whacked my biggest chuck w it. He never told me he was gonna sell it ( or id have bought it ).

Ugh! It sucks when things like that happen. I was poor and dumb and not into guns when I was in college and sold the 6.5x55 Swede rifle my grandpa had given me. I regretted doing that but a couple years later ran across it again in the used aisle of a local shop. I had them set it behind the counter and hold on to it til the next day when I could come back with my checkbook. I felt like the world was right again, but naturally when I went back they'd already sold it out from under me. I'm still mad at myself for letting that get away twice.

 

[dh1633pm]

I got a Henry. It sucks. Accurate, and nice finish. But The action is the opposite of smooth. My dad has both the early Winchester and Remington pumps. Both are very smooth.

 

[gregp74]

I had a 552 and the tinny sound when dry-firing made it seem like a cap gun. I finally couldn't take it anymore and traded it in for a Marlin 39A. The only good thing about the 552 was that it was great shooting aerial targets. It pointed beautifully! The Marlin 39A didn't, but it was more accurate and solid. Loved that little rifle!

I had a new production 552 briefly but ended up trading it. It's full sized and reminds me of a centerfire rifle but it just didn't wow me.