1914 H&H Sling Swivel problem

[Sourdough]

Hoping someone can help me out. I've got a 1914 Holland & Holland 375 H&H. It came with two sling attach points (back bottom of stock and barrel band) but no sling. I purchased a sling and Uncle Mikes Quick Release Sling Swivels. Fit perfect through the attach point on the stock. On the barrel however the hole in the attach point is too small to accept the post on the sling swivel. I swapped them to be sure there wasn't a manufacturing defect with one of the swivels. Both are too big for the barrel attach point.

For a moment I thought about drilling out the barrel attach point but quickly guessed that would compromise the barrel band.

Could the front be metric from Holland & Holland back in the day? Anyone come across the before? Solution? Thanks.

 

[Nkawu]

Sounds like you have the European sized sling studs and need to corresponding sized swivel.

 

[Hoofnit]

Likely originally used these…

Hoosier Gun Works : Online Catalog : Accessories : Swivels

 

[Anbessa Gedai]

Hoping someone can help me out. I've got a 1914 Holland & Holland 375 H&H. It came with two sling attach points (back bottom of stock and barrel band) but no sling. I purchased a sling and Uncle Mikes Quick Release Sling Swivels. Fit perfect through the attach point on the stock. On the barrel however the hole in the attach point is too small to accept the post on the sling swivel. I swapped them to be sure there wasn't a manufacturing defect with one of the swivels. Both are too big for the barrel attach point.

For a moment I thought about drilling out the barrel attach point but quickly guessed that would compromise the barrel band.

Could the front be metric from Holland & Holland back in the day? Anyone come across the before? Solution? Thanks.

"SD",

Let me say first . . . I am NO expert on early British rifles.
Having said that, I would have thought H & H in 1914 was not sizing anything to a metric standard.

I would also think you are wise not to modify the rifle, but just source a swivel assy that fits the barrel band attach point. Measure the diameter of the attach point, and source accordingly . . . quite likely from one of the suppliers mentioned in previous posts.

Perhaps one of the H & H experts on the forum can explain why they did that?
Was it an "error" that escaped detection before the rifle was delivered?
Or perhaps this was a method to induce the buyer to also buy a 'special' H & H sling with swivels of two different Sizes?

 

[Sourdough]

Thanks for the help folks. I've sourced a euro style sling swivel. Appreciate it.

 

[Albert Penselldiche]

"SD",

Let me say first . . . I am NO expert on early British rifles.
Having said that, I would have thought H & H in 1914 was not sizing anything to a metric standard.

I would also think you are wise not to modify the rifle, but just source a swivel assy that fits the barrel band attach point. Measure the diameter of the attach point, and source accordingly . . . quite likely from one of the suppliers mentioned in previous posts.

Perhaps one of the H & H experts on the forum can explain why they did that?
Was it an "error" that escaped detection before the rifle was delivered?
Or perhaps this was a method to induce the buyer to also buy a 'special' H & H sling with swivels of two different Sizes?

I suspect originally both sling swivel mounts had same diameter hole. Someone probably replaced the rear stud in the stock at some point. OP should consider making it match the barrel band. Actually, I'm surprised a stud was mounted. I thought a platform with hole attached with two screws was typical style for that era.

 

[rookhawk]

No pics, so good advice is hard to offer. 2nd post is a good one, so is the fish hook option.

What you might be realizing is a $20,000 London rifle isn’t compatible with $7 uncle mikes swivels.

If they are large eye swivels, they were designed for a rawhide lace and on a cotton web sling. Fish hook swivels will work in that case, but they scratch the gun and are noisy.

Let’s see pics to figure out if they are original or not so we can point you to the answer.

 

[Hunter4752001]

I suspect a 1914 H&H was manufactured before QD sling swivels were standardised (either Euro or US). It is quite likely the barrel band was an in-house propriety setup utilising a screw that went through the stud.

 

[Sourdough]

 

[Huvius]

I think Ontario Hunter is correct.
The swivel in the stock looks like a replacement.

 

[rookhawk]

View attachment 603170
View attachment 603171

Well, the rear sling stud is a modern and incorrect sling eye. That's your first problem. It appears to be modern euro style mount on the butt stock. A euro eye is a smaller diameter and requires a modern euro swivel as mentioned in the 2nd post above.

If you want an original large eye they are as rare as hen's teeth. I bought a few for a hefty sum from a retired gunsmith years ago. If you need the correct H&H style one that rifle was supposed to have, send me a PM.

But be warned, the H&H period correct large sling eye is compatible with original fish hook sling swivels (astoundingly expensive to get the correct ones, again, I may have a vintage set) OR the traditional rawhide leather strap that laces through it to a 1.5" cotton web safari sling. This traditional sling type is still offered on modern Rigby's and Trader Keith makes a nice reproduction for the H&H.

 

[rookhawk]

Here's two different systems contemporaneous with the date of a vintage H&H rifle.

System 1 stayed in fashion to the modern era on the continent. Its the top arrangement. Ignore the piece designed to be screwed to a combination gun or shotgun's rib for purposes of discussion. The idea is that the front sling swivel hinges front to back fairly quietly and is affixed with a roll pin. The rear is put into the butt stock. Take note that in the second picture it cannot hinge to 90 degrees in one direction so that the swivel will not leave impressions on the wood.

System 2 is the oversized eye that is installed in the butt stock. This is very traditionally English and requires either fish hook swivels or the rawhide lace end slings I've mentioned. The curse of the rawhide arrangement is it isn't quick to install or remove, but the benefit is its the absolute quietest sling type which is why it was so in fashion in the golden era.

 

[Albert Penselldiche]

I think Ontario Hunter is correct.
The swivel in the stock looks like a replacement.

It appears the stock is also a replacement. Hard to imagine a rifle of that vintage would not have even one tiny blemish from use.

 

[Sourdough]

Here's two different systems contemporaneous with the date of a vintage H&H rifle.

System 1 stayed in fashion to the modern era on the continent. Its the top arrangement. Ignore the piece designed to be screwed to a combination gun or shotgun's rib for purposes of discussion. The idea is that the front sling swivel hinges front to back fairly quietly and is affixed with a roll pin. The rear is put into the butt stock. Take note that in the second picture it cannot hinge to 90 degrees in one direction so that the swivel will not leave impressions on the wood.

System 2 is the oversized eye that is installed in the butt stock. This is very traditionally English and requires either fish hook swivels or the rawhide lace end slings I've mentioned. The curse of the rawhide arrangement is it isn't quick to install or remove, but the benefit is its the absolute quietest sling type which is why it was so in fashion in the golden era.

View attachment 603174
View attachment 603175

Very cool info, Thanks!

 

[rookhawk]

Two period correct H&H rifles with the correct swivel stud for example:

 

[Troubleshooter]

Well, the rear sling stud is a modern and incorrect sling eye. That's your first problem. It appears to be modern euro style mount on the butt stock. A euro eye is a smaller diameter and requires a modern euro swivel as mentioned in the 2nd post above.

Agree with Rookhawk and Ontario Hunter that the rear sling stud is an incorrect replacement; however in the original post it was stated that the Uncle Mikes QD swivels fit the rear stud but not the front barrel-mounted stud. Regardless, the rear stud should be replaced with something correct.

Sourdough: I can't tell from your photo but look at the front stud and see whether some previous owner has inserted a roll pin in an attempt to reduce the inside diameter of the stud hole. Something that might help is if you could measure the inside diameter of both of your studs so that we can gain a better idea of the dimensions involved.

System 2 is the oversized eye that is installed in the butt stock. This is very traditionally English and requires either fish hook swivels or the rawhide lace end slings I've mentioned. The curse of the rawhide arrangement is it isn't quick to install or remove, but the benefit is its the absolute quietest sling type which is why it was so in fashion in the golden era.

These used to be available from Numrich Arms as recently as a few years ago, but their website seems to be having issues at this time, and I cannot locate them. If memory serves, they were made for one of the Remington long guns.

I did locate a set of fishhook "Sling Strap Hooks" there for $33.69 apparently originally made for a Remington. https://www.gunpartscorp.com/products/817010

And as Hoofnit mentioned in Post #3 above, used ones are also available from Hoosier Gun Works; listed as "Hook Swivel Stud (Win?)" for only $10.00
http://www.hoosiergunworks.com/catalog/swivels.html

One of the Trader Keith rawhide lace slings would be a more exquisite solution however.

 

[rookhawk]

Agree with Rookhawk and Ontario Hunter that the rear sling stud is an incorrect replacement; however in the original post it was stated that the Uncle Mikes QD swivels fit the rear stud but not the front barrel-mounted stud. Regardless, the rear stud should be replaced with something correct.

Sourdough: I can't tell from your photo but look at the front stud and see whether some previous owner has inserted a roll pin in an attempt to reduce the inside diameter of the stud hole. Something that might help is if you could measure the inside diameter of both of your studs so that we can gain a better idea of the dimensions involved.



These used to be available from Numrich Arms as recently as a few years ago, but their website seems to be having issues at this time, and I cannot locate them. If memory serves, they were made for one of the Remington long guns.

I did locate a set of fishhook "Sling Strap Hooks" there for $33.69 apparently originally made for a Remington. https://www.gunpartscorp.com/products/817010

And as Hoofnit mentioned in Post #3 above, used ones are also available from Hoosier Gun Works; listed as "Hook Swivel Stud (Win?)" for only $10.00
http://www.hoosiergunworks.com/catalog/swivels.html

View attachment 603213

One of the Trader Keith rawhide lace slings would be a more exquisite solution however.

Sadly, they’ve been out of stock for years.

I’ve seen an excellent set of fish hook sling swivels sell for as much as $185. There was a shorter set akin to Parker Hale, and a Longer Hook that was similar to the original Winchesters. Both work with the large eye swivel studs. Jeff’s Outfitters had them 15 years ago for a bargain price of $75 a pair but they are long gone as well. Anytime you can find them for a palatable price, buy them. As a side anecdote, I’ve also seen British ones permenantly sewn to olive green 1.5” cotton sling webbing with leather ends where the swivels can be quickly removed from the rifle, but never removed from the sling.

As to the swivel stud, I needed one about 15 years ago for an Isaac Hollis 500 express double rifle and couldn’t find them anywhere. A few gunsmiths said they’d make one for $150, but I’d need to supply an original I did not have. In the end, I found four of them that a retired gunsmith had. I’m embarrassed to say how much I paid for them, but they weren’t for sale and I needed them And would continue needing them to unravel many guns “uncle mikes upgrades” that they’ve endured.

There are two issues to getting a swivel to work with a stud, you’ve mentioned the first which is the hole diameter of the swivel must be big enough for the swivel stud. The other issue you may have overlooked is the space between the swivel and the pin itself so it can articulate in the larger eye. There is a lot of trial and error when you have a mix of old and new parts, or drilled out barrel band studs, etc.

 

[Albert Penselldiche]

Personally, I would have no problem opening up the eye in the barrel band stud. The gun clearly has been "restored" with a new stock. I'm sure that's when the nonhistorical swivel stud was installed. So this gun has lost a small amount of collector value which, in my opinion, would not be significantly compromised by opening up the eye of the barrel band swivel slightly.

Uncle Mike's detachable sling swivels may not be junk but they're not far above the bar. The catch pin is only peened on and they will come loose from moorings and fall out eventually. Go with the cheaper detachable swivels that require threading and unthreading the locking pin. Cheaper but they last. Not super quick to detach and reattach but better than your gun falling on the ground. Been there!

 

[Huvius]

Homesteadparts has that same hook set.
They are Winchester items originally.

 

[Tom Leoni]

It looks to me that at least the studs are not original.

British pre-war sling attachment are of the large eye type, made for thong-style leather slings. Every single British pre-war rifle I've seen or owned has them. See Rookhawk's picture for what they look like.

Also, something about the stock of that rifle suggest to me that it may be more recent. I may be mistaken, since the OP only posted images of part of the stock and forend, but something in the finish and grain makes me think the stock may be a professional-grade replacement.

The best way to tell would be to see the proportions of the whole stock (including forend). If the latter is short and slim, chances are it's original. If it's beefier and long, it's not. Older, especially pre-WWI British rifles have extremely slender forends, and I don't think I've ever seen that light a color and that gain pattern.

Again, I may be 100% off-base.