https://thegreatmodel8.net/

I just read something in Phil Sharpe's book, "The Rifle in America," which was published in 1938. What he said was that one of the differences between the Model 8 and the Model 81 was that the Model 81 had a removable magazine, and even talked about a hunter being able to carry a spare loaded magazine, I guess about like you can with the Models 740/742/7400, etc. I quote:

"The magazine (of the Model 81) is of detachable type on this and holds five cartridges."

"...the magazine assembly was made detachable and of the box type so that the magazine could be recharged entirely separate from the gun as a safety precaution. In addition. completely charged spare magazines could be readily carried in the pocket of the hunter."

This is the only instance that I have read that the Model 81 magazine can be removed, and there was no reference to the removable magazine being the result of an after-market conversion, such as by POEC or Kreiger. I took another look at my Model 81's magazine, and if it is removable without complete dis-assembly of the receiver, it is not apparent to me how it can done. I think Phil Sharpe is incorrect on this point - or is he?

He should have tried it before he wrote the article, he is in fact incorrect.

the Model 81's magazine is not removeable.

I thought that perhaps at the inception of the Model 81 idea, there may have been some consideration given to providing a detachable box magazine, and even a prototype, but that did not come to pass. Had I been a decision-maker at Remington at that time, I would have provided for a detachable magazine. It certainly was not a new concept, as all of the early Winchester semi autos (05, 07 and 10) had them, it would have been a fairly simple redesign, and it may well have contributed to increased sales. In fact, that was exactly what was done by Remington in the development of the 1955 Remington 740.

Maybe Sharpe was just ahead of his time, or maybe that was what Remington may have originally intended to do. But it's odd he would make such an incorrect statement, as he was was in the top rank of gun writers, along with Askins, Hatcher, Whelan, and Keith, during the 1930s and 40s.