Savage Marking Check

[SpikeDD]

For obvious reasons, these markings don't appear to fit the familiar Savage square "5" in a full box or corner-less box found on the majority of Savage rifles. So far, I only have examples that appear on cocking pieces. If anyone wishes to take some time looking over their Savage rifles and post pics of examples matching the three shown here, it would be appreciated.
Attachment 60788Attachment 60789Attachment 60790

Information

Warning: This is a relatively older thread This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.

[Seaforth72]

I have noticed the squared "S" by itself, the S in a square and the S in a circle. I wonder if these variations and your S in a broken square were subcontractor variations on the Stevens-Savage logo? I understand a lit of the parts were subcontracted and the only named part I have noticed was the butt plate trap door. As I recall it is marked ILCO. S.

[Surpmil]

Interesting, never seen one like it, but I don't believe Savage cocking pieces had the concave top radius did they? In which case presumably a Long Branch production. Could it be they were finishing up or building from partially finished components or materials obtained from Savage when their production ended in '44?

Too much oil on that last one; someone's liable to get it in the eye when the trigger is pulled.

[SpikeDD]

Someone in another thread posted an interest to any truth that parts were shared between Savage and Longbranch. I thought I remembered seeing one of my Longbranch rifles with both Canadian and Savage markings on the cocking piece and after locating the rifle, I posted the third photo above.
Clearly, it is different than the known Stevens Savage mark common to these rifles. After a few days of thinking I had seen that mark before, I checked and found two more rifles with the same mark. A subcontractor mark seems to be the most likely answer as I think most will agree it is not Stevens Savage. It was pointed out that the machining of this cocking piece didn't fit the known machining style of Stevens Savage which I think lends more credit to a subcontractor.
Still, the third photo is the closest example of shared parts between the US and Canada, albeit, not technically Savage, it is still US made. If you blow the photo up, I think it is fairly clear that the Canadian stamp has been struck over the top left corner of the box, having nearly obliterated the downward leg of the top left corner, not the other way round. In my opinion, this shows that this cocking piece landed in Canada with that mark on it, whomever it may have come from.

[Lee Enfield]

For obvious reasons, these markings don't appear to fit the familiar Savage square "5" in a full box or corner-less box found on the majority of Savage rifles. So far, I only have examples that appear on cocking pieces. If anyone wishes to take some time looking over their Savage rifles and post pics of examples matching the three shown here, it would be appreciated.
Attachment 60788Attachment 60789Attachment 60790

What establishes that this is a Savage-Stevens marking?

[SpikeDD]

What establishes that this is a Savage-Stevens marking?

Wow...how did I know that was coming? Ok.... In my first post you can quote me as posting... "For obvious reasons, these markings don't appear to fit the familiar Savage square "5" in a full box or corner-less box found on the majority of Savage rifles". The "don't" bit indicates I am suggesting this is NOT a Stevens-Savage mark.

In my second post you can quote me as posting... "Clearly, it is different than the known Stevens Savage mark common to these rifles."

Also...

"

A subcontractor mark seems to be the most likely answer as I think most will agree it is not Stevens Savage.

....More to the point... " it is NOT Stevens Savage.

So...let me ask you, which parts am I establishing that this is in fact a Stevens Savage part?

[Lee Enfield]

Wow...how did I know that was coming? Ok.... In my first post you can quote me as posting... "For obvious reasons, these markings don't appear to fit the familiar Savage square "5" in a full box or corner-less box found on the majority of Savage rifles". The "don't" bit indicates I am suggesting this is NOT a Stevens-Savage mark.

In my second post you can quote me as posting... "Clearly, it is different than the known Stevens Savage mark common to these rifles."

Also...

"....More to the point... " it is NOT Stevens Savage.

So...let me ask you, which parts am I establishing that this is in fact a Stevens Savage part?

Sorry, I guess that my meaning wasn't clear.

If I understand you correctly, you are asking if these are cocking pieces "out-sourced" by Savage-Stevens.

Are the illustrated cocking pieces on Savage rifles, and Savage bolts?

Can we find illustration of this type of machining which is traceable to useage by Savage-Stevens?

Examples which show totally different machining characteristics to these are dated 1941, '42 &'43.
Does anyone have a 90CxXxX to 1,000,000+ serial numbered Savage who can illustrate for us it's cocking piece machining and markings?

[SpikeDD]

Excellent questions, Lee.

Just to clarify, I am suggesting the idea that these parts, which bear this mark, were produced by a subcontractor for Stevens Savage, not by Stevens Savage.

2 of the photos above are from all matching Savage rifles with savage marked bolts and bolt heads.

The one photo, which bears both the Canadian mark and this unknown mark, is on a 1945 dated Longbranch that is in beautiful, original condition with all matching parts.

I know you posses the ability to closely examine the photo and I ask you to do so and please post your opinion on which mark you feel was stamped first. I call your attention to the upper left corner of the "S" mark.

I look forward to more people finding this mark on their Savage rifles that may show some kind of pattern of usage, ie... serial number ranges.

[SpikeDD]

Interesting, never seen one like it, but I don't believe Savage cocking pieces had the concave top radius did they? In which case presumably a Long Branch production. Could it be they were finishing up or building from partially finished components or materials obtained from Savage when their production ended in '44?

Too much oil on that last one; someone's liable to get it in the eye when the trigger is pulled.

Hello Surpmill,
I possess quite a few Savage rifles and all of them, except the early examples with button style cocking piece, have the radius top style. In particular, I have one of the Savage rifles that came in a box numbered to the rifle, with the bolt in a small box also numbered to the rifle and it has a radius top cocking piece with a stand alone square "S".

PS... I promise, If I ever get around to shooting the 1945 Longbranch, I will clean the grase off of it first ;-)

[Lee Enfield]

Excellent questions, Lee.

Just to clarify, I am suggesting the idea that these parts, which bear this mark, were produced by a subcontractor for Stevens Savage, not by Stevens Savage.

2 of the photos above are from all matching Savage rifles with savage marked bolts and bolt heads.

The one photo, which bears both the Canadian mark and this unknown mark, is on a 1945 dated Longbranch that is in beautiful, original condition with all matching parts.

I know you posses the ability to closely examine the photo and I ask you to do so and please post your opinion on which mark you feel was stamped first. I call your attention to the upper left corner of the "S" mark.

I look forward to more people finding this mark on their Savage rifles that may show some kind of pattern of usage, ie... serial number ranges.

If you look at the 1930s trials rifle in the knowledge base, the machining of the cocking piece is identical to that found in Square S cocking pieces.
My understanding is that Savage and Long Branch built No4 rifles exactly to the drawings which they were supplied by the UK.

This explains why early production from both factories is identical to a 1933 trials rifle, except for the cut off and ball detent rear sight.

While Long Branch continued to evolve parts, and receiver drawings during production, I have not noticed a similar significant evolution in Savage-Stevens production.

Remember that ALL of Savage-Stevens production (except for a few the US Gov. snagged for China) was under British order and acceptance, changes in parts machining would have to be accepted by the UK inspectors, after approval from Enfield(or whoever the UK design board was).